Los Angeles Innocence Project to appeal judge’s ruling declining to review new evidence supporting Scott Peterson’s claim of actual innocence.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Brittany Murphy, bmurphy@sloweymcmanus.com, 508-826-2817

LOS ANGELES, CA - April 28, 2026 - A superior court in California today declined to review new evidence supporting Scott Peterson’s claim of actual innocence set forth in a habeas petition filed in August 2025.  The court held that procedural bars prohibit Mr.  Peterson from bringing forth new evidence showing that he did not kill his wife and unborn son. 

The Los Angeles Innocence Project (LAIP) represents Mr. Peterson and intends to file the petition in a higher court. “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,” said Hannah Brown, LAIP’s Deputy Director. 

Mr. Peterson’s efforts to have his claim of innocence reviewed have been repeatedly denied without a fair review.  “Habeas corpus proceedings are extremely complex and the law of habeas is often misunderstood by superior court judges who review those cases,” said Paula Mitchell, LAIP’s Director, who formerly taught Habeas Corpus law at Loyola Law School and has been investigating Mr. Peterson’s case over the last three years.

“In the court’s ruling, strong exculpatory evidence was disregarded as ‘inadmissible’ which is not the correct legal standard,” explains Ms. Brown. “LAIP appreciates the willingness and courage of the witnesses who continue to come forward with information shedding light on what really happened,” added LAIP investigator Danielle Leaf, who conducted over 50 interviews with various witnesses, many of whom brought forward evidence that Mr. Peterson did not commit these crimes.

LAIP has uncovered compelling new scientific evidence showing that the jury in Mr. Peterson’s case relied on unreliable scientific evidence to convict him.  

Mr. Peterson was convicted of murdering his wife, Laci Peterson, and unborn son, Conner, and sentenced to death in 2005.  An international media frenzy immediately painted Mr. Peterson as a pariah. “As with other well known high profile cases, the media frenzy in this case heavily contributed to Mr. Peterson’s inability to get a fair trial,” said Mitchell, who added that Mr. Peterson currently has a separate habeas petition pending in the California Supreme Court alleging that juror misconduct denied him his right to a fair trial. 

The LAIP is hopeful that the higher court will permit Mr. Peterson an opportunity to have a fair review of the new evidence uncovered in his case so justice can be served. 

New Scientific Evidence Exonerates Peterson

The LAIP presented compelling new scientific studies and reports based on considerable data that was unavailable at the time of trial that undermines the prosecution’s theory of the case.  The new evidence goes to the very heart of the evidence presented at trial as to when and how the crimes occurred. 

As one example, the medical examiner was unable to determine a time or date of death, but the jury was told by prosecution expert Dr. Greggory DeVore that Mr. Peterson killed Laci and Conner Peterson on the night of December 23 or morning of December 24, times when he and Laci were at home alone together.  But new scientific research and studies published long after Peterson was convicted now show that Laci and Conner Peterson were not killed until four to twelve days after Laci disappeared from the Petersons’ home in Modesto, times that Mr. Peterson could not have been involved in the crimes.  

The prosecution further theorized at trial that Mr. Peterson put his wife’s body in the San Francisco Bay just south of Brooks Island on December 24, and presented evidence to that effect by Dr. Ralph Cheng who told the jury that in his opinion, the bodies originated at that exact location, which happened to be where Peterson was fishing on December 24.  

Advances in three dimensional modeling technology now contradict Dr. Cheng’s “hypothesis” that the bodies were placed south of Brooks Island and show instead that the bodies were most likely put into the water off the Albany Bulb.  That technology was not yet available at the time of Mr. Peterson’s trial.  The LAIP maintains that this and other new evidence addressed in his habeas petition shows that the jury relied on evidence that is no longer considered scientifically sound to convict Mr. Peterson.

Medina Burglary Occurred on December 24; Police intentionally destroyed exculpatory evidence

The LAIP also uncovered evidence showing a burglary occurred across the street from the Petersons’ home on December 24, the day Laci disappeared, and that the prosecution suppressed evidence linked to that burglary and when it occurred.  The defense argued that Laci’s disappearance was related to that burglary but was unable to establish that it occurred the same day she disappeared.  The prosecution told the jury that the burglary was unrelated to Laci’s disappearance because it did not take place until two days later, on December 26.  

New evidence uncovered by the LAIP now shows that police failed to investigate the burglary, including when it occurred and how many people were involved. 

In addition, new evidence shows that the Modesto Police Department knowingly and intentionally destroyed the only existing copies of videotaped police interviews conducted with the men who committed the burglary the day they were arrested.  

The Modesto Police Department recently provided documents showing that just two weeks after arraigning Mr. Peterson on capital murder charges, investigators met to discuss the burglary and the following day inexplicably and intentionally destroyed the only copies of the videotaped interviews police conducted with the burglars.

In addition to the above, Mr. Peterson has asserted numerous other claims that support his innocence.

Instead of conducting a full and fair review of the considerable new evidence, the San Mateo County Superior Court summarily denied review of all new evidence claims, denying Mr. Peterson his day in court, which he is entitled to along with every other habeas corpus petitioner who has a colorable claim of innocence.

Mr. Peterson has a petition already pending in the California Supreme Court asserting a separate claim of juror misconduct, which denied him his constitutional right to a fair trial by a fair and unbiased jury.  In 2020, the Supreme Court agreed that Mr. Peterson’s juror misconduct claim warranted review and sent the matter to the trial court for review.

In 2022, the superior court held an evidentiary hearing and ruled that the juror in question provided false answers on her juror questionnaire but that her false answers were unintentional and did not prejudice Peterson.  The LAIP is now challenging that ruling on behalf of Mr. Peterson in the California Supreme Court.  

Mr. Peterson is no longer on death row because in 2020, the Supreme Court held that the death sentence imposed in 2005 was unconstitutional for procedural reasons.  After spending 15 years serving an unconstitutional sentence on death row, Mr. Peterson was resentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole which he is now serving in a California prison.

“The LAIP is undeterred and will continue to fight for Mr. Peterson’s innocence,” said Ms. Brown. 

For a copy of the new evidence supporting Mr. Peterson’s innocence, please contact Brittany Murphy, bmurphy@sloweymcmanus.com, 508-826-2817.

Anyone with information related to Mr. Peterson’s case is encouraged to contact the LAIP at admin@innocencela.org.