Scott Peterson is trying to get his conviction overturned for the murder of his wife and unborn child. That’s some bold move! I mean, if you followed the trial back in the day, you probably have a strong opinion on whether he’s guilty or not. But now, he’s pushing to get a new trial and have his conviction thrown out.
So, what’s his reasoning? Well, the L.A. Innocence Project is claiming that after a year of investigating the matter, it has gotten new evidence that will exonerate him.
The L.A. Innocence Project filed a petition Friday with the Los Angeles Court of Appeals after investigating the Peterson case for over a year … claiming he’s innocent and his conviction should be overturned … according to multiple reports.
As you know … Scott’s wife Laci Peterson was 8 months pregnant with Peterson’s child when she disappeared on Christmas Eve 2002. Her body was found in the San Francisco Bay months later, and he became a prime suspect when it was revealed he was having an affair with his massage therapist.
Cops arrested Scott in April 2003 and he was ultimately found guilty of first-degree murder and second-degree murder.
The Innocence Project claims they have new evidence that jurors did not hear at trial … and they say police and prosecutors botched the investigation.
Among the alleged new evidence … the Petersons’ unborn child died at a later date than prosecutors claimed, and Laci’s body was dumped in a completely different area than where police alleged.
The Innocence Project also says police ignored a burglary at a neighbor’s house and a burned-out van with a blood-stained mattress inside … which they claim may be related to Laci’s death.
Peterson says … “It is important to me that whoever killed my wife and son be found and held accountable. If whoever committed such violence against Laci and Conner is still at large they are a danger to public safety. It is also important to me that I clear my name and my family’s name because I did not and could never harm or kill my family.”
Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying whether I believe him or not – that’s for the courts to decide. But it sure is interesting to see a high-profile case like this resurface on the grounds of new evidence. We are waiting to see how it will play out in the Appeals court.
