Why Scott Peterson is NOT Guilty!

Since the Peterson Investigation Fund has been announced, I've received heavier than normal email volume asking how I can be so evil or so crazy or so stupid to think Scott Peterson is innocent. It's quite simple. The burden of proof was on the Prosecution, and they did not prove that Scott murdered Laci and Conner.

They claim the murder took place at 523 Covena, the home Scott and Laci shared. In spite of the fact that the Modesto Police Department had control over the supposed crime scene within 1 hour of Laci being reported missing, and engaged in 2 extensive two-day follow-up searches, they produced no evidence from the home, no evidence that Scott engaged in a clean-up of evidence, and no evidence on Scott's hands, arms, upper body, or face to indicate he had been in a struggle with Laci. So, we are left to believe that Scott Peterson, in his very first murder attempt, is brilliant enough to choose just the right method of murder so as to leave no evidence to have to clean up and to leave Laci virtually unable to respond with any efforts to save herself. Drs. Lee, Wecht, and Baden find that just as incredible as I do.

They claim the murder took place the night of the 23rd, and that he removed her body from the house to the pickup for transport to the warehouse on the morning of the 24th. Given the timeline they provided during the trial, Laci would have been dead from 8-12 hours before he removed her body from the house. And yet the cadaver dog on the 27th did not detect a cadaver scent in the house, in the pickup, on the tarp/boat cover that Scott supposedly used to wrap Laci, nor the market umbrellas that he supposedly used to weigh the tarp down, nor the boat that he supposedly used to dump her in the Bay. By the time he had ended the dastardly deed, Laci was already dead for some 16 hours.

Nor did they produce any witnesses that saw Scott removing Laci from the house to the pickup, or from the pickup to the boat. So, Scott not only managed to choose a manner of death that would leave behind no forensics and to leave Laci in the house and transport her with the pickup and boat without her giving off any cadaver scent, but he also managed to pull it all off without encountering a single witness.

As far as the place where Scott supposedly disposed of the body, they could not prove he did so. No, the location where the bodies were found is not proof that Scott put them there. Why? Because the Prosecution did not prove they washed ashore.

Using the location where the bodies were found and all the known environmental conditions in that area between December 24 and April 13, Dr. Cheng developed a high probability area to pinpoint where Laci was when she and Conner separated. Detective Hendee was assigned to search that area for the anchors and missing body parts. He put together the most skilled team of divers and most sophisticated sonar equipment in the United States. He expanded the 1/4 square mile high probability area to the 1 3/4 square mile area where Scott was fishing, just to be sure. Did they find any evidence that Scott placed Laci's body there. No. Furthermore, Dr. Cheng had to admit that his high probability area was defined by Conner's trajectory, retracing him from where he was found. He could not reproduce a trajectory that got him and Laci back to the same place. That's incredible.

No evidence of the crime in the home or the pickup or the boat. No cadaver scent in the home or the pickup or the boat. No witnesses that saw Scott Peterson commit any part of this crime. No evidence that Laci was ever where they said Scott put her. No evidence that Laci and Conner were ever in the same place in the Bay.

With almost every Prosecution witness, Mark Geragos and Pat Harris showed the Jury that the Prosecution did not have the evidence to back up its charges against Scott. That should have been sufficient for a Not Guilty verdict.

Why wasn't it? The first reason is because the Jury fell for Distaso's argument: It's not reasonable that anyone else put Laci's body in the bay. The Jury foreman said if the bodies had been found elsewhere, there would not have been a trial. So, although the Prosecution didn't prove Scott put Laci's body there, absence of evidence that someone else put her body there was sufficient to convict Scott. So Scott is guilty by default.

Not by actual evidence that he committed the crime, but by the absence of evidence that someone else did. This line of reasoning, not evidence, is what convicted Scott Peterson:

This whole trial put the burden of proof square on the shoulders of the Defense.


We can't prove she was murdered, but they can't prove she wasn't, so she was.

We can't prove she was murdered on the night of the 23rd, but they can't prove she wasn't, so she was.

We can't prove she was murdered at the house, but they can't prove she wasn't, so she was.

We can't prove she was transported in the pickup, but they can't prove she wasn't, so she was.

We can't prove she was transported in the boat, but they can't prove she wasn't, so she was.

We can't prove she washed ashore, but they can't prove she didn't, so she did.

We can't prove where she and Conner separated, but they can't prove where either, so it was where we say it was.

I believe the second reason Scott was convicted is because of the prejudicial nature of much of the evidence presented by the Prosecution. The autopsy pictures provided no evidence of manner or location of death. The Amber calls provided no evidence that Scott murdered Laci or where he disposed of her. They certainly did not elicit any confession. The taped phone calls between Sharon and Scott provided no evidence of the crime or Scott's involvement in it, nor elicited any confession. Their value was prejudicial, not probative. They produce no information as to when, where, or how the murder was committed, or by whom.

Scott Peterson is guilty of adultery. But, adultery is not a capital offense in California. It is not even a crime. Scott one day will answer to Laci and to God for his adultery. But, he is not accountable to the State of California or to us.

Scott Peterson is guilty of lying. He lied to Amber and about Amber. Most adulterers, whether male or female, engage in a series of lies, at least when they begin the affair. He also lied to his parents at times when he didn't want them to know where he was, perhaps to protect them, perhaps to preserve some iota of privacy, perhaps as a pre-planned cover for his whereabouts to keep the media at bay.

Amber herself lied to Scott, and she lied, at various times to the police officers for whom she worked as a spy. Yet, her lies are seen as heroic, at the least a necessary evil. But the most important fact is that Scott would have told Amber the same lies even if Laci were alive and well. He started the lies on the very first date, in order to avoid having to be with Amber on the holidays. If Laci had been at home, as planned, from December 24 through January 6, and Amber had called Scott, he would have told her the same lies. He did not invent new lies when Laci disappeared. He did not even embellish on the lies he was already telling. He simply carried them out as planned.

Detective Brocchini lied on numerous occasions. He lied to the Rocha family when he said they had evidence against Scott that they didn't have. He lied via his efforts to excise exonerating information, and misstating what he was being told by witnesses.

Someone lied about knowing Ron Grantski was also fishing on the afternoon of December 24. Ron said he was sure he told police officers about it in the initial interviews, but no police officer had it in a report or recalled him saying so.

Several witnesses lied on the witness stand. One witness's entire testimony was stricken from the record because she suddenly had recollections that were not only new to the Defense, but caught the Prosecution by surprise, too. Harvey Kemple was exposed as a liar. Several pieces of information he gave to the police were proven to be false. Contradictions and faulty memories abounded among the witnesses for the Prosecution.

Obviously, Scott's lying was not a sign of consciousness of guilt, but the simple foibles of human nature.

But where is the evidence that he murdered Laci? Where is the evidence that he put her body in the Bay? If 3 exhaustive searches of the house and vehicles, 2 exhaustive searches of the warehouse, 3000+ wiretaps, hundreds of wiretaps by the girlfriend and various family members, friends being used as spies, ground and GPS surveillance, cell phone records, examination of all financial records both personal and business, examination of all computers, and an exhaustive search of the 1 3/4 square mile are where Laci would have been if Scott murdered her -- if all this could not produce any evidence that Scott murdered Laci, then the only logical conclusion is that he didn't do it. He's factually innocent.