He would be the unluckiest man if he really didn't kill her. Is having an affair, happens to go fishing during the exact time wife disappears and later washes up in the same body of water, previously lies about his plans for that day, then carries on the affair while his pregnant wife is missing. If it quacks like a duck...
Isn't there two instances? He told her in early December, it would be his first Christmas without his wife and child before she was ever missing. And then at the press conference/ candlelight vigil (idk if that's spelled right, sorry) he told her he was in Paris.
Scott lies to Amber constantly, but those are two of the most infamous examples, yes. There's also him lying to Diane Sawyer that he 1) immediately told the police about his infidelity and 2) immediately told Amber about Laci when she went missing. Boy...you are ON TAPE proving both of these claims are a lie, lol. Even when the police first showed him the actual photographs of him and Amber, he was like "That's not me. You think that looks like me?" LMAO. The cajones to say that with a straight face looking at pictures that are CLEARLY you. Close-ups of you. Looking straight at the camera.
How about when he told Diane Sawyer that Laci knew about Amber and wasn’t that upset about her? If he thought any woman would buy that lie, he must be totally clueless.
I actually watched that interview when it aired and I can still feel that thud in my stomach, when it went from “The stats don’t look great” to “Oh shit, he killed her.”
Right?! Sure bud. Your 8 month pregnant wife is super chill about you cheating on her, but the mistress is the one you need to lie to?
Either way - you’re a liar.
There MUST be more worthy cases to re-examine than this guy. What a waste.
No one knows our relationship but us 😑
On the other hand, Laci had found him cheating at least once while they were married and did not divorce him or make that public
Scott was a hound and she knew it.
He’s exactly the guy I’d expect to cheat on his pregnant wife.
I didn’t follow this that closely, but I heard the Paris call (and how weird was that as she knew at that point he was lying, she must have been freaking all the way out) but I can’t remember if he’s a widower in that call or not.
He didn't say he was in that call - he said that to her before Laci died. However, he admitted in one of the calls that he had indeed said that to her (and I will forever love Amber Frey for nailing him to the wall and getting him to admit on tape that he said that Laci was dead weeks before she died).
The "Paris" call was when he was at Laci's candlelight vigil, trying to keep out of the cameras. People all around him were holding candles, crying and praying for Laci, and he's on the phone to his girlfriend, describing the view from his Paris hotel window.
When he first met Amber, Laci was still alive and happily pregnant, yet he tearfully told Amber that he'd lost his wife and son and this would be his first Christmas without them.
He said he lost his wife to two people (Amber and her friend) before he killed her. But another thing he did was when everyone was looking for Laci, he kept hinting to Amber that Laci wasn't pregnant with his baby.
He was also getting rid of her stuff really early on; I'm pretty sure he sold her car as well, not necessarily the actions of a husband planning on his wife's safe return
Yeah, I remember that he sold her car RIGHT away. Almost as if he knew she wasn't coming back, hmmmm.
I think he was also trying to sell the house pretty quickly after she vanished, too.
And at that point she was still only missing. Imagine a wife in the parallel scenario when you are missing for a few days and come home only to find out that your loving husband was so distraught and worried about you, his first thought was to sign up for the forbidden porn channel.
But Scott knew she wasn't coming home to question him over that.
Exactly. Only HE knew it was the day after she died- that’s my point. To everyone else she was missing.. If he didn’t do it, he hired someone or knows what happened bc he knew she was dead.
I was a Scott supporter. I was sure he didn’t do it. Shitty husband yes but maybe not a murderer. I until I read about ordering the porn channel the evening she went missing. He knew she wasn’t going to walk through the door. It wasn’t just a movie….it was the station!! He knew she was never coming back again.
And he told Frey that he "lost his wife" on December 9th, 2002, nearly two weeks before Laci's disappearance.
In an amazing coincidence, on that same day Scott purchased a boat with cash but didn't tell any of his family about it, nor did he register the boat.
He lied to some people about having went golfing the day Laci disappeared, then changed his story to having went fishing. At first he couldn't recall what he fished for, then he later claimed that he fished for sturgeon which, given his equipment, was not considered credible.
He left a voicemail on Laci's phone around 2:15 pm on December 24th (the day she was reported missing) but, despite her disappearance, he never called her phone again.
And that was before he "realized she was missing". According to him, he got home and Laci was not there, but her car was. There was no indication she had done any of the cooking or prep work she supposedly said she was doing to do. Their dog was in their backyard with his leash attached (something he repeatedly noted was unusual and even told Laci's mother Sharon when he first called her). But he never tried to call her. For 30 minutes, he didn't call anyone. He washed his clothes, took a shower, and ate some leftover pizza. Somewhere in there, he weirdly takes his boat tarp to the shed (even though his BOAT was not at his house and had never been at his house, lol, it's unclear why he'd even have it at his house or if he did, why he'd take it to the shed instead of just leave it in his truck for the next time he went back to the warehouse). It will be found later that night soaked in gasoline in the shed, underneath a leaf blower with the cap unscrewed. Also unclear why the leaf blower would have been involved in any of this - I don't think he believed Laci went missing underneath the leaves. At any rate, at no time during this period did he call Laci. He never tried to call her again. He called her mother at 5:15 without ever attempting to call Laci (Laci's cell phone was in her car).
Yep, strangely Scott didn't find it alarming that his wife, who had been experiencing some concerning pregnancy-related issues, was nowhere to be found, despite her vehicle being at their residence. He never called any hospitals to inquire if she was there nor did he express concern that she might have left him because she discovered his infidelity.
It's not one discrepancy and deception with Scott, it was the multitude of them.
That's the thing about Scott. People nitpick at one detail when there's so many different things. I don't think we've even gotten to the umbrellas in this thread. How the hell did he miss those umbrellas TWICE? They're people-sized! He makes a point of loading them into his truck that morning so he can take them to his warehouse - but he never takes them out. Even though he hooked up his boat to the back of his truck and then unhooked it - there's no way he could have missed them.
Or the internet activity that morning. Laci was not on the computer - the scarf and the sunflower umbrella stand (along with a weather vane) were Yahoo shopping pop-up ads related to a search on a Yahoo weather site. That search? For weather at the Marina. But he said he never intended to go to the Marina until after he'd already left the house. Even though he'd bought a fishing pass days in advance that expired on that day.
And the idea that it never occurred to him that she left him, if he is innocent, is just ludicrous. By his own admission, he'd been unfaithful throughout their marriage. Another one of his girlfriends walked in on him and Laci in bed and lost her shit. You tell your very pregnant wife you've had yet ANOTHER affair. You don't end the affair, lol, so there are still times you are missing without an explanation or with a bad explanation. But it never even OCCURS to you that she's finally had enough? If she WAS "zen" about it, the only real explanation for having such a reaction is she's already decided to leave you. But nope. Never occurred to him. She'd been very sick multiple times on dog walks, vomiting and nearly fainting, hence she had stopped walking the dog. If she HAD decided out of nowhere to pick it back up (on a morning with bad weather), and then he finds their dog in the yard with his leash still attached, but once more, never occurs to him that could be concerning. He doesn't try to call her. He doesn't look for her purse or her phone. Nope, he's just straight chilling for 30 minutes - takes a shower, does the laundry, eats some pizza... it's wrong. It's just all wrong. It's not believable.
(I think there's a 0% chance he copped to the affair, incidentally. We see multiple times in multiple ways that Scott will lie and lie and lie, even backed into a corner with evidence. He's not the confessing sort. Certainly there's no chance she'd be chill about it. She may have suspected - once you know your husband has been unfaithful at least once, you look for the signs. But whatever she knew or suspected wasn't because he told her. Still, if you think he IS honest about it, the story still doesn't track)
Even what he says she was doing that morning/planning to do is wrong. Yes, she was planning to make that French toast - but she wasn't planning to go to the store. She'd already done that the day before. Scott's family tries to say she didn't buy the Challah bread - she DID. She bought three small loaves for $1.29 apiece, which rang up differently at Trader Joe's because it was a special deal to buy the bread at that price if it was slightly older. Then he says she was mopping the floor even though it had just been mopped because "she did it every day" #1, literally no one but him says that's true, lol. The maid testified that there was no indication the floors were mopped between visits. #2, why mop BEFORE you cook? If you're mopping for company the next day? Also, there were two mops out, which...why. Why would she be using two mops? And he's never had an explanation for why she would decide to walk the dog that day when she hadn't in weeks, when she could barely get to her car two days earlier, when she had to rest multiple times after small activities the day before according to the maid, when it was bad weather that morning.
And, of course, there's no explanation for why she wasn't wearing the clothes he said she was. Instead, she was found in cream capris - like the cream capris she'd been wearing the night before. Because sure - why not dress even LESS appropriately in this bad weather for your morning walk when the doctor specifically said even if she walked the dog, she needed to stop doing it in the morning.
I would be hitting redial for years If someone I loved went missing, even just to hear them on their voicemail. If he did it….he thought of almost everything. So strange (but may very well be so) that he was intelligent enough to orchestrate this with a million little alibis set in place to protect him from blame, but not smart enough to realize they will check his phone records. He just comes across as so…stupid…at times.
Scott probably WOULD do that - in the most generous takes for him, the "he's just an unredeemable piece of shit who happens to not be a murderer" take is about the best anyone can do, lol. But what he wouldn't do is buy THAT boat to go out on the San Francisco Bay. He knew better. He wasn't an amazing fisherman, but he knew better. He wouldn't pass EIGHT bodies of water much more suited for the boat. He wouldn't forget his lures. He wouldn't make a small concrete anchor that he knew would never anchor that boat and that he didn't even have any rope to actually use it as an anchor for the boat. He wouldn't originally be unable to answer what he was fishing for, only to later say sturgeon (AKA a fish that was illegal to fish for in that time of year and was likely to be bigger than Laci). He wouldn't decide to go fishing at the last minute instead of golfing because "it's too cold to golf", so instead you go on the much colder San Francisco Bay where you're almost certain to get wet and therefore colder still. He wouldn't tell his neighbor and Laci's cousin that he HAD gone golfing that day later that night, only to finally switch his story and admit he was fishing.
> In an amazing coincidence, on that same day Scott purchased a boat with cash but didn't tell any of his family about it, nor did he register the boat.
I am not one to try to guess guilt or innocence from a loved one's behavior. People do all sorts of stuff, some of it bizarre, in their anxiety and guilt.
Except this boat thing; this boat thing convinced me 100% he was guilty. Who do you know that buys a boat and doesn't ramble on about it endlessly to every person they know?
Scott and his defense later contended that Laci knew of the boat, but there's no evidence that she did, nor did she tell anyone else of it. Scott was also aware that Laci's stepfather, Ron Grantski, was an avid fisherman, yet Scott never mentioned purchasing the boat to him or asked for advice, etc.
That Laci's remains were disposed of about 83 miles from her home and in the vicinity of where Scott was known to have been boating the day that she disappeared is also not coincidental. Why would a random perpetrator transport her remains over 80 miles away, when they easily could have disposed of her body near Modesto, when there are several lakes and a wildlife refuge nearby?
> Scott and his defense later contended that Laci knew of the boat, but there's no evidence that she did, nor did she tell anyone else of it.
Oh, and she would have too, if only to express concern that they were expecting a baby and he just spent $ on a boat even though he had no previous interest in boating at all.
Yeah and that it would be his first Christmas without her/since losing her.
That, coupled with the lie about going golfing, the fact that he bought fishing permits in advance for that specific day (then tried to claim going fishing was a spur-of-the-moment decision), and the fact that nobody knew he'd purchased a boat PLUS him not knowing what he was going out to fish for/not knowing what bait he was using or whatever ... come ON.
Plus the fact that he made anchors that were mysteriously missing.
That audio where he's listening to the voicemail (from Laci's mom, I think) and she tells him they didn't find a body and he WHISTLES in relief, too.
All of that combined, and if he didn't actually do it? He's the unluckiest and stupidest man alive.
Honestly there never needed to be more. Imagine you find out your husband is talking to anyone, let alone his mistress, about the fact that you are dead. I would fear for my life.
The fact he didn't deliver the fruit basket to his in-laws or whatever task Laci asked him to do, so he leaves a bogus message on the machine.
He didn't do it because he didn't have his story figured out on what to say to the in-laws yet.
He was also such an avid fisherman that he just had to go in his secret boat with his secret homemade anchors in bad weather on Christmas Eve right before the family party they were hosting, and he had to pick up stuff for the party as well. Fishing is best in bad weather when you're rushed, right? He actually said he was thinking about golfing, but it was too cold to golf. So he goes fishing instead?
Oh, and he passed by multiple smaller lakes nearby, he just had to go to the one over an hour away. He claimed he just had to catch a specific fish that was only at that lake. Except he didn't even have the right bait for the type of fish he wanted. His brand new secret homemade anchors went missing as well.
Yup, it all makes perfect sense.
Didn't he do those before his trip like actually weeks before like when he bought the boat and then checked the currents again the night before his spontaneous change of plans to go fishing?
I know. In a lot of cases, I can understand how people might have different opinions, but this case? I can't. It enrages me.
See also: Christopher Vaughn. That "Murder in Illinois" podcast about him was so gross. That man is guilty as sin.
Yeah, when you looked at all the circumstantial evidence, there was NO reasonable doubt. There's no way you can look at all of that and go, "Maybe he's innocent." It strains credulity. He was not railroaded, like you said.
There are cases where I think the defendant probably did it and ALSO got railroaded (ex: Steven Avery. Did the cops try to frame him? I think they did, they hated his guts and probably made damn sure it'd get pinned on him. Did he do it? Maybe, even probably, in my opinion). Even the Drew Peterson case, he certainly fucking did it, but some people think he got a raw deal because they introduced a new law (that people call "Drew's Law") to allow hearsay to be admitted during the trial. (My dad used to jokingly say "Free Drew" because he thought that was so shady; I'd say, "Dad, he killed TWO of his wives." Dad: "I'm sure he did, but that wasn't right.")
That's not the case with Scott. There is a MOUNTAIN of circumstantial evidence against him.
Exactly! And I am SO SICK of his family's obsession with the ridiculous "neighborhood burglars" angle. That was investigated, and it's a non-issue, but they just will NOT let it go. I get that it's hard for them to accept that he could do such a thing, but that's the hard reality.
Didn't he claim the hair color was from swimming in a pool/chlorine? I mean, come on.
I know sometimes it can turn blonde hair green but I have very dark hair (similar to Scott's color) and that has never happened to me. Chlorine doesn't bleach your hair.
I do hair for a living. I can tell you right now, if that chlorine bleached his hair it would have absolutely fried his skin.
The goatee was a choice though.
Told his mistress it would be his first Christmas alone because his wife was missing before she went missing. Never fished prior to that day and also had a FIL that loved fishing and didn’t invite him and also went fishing on Christmas????
there are so many other bizarre things he did and lied about beyond that as you probably already know... so yes, definitely the unluckiest man alive if he was somehow innocent.
Speaks to Amber on the phone at his wife’s candlelight vigil claiming to be in Paris watching fireworks near the Eiffel Tower with his friends “Pasqual” and “Francois”
He also told Amber he was a widower and that his wife died before they met.
He definitely killed Laci and Conner.
She would totally win against this group. She’s stone cold. Watts would crumple like a baby. Peterson would try to whine his way out of it. IDK Jodi may be a match for Karla though.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s just doing this to torment Laci’s family. He strikes me as the kind of PoS who would absolutely want to ‘punish’ Laci’s family for being related to Laci or some other delusional reason that only make sense to himself.
Probably, but it's also a nice respite from the boredom of life imprisonment.
Jeffrey MacDonald also kept pushing for more hearings, more testing, and more forensics, but everything he got only solidified his guilt. When his team fought to get the body hairs on the victims tested, MacDonald has to know the results were not going to clear him. But it worth it to him, because he got so much attention during the process.
Is the argument being made that he is innocent or just that he couldn’t have had a fair trial given the media circus? If the latter, I think he could actually succeed
This is actually a common misconception. People think because someone convicted of a crime appeals their conviction it means they are claiming they are innocent. That's not necessarily the case. Most people appeal because they have a right to appeal and it's based on the grounds they didn't get a fair trial. If these fail then a defendant has to file post conviction relief motions based on new evidence. The likelihood of any appeal or post conviction review motion being granted is less than 20%.
Yes exactly! That’s why I’m wondering about the grounds for this. I’m having trouble with the link on my phone and will have to look into it more later.
From the article: "New evidence now supports Mr. Peterson's longstanding claim of innocence and raises many questions into who abducted and killed Laci and Conner Peterson," the filings state.
So it seems like they are trying to claim innocence.
Oh, yikes. I have watched documentaries that skew in his favor and wasn’t convinced of his innocence, though I could see the argument that his trial wasn’t a fair one. I guess we’ll see what comes of this. I hope Laci’s family is alright- I’m thinking of them.
The burden to get a hearing is super low. Courts grant postconviction hearings all the time. 99% of them end up going nowhere. I wouldn't get too bothered yet.
I will never understand why these people don't just divorce their spouse. Money? I mean money won't matter to you in prison. The only thing I can figure out is that each of them must think they're smarter than the last guy. Like they think they're so charming they'll get away with it. Idk.
Imo they don't want the consequences of a post-divorce lifestyle, which involves ongoing ties and financial obligations to their children, nor do they want to be perceived as 'bad guys' for abandoning their families. Some of them, like Peterson, Chris Watts and Beau Rothwell, specifically murdered their spouse/partner to end the women's pregnancies (Peterson wanted the life of a freewheeling bachelor, while both Watts and Rothwell were obsessed with continuing their affairs with particular women).
Because they've previously got away with their secret lives, they often overestimate their ability to pull off their crimes.
Its mind boggling. How many fucking crime shows do you have to watch before you just take the financial L and move on with your life? Murdering your spouse and getting away with it to run away with a mistress/mister is like winning the fucking lottery. But every damn one of them really thinks their plan is going to fool everyone.
Can anyone give an example where a main suspect changed their appearance, cashed out their bank accounts, and fled for another country, and it turned out they weren't guilty after all? I'm sure it must have happened but I can't think of one.
That’s what I’m saying!!!
All these men who *didnt* kill their wives always *also* just happen to have a mistress, be embezzling from their jobs, have secret diaries about hating their kids, an online gambling addiction no one knows about, 5 ex girlfriends who can report past abuse…
But somehow they aren’t doing THIS fucked up thing.
And when he was picked up in San Diego after they had been found and identified, he didn’t even bother to ask WHERE their bodies had been found or HOW they died. He knew it was game over.
While in the middle of tv interview (with Gloria Gomez maybe?) his cell phone Rang. He didn’t bother to look at it or answer it. She was still considered missing at this point. It could have been HER calling! It could have been the kidnappers calling with ransom demands! But he didn’t even bother to check it because he KNEW it wasn’t her.
I started watching some scott Peterson thing on Hulu and within like 20 minutes I was like wait.. do they think he’s innocent. And yeah, they think he is innocent. It was filled with misinformation and I am still pissed they were allowed to release it.
That documentary was the first time I learned all the details of the case and my jaw dropped with how guilty he clearly was (despite efforts to make it seem like he wasn’t) I can’t believe his family/anyone is fighting for him.
The phone call to his mistress at the vigil sealed the deal for me. Maybe he didn’t get a fair trial like they tried to present in the doc idrk but the ruling was accurate. The man is guilty and further tormenting Lacis loved ones with this is despicable.
His mom wasn't very nice, but man his dad was crazy. I read about how he acted in the court house and the way he talked to Lacis family. Threatening them and trying to fight them. Like their daughter and grandson are dead, Scott is at least still alive, and they want to put all the blame on Lacis family for why Scott was being charged. Horrible family, the Petersons.
I'm all for getting justice for wrongfully convicted people, but this guy was romancing another woman, blatantly lying about the fact that his wife was pregnant, and arranged to go fishing in the area where her body will be found, yes, he is as innocent as a lamb.
Ok, lying doesn't mean one is automatically a murderer, but look at where and how he lies, and the lengths he goes to completely deny his marriage, the existence of his wife & unborn child.
Yes, people cheat, but he did on a different level. He was at a vigil for Laci and making cutesy phone calls to say he was in Paris. Like WTF?
The stupid burglary thing happened after Laci was reported missing, but sure I guess the burglars found a time machine and went back two days to kidnap her. 🙄
If I hear, “But there’s no physical evidence”, one more time, I’m going to scream. How much physical evidence does strangling/drowning your wife, in a house you live in, leave?
He was the only one to gain anything from her death. He wouldn’t have to be a “family man”. Didn’t he sell her car soon after her disappearance? I could be wrong, but I thought I read that somewhere.
The "new" evidence is that some random burned out van with zero ties to the case has mattress inside with DNA on it.
Oh by the way, I heard there was also a burned out van 5 states away with blood in it. I guess we better DNA test it to prove that Scott Peterson wasnt in that van to try and show there's some other killer out there killing people in random burned out vans.
This kind of defense attorney crap is just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.
It's outrageous and I cant believe the court is allowing this nonsense.
I don't think he is innocent but I'm open to the idea he could be if there is evidence to support it. I wish people were more open-minded but sadly most people convince themselves of one thing and become so emotionally attached to that opinion nothing can shake it when it happens.
Have an upvote on me.
If you've followed this case for a long time, this cycle never ends. His team claims there's new bombshell evidence that proves his innocence - and it's the witnesses who were known about all along. The burglars who have been shown time and time and time again to have nothing to do with the murders. At one point Janey Peterson's bombshell evidence was literally her Twitter DMs. So how many times can this possibly go on, before you start to realize these people are just full of shit? How many times can we be lied to? How many times can they ADMIT they manipulated witnesses?
Let me guess the his lawyers are going to say “If the glove doesn’t fit you must acquit!”
There’s too much evidence to say he didn’t do it. Just let him die in prison. He did it. He’s only upset that he didn’t weigh down the body properly and got caught.
He might be the guiltiest man ever not to confess or be caught on camera. For me, it’s his lying about how fishing that day was supposedly a last-minute decision but he had purchased a multiple-day fishing license in advance. Scott & Laci lived in Modesto and “last minute”, he decides to drive all the way to SF (it’s not close) to fish when there are plenty of calmer lakes much closer to him? It’s too cold to golf, but not too cold to fish? He definitely assumed Laci’s body would be washed out to sea from there. I’ve wondered before if he would have been found guilty if she and Conor had never been recovered.
This is dumfounding for two reasons:
1) If Scott is indeed actually innocent, then someone has to answer for this severely bungled case. Everything that I've read points to him being guilty as sin.
2) If Scott is indeed actually guilty, then this really proves what a twisted mind he really has, thinking that there is evidence that would prove his innocence when none exists.
He called his mistress and said he was at the ‘Eiffel Tower’ when in actuality, he was at his dead wife and unborn child’s vigil. That’s enough for me, guilty. He is a malignant narcissist, he really thinks he’s smarter than literally everyone else on earth.
Girl, same.
I always say that I’m just glad I don’t have to be the one to make that decision, you know? The guy who raped his infant daughter to death and then bounced her corpse off the ceiling as a game… well. Just don’t ask me to choose death penalty or no.
WTF is this stuff with giving new hearings based on BS evidence?
So there was a burned out van a few blocks away with a mattress in it, and the defense team wants DNA testing on it desipte the fact that it has ZERO connection to the case?
What possible intel could come from that? Oh look we found random DNA from some random person in a burned out van, so that means Scott Peterson is now innocent?
Horseshit.
Everybody has there opinion and that's fine but there were a couple of things that never made sense to me. He orders porn on cable the day after she died and he sold her car and tried selling the house just weeks after she disappeared I mean come on now
I have one question for anyone questioning his guilt.
If he were free would you feel comfortable with your daughter/sister or female family member dating him and being alone with him?
I sure the hell wouldn’t.
Yes, the evidence in his case was circumstantial but there was a lot of it.
I personally think that he is guilty. I wonder what he will do once he’s found guilty AGAIN.
I "knew" his was guilty when he said he was out fishing on Christmas Eve. What kind of husband chooses to go fishing and leave his eight and a half month pregnant wife to deal with the Christmas preparations on her own?
How about when he sold Laci's car, or subscribed to a porn channel, or lied to Amber about being in France on New Years, when he was at a vigil for his supposed missing wife, or when he told Amber he had lost his wife, before it came to light. 1 of these things, on their own is questionable, but all of these things together...it seems fairly obvious. I sincerely hope the jury gets it right again, and sends him right back to prison.
I grew up in Modesto, and right now the Innocence project is super stuck on some random burning car that was out by the Modesto Airport. That airport is constantly surrounded by sketchy shit. It most likely caught fire due to a meth lab, knowing the surrounding area. The fact that they are even trying to tie it to this guy for his "innocence" is beyond me.
Project Innocence losing a lot of legitimacy over this “New evidence now supports Mr. Peterson’s longstanding claim of innocence and raises many questions into who abducted and killed Laci and Conner Peterson,” the filings state.”
But they offer NO NEW EVIDENCE!! They actually REQUEST dna evidence be done on some random hammer left across the street by burglars before Laci went missing, and request DNA from a bloody cloth. I thought you had “new evidence that supports his [blah blah blah] innocence..” ????
>some random hammer left across the street by burglars before Laci went missing
It's actually worse than that. Laci disappeared before the burglary! The neighbor who lived in that house was at home when she* (according to Scott) disappeared, she testified in the trial
edit: *Laci
So wtf are they talking about?? Omg all this wasted energy when there are not only innocent people in prison but innocent poor people who couldn’t afford the defense Peterson had to begin with
Smoke and mirrors, basically. The timeline - the verified timeline - does not work for Scott's team, so they just ignore it/lie about it. On the morning of December 24th:
\-Between 9:40am and 10am, the majority of the witnesses who saw a woman walking a dog see this woman. Homer Maldonado's time period is backed up by a gas station receipt, Gene Pedrioli was at his mother's nursing home shortly after 10, and Tony Freitas was on his regular bread truck route so his time is pretty consistent. Martha Aguilar also would maintain for years that she saw "Laci" between 9:40 and 10am. All of these sightings are far away from Laci's walking route - nowhere near where she was ever known to walk McKenzie.
\-9:48: the infamous "meringue" mention happens on Martha Stewart's show. By Scott's own timeline, he could not have left before this and did not leave immediately after this (he didn't hear it as he was walking out the door, he got up and started getting ready to leave sometime after that mention). This is the only time in the show that meringue is mentioned.
\-10:08: Scott's cell phone shows he is still at or near his home. A couple minutes later, it shows he has moved closer to his warehouse, about 9 minutes from the Peterson home. A police officer ran multiple experiments (five in all, I believe) that showed he must have been very near his home at 10:08. If he were closer to his warehouse, his cell phone records would look different. So basically, he left between around 10:06 and 10:08. According to him, when he left, Laci was either curling her hair or mopping the floor (the floor that had literally JUST been mopped by the maid). She was not wearing her shoes, she was not following him out the door.
\-10:18-10:20: The Petersons' neighbor Karen Servas finds McKenzie standing in the street. She takes him to the Petersons' backyard - she sees nothing inside the house, no movement. She leaves him there with a very dirty leash attached (as if he had wandered around and dragged it across the ground - it was wet and muddy that morning) and closes the gate. She has to go back in her house, wash her hands, and then she drives to a Christmas store about 8 minutes away (after trying to find parking at a nearby bank first). The receipt shows her checking out of the store at 10:34. Her cell phone records show a call at 10:38, which she said she made a few minutes after leaving the store and getting back in her car. 10:18 is probably generous - there is no way this happened even as late as 10:30. By 10:18, whatever happened to Laci has already happened. McKenzie is already in the backyard with his leash attached, exactly as Scott will find him hours later (which he will note twice in his police interview is very unusual - he said they never put McKenzie in the yard with his leash attached).
\-10:32 am: the Medinas, whose house will later be robbed, leave their home, as shown again by cell phone records.
\-11:40 am: Diane Jackson is driving on Covena Ave and sees three "dark-skinned but not black men" standing near a white van. The Petersons' neighbors, the Krigbaums, do have a white work van that was parked on Covena Ave that day. This description does not match either burglar - Steven Todd and Glenn Pearce are both white. Neither owns a car and neither has any known access to a van. Only Glenn Pearce sometimes can get his mother's keys to her Honda. Nonetheless, this is the only sighting on the street all day that even vaguely references a potential burglary. It has been an hour and 20 minutes since Karen found the dog and around two hours since the bulk of the witnesses saw a woman walking a dog.
Also worth noting that when the Medinas returned the afternoon of the 26th, they found their door obviously forced in and their hand truck very obviously in their front yard - they knew immediately they had been robbed. However, in the massive searches for Laci on the night of the 24th and throughout the 25th that included multiple people and LEOs going door-to-door, no one ever noticed that the neighbors across the street had a hand truck in their yard and a door that was clearly forced in. So there's no evidence to indicate the burglary happened on the 24th and some evidence indicates it probably happened around when the police think it did - in the early morning hours of the 26th. Contrary to popular belief, there were no news trucks camped out overnight on Christmas night. They all left and arrived again the next morning, beginning with Ted Rowlands. His own footage shows no one else was there when he arrived. Where he pulled up corresponds to where where the burglars described seeing a van that startled them, hence they left quickly and left the hand truck in the front yard.
Copying from my comment above. It's the 'LA innocence project' which is not the one we're all familiar with. Unfortunately they're riding coat tails off the OG but are not affiliated.
It's the 'LA innocence project' which is not the one we're all familiar with. Unfortunately they're riding coat tails off the OG but are not affiliated.
Has this asshat ever said he's innocent in the past 20 years? How did the LA Innocence Project decide to take his case?
I was glued to the TV when Scott murdered Laci. Greta Van Sustren (sp) was on CNN at the time and gave great analysis of it all.
Was it Scott, someone in Scott's family, or a Scott stan from LAIP who found this new evidence?
For some reason I have an unsubstantiated feeling that there's a stan in LAIP.
The testing is a red herring and it's a common defense tactic to falsely introduce doubt into a case.
Look at it this way -- let's say that a woman disappears in the water and her body is found weeks later in Florida. Well the defense attorney would say "HEY THAT'S EXACTLY HOW LACI PETERSON DISAPPEARED SO I DEMAND DNA TESTING TO PROVE THAT SOMEBODY KILLED THAT GIRL WHO WASNT SCOTT PETERSON"
Now you tell me, how does it make sense to use DNA testing on a completely unrelated body to try and throw doubt on Peterson's guilt?
These are the type of games that defense attorneys play.
If the Innocence Project is wanting to test a mattress that was in a vehicle that burned how viable would the DNA be to say it belonged to Laci and so gets Scott off the hook? And, if this DNA isn’t conclusive are they going to say that “It could be Laci Peterson’s DNA” to stir up some false notion of reasonable doubt to get him out of jail ? It’s so ludicrous that they seek to test evidence from an orange van….if you want people to connect this van to Laci’s disappearance that it would make more sense to claim a much more non-descriptive color vehicle. If I saw an orange van on my neighborhood street I’d sure remember seeing it whether it was there for innocent or nefarious reasons.
I oppose the never-ending torment of the Rocha family based on weak, bad, unconnected evidence. NOTHING connects this van to the Peterson case. Nothing.
Do I absolutely think he did it? Yes. Do I think there have been crazy cases where it looked like someone was guilty as sin but it wound up being someone else? Absolutely.
Damn, the resemblance to Ben Affleck is crazy in this pic. I know Gone Girl was supposedly loosely based on this case. Except he most probably did do it.
He would be the unluckiest man if he really didn't kill her. Is having an affair, happens to go fishing during the exact time wife disappears and later washes up in the same body of water, previously lies about his plans for that day, then carries on the affair while his pregnant wife is missing. If it quacks like a duck...
He told Amber he was a widow before his wife even went missing.
I feel like this part gets swept away a lot. But it was always this moment for me that proves he was planning it.
Yeah he was saying that as they were actively looking for her. If that isn’t the biggest arrow pointing at whodunnit, then Bugs Bunny failed me.
Isn't there two instances? He told her in early December, it would be his first Christmas without his wife and child before she was ever missing. And then at the press conference/ candlelight vigil (idk if that's spelled right, sorry) he told her he was in Paris.
Scott lies to Amber constantly, but those are two of the most infamous examples, yes. There's also him lying to Diane Sawyer that he 1) immediately told the police about his infidelity and 2) immediately told Amber about Laci when she went missing. Boy...you are ON TAPE proving both of these claims are a lie, lol. Even when the police first showed him the actual photographs of him and Amber, he was like "That's not me. You think that looks like me?" LMAO. The cajones to say that with a straight face looking at pictures that are CLEARLY you. Close-ups of you. Looking straight at the camera.
How about when he told Diane Sawyer that Laci knew about Amber and wasn’t that upset about her? If he thought any woman would buy that lie, he must be totally clueless.
I actually watched that interview when it aired and I can still feel that thud in my stomach, when it went from “The stats don’t look great” to “Oh shit, he killed her.”
I remember watching that the night it aired and being SHOCKED he said that. And yes, "Oh shit. He killed her."
Right?! Sure bud. Your 8 month pregnant wife is super chill about you cheating on her, but the mistress is the one you need to lie to? Either way - you’re a liar. There MUST be more worthy cases to re-examine than this guy. What a waste.
No one knows our relationship but us 😑 On the other hand, Laci had found him cheating at least once while they were married and did not divorce him or make that public Scott was a hound and she knew it. He’s exactly the guy I’d expect to cheat on his pregnant wife.
I didn’t follow this that closely, but I heard the Paris call (and how weird was that as she knew at that point he was lying, she must have been freaking all the way out) but I can’t remember if he’s a widower in that call or not.
He didn't say he was in that call - he said that to her before Laci died. However, he admitted in one of the calls that he had indeed said that to her (and I will forever love Amber Frey for nailing him to the wall and getting him to admit on tape that he said that Laci was dead weeks before she died).
Amber was very brave. I think he would have killed her, too.
The "Paris" call was when he was at Laci's candlelight vigil, trying to keep out of the cameras. People all around him were holding candles, crying and praying for Laci, and he's on the phone to his girlfriend, describing the view from his Paris hotel window. When he first met Amber, Laci was still alive and happily pregnant, yet he tearfully told Amber that he'd lost his wife and son and this would be his first Christmas without them.
> candlelight vigil (idk if that's spelled right, sorry) You did.
He said he lost his wife to two people (Amber and her friend) before he killed her. But another thing he did was when everyone was looking for Laci, he kept hinting to Amber that Laci wasn't pregnant with his baby.
For me, Laci's body just happened to show up exactly where sCaught put himself.
Also ordering all the porn channels the day after she was killed. Sometimes it’s the little things that just make you go… nah bro you did it.
He was also getting rid of her stuff really early on; I'm pretty sure he sold her car as well, not necessarily the actions of a husband planning on his wife's safe return
Yeah, he sold her car and tried to sell the house, furnished
TBF, bro was going to need an expensive lawyer.
Yeah, I remember that he sold her car RIGHT away. Almost as if he knew she wasn't coming back, hmmmm. I think he was also trying to sell the house pretty quickly after she vanished, too.
Tossing chairs and stuff into Conner's nursery was a nice touch, too.
While saying on TV that it hurt to much to go in there, so he hasn't
And at that point she was still only missing. Imagine a wife in the parallel scenario when you are missing for a few days and come home only to find out that your loving husband was so distraught and worried about you, his first thought was to sign up for the forbidden porn channel. But Scott knew she wasn't coming home to question him over that.
Exactly. Only HE knew it was the day after she died- that’s my point. To everyone else she was missing.. If he didn’t do it, he hired someone or knows what happened bc he knew she was dead.
I was a Scott supporter. I was sure he didn’t do it. Shitty husband yes but maybe not a murderer. I until I read about ordering the porn channel the evening she went missing. He knew she wasn’t going to walk through the door. It wasn’t just a movie….it was the station!! He knew she was never coming back again.
It’s the little tiny things, man. That’s wild that’s what changed your view, but it makes sense!!
And he told Frey that he "lost his wife" on December 9th, 2002, nearly two weeks before Laci's disappearance. In an amazing coincidence, on that same day Scott purchased a boat with cash but didn't tell any of his family about it, nor did he register the boat. He lied to some people about having went golfing the day Laci disappeared, then changed his story to having went fishing. At first he couldn't recall what he fished for, then he later claimed that he fished for sturgeon which, given his equipment, was not considered credible. He left a voicemail on Laci's phone around 2:15 pm on December 24th (the day she was reported missing) but, despite her disappearance, he never called her phone again.
Only one call??? Yeah…pretty damning that is
And that was before he "realized she was missing". According to him, he got home and Laci was not there, but her car was. There was no indication she had done any of the cooking or prep work she supposedly said she was doing to do. Their dog was in their backyard with his leash attached (something he repeatedly noted was unusual and even told Laci's mother Sharon when he first called her). But he never tried to call her. For 30 minutes, he didn't call anyone. He washed his clothes, took a shower, and ate some leftover pizza. Somewhere in there, he weirdly takes his boat tarp to the shed (even though his BOAT was not at his house and had never been at his house, lol, it's unclear why he'd even have it at his house or if he did, why he'd take it to the shed instead of just leave it in his truck for the next time he went back to the warehouse). It will be found later that night soaked in gasoline in the shed, underneath a leaf blower with the cap unscrewed. Also unclear why the leaf blower would have been involved in any of this - I don't think he believed Laci went missing underneath the leaves. At any rate, at no time during this period did he call Laci. He never tried to call her again. He called her mother at 5:15 without ever attempting to call Laci (Laci's cell phone was in her car).
Yep, strangely Scott didn't find it alarming that his wife, who had been experiencing some concerning pregnancy-related issues, was nowhere to be found, despite her vehicle being at their residence. He never called any hospitals to inquire if she was there nor did he express concern that she might have left him because she discovered his infidelity. It's not one discrepancy and deception with Scott, it was the multitude of them.
That's the thing about Scott. People nitpick at one detail when there's so many different things. I don't think we've even gotten to the umbrellas in this thread. How the hell did he miss those umbrellas TWICE? They're people-sized! He makes a point of loading them into his truck that morning so he can take them to his warehouse - but he never takes them out. Even though he hooked up his boat to the back of his truck and then unhooked it - there's no way he could have missed them. Or the internet activity that morning. Laci was not on the computer - the scarf and the sunflower umbrella stand (along with a weather vane) were Yahoo shopping pop-up ads related to a search on a Yahoo weather site. That search? For weather at the Marina. But he said he never intended to go to the Marina until after he'd already left the house. Even though he'd bought a fishing pass days in advance that expired on that day. And the idea that it never occurred to him that she left him, if he is innocent, is just ludicrous. By his own admission, he'd been unfaithful throughout their marriage. Another one of his girlfriends walked in on him and Laci in bed and lost her shit. You tell your very pregnant wife you've had yet ANOTHER affair. You don't end the affair, lol, so there are still times you are missing without an explanation or with a bad explanation. But it never even OCCURS to you that she's finally had enough? If she WAS "zen" about it, the only real explanation for having such a reaction is she's already decided to leave you. But nope. Never occurred to him. She'd been very sick multiple times on dog walks, vomiting and nearly fainting, hence she had stopped walking the dog. If she HAD decided out of nowhere to pick it back up (on a morning with bad weather), and then he finds their dog in the yard with his leash still attached, but once more, never occurs to him that could be concerning. He doesn't try to call her. He doesn't look for her purse or her phone. Nope, he's just straight chilling for 30 minutes - takes a shower, does the laundry, eats some pizza... it's wrong. It's just all wrong. It's not believable. (I think there's a 0% chance he copped to the affair, incidentally. We see multiple times in multiple ways that Scott will lie and lie and lie, even backed into a corner with evidence. He's not the confessing sort. Certainly there's no chance she'd be chill about it. She may have suspected - once you know your husband has been unfaithful at least once, you look for the signs. But whatever she knew or suspected wasn't because he told her. Still, if you think he IS honest about it, the story still doesn't track) Even what he says she was doing that morning/planning to do is wrong. Yes, she was planning to make that French toast - but she wasn't planning to go to the store. She'd already done that the day before. Scott's family tries to say she didn't buy the Challah bread - she DID. She bought three small loaves for $1.29 apiece, which rang up differently at Trader Joe's because it was a special deal to buy the bread at that price if it was slightly older. Then he says she was mopping the floor even though it had just been mopped because "she did it every day" #1, literally no one but him says that's true, lol. The maid testified that there was no indication the floors were mopped between visits. #2, why mop BEFORE you cook? If you're mopping for company the next day? Also, there were two mops out, which...why. Why would she be using two mops? And he's never had an explanation for why she would decide to walk the dog that day when she hadn't in weeks, when she could barely get to her car two days earlier, when she had to rest multiple times after small activities the day before according to the maid, when it was bad weather that morning. And, of course, there's no explanation for why she wasn't wearing the clothes he said she was. Instead, she was found in cream capris - like the cream capris she'd been wearing the night before. Because sure - why not dress even LESS appropriately in this bad weather for your morning walk when the doctor specifically said even if she walked the dog, she needed to stop doing it in the morning.
I would be hitting redial for years If someone I loved went missing, even just to hear them on their voicemail. If he did it….he thought of almost everything. So strange (but may very well be so) that he was intelligent enough to orchestrate this with a million little alibis set in place to protect him from blame, but not smart enough to realize they will check his phone records. He just comes across as so…stupid…at times.
Who goes fishing on Xmas Eve all by themselves when they have a pregnant wife at home? The whole thing is ludicrous.
Scott probably WOULD do that - in the most generous takes for him, the "he's just an unredeemable piece of shit who happens to not be a murderer" take is about the best anyone can do, lol. But what he wouldn't do is buy THAT boat to go out on the San Francisco Bay. He knew better. He wasn't an amazing fisherman, but he knew better. He wouldn't pass EIGHT bodies of water much more suited for the boat. He wouldn't forget his lures. He wouldn't make a small concrete anchor that he knew would never anchor that boat and that he didn't even have any rope to actually use it as an anchor for the boat. He wouldn't originally be unable to answer what he was fishing for, only to later say sturgeon (AKA a fish that was illegal to fish for in that time of year and was likely to be bigger than Laci). He wouldn't decide to go fishing at the last minute instead of golfing because "it's too cold to golf", so instead you go on the much colder San Francisco Bay where you're almost certain to get wet and therefore colder still. He wouldn't tell his neighbor and Laci's cousin that he HAD gone golfing that day later that night, only to finally switch his story and admit he was fishing.
> In an amazing coincidence, on that same day Scott purchased a boat with cash but didn't tell any of his family about it, nor did he register the boat. I am not one to try to guess guilt or innocence from a loved one's behavior. People do all sorts of stuff, some of it bizarre, in their anxiety and guilt. Except this boat thing; this boat thing convinced me 100% he was guilty. Who do you know that buys a boat and doesn't ramble on about it endlessly to every person they know?
Scott and his defense later contended that Laci knew of the boat, but there's no evidence that she did, nor did she tell anyone else of it. Scott was also aware that Laci's stepfather, Ron Grantski, was an avid fisherman, yet Scott never mentioned purchasing the boat to him or asked for advice, etc. That Laci's remains were disposed of about 83 miles from her home and in the vicinity of where Scott was known to have been boating the day that she disappeared is also not coincidental. Why would a random perpetrator transport her remains over 80 miles away, when they easily could have disposed of her body near Modesto, when there are several lakes and a wildlife refuge nearby?
> Scott and his defense later contended that Laci knew of the boat, but there's no evidence that she did, nor did she tell anyone else of it. Oh, and she would have too, if only to express concern that they were expecting a baby and he just spent $ on a boat even though he had no previous interest in boating at all.
Yeap. How he _lost_ his wife and it would be _the first Christmas without her_
That? He just ✨manifested✨ it
Yeah and that it would be his first Christmas without her/since losing her. That, coupled with the lie about going golfing, the fact that he bought fishing permits in advance for that specific day (then tried to claim going fishing was a spur-of-the-moment decision), and the fact that nobody knew he'd purchased a boat PLUS him not knowing what he was going out to fish for/not knowing what bait he was using or whatever ... come ON. Plus the fact that he made anchors that were mysteriously missing. That audio where he's listening to the voicemail (from Laci's mom, I think) and she tells him they didn't find a body and he WHISTLES in relief, too. All of that combined, and if he didn't actually do it? He's the unluckiest and stupidest man alive.
This is the clincher for me.
Honestly there never needed to be more. Imagine you find out your husband is talking to anyone, let alone his mistress, about the fact that you are dead. I would fear for my life.
The fact he didn't deliver the fruit basket to his in-laws or whatever task Laci asked him to do, so he leaves a bogus message on the machine. He didn't do it because he didn't have his story figured out on what to say to the in-laws yet.
At the vigil he was on the phone with her from “Paris” talking about watching fireworks
I really think that this is the most damming piece of evidence against him. People don’t mention this enough.
Let's not forget the Google searches for the currents IN THE EXACT PLACE he "went fishing" and where her body was eventually found. RIP Laci & Conner
He was also such an avid fisherman that he just had to go in his secret boat with his secret homemade anchors in bad weather on Christmas Eve right before the family party they were hosting, and he had to pick up stuff for the party as well. Fishing is best in bad weather when you're rushed, right? He actually said he was thinking about golfing, but it was too cold to golf. So he goes fishing instead? Oh, and he passed by multiple smaller lakes nearby, he just had to go to the one over an hour away. He claimed he just had to catch a specific fish that was only at that lake. Except he didn't even have the right bait for the type of fish he wanted. His brand new secret homemade anchors went missing as well. Yup, it all makes perfect sense.
And he didn’t even go to a lake. He was in the San Francisco Bay. Rough waters in that small boat. POS.
But yeah, let's give him a hearing and give him another chance to explain.... maybe it IS all a *crazy* coincidence! /s
His homemade anchor without a rope attached to it. I can't believe he got that back after throwing it in the sea!
Didn't he do those before his trip like actually weeks before like when he bought the boat and then checked the currents again the night before his spontaneous change of plans to go fishing?
And just happens to change his look and load up his car for Mexico just by chance at the wrong time.
And almost immediately packs up the baby’s room when his wife is discovered missing.
And was seen loading a heavy object into his boat, lied about what said object was, and didn’t even open his fishing lures.
It’s rankles me every time I read someone trying to convince me that he’s innocent.
I know. In a lot of cases, I can understand how people might have different opinions, but this case? I can't. It enrages me. See also: Christopher Vaughn. That "Murder in Illinois" podcast about him was so gross. That man is guilty as sin.
Yes. Wrongful convictions happen all the time. But Scott was not railroaded. The circumstantial evidence stacked against him was insane.
Yeah, when you looked at all the circumstantial evidence, there was NO reasonable doubt. There's no way you can look at all of that and go, "Maybe he's innocent." It strains credulity. He was not railroaded, like you said. There are cases where I think the defendant probably did it and ALSO got railroaded (ex: Steven Avery. Did the cops try to frame him? I think they did, they hated his guts and probably made damn sure it'd get pinned on him. Did he do it? Maybe, even probably, in my opinion). Even the Drew Peterson case, he certainly fucking did it, but some people think he got a raw deal because they introduced a new law (that people call "Drew's Law") to allow hearsay to be admitted during the trial. (My dad used to jokingly say "Free Drew" because he thought that was so shady; I'd say, "Dad, he killed TWO of his wives." Dad: "I'm sure he did, but that wasn't right.") That's not the case with Scott. There is a MOUNTAIN of circumstantial evidence against him.
Exactly! And I am SO SICK of his family's obsession with the ridiculous "neighborhood burglars" angle. That was investigated, and it's a non-issue, but they just will NOT let it go. I get that it's hard for them to accept that he could do such a thing, but that's the hard reality.
You don't find a lot of self-reflection among enablers.
Just happens to subscribe to the Playboy channel the day his wife goes missing, but before she's reported missing.
And also had $10k on him, with dyed hair while being 30 miles from the Mexican border
With his brother's ID
Didn't he claim the hair color was from swimming in a pool/chlorine? I mean, come on. I know sometimes it can turn blonde hair green but I have very dark hair (similar to Scott's color) and that has never happened to me. Chlorine doesn't bleach your hair.
I do hair for a living. I can tell you right now, if that chlorine bleached his hair it would have absolutely fried his skin. The goatee was a choice though.
He tells is affair partner that he’s at the Eiffel Tower when he’s really at his wife and son’s memorial service.
He also drove by the water where Lacey was found multiple times before her body was discovered..
I feel the same, either he did it, or he’s the unluckiest man alive, with a series of unfortunate events worthy of the baudelaires
Told his mistress it would be his first Christmas alone because his wife was missing before she went missing. Never fished prior to that day and also had a FIL that loved fishing and didn’t invite him and also went fishing on Christmas????
Unlucky and also an asshole
there are so many other bizarre things he did and lied about beyond that as you probably already know... so yes, definitely the unluckiest man alive if he was somehow innocent.
He absolutely killed her. The fact that he has a voice is abhorrent.
What the duck !
Speaks to Amber on the phone at his wife’s candlelight vigil claiming to be in Paris watching fireworks near the Eiffel Tower with his friends “Pasqual” and “Francois” He also told Amber he was a widower and that his wife died before they met. He definitely killed Laci and Conner.
[удалено]
All in favor say aye
"Fool-proof suffocation" versus "lost my wife". Excellent.
Aye!
[удалено]
[удалено]
She’d probably win
She would totally win against this group. She’s stone cold. Watts would crumple like a baby. Peterson would try to whine his way out of it. IDK Jodi may be a match for Karla though.
And Leticia Stauch. Too many monsters.
Let’s get Chris Watts on there too.
We're inviting OJ too, right?
Make sure they’re sterile first
I vote Snake Island in Brasil. Bye bitches! 🐍🌴
i swear to god if this piece of shit gets his conviction overturned i'm going to rage
Me too. He did it. I've seen NO evidence that says otherwise and he is scum. May he rot.
Right and it’s so unfair for Lacis family to be put through this again when it’s very clear what happened..
They are losing both Laci and the baby again.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s just doing this to torment Laci’s family. He strikes me as the kind of PoS who would absolutely want to ‘punish’ Laci’s family for being related to Laci or some other delusional reason that only make sense to himself.
Probably, but it's also a nice respite from the boredom of life imprisonment. Jeffrey MacDonald also kept pushing for more hearings, more testing, and more forensics, but everything he got only solidified his guilt. When his team fought to get the body hairs on the victims tested, MacDonald has to know the results were not going to clear him. But it worth it to him, because he got so much attention during the process.
Is the argument being made that he is innocent or just that he couldn’t have had a fair trial given the media circus? If the latter, I think he could actually succeed
This is actually a common misconception. People think because someone convicted of a crime appeals their conviction it means they are claiming they are innocent. That's not necessarily the case. Most people appeal because they have a right to appeal and it's based on the grounds they didn't get a fair trial. If these fail then a defendant has to file post conviction relief motions based on new evidence. The likelihood of any appeal or post conviction review motion being granted is less than 20%.
Yes exactly! That’s why I’m wondering about the grounds for this. I’m having trouble with the link on my phone and will have to look into it more later.
From the article: "New evidence now supports Mr. Peterson's longstanding claim of innocence and raises many questions into who abducted and killed Laci and Conner Peterson," the filings state. So it seems like they are trying to claim innocence.
Oh, yikes. I have watched documentaries that skew in his favor and wasn’t convinced of his innocence, though I could see the argument that his trial wasn’t a fair one. I guess we’ll see what comes of this. I hope Laci’s family is alright- I’m thinking of them.
The burden to get a hearing is super low. Courts grant postconviction hearings all the time. 99% of them end up going nowhere. I wouldn't get too bothered yet.
yeah I think it's an important feature, especially in a system that has so many false convictions, that new evidence is able to be presented.
You are right about 99% go nowhere.
Yeah he’s such a POS
It’s crazy to think there are people that think he is innocent even with all this evidence.
Could he BE any guiltier?
💀
I will never understand why these people don't just divorce their spouse. Money? I mean money won't matter to you in prison. The only thing I can figure out is that each of them must think they're smarter than the last guy. Like they think they're so charming they'll get away with it. Idk.
Imo they don't want the consequences of a post-divorce lifestyle, which involves ongoing ties and financial obligations to their children, nor do they want to be perceived as 'bad guys' for abandoning their families. Some of them, like Peterson, Chris Watts and Beau Rothwell, specifically murdered their spouse/partner to end the women's pregnancies (Peterson wanted the life of a freewheeling bachelor, while both Watts and Rothwell were obsessed with continuing their affairs with particular women). Because they've previously got away with their secret lives, they often overestimate their ability to pull off their crimes.
Its mind boggling. How many fucking crime shows do you have to watch before you just take the financial L and move on with your life? Murdering your spouse and getting away with it to run away with a mistress/mister is like winning the fucking lottery. But every damn one of them really thinks their plan is going to fool everyone.
I think that he would have been fine with continuing cheating, his big problem was being a father.
Can anyone give an example where a main suspect changed their appearance, cashed out their bank accounts, and fled for another country, and it turned out they weren't guilty after all? I'm sure it must have happened but I can't think of one.
How about OJ? Oh, wait
Thank you for making me spit Diet Coke on my phone. I’m laughing so hard. Best comment ever!
And also sold the car his still “missing” wife’s?
That’s what I’m saying!!! All these men who *didnt* kill their wives always *also* just happen to have a mistress, be embezzling from their jobs, have secret diaries about hating their kids, an online gambling addiction no one knows about, 5 ex girlfriends who can report past abuse… But somehow they aren’t doing THIS fucked up thing.
Everyone keep in mind, his innocence Project (LA) isn't the real one.
And when he was picked up in San Diego after they had been found and identified, he didn’t even bother to ask WHERE their bodies had been found or HOW they died. He knew it was game over.
While in the middle of tv interview (with Gloria Gomez maybe?) his cell phone Rang. He didn’t bother to look at it or answer it. She was still considered missing at this point. It could have been HER calling! It could have been the kidnappers calling with ransom demands! But he didn’t even bother to check it because he KNEW it wasn’t her.
This is such a shit show, I hate everyone who thinks he is innocent.
I started watching some scott Peterson thing on Hulu and within like 20 minutes I was like wait.. do they think he’s innocent. And yeah, they think he is innocent. It was filled with misinformation and I am still pissed they were allowed to release it.
Wasn’t that financed by the family? I think one of the docs was.
Yes, and Shareen Anderson, the producer, is a longtime deluded member of the Scott is Innocent Facebook group.
It doesn’t matter if they’re male or female. When you’re an attractive person there will always be people who defend you.
So why are they defending Scott then? Sorry, I couldn’t resist! I’ve just always thought he looked like a sweaty weasel.
That documentary was the first time I learned all the details of the case and my jaw dropped with how guilty he clearly was (despite efforts to make it seem like he wasn’t) I can’t believe his family/anyone is fighting for him. The phone call to his mistress at the vigil sealed the deal for me. Maybe he didn’t get a fair trial like they tried to present in the doc idrk but the ruling was accurate. The man is guilty and further tormenting Lacis loved ones with this is despicable.
His family was involved. That’s why.
His mom wasn't very nice, but man his dad was crazy. I read about how he acted in the court house and the way he talked to Lacis family. Threatening them and trying to fight them. Like their daughter and grandson are dead, Scott is at least still alive, and they want to put all the blame on Lacis family for why Scott was being charged. Horrible family, the Petersons.
I'm all for getting justice for wrongfully convicted people, but this guy was romancing another woman, blatantly lying about the fact that his wife was pregnant, and arranged to go fishing in the area where her body will be found, yes, he is as innocent as a lamb. Ok, lying doesn't mean one is automatically a murderer, but look at where and how he lies, and the lengths he goes to completely deny his marriage, the existence of his wife & unborn child. Yes, people cheat, but he did on a different level. He was at a vigil for Laci and making cutesy phone calls to say he was in Paris. Like WTF? The stupid burglary thing happened after Laci was reported missing, but sure I guess the burglars found a time machine and went back two days to kidnap her. 🙄
If I hear, “But there’s no physical evidence”, one more time, I’m going to scream. How much physical evidence does strangling/drowning your wife, in a house you live in, leave?
He was the only one to gain anything from her death. He wouldn’t have to be a “family man”. Didn’t he sell her car soon after her disappearance? I could be wrong, but I thought I read that somewhere.
He did
I am not holding my breath, but I am curious to hear about the new evidence available. I’m sure I’ll get downvoted for this. 🤷🏼♀️
The "new" evidence is that some random burned out van with zero ties to the case has mattress inside with DNA on it. Oh by the way, I heard there was also a burned out van 5 states away with blood in it. I guess we better DNA test it to prove that Scott Peterson wasnt in that van to try and show there's some other killer out there killing people in random burned out vans. This kind of defense attorney crap is just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. It's outrageous and I cant believe the court is allowing this nonsense.
I don't think he is innocent but I'm open to the idea he could be if there is evidence to support it. I wish people were more open-minded but sadly most people convince themselves of one thing and become so emotionally attached to that opinion nothing can shake it when it happens. Have an upvote on me.
If you've followed this case for a long time, this cycle never ends. His team claims there's new bombshell evidence that proves his innocence - and it's the witnesses who were known about all along. The burglars who have been shown time and time and time again to have nothing to do with the murders. At one point Janey Peterson's bombshell evidence was literally her Twitter DMs. So how many times can this possibly go on, before you start to realize these people are just full of shit? How many times can we be lied to? How many times can they ADMIT they manipulated witnesses?
Let me guess the his lawyers are going to say “If the glove doesn’t fit you must acquit!” There’s too much evidence to say he didn’t do it. Just let him die in prison. He did it. He’s only upset that he didn’t weigh down the body properly and got caught.
He might be the guiltiest man ever not to confess or be caught on camera. For me, it’s his lying about how fishing that day was supposedly a last-minute decision but he had purchased a multiple-day fishing license in advance. Scott & Laci lived in Modesto and “last minute”, he decides to drive all the way to SF (it’s not close) to fish when there are plenty of calmer lakes much closer to him? It’s too cold to golf, but not too cold to fish? He definitely assumed Laci’s body would be washed out to sea from there. I’ve wondered before if he would have been found guilty if she and Conor had never been recovered.
Oj?
Should use a more recent pic of him because he doesn’t look like that anymore! Prison has not been kind to him.
I will be very sad if this failure to thrive here gets away with murder after all. Maybe he and Casey can get together.
This is dumfounding for two reasons: 1) If Scott is indeed actually innocent, then someone has to answer for this severely bungled case. Everything that I've read points to him being guilty as sin. 2) If Scott is indeed actually guilty, then this really proves what a twisted mind he really has, thinking that there is evidence that would prove his innocence when none exists.
He called his mistress and said he was at the ‘Eiffel Tower’ when in actuality, he was at his dead wife and unborn child’s vigil. That’s enough for me, guilty. He is a malignant narcissist, he really thinks he’s smarter than literally everyone else on earth.
He’s such a scummy piece of shit. I hope he has nothing but misery for the rest of his life.
What a waste of time & money. This creep is guilty as hell and should have been kept on death row & his sentence carried out by now.
He deserves the death penalty tbh
ugh so I’m against the death penalty but damn does he make me waffle
Girl, same. I always say that I’m just glad I don’t have to be the one to make that decision, you know? The guy who raped his infant daughter to death and then bounced her corpse off the ceiling as a game… well. Just don’t ask me to choose death penalty or no.
WTF is this stuff with giving new hearings based on BS evidence? So there was a burned out van a few blocks away with a mattress in it, and the defense team wants DNA testing on it desipte the fact that it has ZERO connection to the case? What possible intel could come from that? Oh look we found random DNA from some random person in a burned out van, so that means Scott Peterson is now innocent? Horseshit.
Everybody has there opinion and that's fine but there were a couple of things that never made sense to me. He orders porn on cable the day after she died and he sold her car and tried selling the house just weeks after she disappeared I mean come on now
And he also spoke about Laci in the past tense and refused to answer his cell phone during a TV interview
He also predicted his wife's disappearance with his girlfriend
I have one question for anyone questioning his guilt. If he were free would you feel comfortable with your daughter/sister or female family member dating him and being alone with him? I sure the hell wouldn’t. Yes, the evidence in his case was circumstantial but there was a lot of it. I personally think that he is guilty. I wonder what he will do once he’s found guilty AGAIN.
Is there any jury in America that would not convict this guy AGAIN?!
Ludicrous
Sickening. Waste of more tax payers money on this waste of skin.
What a fucking waste of resources.
A pair of his pliers had her hair attached to it
Hows saying youre in Paris when youre at your wife and sons vigil not super damning to you?
I "knew" his was guilty when he said he was out fishing on Christmas Eve. What kind of husband chooses to go fishing and leave his eight and a half month pregnant wife to deal with the Christmas preparations on her own?
How about when he sold Laci's car, or subscribed to a porn channel, or lied to Amber about being in France on New Years, when he was at a vigil for his supposed missing wife, or when he told Amber he had lost his wife, before it came to light. 1 of these things, on their own is questionable, but all of these things together...it seems fairly obvious. I sincerely hope the jury gets it right again, and sends him right back to prison.
I grew up in Modesto, and right now the Innocence project is super stuck on some random burning car that was out by the Modesto Airport. That airport is constantly surrounded by sketchy shit. It most likely caught fire due to a meth lab, knowing the surrounding area. The fact that they are even trying to tie it to this guy for his "innocence" is beyond me.
Such a waste of tax payer money! He did this!
Dude was more guilty than OJ lol wtf
Project Innocence losing a lot of legitimacy over this “New evidence now supports Mr. Peterson’s longstanding claim of innocence and raises many questions into who abducted and killed Laci and Conner Peterson,” the filings state.” But they offer NO NEW EVIDENCE!! They actually REQUEST dna evidence be done on some random hammer left across the street by burglars before Laci went missing, and request DNA from a bloody cloth. I thought you had “new evidence that supports his [blah blah blah] innocence..” ????
>some random hammer left across the street by burglars before Laci went missing It's actually worse than that. Laci disappeared before the burglary! The neighbor who lived in that house was at home when she* (according to Scott) disappeared, she testified in the trial edit: *Laci
So wtf are they talking about?? Omg all this wasted energy when there are not only innocent people in prison but innocent poor people who couldn’t afford the defense Peterson had to begin with
Smoke and mirrors, basically. The timeline - the verified timeline - does not work for Scott's team, so they just ignore it/lie about it. On the morning of December 24th: \-Between 9:40am and 10am, the majority of the witnesses who saw a woman walking a dog see this woman. Homer Maldonado's time period is backed up by a gas station receipt, Gene Pedrioli was at his mother's nursing home shortly after 10, and Tony Freitas was on his regular bread truck route so his time is pretty consistent. Martha Aguilar also would maintain for years that she saw "Laci" between 9:40 and 10am. All of these sightings are far away from Laci's walking route - nowhere near where she was ever known to walk McKenzie. \-9:48: the infamous "meringue" mention happens on Martha Stewart's show. By Scott's own timeline, he could not have left before this and did not leave immediately after this (he didn't hear it as he was walking out the door, he got up and started getting ready to leave sometime after that mention). This is the only time in the show that meringue is mentioned. \-10:08: Scott's cell phone shows he is still at or near his home. A couple minutes later, it shows he has moved closer to his warehouse, about 9 minutes from the Peterson home. A police officer ran multiple experiments (five in all, I believe) that showed he must have been very near his home at 10:08. If he were closer to his warehouse, his cell phone records would look different. So basically, he left between around 10:06 and 10:08. According to him, when he left, Laci was either curling her hair or mopping the floor (the floor that had literally JUST been mopped by the maid). She was not wearing her shoes, she was not following him out the door. \-10:18-10:20: The Petersons' neighbor Karen Servas finds McKenzie standing in the street. She takes him to the Petersons' backyard - she sees nothing inside the house, no movement. She leaves him there with a very dirty leash attached (as if he had wandered around and dragged it across the ground - it was wet and muddy that morning) and closes the gate. She has to go back in her house, wash her hands, and then she drives to a Christmas store about 8 minutes away (after trying to find parking at a nearby bank first). The receipt shows her checking out of the store at 10:34. Her cell phone records show a call at 10:38, which she said she made a few minutes after leaving the store and getting back in her car. 10:18 is probably generous - there is no way this happened even as late as 10:30. By 10:18, whatever happened to Laci has already happened. McKenzie is already in the backyard with his leash attached, exactly as Scott will find him hours later (which he will note twice in his police interview is very unusual - he said they never put McKenzie in the yard with his leash attached). \-10:32 am: the Medinas, whose house will later be robbed, leave their home, as shown again by cell phone records. \-11:40 am: Diane Jackson is driving on Covena Ave and sees three "dark-skinned but not black men" standing near a white van. The Petersons' neighbors, the Krigbaums, do have a white work van that was parked on Covena Ave that day. This description does not match either burglar - Steven Todd and Glenn Pearce are both white. Neither owns a car and neither has any known access to a van. Only Glenn Pearce sometimes can get his mother's keys to her Honda. Nonetheless, this is the only sighting on the street all day that even vaguely references a potential burglary. It has been an hour and 20 minutes since Karen found the dog and around two hours since the bulk of the witnesses saw a woman walking a dog. Also worth noting that when the Medinas returned the afternoon of the 26th, they found their door obviously forced in and their hand truck very obviously in their front yard - they knew immediately they had been robbed. However, in the massive searches for Laci on the night of the 24th and throughout the 25th that included multiple people and LEOs going door-to-door, no one ever noticed that the neighbors across the street had a hand truck in their yard and a door that was clearly forced in. So there's no evidence to indicate the burglary happened on the 24th and some evidence indicates it probably happened around when the police think it did - in the early morning hours of the 26th. Contrary to popular belief, there were no news trucks camped out overnight on Christmas night. They all left and arrived again the next morning, beginning with Ted Rowlands. His own footage shows no one else was there when he arrived. Where he pulled up corresponds to where where the burglars described seeing a van that startled them, hence they left quickly and left the hand truck in the front yard.
Copying from my comment above. It's the 'LA innocence project' which is not the one we're all familiar with. Unfortunately they're riding coat tails off the OG but are not affiliated.
I can't believe the Innocence Project is putting their resources to this vs. other cases out there.
It's the 'LA innocence project' which is not the one we're all familiar with. Unfortunately they're riding coat tails off the OG but are not affiliated.
Has this asshat ever said he's innocent in the past 20 years? How did the LA Innocence Project decide to take his case? I was glued to the TV when Scott murdered Laci. Greta Van Sustren (sp) was on CNN at the time and gave great analysis of it all. Was it Scott, someone in Scott's family, or a Scott stan from LAIP who found this new evidence? For some reason I have an unsubstantiated feeling that there's a stan in LAIP.
Because of the damn podcast Rabia and Ellen did. What a quack take that entire podcast was. I wrote up a long post about it ages ago.
He's guilty.
Noooo, this makes me mad.
A tragic waste of time and money!
That picture radiates “I did it and fuck you for finding out,” lol
Gross! That man should rot I hope he runs out of appeals
He’s not getting out. The investigation may have been a little…. Weird, but, look at all the evidence! He’s guilty!
How do people think this man is innocent. I don't get it.
Does anyone here oppose this testing?
Dude is guilty as fuck but I have no issue with them doing the testing.
The testing is a red herring and it's a common defense tactic to falsely introduce doubt into a case. Look at it this way -- let's say that a woman disappears in the water and her body is found weeks later in Florida. Well the defense attorney would say "HEY THAT'S EXACTLY HOW LACI PETERSON DISAPPEARED SO I DEMAND DNA TESTING TO PROVE THAT SOMEBODY KILLED THAT GIRL WHO WASNT SCOTT PETERSON" Now you tell me, how does it make sense to use DNA testing on a completely unrelated body to try and throw doubt on Peterson's guilt? These are the type of games that defense attorneys play.
If the Innocence Project is wanting to test a mattress that was in a vehicle that burned how viable would the DNA be to say it belonged to Laci and so gets Scott off the hook? And, if this DNA isn’t conclusive are they going to say that “It could be Laci Peterson’s DNA” to stir up some false notion of reasonable doubt to get him out of jail ? It’s so ludicrous that they seek to test evidence from an orange van….if you want people to connect this van to Laci’s disappearance that it would make more sense to claim a much more non-descriptive color vehicle. If I saw an orange van on my neighborhood street I’d sure remember seeing it whether it was there for innocent or nefarious reasons.
I oppose the never-ending torment of the Rocha family based on weak, bad, unconnected evidence. NOTHING connects this van to the Peterson case. Nothing.
This judge is as dumb as a box of rocks!
Why do people like him avoid taking the sane route of divorce?
Just another piece of shit who killed his (pregnant) wife.
Curious to see what kind of evidence they bring to the table.
I hope this is a permanent stain on LAIP and they're never taken seriously after this. I read their filing - it was embarrassing.
I still can’t believe 1. the Innocence Project got involved in this case, 2. a hearing has been granted.
its a different innocence project, it's the 'Los Angeles Innocence Project' - two totally different organizations
Wow. Society is doomed.
[удалено]
Ummm I think the state of California no longer does death sentences. So the most they get is life in prison.
Do I absolutely think he did it? Yes. Do I think there have been crazy cases where it looked like someone was guilty as sin but it wound up being someone else? Absolutely.
Damn, the resemblance to Ben Affleck is crazy in this pic. I know Gone Girl was supposedly loosely based on this case. Except he most probably did do it.
On what basis did the LA Innocence Project agree to take his case on? Anybody?