Attorney Jeremy Rosenthal has the latest on Scott Peterson

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Everybody. Jeremy Rosenthal joins us. Now take a look at

(00:02):
some of the legal stories making headlines in our news
right now. Jeremy, welcome back in glad to.

Speaker 2 (00:08):
Have you, JT.

Speaker 1 (00:10):
How are you doing great? All right, let's talk about
this crazy motion here now Scott Peterson. We remember Scott
Peterson in California killed Lacy Peterson, his wife and their
unborn son. This happened over twenty years ago, I think
early two thousands, right, it's been a long while.

Speaker 2 (00:29):
Yeah, it's two thousand and four.

Speaker 3 (00:30):
Yeah, and he's back, you know, whether you want him
back in the news cycle or not. Here he is
Scott Peterson and the Lacy Peterson case really disturbing set
of facts.

Speaker 2 (00:40):
But yeah, a lot going on here.

Speaker 1 (00:41):
All right. So he's now fifty two, he no longer
has his hair dyed blonde, trying to go to Mexico.
He's in jail big time for the rest of his life.
Avoided the death penalty there. But now all of a sudden,
he's saying, I want this murder conviction tossed out here
in California. I have some substantial new evidence. What's he.

Speaker 2 (01:01):
Well?

Speaker 3 (01:02):
Okay, So the probably the most surprising thing about this
motion to me is not what's in it, but who
filed it. This was filed by the Innocence Project of
Los Angeles and JT. I'm a criminal defense lawyer, so
I run in these circles, and what I'll tell you
is the Innocence Project is the gold standard and they

(01:23):
are extremely, extremely extremely selective about the cases that they choose.
They don't choose clunkers, They choose sure things because they
want to protect their reputation. And they're the ones that
are behind this. They filed roughly a nine hundred page motion.
I don't think there's anything that's ridiculously new. They point

(01:45):
out that the entire case was circumstantial. Mark Garrigos, his lawyer,
says that, look, he was convicted of acting weird after
she died, and that's extremely weird after she died. But
they're pointing to a burglary that happened across the street,
and Scott Peterson's theory is that Lacy must have come

(02:12):
across this burglary right across the street, maybe intervene, tried
to intervene, and then what happened was, you know, maybe
something bad happened. Maybe she got abducted. There's always been controversy.
Did this happen the day after or two days after
this burglary? That's what this is all about, all right, it's.

Speaker 1 (02:30):
Been over twenty years now, Okay, he was convicted. What
is prosecution saying about this as much as they're screaming, hey,
here's some possibilities. He was convicted by a jury of
his peers. He has always claimed his innocence. That's true.
But here's the deal. They had pretty good evidence, you know,
to convict this guy. In all of this is the

(02:53):
prosecution calling hogwash here, even though this organization has some credibility,
quote unquote.

Speaker 3 (03:00):
The prosecution is saying, look, you, Scott Peterson, that's not enough. Okay,
everybody in prison, you get your day in trial, you
get your day in court. In America, you don't get
your day in court until you win. That's not how
it works. And that's kind of what the prosecution's attitude is,
which is and and they basically say, look, Scott Peterson, fine,

(03:22):
you say that you're innocent, Fine, we'll hear you out,
but you got to you got to show us a nexus.
You've got to show us a connection between the things
that you are saying are out there and reality you
can't just sit here and guess at it. And that's
kind of where this thing lies. There is a I
will say, there's a van that was about two blocks

(03:45):
away that they found burned out, and Peterson's team wants
that tested for Lacy's DNA.

Speaker 2 (03:51):
You want, They want to test.

Speaker 3 (03:52):
It for the DNA of the people who they ultimately
arrested for that burglary. The judge is authorizing the retesting
of some masking tape I believe that was found on
Lacey's pants. That's really their only shot here is if
that comes away with somebody else's DNA that's not Scott Peterson.
But to your point, JT, Yeah, you don't get your

(04:15):
day in court until you win.

Speaker 2 (04:17):
Yeah.

Speaker 1 (04:17):
Let me ask you this, where are we in this process?
Is there a chance that they get a new trial?
Is a judge looking at this going okay, well, maybe
let's see.

Speaker 2 (04:27):
They haven't shut it down yet.

Speaker 3 (04:28):
And if if that tape test comes back and and
and it does show a nexus between some other human
and Lacey, uh, that that that could be behind this, then.

Speaker 2 (04:40):
It could be game on.

Speaker 3 (04:42):
Uh that they came on.

Speaker 2 (04:43):
But but we don't know. Yeah, and but it can
very well be shut down.

Speaker 1 (04:47):
All right, Very good, Jeremy, thank you for the updated
on this crazy, bizarre story.