LA Innocence Project takes up notorious case of convicted wife-killer Scott Peterson

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not many details yet, but I always assumed he was guilty. For the Innocence Project to get involved does that give anyone else pause to think...."hmmm maybe he is innocent?" If not Scott then the last 20 years have been wasted with any possible suspects being long gone.

https://abc7.com/scott-peterson-innocence-project-laci-murder/14337140/

The motions for DNA testing of evidence and access to other evidence have to do with the burglary across the street from Laci and Scott’s house; the theory that she witnessed the perpetrators on her way home from the dog walk and they abducted her has been in existence for years. The theory also suggests that her body was dumped in the Bay by the real killers after it was widely reported that Scott was fishing there on the day Laci disappeared.

I posted about that theory here a few years ago and people lost their minds berating and ridiculing me, so it’s interesting to see LA Innocence taking up the case as those projects don’t get involved without strong evidence of actual innocence.

If it turns out Laci’s DNA is on the mattress from the burned out can, thus Scott is innocent, how will all the people who demonized him for simply being a run of the mill philanderer going to feel?

Probably just glad he paid for his cheating with a couple decades of his life.

Burned out van, no thanks autocorrect!

You mention the theory and that you posted about it. Just curious, do you think this is what happened?

I think it’s plausible. I encourage folks to watch that recent docuseries on Hulu, or at least the final episode where investigators presented the evidence supporting the alternative theory of the case.

Laci was spotted walking her dog at the park. Her dog was later found trailing its leash outside of the yard. There was a van seen on their street that day. There is also something about the timing of when the mailman saw Laci, or saw the dog. In any case, it adds up to compelling circumstantial evidence and when you factor the timing of Laci’s disappearance and the later discovery of her body and Connor’s, it is entirely possible she was dumped in the Bay by perpetrators seeking to point the finger in the husband’s direction since his whereabouts had been reported extensively in the media.

People get hung up on this one thing so I’ll just also add: for a time some years ago - way before Laci Peterson’s case - I found myself spending some time at a forum called The Other Woman. Yes, a forum for adulterers. I stumbled on it by accident but it was a window into marriage that I was very interested to see - I was unmarried and averse at the time. Anyway my point is I heard a lot of stories about how women ended up with cheating men, and I’m sorry to tell you that it isn’t uncommon for a married man who cheats to ‘kill’ his wife for the convenience of communicating with a lover. I’m sure there is some perverse psychological thing going on there, but yeah, some cheating men claim to be widows probably just for the extra sympathy F factor it compels.

I also should add that I am in general a misandrist and suspicious of husbands and boyfriends and exes as a rule - I’ve seen what they are capable of my whole life, including my own ‘father’, who I feared my whole childhood would someday kill my mother in a fit of rage.

I wouldn’t cross the street to piss on Scott Peterson if he was on fire, I think he was a pig of a husband. I’m not at all in the camp of googly eyed Scott Peterson fans who feel deeply his innocence.

I’m a natural born skeptic and someone who has seen the shortcomings of the criminal justice system close up - I was so troubled, I quit. I cannot imagine any reason not to test DNA evidence if it might exonerate an innocent person. It shocks my conscience when prosecutors fight so hard for convictions that might be unsound.

The Michael Morton case is one worth looking up and learning. There is a movie from 2013, An Unreal Dream: the Michael Morton Story. A man can be made to look like a murdering POS by the time cops and prosecutors and media have had their way, even when he is 100% innocent of any crime.

Because the justice system isn't perfect, all outcomes are unreliable?

I didn't say that, but nice straw man.

When there is DNA evidence untested in a case with plausible alternative theory of the crime and numerous pieces that fit that theory, the DNA evidence should be tested, period. Prosecutors who fight such testing under the guise of preserving the integrity of convictions are undermining public faith in the criminal justice system.

The hundreds of actual innocence exonerations in recent decades, many of which have long sordid histories of law enforcement and prosecutors fighting every step of the way to be an obstacle to finding the truth, are eroding public faith in the system every bit as much as the egregious actions of some law enforcement officers which we see on a nearly weekly basis on our TVs and phones.

What many in the public don't even seem to grasp is that prosecutors have an ethical obligation to pursue justice, not merely convictions. However most prosecutors are dogged about convictions at any cost, including far too many who engage in misconduct to get the win, never mind the truth. As a result, there are a lot more actually innocent people in prison that any of y'all want to believe.

Test the DNA. Hopefully there is zero connection to Laci, which would put to rest all notions of Peterson's innocence and we could all stop talking about him forever.

Prosecutors fight this evidence because any result will produce additional confusion. If they don't find the DNA, it's inconclusive. If they do find DNA, there are dozens of reasonable explanations for finding it. The DNA evidence would prove nothing. The defense would only use it to claim that there is "reasonable" doubt. It's not reasonable because there is no possible way for DNA to be conclusive in this case.

Wrong. If Laci’s DNA is present on the mattress from the back of the burned out van found in Modesto, then she didn’t get killed in her house by her husband and dumped in the bay on Xmas Eve as police alleged.

DNA from a burned-out van? Keep dreaming. And if they did find DNA from a burned-out van, the most likely explanation is cross-contamination. That would imply that the evidence was mishandled, leading to any number of potential remedies.

[Anonymous]

Update from 3 hours ago:

"Lawyers for the nonprofit now fighting for Peterson are focusing on stains from a mattress in the back of a burned van that tested presumptive positive for blood."

https://abc7.com/scott-peterson-case-new-evidence-innocence-project/14352815/

[Anonymous]

I’ve watched the docu series and still don’t see how people find him innocent. On top of everything else already mentioned, he tried to sell their house weeks after her disappearance but then he realized he couldn’t sell the house just himself because her name was on it. So he sold her car instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Update from 3 hours ago:

"Lawyers for the nonprofit now fighting for Peterson are focusing on stains from a mattress in the back of a burned van that tested presumptive positive for blood."

https://abc7.com/scott-peterson-case-new-evidence-innocence-project/14352815/

Just…blood? Like, anyone’s blood, not specifically Laci’s?

They have to have so many more deserving cases to work on. I mean, come on.

[Anonymous]

I always believed he was guilty, just “because.”

There never was any physical evidence to convince me - I remember at the time once finding out Scott had cheated on his pregnant wife, then that was it in my head…..
I automatically assumed an adulterer = murderer.

Looking back on things >> I now find it preposterous that a person was sent to death row only on circumstantial evidence alone.
And the fact that a respected organization as the LA Innocence Project is saying he may be innocent after all speaks volumes since I doubt they would get involved in this case (due to the controversy involved!) unless they had compelling evidence to exonerate Scott.

After all, they have a good reputation to uphold.

So like everyone, I will keep an open mind going forward and hopefully the truth (in whatever capacity) will come out. ⚖️

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this case makes people, especially women, so uncomfortable because it reveals how entirely vulnerable we each are to such horror.

Either she was snatched from her dooryard by tweakers or she was extinguished by her beloved husband, who on the surface seemed like the perfect guy next door.

Every woman on this board could find herself in either predicament someday, no matter how much you want to believe it isn't possible.

There are certain parallels to the Scott Peterson case in regard to that husband/father (don’t remember his name?) who about seven years back killed his pregnant wife as well.

I mean both men are reasonably attractive and look normal.
And they both acted weird in how they did things after their wives disappeared.

Both couldn’t wait to sell the family home and both had mistresses who looked trashy.

[Anonymous]

But the Colorado husband actually admitted guilt thus sparing the families a lengthy, painful trial.

Scott always maintained his innocence.

Both men were in their early 30’s too.
Both looked completely normal and were even a little (very little!!) bit handsome too.

Scott has been locked up for two decades (31-51 yrs old) but comparing his two mugshots he doesn’t look like he has aged very much!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Update from 3 hours ago:

"Lawyers for the nonprofit now fighting for Peterson are focusing on stains from a mattress in the back of a burned van that tested presumptive positive for blood."

https://abc7.com/scott-peterson-case-new-evidence-innocence-project/14352815/

Just…blood? Like, anyone’s blood, not specifically Laci’s?

They have to have so many more deserving cases to work on. I mean, come on.

Yes, presumptive positive for human blood. IT HAS NOT EVER BEEN DNA TESTED - that’s the point of the motion.

Seems like you like to comment without first marshaling facts.

Prosecutors all over this country fight to prevent DNA testing rather than allow someone to prove that they’ve wrongfully convicted an innocent person. Just ask Michael Morton, and hundreds more who have been exonerated by DNA after decades and decades languishing in prison by wrongful conviction.

[Anonymous]

A lot of you are wrong

[Anonymous]

The motive just isn’t there for anyone else. I know motive isn’t a required element, but still no one else had one.

[Anonymous]

If someone who has been following this closely wouldn’t mind: please share more details about the van and the mattress. Was the van definitively connected to the robbery, or to the men who committed the robbery? What makes this particular van and mattress of interest in this case? Where has the van and mattress been during the intervening time? When was the presumptive positive test on the mattress obtained?

I work in forensic DNA, and my concern is that if the mattress sample is tested it could produce a very inconclusive result. For example, if the DNA quantity is very low, the DNA is very degraded, and/or a complex mixture is present. That’s not to say I don’t think there is potential value in testing it (I don’t know enough about the relevant details)… but I’m not at all sure it will provide the answers people seem to be looking for.

On a separate note: I’ve never watched the documentary mentioned here, but I did listen to the episodes of “The Prosecutors” podcast that pertain to this case. It’s not surprising to me that Scott Peterson was found guilty based on the evidence presented in the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If someone who has been following this closely wouldn’t mind: please share more details about the van and the mattress. Was the van definitively connected to the robbery, or to the men who committed the robbery? What makes this particular van and mattress of interest in this case? Where has the van and mattress been during the intervening time? When was the presumptive positive test on the mattress obtained?

I work in forensic DNA, and my concern is that if the mattress sample is tested it could produce a very inconclusive result. For example, if the DNA quantity is very low, the DNA is very degraded, and/or a complex mixture is present. That’s not to say I don’t think there is potential value in testing it (I don’t know enough about the relevant details)… but I’m not at all sure it will provide the answers people seem to be looking for.

On a separate note: I’ve never watched the documentary mentioned here, but I did listen to the episodes of “The Prosecutors” podcast that pertain to this case. It’s not surprising to me that Scott Peterson was found guilty based on the evidence presented in the case.

Apparently, some van was set on fire near the Peterson home. The theory is that burglars kidnapped and killed Laci, took her body to the marina to dump it, then returned to the Peterson home to hurn the van. I suppose the burglars could have had two vehicles, killed Laci in the van, transfered her to another vehicle, and then burned the van.

None of it makes sense.

What does make sense is that Peterson planted evidence in the van.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not many details yet, but I always assumed he was guilty. For the Innocence Project to get involved does that give anyone else pause to think...."hmmm maybe he is innocent?" If not Scott then the last 20 years have been wasted with any possible suspects being long gone.

https://abc7.com/scott-peterson-innocence-project-laci-murder/14337140/

The motions for DNA testing of evidence and access to other evidence have to do with the burglary across the street from Laci and Scott’s house; the theory that she witnessed the perpetrators on her way home from the dog walk and they abducted her has been in existence for years. The theory also suggests that her body was dumped in the Bay by the real killers after it was widely reported that Scott was fishing there on the day Laci disappeared.

I posted about that theory here a few years ago and people lost their minds berating and ridiculing me, so it’s interesting to see LA Innocence taking up the case as those projects don’t get involved without strong evidence of actual innocence.

If it turns out Laci’s DNA is on the mattress from the burned out can, thus Scott is innocent, how will all the people who demonized him for simply being a run of the mill philanderer going to feel?

Probably just glad he paid for his cheating with a couple decades of his life.

Burned out van, no thanks autocorrect!

You mention the theory and that you posted about it. Just curious, do you think this is what happened?

I think it’s plausible. I encourage folks to watch that recent docuseries on Hulu, or at least the final episode where investigators presented the evidence supporting the alternative theory of the case.

Laci was spotted walking her dog at the park. Her dog was later found trailing its leash outside of the yard. There was a van seen on their street that day. There is also something about the timing of when the mailman saw Laci, or saw the dog. In any case, it adds up to compelling circumstantial evidence and when you factor the timing of Laci’s disappearance and the later discovery of her body and Connor’s, it is entirely possible she was dumped in the Bay by perpetrators seeking to point the finger in the husband’s direction since his whereabouts had been reported extensively in the media.

People get hung up on this one thing so I’ll just also add: for a time some years ago - way before Laci Peterson’s case - I found myself spending some time at a forum called The Other Woman. Yes, a forum for adulterers. I stumbled on it by accident but it was a window into marriage that I was very interested to see - I was unmarried and averse at the time. Anyway my point is I heard a lot of stories about how women ended up with cheating men, and I’m sorry to tell you that it isn’t uncommon for a married man who cheats to ‘kill’ his wife for the convenience of communicating with a lover. I’m sure there is some perverse psychological thing going on there, but yeah, some cheating men claim to be widows probably just for the extra sympathy F factor it compels.

The problem with this theory is that burglars don't just decide to add abduction to an existing crime.

You speak as someone entirely naive of criminal behavior. Again, as someone who has spent decades working in the system, I have seen all kinds of horrific crime arising out of all kinds of circumstances often with zero logic involved.

The Modesto area where Scott and Laci lived is well known for having serious issues with meth, lots of tweakers criminals running around. Tweakers do things that defy reason, and snatching a pregnant woman who saw a couple of tweaker burglars leaving a break-in is actually well within the realm of conceivable for anyone who has worked in the system and seen the random human savagery close up.

Can you find me a case of meth addicts randomly kidnapping a woman that witnessed them commiting a burglary. Even meth addicts act rationally. A kidnapped women is only useful for ransom.

And then the burglars made Scott dye his hair, take out $10,000 in cash, and carry a fake ID right before getting arrested! Classic meth addict behavior.

While driving towards the Mexican border!

+1 the natural thing to do when your wife, who is 9 mos pregnant, is missing

He was in disguise looking for the real killers of his wife. What did you want him to do, go golfing?

[Anonymous]

Thread is pathetic.

It’s just a bunch of MAGAs racists who always hated the Innocence Project.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot of you are wrong

...and? wrong about what exactly?