Scott Peterson could take the stand in court. How might Frank Carson case matter?
A new petition by Scott Peterson’s defense team aims to overturn his conviction and includes a 140-page declaration written by Peterson himself. This could mean Peterson would have to take the stand and be cross-examined.
The Peterson case again pierced into the public zeitgeist last year when the Los Angeles Innocence Project took it up. The LAIP, which has no affiliation with the Innocence Project, has pushed an alternate narrative surrounding Laci and Conner Peterson’s death that it says exonerates Peterson.
On April 24, LAIP submitted a petition in a state appeals court requesting to overturn Peterson’s conviction, alleging that new evidence and previously dismissed eyewitness testimony should grant him a new trial.
“Individually and cumulatively, the new evidence presented in this petition eviscerates the prosecution’s original case and exonerates (Peterson),” a press release from LAIP reads. “Had the jury heard this evidence, it is highly likely they would not have reached a guilty verdict.”
Peterson’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus could mean he would take the stand in a new trial if he wants any of the alleged evidence detailed in his declaration to be heard in court. However, legal experts have mixed opinions on if this could happen.
Attorney says Frank Carson settlements help Peterson’s case
Mark Reichel, a Sacramento-based attorney familiar with the Peterson case, said LAIP is alleging the right things and that Peterson could have a shot at a new trial because of recent settlements by Stanislaus County and Modesto in the high-profile Frank Carson case.
Reichel said that because Stanislaus County paid out more than $22 million, it made “basically an admission that what they did … was frame an innocent person with bad police work on purpose.”
LAIP alleges that new evidence by a retired Los Angeles Police Department lieutenant, who’s now a police practices expert, explained after reviewing the police reports that the Modesto Police Department’s investigation was “disorganized, failed to follow basic police procedures that were standard at the time, and was driven by confirmation bias.”
Also among LAIP’s list of alleged new evidence is that both the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office and the Modesto Police Department ignored evidence that could have exonerated Peterson. This includes reported new statements by eyewitnesses who said they saw Laci walking the family dog after Peterson left their home on Dec. 24. LAIP alleges that MPD refused to interview some of these witnesses.
LAIP also alleges that 11 eyewitness reports in the case provide “substantially probative evidence that Laci was seen walking the dog. It also alleges that MPD refused to investigate these claims, which were “all within the same timeframe and all within a one-third square mile area around the Petersons’ home.”
“It’s pretty strong evidence for a new trial,” Reichel said. “And my bigger prediction is, if he gets a new trial, I think he gets acquitted.”
Reichel said he doesn’t think Peterson will take the stand and it would be in his defense’s best interest to make sure he doesn’t — suggesting instead that it attack the prosecution’s case.
However, Mark Merin, a civil rights attorney, said it is possible that Stanislaus County prosecutors could be able to cross-examine Peterson during an appeals hearing — but the chances are very slim.
“If that’s the only way that he could present the evidence that he thinks will exonerate him or will lead to a reversal, then he’s going to take the stand,” Merin said. “Otherwise, he’ll rely upon other people’s evidence. But he can’t … get the contents of the declaration in unless he’s the one who testifies.”
‘These cases are extremely unlikely to succeed’
William Portanova, a Sacramento-based defense attorney, said Peterson’s entire attempt is a long shot.
“In the vast majority of these cases, there is no evidentiary hearing,” Portanova said. “These cases are extremely unlikely to succeed.”
Despite what it’s up against, LAIP is still aggressively trying to find a way to set Peterson free. Its petition is so long — almost 1,000 pages — that it needs special permission to exceed the word count. The request is being reviewed, meaning the petition itself hasn’t technically been filed yet, according to the DA’s Office.
In May 2024, Peterson’s defense suffered a major setback when it requested the DNA retesting of already collected evidence. Out of the 14 items LAIP wanted to test, only one was accepted by San Mateo County Judge Elizabeth Hill.
Many of the items LAIP wanted to test were linked to its orange-van narrative — based on the idea Laci was abducted by being pushed into a van at La Loma Park while walking her dog. The van was found with a bloodstained mattress inside, which already was tested for DNA when detectives were investigating Laci’s murder.
The claim that several items linked to the orange-van narrative allegedly weren’t properly tested for DNA is among several of LAIP’s arguments for Peterson’s conviction to be overturned.
LAIP’s narrative of events suggests Laci was kidnapped because she tried to interrupt a burglary across the street from the Petersons’ home. The burglary was put on record as happening on Dec. 26, 2002.
However, now LAIP is saying it has evidence the burglary happened two days before and Laci didn’t die on Christmas Eve but instead sometime between Dec. 28, 2002, and Jan. 05, 2003, according to “new scientific and medical research” that indicates the fetal growth timeline of Connor was inaccurate.
Other alleged evidence includes a new expert analysis that shows that historical wind and tides of the San Francisco Bay indicate Laci’s corpse was placed in the water off the Albany Bulb and not dumped from Peterson’s fishing boat.
While scientific arguments are a large part of LAIP’s reasons for why Peterson’s conviction should be overturned, a larger part is attacking the investigation itself. LAIP claims that MPD “destroyed and suppressed exculpatory evidence that had the jury heard, it would not have reached a guilty verdict.”
It alleges that videotaped interviews police conducted with two of the burglars the night of their arrest were destroyed and that the videotaped interviews “included details surrounding when and how the burglary occurred.”
“Every aspect of the prosecution’s theory as to how the crimes in this case were committed has now been shown to be false,” reads LAIP press release. “The new evidence set forth in this Amended Petition shows that the prosecution’s entire theory of the case was wrong.”
The DA’s Office said it could not comment on the case or refute any of the claims of LAIP’s petition because had not technically been filed yet.
Editor’s note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly listed the date put on record, and what the Los Angeles Innocence Project asserts is the actual date of a burglary happened near the Peterson’s home in 2002.
This story was originally published April 28, 2025 at 3:13 PM with the headline "Scott Peterson could take the stand in court. How might Frank Carson case matter?."
