More than two decades after one of America’s most notorious murder convictions, Scott Peterson’s legal team says unanswered questions and untested evidence could reignite debate over whether the right man was convicted.
According to Fox News, the claims come as a new documentary revisiting the case is set to premiere this summer, and just weeks after a California judge rejected Peterson’s latest attempt to overturn his conviction.
Peterson was convicted of murdering his wife, Laci Peterson, and their unborn son, Conner, after Laci disappeared from Modesto, California, on or around Dec. 24, 2002.
Although a San Mateo County Superior Court judge denied his most recent challenge on April 27, the Los Angeles Innocence Project, which now represents Peterson, has vowed to appeal the ruling.
At CrimeCon in Las Vegas, Peterson’s longtime attorney, Mark Geragos, argued that significant evidence remains unexplored.
“I have never seen anything that ties Scott Peterson to a criminal conviction in this case,” Geragos told Fox News Digital.
Among the issues he highlighted was a burned van discovered near the Peterson home after a burglary in the area.
“There was a van, it was ditched and set on fire very close to the house, within miles,” Gergaos said. “That van contained a treasure trove of evidence that should have been tested in real time, some of which was, some of which still exists, and that they’re actively not trying to or prevent the defense from doing it.”
Peterson’s attorneys have long argued that Laci may have encountered burglars who were breaking into a nearby home on the day she vanished.
According to previous court filings, the defense contends that such an encounter would have occurred after Peterson left home for a fishing trip, potentially placing him away from the scene when his wife disappeared.
Geragos also said the Innocence Project submitted numerous items for additional DNA testing, but the request was denied.
“Why wouldn’t you want to? Why wouldn’t you want to vindicate yourself if you’re the prosecution? The only explanation is because you’re not sure that you’ve got the right guy,” Geragos said.
He added that the case may not be finished.
“There’s clearly new stuff that’s gonna come out,” he said, adding that “there are still bombshells yet to come.”
Retired Los Angeles Police Department detective and private investigator Ninette Toosbuy, who works with Peterson’s defense team, also pointed to witness accounts she believes were overlooked.
According to Toosbuy, several people contacted Modesto police claiming they saw Laci Peterson on the morning of Dec. 24, but those reports were never fully investigated.
“So I think there are two real critical areas where exculpatory information was not provided to the defense team,” Toosbuy said. “One was the multiple witnesses who had contacted Modesto PD to say that they had seen Laci Peterson on the morning of the 24th. Those witnesses were not all vetted out.”
She argued that confirming even a small number of those accounts could have significantly altered the investigation.
“If just one or two witnesses had been vetted and could have confirmed that, in fact, they did see Laci Peterson in the park or in the neighborhood, and that their statement was reliable, that would have immediately, within the first 48 hours, eliminated Scott Peterson as a suspect,” she said.
“And yet that was an area that Modesto PD decided not to pursue. And from my standpoint as an investigator, it’s a real failure of the investigation.”
The latest claims are expected to receive renewed attention when A&E releases the two-part documentary “Scott Peterson: The New Evidence” on July 16 and 17. The program will feature witness testimony and interviews with Geragos and others closely connected to the case.