For years, Scott Peterson said he didn’t kill his pregnant wife Laci or their unborn son, Conner. But prosecutors say he did and that the evidence is “overwhelming.”
Peterson, convicted in 2004, returned to the headlines this year after the Los Angeles Innocence Project announced it would take up his latest appeal.
He also broke his silence after two decades in a “Face to Face with Scott Peterson” interview streaming on Peacock.
Netflix also unveiled the “American Murder: Laci Peterson” true crime docuseries Aug. 14, featuring interviews with Laci’s mother, Sharon Rocha, and Peterson’s former mistress, Amber Frey.
LACI PETERSON’S MOM REVEALS FIRST IMPRESSION OF KILLER SON-IN-LAW
When Frey learned of Laci’s disappearance, she became a witness for the prosecution and revealed Peterson claimed to her that he was a widower — before Laci’s death.
She started recording her phone calls with him, including one in which he said he didn’t want to be a father and was considering a vasectomy.
However, he admitted in the new interview that his behavior was “horrible,” according to People, which revealed an early look at Peterson’s first interview in 20 years, which begins streaming Aug. 20.
“I was a total a-hole to be having sex outside our marriage,” he continued.
TIMELINE: THE LACI PETERSON CASE
Peterson, who has always maintained his innocence despite a conviction at trial and two decades of failed appeals, is still hoping he can convince a court he didn’t kill Laci, who was 8 months pregnant with their son Conner.
“If I have a chance to show people what the truth is, and if they are willing to accept it, it would be the biggest thing that I can accomplish right now,” Peterson claims in the interview. “Because I didn’t kill my family.”
Prosecutors at trial revealed a mountain of evidence against him. He had been arrested near the Mexico border with bleached hair carrying thousands of dollars in cash and his brother’s passport.
Peterson has also floated the possibility that the men responsible for a burglary across the street from the Modesto home he shared with Laci were responsible for her death. However, prosecutors say the burglary happened two days after she was reported missing.
Investigators also blew up his alibi. He claimed to have gone fishing in Berkeley, where a police K9 unit picked up Laci’s scent at a boat ramp. They also found her hair in the teeth of a pair of needle-nose pliers they found on his boat.
When an officer asked him what he was fishing for and with what bait, he allegedly mumbled an answer, walked outside, slammed a flashlight on the ground and said “F—.”
SCOTT PETERSON PROSECUTORS LAY OUT ‘OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE’ AGAINST KILLER’S NEW APPEAL IN 337-PAGE FILING
Both her remains and Conner’s washed up separately in the body of water in April 2003.
Laci was missing her head and three limbs. A forensic pathologist determined she had not been dismembered, but her body likely came apart due to the marine conditions after being anchored down.
Prosecutors argued that the homemade concrete anchor Peterson used for his boat would have been easily duplicated. They suggested he made more and used them to try and hold his wife’s body on the seafloor.
FOLLOW THE FOX TRUE CRIME TEAM ON X
GET REAL TIME UPDATES DIRECTLY ON THE TRUE CRIME HUB
“Peterson’s lawyers are probably unhappy he did the Peacock interview,” said Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor practicing privately in Los Angeles. “It’s unlikely he’ll get a new trial because there was so much circumstantial evidence of his guilt. He was fishing almost a hundred miles away where his wife’s body was found, and her hair was on his boat.”
SIGN UP TO GET TRUE CRIME NEWSLETTER
Peterson’s latest appeal suffered a setback this summer when a judge decided most of the evidence he wanted retested shouldn’t be. But the court allowed his request for new testing on some evidence, including a 15½-inch strip of duct tape recovered from Laci’s remains in the San Francisco Bay.
“[His] only real chance is if the DNA on the duct tape on her body shows someone else,” Rahmani said.
However, even if he does get a new trial, prosecutors could use the Peacock interview against him as evidence of a motive, Rahmani said.
“And at a minimum, the jury will hate him because he cheated on his pregnant wife and showed little remorse when she disappeared,” he added.
Peterson previously declined to discuss his case with Fox News Digital, citing the pending appeal.
Read the full article here
