Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Retired LAPD detective says Scott Peterson deserves a new trial, claims police overlooked critical witnesses
Fox News via Yahoo ^ | July 19th, 2026 | Stephanie Nolasco

Posted on 07/19/2026 9:52:12 AM PDT by Mariner

Nearly 22 years after Scott Peterson was found guilty of murdering his pregnant wife, his legal team says "new evidence" could help overturn his conviction.

The 53-year-old's attorneys with the Los Angeles Innocence Project (LAIP) say they've uncovered what they argue is new evidence that could undermine one of America's most infamous murder convictions. They detail their findings in A&E's new two-part docuseries, "Scott Peterson: The New Evidence."

"When you initially have a missing person's case, there are certain protocols, certain things that must be done, and that is to follow up on every possible lead to determine when and where the missing person was last seen," Ninette Toosbuy, a retired LAPD detective who appears in the documentary, told Fox News Digital

(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last
To: Mariner

I’m sure this defective is writing a book that we can all BUY.


21 posted on 07/19/2026 12:06:40 PM PDT by Mark (DONATE ONCE every 3 months-is that a big deal?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mark

He’s guilty, Jim.

The nicest touch in all of it was telling Amber Fry (sp?) that he was at a fertilizer sales convention in Paris. When he was somewhere nearby. And when his normal number came across, and she asked him about it.

Two ways to commit a crime:

1) do it entirely by yourself, so there are no co-conspirators to rat you out, or

2) work with co-conspirators.

Scott Peterson went with number 1, but overlooked the caveat “Do not choose this option if you are not very smart.”


22 posted on 07/19/2026 12:42:35 PM PDT by Wally_Kalbacken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: bobrlbob

When polixe took him into custody he had dyed his hair, had his brothers id and 5k cash ob him. Near a Mexican border crosdin... why?


23 posted on 07/19/2026 12:52:10 PM PDT by desertsolitaire ("Wenn hinter Fliegen Fliegen fliegen, fliegen Fliegen Fliegen nach.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: skr

a lot of water under the bridge since the Peterson trial and I really don’t give a hoot if he stays in jail til he dies.

Having a chat with keyboard and she says “breaking up is hard to do.”
do I buy new one at amz? I use it with Mac mini. My techie neighbor moved but he’ll be back soon to install printer he persuaded me to get. a thousand years of ink included.

My life has been all askewed up since he moved.


24 posted on 07/19/2026 12:56:20 PM PDT by Veto! ((Whatever it is, I'm against it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
I moved there in 1998 for work and stayed till 2005. I didn't really like that area, but I like it as a jumping off point. I could be in san fran in a couple of hours. Trout fishing and camping in the Sierras in a couple of hours. Yosemite. Etc.

I loved California, but this was before the state went totally down the drain.

25 posted on 07/19/2026 1:49:51 PM PDT by LouAvul (They're doing it again because you didn't hang them last time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Laci Peterson, Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman are looking down in amusement at the silly mortals claiming “UNFAIR!”


26 posted on 07/19/2026 2:17:54 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens. --DJT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda

Moreover, the defense at the original trial had this information due to pretrial discovery but chose not to put these supposed witnesses on the stand. That was a tactical choice by the defendant and their attorneys. Peterson does not get to revisit that decision in a new trial.


27 posted on 07/19/2026 2:33:07 PM PDT by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: bobrlbob

I watched the trial numerous times there was no reasonable doubt he was 100% guilty 150% guilty. It’s just some money making opportunity and a waste of taxpayer money.


28 posted on 07/19/2026 2:48:51 PM PDT by Hildy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Rockingham

Yep Geragos admitted to knowing about the witnesses but decided against it thinking the DA didnt prove their case, so ya snooze ya lose


29 posted on 07/19/2026 2:51:01 PM PDT by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

I NEVER thought they proved their case.

“better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer”.


30 posted on 07/19/2026 3:27:13 PM PDT by faucetman (Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda

Geragos would have put the witnesses on if he thought them credible. The approach of simply saying that “the government didn’t prove their case” is usually a weak and unpreferred defense strategy to get a guilty person off the hook. Juries prefer to be shown on the evidence that a defendant they acquit is genuinely innocent.


31 posted on 07/19/2026 9:43:08 PM PDT by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson