Peacock: Face to Face With Scott Peterson

Source:Peacock Face To Face With Scott Peterson.

"Synopsis: It was a case that captivated the country. At 8 months pregnant, Laci Peterson went missing on Christmas Eve, 2002. As the investigation unfolded, her husband Scott was revealed to be a liar, a cheater, and ultimately a murderer. The world’s media hung on every moment of the trial, and Scott was convicted and sentenced to death. Case closed. Or is it? For the first time since before his arrest in 2003, Scott speaks on camera in a series of intimate conversations revealing his side of the story with Director and Executive Producer Shareen Anderson, who has been investigating this case for over a decade. While many still believe the jury got it right, Scott’s family and experts close to the case have spent over 20 years committed to uncovering inconsistencies in the evidence as well as finding new information around alternative theories surrounding Laci’s murder. And in a shocking twist on a murder the world thought was solved, the Los Angeles Innocence Project takes over Scott’s case in 2024." 

From Peacock

When the case first broke in 2003-04, or it became famous at that point, I thought Scott Peterson was probably guilty of murdering his wife. But I wasn't following the case that closely. Mostly getting updates and seeing occasional news reports about it. But then A&E produces a documentary about it in 2017 and I watched that very closely. And now based on just the original evidence of this case, it looks like Scott Peterson is guilty of nothing other than being an adulterer. Other than the adultery, he was an excellent husband. He made good money, he loved his wife, his in-laws loved him. 

The Peacock documentary that I saw the first time on Sunday, just reenforces what I already know and believe about this case. To get a guilty conviction when it comes to 1st degree murder, it has to be beyond any reasonable doubt. And juries have gotten that wrong before. You can't believe that the defendant is probably guilty. You have to know that. And it's the job of the prosecution to make you know that based on the evidence that they present to you. Otherwise you have reasonable doubt.

Dave Harris who was 1 of the 2 courtroom prosecutors in the Stanislaus County DA case against Scott Peterson, when he was arguing in the court with opening statement essentially said: 

"Based on the evidence in this case, Scott Peterson has to be the murderer. He was the only 1 who could've done it". That's not beyond a reasonable doubt. If anything, if proves reasonable doubt, because it suggests that not even the prosecutors know that Scott murdered his wife Laci. They just believe that, perhaps strongly believe that. 

Modesto PD Detective Al Brocchini who was 1 of the lead detectives on this case, thought Scott Peterson was basically guilty because of what he saw as evidence which was cleaning materials and things that you use on a boat, all over the Peterson home when they got to that place to start their investigation. Well, if you just murdered your wife, you wanted to get away with it, and you are not a moron, why would you leave all that stuff there, after you just murdered your wife? You don't have to be a professional hitman to know that leaving solid evidence behind after you just illegally killed someone, is not smart. 

I'm not saying that Scott Peterson is innocent here. The fact is he could've committed this crime. He had motive, opportunity, ability, access, no alibi. I'm just saying that the prosecutors on this case didn't prove that he did. And from looking at that jury and listening to them about what they said about this case, I think they actually just convicted him of cheating on his wife, who was pregnant with his baby. And since adultery is not illegal anywhere in America, (thank God) they convicted him of 1st degree murderer because they think he's a bad guy.

You can follow me on Threads, Blue Sky, and Twitter.

You can also see this post on WordPress.