April 29, 2026
Judge Denies Scott Peterson’s Latest Attempt To Prove His Innocence
Apple Podcasts 
Spotify 
Castro 
RSS Feed A California judge has refused to review new evidence that the L.A. Innocence Project and Scott Peterson’s attorneys say will exonerate him. Peterson’s defense team says they will take their fight further, and plan to appeal to a higher court. The LAIP says they have conducted more than 50 interviews with witnesses who have information that will shed light on what really happened, as well as new scientific evidence that jurors were not able to hear during his trial.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
00:00:02
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks. It is Wednesday, April twenty ninth, and one of the most infamous inmates in the country is still trying to get out of prison. Scott Peterson says he has compelling new scientific evidence that can prove he did not murder his pregnant wife Lacy, but a judge just told him, we ain't trying to hear that. With that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Scott Peterson said there he has new evidence that shows he did not kill his wife. A court just says we ain't trying to hear it, not even giving him the option to present it. Robes. A lot of people don't even realize this dude's still trying to get out of jail saying he's innocent.
00:00:44
Speaker 2: Yeah, he's been saying he's innocent from the get go. And look, the La Innocence Project recently in recent years took up his case and they are his biggest champions right now, alongside his high powered attorneys. And yes, they are claiming they have evident instead completely exonerates Scott Peterson in the murder of his then eight month pregnant wife, Lacy and their unborn son, Connor, and a judge said, I refuse to review it, and that has made some headlines.
00:01:16
Speaker 1: You know, that cannot be said enough. If folks haven't been following this robes, because this murder was in two thousand and two, we're that far removed from it. Robes and if people haven't been following, Scott Peterson is not just just presenting something or a new trial or this or that. He is saying he is innocent, and he is saying he can prove it. This is one of the most infamous cases of our lifetimes, and the man is saying he can prove prove he didn't do it. You got my attention at least.
00:01:49
Speaker 3: Yeah.
00:01:49
Speaker 2: We've had conversations with his former attorney, Markarages. He told us unequivocally he believes Scott Peterson did not murder his wife. And he's like, I'm not just saying this as his former attorney, I truly believe that Scott Peterson is innocent. And the La Innocence Project agrees. They have put a ton of resources behind this very high profile case and they're obviously upset about this ruling by this judge. They filed the petition in August, so last summer of twenty twenty five, alleging that Scott Peterson was in fact wrongfully convicted based on what it calls false evidence. And so they have an official response to the judge's ruling saying, we disagree with and are disappointed by the court's ruling on every level. The ruling demonstrates a profound misunderstanding and misapplication of the law applied to habeas corpus petitions. In the court's ruling, strong exculpatory evidence was disregarded as inadmissible, which is not the correct legal standard.
00:02:51
Speaker 3: So look, this new evidence.
00:02:54
Speaker 2: We don't know exactly what it is, but like you said, they're calling it compelling new scientific evidence, showing that the jury relied on unreliable scientific evidence to convict him.
00:03:06
Speaker 3: So this is all about DNA.
00:03:08
Speaker 1: They're using phrases like wrongfully convicted. They're using phrases like exculpatory. They're using words that not just bring into question some things that happen or some technicalities during the trial. No, no, no, they say we can prove these innocent. Wow, why aren't we listening to that?
00:03:31
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't understand how a judge says, I refuse to even look at the evidence you've presented me because it's not proper based on this habeas corp.
00:03:40
Speaker 3: Look, I'm not a lawyer. I don't know what all of this means.
00:03:43
Speaker 2: But obviously you've got different lawyers interpreting it in different ways than this judge did. So Peterson's attorneys very quickly said after the judge refused to review this that they are going to appeal this to a higher court. So they have another now battle to fight, and so there's another appellic court that they can take this to. But in terms of the new evidence, look, the Los Angeles Innocence Project says they have conducted more than fifty interviews with various witnesses who have information shedding light on what really happened in addition to this scientific evidence. So they sound like they are ready to put on an entirely new trial, and that is what they are asking for. They're either asking that once a judge or a court looks at this new evidence they're presenting, that either they will exonerate him and just set him free, or they will grant him a new trial, which would be the more likely of the two scenarios. But they got to get a judge or a court to actually look at the evidence first, which sounds like that is their biggest hurdle right now.
00:04:45
Speaker 1: You're right, and we need to make sure we're not calling into question at all any of the legalities here. There are so many technical thists and that, and yes, it's possible they might be sitting on some evidence, but the judges are doing the right thing, and there are reasons and things that bar them from letting this stuff in. Okay, they'll keep fighting, they'll keep fighting, But it's this is no small thing that this infamous case. Are you really suggesting that there is a killer out there on the loose who killed a mother and an eight month old pregnant mother an eight month pregnant woman. Are you telling me that person has been on the loose for the past one that's a big deal in and of itself.
00:05:24
Speaker 3: Absolutely, tell me.
00:05:25
Speaker 1: There's a wrongful conviction for a guy who was for a little while on death row. That's also a big deal.
00:05:31
Speaker 3: He was on death row for a long while.
00:05:33
Speaker 2: He was just he was removed from death row in twenty twenty one, Babe, just four years ago, so he'd been sitting on death row for nearly two decades before he was re sentenced and he was instead sentenced to life behind bars without the possibility of parole. But certainly this is a fascinating case that captivated the country. And when you hear that his attorneys and the La Innocence Project are saying that jurors did not get to hear evidence that they argue absolutely would have affected the outcome of the trial. You want to make sure, obviously that our legal system works. And so if you're hearing something that significant by a fairly well respected organization that doesn't just take up anyone's case, they do their due diligence before they decide to back somebody, and there is weight behind that organization for sure, when they say they have new evidence.
00:06:28
Speaker 1: And they have a track record, and they don't mess around everybody always everybody don't sell blocked. The is trying to get a hold of Innocent Project as they please help me with my case. They have to be very careful and discerning because they put time and research and money and effort into all these If they are spending this kind of time, they think it's a worthy cost, absolutely, and so that gives a lot of credibility to the case. In my opinion, at least doesn't mean they're always right, but they are not just wasting their time.
00:06:55
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think it absolutely is a completely different scenario when you have an organization like the La Innocence Project backing your case and trying to get it at least re examined. Now, for those of you who might need a little refresher, I guess maybe we hopefully we have some younger listeners just to remind you about the crime itself. Scott Peterson's wife, Lacy, eight months pregnant, disappeared on Christmas Eve in two thousand and two. She was out for a run, she went missing. Her body was eventually found quite a ways. I didn't realize it was this much longer April of the following year, so a solid four months went by before her body was found in this San Francisco Bay. Peterson's alibi was that he went fishing alone in the San Francisco Bay when the day she went missing, and when he came back home she was nowhere to be found.
00:07:47
Speaker 3: So look, people put two and two together.
00:07:49
Speaker 2: Oh, he just so happened to be fishing on a boat in the very bay where her body ended up washing up.
00:07:55
Speaker 3: Four months later, certainly.
00:07:57
Speaker 2: Suspicious, but the La Innocence Project and his attorneys blame part of his conviction on the media frenzy, and it was for those of you who weren't around during that time, a media frenzy is certainly an understatement.
00:08:09
Speaker 3: This was the biggest story at that time.
00:08:13
Speaker 1: Uh yeah. It has remained a public fascination from stories being tone. It was a tabloid story, of course, but it was a mainstream story. It was on TV every single day. There have been stories and movies and books and whatever else. People have become stars on TV covering this story. So it yeah, it was that thing at the time, because I mean that you can see I don't know any picture of Lacy Peterson without that glorious smile on her face.
00:08:39
Speaker 3: It's cute temples.
00:08:40
Speaker 1: We can all remember that. I remember that image, and so yes, it was. It was. It's really burned into our memories. And he's the only person ever associated with her demise. And you're telling me now that was wrong. They're telling us, at least Robes and the Innocence Project. I mean, we should go back and look at their record, if you will. But it's not just a matter of resources. They put into it roal, this is their reputation as well.
00:09:06
Speaker 3: Absolutely, that's a very good point.
00:09:08
Speaker 1: How profile this one is. And wow, we could be wrong on this one. That everybody's paying attention is a lot at stake for them.
00:09:15
Speaker 2: You make a very good point for them to put their name on something on someone who I would argue if you polled Americans would say, oh my god, he's so guilty.
00:09:24
Speaker 3: He's the husband of you know.
00:09:27
Speaker 2: You know, the biggest cause of death for a pregnant woman is murder, and oftentimes it's the man who impregnated her who does the murdering. So this is basically your obvious suspect here. But also add to the fact, I mean, look, he was made into a pariah by the media, namely because he was having an affair with Amber Fry.
00:09:47
Speaker 1: I forgot about her.
00:09:47
Speaker 2: Yeah, Amber Fry, who actually aided in the investigation. She was secretly recording their conversations, trying to find him saying something about his wife or getting him to say something that would be incriminating. One of the worst things maybe was that he had a phone call.
00:10:02
Speaker 3: Do you remember this.
00:10:03
Speaker 2: He was at one of the vigils for Lacy Peterson while she was missing, people were searching for her, and they had a recorded phone call with him from the vigil to Amber Frye saying he was spending New Year's Even Paris when he was actually there at a vigil for his missing pregnant wife. So look, it looked bad, but they didn't actually get a smoking gun from any of those recordings from Amber Frye. The conversations just that he was just a terrible husband, but that didn't make him a murderer.
00:10:29
Speaker 1: What if if you are innocent of killing your eight month pregnant wife, he did everything wrong to make him look guilty. That is single move he made looked bad.
00:10:46
Speaker 2: And certainly that did not go unnoticed by Lacy Peterson's family. When we come back, we're gonna tell you how they have reacted to all of this news that.
00:10:57
Speaker 3: Yes, Scott Peterson didn't kill their daughter.
00:11:00
Speaker 2: What do Lacy Peterson's family have to say about all of this? And and and.
00:11:13
Speaker 3: Welcome back everyone to this episode of Amy and TJ.
00:11:16
Speaker 2: Where we are talking about Scott Peterson back in the headlines again today after a California judge has denied his latest attempt to prove his innocence.
00:11:26
Speaker 3: His attorneys the La Innocence.
00:11:27
Speaker 2: Project all claim they have new evidence that exonerates him in the murder of his pregnant wife Lacy and their unborn son, Connor. But a judge said, yeah, I'm not even going to look at that because it's not correct the way you filed this, I shouldn't. I don't even have the right the legal reasoning behind actually reviewing this evidence. They're going to appeal it, take it to a higher court. But this has been in the news and in the headlines for so long.
00:11:53
Speaker 3: This was a murder that happened in two thousand and two.
00:11:56
Speaker 2: We talk about all the time the impact all of these legal proceedings and all of these appeals, the toll it takes on the victim's family.
00:12:05
Speaker 3: We see this time and time again.
00:12:09
Speaker 1: And this is one. I mean, look, they already had a pretty big reversal with the because there was a death penalty phase and there was a whole death penalty do over and he was taken off death row. I mean, the family had to go through that, and now, I mean, I don't know what peace they have had through this. I'm sure they are already done with who they believe killed Lacy Peterson. The idea. Now they have to go sit through more court hearings, they have to wait and wonder, they have to hear more about this case.
00:12:41
Speaker 3: Eh, that's awful, Yes, it is awful.
00:12:44
Speaker 2: And Lacy's family pretty much from the beginning always suspected Scott Peterson, and they certainly believe that he is the person who killed their daughter and their unborn grandchild. And look, they were face to face with him at that re sentencing hearing twenty twenty one.
00:13:01
Speaker 3: They looked him right in the eye.
00:13:03
Speaker 2: Her mother called him evil, called him sociopathic, called him a remorseless killer, and she told him to his face that he deserved to die. So they were very, very upset about the re sentencing that allowed Scott Peterson to live the rest of his life behind bars and not face the death sentence. They absolutely wanted him to die for the crime they believe he committed against their daughter and their unborn grandson.
00:13:29
Speaker 3: And look, we should point out Scott Peterson is not done.
00:13:32
Speaker 2: He has this appeal that they are taking to a higher court that was just rejected by this judge. But they actually have another appeal pending as well, and this one is on jury misconduct. So the La Innocence Project has two different rulings that they are appealing to two different courts, trying to get Scott Peterson another trial or to have him.
00:13:54
Speaker 3: Completely exonerated based.
00:13:56
Speaker 2: On the evidence they are they say they have and that they want to two present in court.
00:14:00
Speaker 3: So this is far from over. And look, this is a tough process.
00:14:04
Speaker 2: Obviously in this country, we want innocent people to have the opportunity to prove their innocence.
00:14:09
Speaker 3: But at what point do you say enough?
00:14:10
Speaker 2: At what point is this too much for Lacy Peterson's family?
00:14:15
Speaker 1: You know, this is how it needs to go, and we have to afford this is a part of the process, part of our system, and we should have every check and balance we should have make sure everybody will never execute someone that's innocent, and we never leave somebody in jail that's innocent. This is why the appeals. Then the process takes so long, But I don't know the legal wrangling, the back and forth. Yes, your heart continues to go out for a family being revictimized a quarter of a century after the death of their loved one.
00:14:42
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's tough. And look.
00:14:44
Speaker 2: In twenty twenty three, Peterson wrote that letter, professing his innocence, He said, I am innocent. I had nothing to do with these horrible crimes that were committed against my wife and my son. So we will continue to follow this developing story. Scott Peterson still trying to get out of prison, still saying he is innocent. We always appreciate you listening to us, every one. I'm Amy Robach alongside t. J.
00:15:08
Speaker 3: Holmes. We will talk to you soon
Speaker 1: Hey there, folks. It is Wednesday, April twenty ninth, and one of the most infamous inmates in the country is still trying to get out of prison. Scott Peterson says he has compelling new scientific evidence that can prove he did not murder his pregnant wife Lacy, but a judge just told him, we ain't trying to hear that. With that, welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Scott Peterson said there he has new evidence that shows he did not kill his wife. A court just says we ain't trying to hear it, not even giving him the option to present it. Robes. A lot of people don't even realize this dude's still trying to get out of jail saying he's innocent.
00:00:44
Speaker 2: Yeah, he's been saying he's innocent from the get go. And look, the La Innocence Project recently in recent years took up his case and they are his biggest champions right now, alongside his high powered attorneys. And yes, they are claiming they have evident instead completely exonerates Scott Peterson in the murder of his then eight month pregnant wife, Lacy and their unborn son, Connor, and a judge said, I refuse to review it, and that has made some headlines.
00:01:16
Speaker 1: You know, that cannot be said enough. If folks haven't been following this robes, because this murder was in two thousand and two, we're that far removed from it. Robes and if people haven't been following, Scott Peterson is not just just presenting something or a new trial or this or that. He is saying he is innocent, and he is saying he can prove it. This is one of the most infamous cases of our lifetimes, and the man is saying he can prove prove he didn't do it. You got my attention at least.
00:01:49
Speaker 3: Yeah.
00:01:49
Speaker 2: We've had conversations with his former attorney, Markarages. He told us unequivocally he believes Scott Peterson did not murder his wife. And he's like, I'm not just saying this as his former attorney, I truly believe that Scott Peterson is innocent. And the La Innocence Project agrees. They have put a ton of resources behind this very high profile case and they're obviously upset about this ruling by this judge. They filed the petition in August, so last summer of twenty twenty five, alleging that Scott Peterson was in fact wrongfully convicted based on what it calls false evidence. And so they have an official response to the judge's ruling saying, we disagree with and are disappointed by the court's ruling on every level. The ruling demonstrates a profound misunderstanding and misapplication of the law applied to habeas corpus petitions. In the court's ruling, strong exculpatory evidence was disregarded as inadmissible, which is not the correct legal standard.
00:02:51
Speaker 3: So look, this new evidence.
00:02:54
Speaker 2: We don't know exactly what it is, but like you said, they're calling it compelling new scientific evidence, showing that the jury relied on unreliable scientific evidence to convict him.
00:03:06
Speaker 3: So this is all about DNA.
00:03:08
Speaker 1: They're using phrases like wrongfully convicted. They're using phrases like exculpatory. They're using words that not just bring into question some things that happen or some technicalities during the trial. No, no, no, they say we can prove these innocent. Wow, why aren't we listening to that?
00:03:31
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't understand how a judge says, I refuse to even look at the evidence you've presented me because it's not proper based on this habeas corp.
00:03:40
Speaker 3: Look, I'm not a lawyer. I don't know what all of this means.
00:03:43
Speaker 2: But obviously you've got different lawyers interpreting it in different ways than this judge did. So Peterson's attorneys very quickly said after the judge refused to review this that they are going to appeal this to a higher court. So they have another now battle to fight, and so there's another appellic court that they can take this to. But in terms of the new evidence, look, the Los Angeles Innocence Project says they have conducted more than fifty interviews with various witnesses who have information shedding light on what really happened in addition to this scientific evidence. So they sound like they are ready to put on an entirely new trial, and that is what they are asking for. They're either asking that once a judge or a court looks at this new evidence they're presenting, that either they will exonerate him and just set him free, or they will grant him a new trial, which would be the more likely of the two scenarios. But they got to get a judge or a court to actually look at the evidence first, which sounds like that is their biggest hurdle right now.
00:04:45
Speaker 1: You're right, and we need to make sure we're not calling into question at all any of the legalities here. There are so many technical thists and that, and yes, it's possible they might be sitting on some evidence, but the judges are doing the right thing, and there are reasons and things that bar them from letting this stuff in. Okay, they'll keep fighting, they'll keep fighting, But it's this is no small thing that this infamous case. Are you really suggesting that there is a killer out there on the loose who killed a mother and an eight month old pregnant mother an eight month pregnant woman. Are you telling me that person has been on the loose for the past one that's a big deal in and of itself.
00:05:24
Speaker 3: Absolutely, tell me.
00:05:25
Speaker 1: There's a wrongful conviction for a guy who was for a little while on death row. That's also a big deal.
00:05:31
Speaker 3: He was on death row for a long while.
00:05:33
Speaker 2: He was just he was removed from death row in twenty twenty one, Babe, just four years ago, so he'd been sitting on death row for nearly two decades before he was re sentenced and he was instead sentenced to life behind bars without the possibility of parole. But certainly this is a fascinating case that captivated the country. And when you hear that his attorneys and the La Innocence Project are saying that jurors did not get to hear evidence that they argue absolutely would have affected the outcome of the trial. You want to make sure, obviously that our legal system works. And so if you're hearing something that significant by a fairly well respected organization that doesn't just take up anyone's case, they do their due diligence before they decide to back somebody, and there is weight behind that organization for sure, when they say they have new evidence.
00:06:28
Speaker 1: And they have a track record, and they don't mess around everybody always everybody don't sell blocked. The is trying to get a hold of Innocent Project as they please help me with my case. They have to be very careful and discerning because they put time and research and money and effort into all these If they are spending this kind of time, they think it's a worthy cost, absolutely, and so that gives a lot of credibility to the case. In my opinion, at least doesn't mean they're always right, but they are not just wasting their time.
00:06:55
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think it absolutely is a completely different scenario when you have an organization like the La Innocence Project backing your case and trying to get it at least re examined. Now, for those of you who might need a little refresher, I guess maybe we hopefully we have some younger listeners just to remind you about the crime itself. Scott Peterson's wife, Lacy, eight months pregnant, disappeared on Christmas Eve in two thousand and two. She was out for a run, she went missing. Her body was eventually found quite a ways. I didn't realize it was this much longer April of the following year, so a solid four months went by before her body was found in this San Francisco Bay. Peterson's alibi was that he went fishing alone in the San Francisco Bay when the day she went missing, and when he came back home she was nowhere to be found.
00:07:47
Speaker 3: So look, people put two and two together.
00:07:49
Speaker 2: Oh, he just so happened to be fishing on a boat in the very bay where her body ended up washing up.
00:07:55
Speaker 3: Four months later, certainly.
00:07:57
Speaker 2: Suspicious, but the La Innocence Project and his attorneys blame part of his conviction on the media frenzy, and it was for those of you who weren't around during that time, a media frenzy is certainly an understatement.
00:08:09
Speaker 3: This was the biggest story at that time.
00:08:13
Speaker 1: Uh yeah. It has remained a public fascination from stories being tone. It was a tabloid story, of course, but it was a mainstream story. It was on TV every single day. There have been stories and movies and books and whatever else. People have become stars on TV covering this story. So it yeah, it was that thing at the time, because I mean that you can see I don't know any picture of Lacy Peterson without that glorious smile on her face.
00:08:39
Speaker 3: It's cute temples.
00:08:40
Speaker 1: We can all remember that. I remember that image, and so yes, it was. It was. It's really burned into our memories. And he's the only person ever associated with her demise. And you're telling me now that was wrong. They're telling us, at least Robes and the Innocence Project. I mean, we should go back and look at their record, if you will. But it's not just a matter of resources. They put into it roal, this is their reputation as well.
00:09:06
Speaker 3: Absolutely, that's a very good point.
00:09:08
Speaker 1: How profile this one is. And wow, we could be wrong on this one. That everybody's paying attention is a lot at stake for them.
00:09:15
Speaker 2: You make a very good point for them to put their name on something on someone who I would argue if you polled Americans would say, oh my god, he's so guilty.
00:09:24
Speaker 3: He's the husband of you know.
00:09:27
Speaker 2: You know, the biggest cause of death for a pregnant woman is murder, and oftentimes it's the man who impregnated her who does the murdering. So this is basically your obvious suspect here. But also add to the fact, I mean, look, he was made into a pariah by the media, namely because he was having an affair with Amber Fry.
00:09:47
Speaker 1: I forgot about her.
00:09:47
Speaker 2: Yeah, Amber Fry, who actually aided in the investigation. She was secretly recording their conversations, trying to find him saying something about his wife or getting him to say something that would be incriminating. One of the worst things maybe was that he had a phone call.
00:10:02
Speaker 3: Do you remember this.
00:10:03
Speaker 2: He was at one of the vigils for Lacy Peterson while she was missing, people were searching for her, and they had a recorded phone call with him from the vigil to Amber Frye saying he was spending New Year's Even Paris when he was actually there at a vigil for his missing pregnant wife. So look, it looked bad, but they didn't actually get a smoking gun from any of those recordings from Amber Frye. The conversations just that he was just a terrible husband, but that didn't make him a murderer.
00:10:29
Speaker 1: What if if you are innocent of killing your eight month pregnant wife, he did everything wrong to make him look guilty. That is single move he made looked bad.
00:10:46
Speaker 2: And certainly that did not go unnoticed by Lacy Peterson's family. When we come back, we're gonna tell you how they have reacted to all of this news that.
00:10:57
Speaker 3: Yes, Scott Peterson didn't kill their daughter.
00:11:00
Speaker 2: What do Lacy Peterson's family have to say about all of this? And and and.
00:11:13
Speaker 3: Welcome back everyone to this episode of Amy and TJ.
00:11:16
Speaker 2: Where we are talking about Scott Peterson back in the headlines again today after a California judge has denied his latest attempt to prove his innocence.
00:11:26
Speaker 3: His attorneys the La Innocence.
00:11:27
Speaker 2: Project all claim they have new evidence that exonerates him in the murder of his pregnant wife Lacy and their unborn son, Connor. But a judge said, yeah, I'm not even going to look at that because it's not correct the way you filed this, I shouldn't. I don't even have the right the legal reasoning behind actually reviewing this evidence. They're going to appeal it, take it to a higher court. But this has been in the news and in the headlines for so long.
00:11:53
Speaker 3: This was a murder that happened in two thousand and two.
00:11:56
Speaker 2: We talk about all the time the impact all of these legal proceedings and all of these appeals, the toll it takes on the victim's family.
00:12:05
Speaker 3: We see this time and time again.
00:12:09
Speaker 1: And this is one. I mean, look, they already had a pretty big reversal with the because there was a death penalty phase and there was a whole death penalty do over and he was taken off death row. I mean, the family had to go through that, and now, I mean, I don't know what peace they have had through this. I'm sure they are already done with who they believe killed Lacy Peterson. The idea. Now they have to go sit through more court hearings, they have to wait and wonder, they have to hear more about this case.
00:12:41
Speaker 3: Eh, that's awful, Yes, it is awful.
00:12:44
Speaker 2: And Lacy's family pretty much from the beginning always suspected Scott Peterson, and they certainly believe that he is the person who killed their daughter and their unborn grandchild. And look, they were face to face with him at that re sentencing hearing twenty twenty one.
00:13:01
Speaker 3: They looked him right in the eye.
00:13:03
Speaker 2: Her mother called him evil, called him sociopathic, called him a remorseless killer, and she told him to his face that he deserved to die. So they were very, very upset about the re sentencing that allowed Scott Peterson to live the rest of his life behind bars and not face the death sentence. They absolutely wanted him to die for the crime they believe he committed against their daughter and their unborn grandson.
00:13:29
Speaker 3: And look, we should point out Scott Peterson is not done.
00:13:32
Speaker 2: He has this appeal that they are taking to a higher court that was just rejected by this judge. But they actually have another appeal pending as well, and this one is on jury misconduct. So the La Innocence Project has two different rulings that they are appealing to two different courts, trying to get Scott Peterson another trial or to have him.
00:13:54
Speaker 3: Completely exonerated based.
00:13:56
Speaker 2: On the evidence they are they say they have and that they want to two present in court.
00:14:00
Speaker 3: So this is far from over. And look, this is a tough process.
00:14:04
Speaker 2: Obviously in this country, we want innocent people to have the opportunity to prove their innocence.
00:14:09
Speaker 3: But at what point do you say enough?
00:14:10
Speaker 2: At what point is this too much for Lacy Peterson's family?
00:14:15
Speaker 1: You know, this is how it needs to go, and we have to afford this is a part of the process, part of our system, and we should have every check and balance we should have make sure everybody will never execute someone that's innocent, and we never leave somebody in jail that's innocent. This is why the appeals. Then the process takes so long, But I don't know the legal wrangling, the back and forth. Yes, your heart continues to go out for a family being revictimized a quarter of a century after the death of their loved one.
00:14:42
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's tough. And look.
00:14:44
Speaker 2: In twenty twenty three, Peterson wrote that letter, professing his innocence, He said, I am innocent. I had nothing to do with these horrible crimes that were committed against my wife and my son. So we will continue to follow this developing story. Scott Peterson still trying to get out of prison, still saying he is innocent. We always appreciate you listening to us, every one. I'm Amy Robach alongside t. J.
00:15:08
Speaker 3: Holmes. We will talk to you soon