Scott Peterson, convicted of murdering his pregnant wife Laci and their unborn son, speaks out after 20 years of maintaining innocence, claiming police ignored leads in a new documentary 'Face to Face with Scott Peterson.'

In this new documentary, Peterson criticizes the investigation, alleging that critical leads were ignored during his 2004 trial that relied heavily on circumstantial evidence. With the new involvement of the Los Angeles Innocence Project and recent judicial decisions allowing for retesting of DNA evidence, Peterson's case has reignited debate about his guilt and the possibility of securing a new trial.

Peterson's convictions have long been a topic of public intrigue and debate. His wife, Laci Peterson, and their unborn son, Conner, were reported missing from their Modesto home in December 2002. Months later, their bodies were discovered in San Francisco Bay, which led to Peterson being swiftly implicated based on circumstantial evidence presented during his high-profile trial.

In the documentary, Peterson states that his decision not to testify in his own defense during the trial was a mistake he deeply regrets. He now expresses a willingness to testify, believing that his own words could help clear his name. He acknowledges his infidelity, calling his affair with Amber Frey a 'terrible mistake' and expressing remorse for cheating on his wife, but he disputes that this should be interpreted as a motive for murder.

Prosecutors argued that Peterson killed his wife to escape the responsibilities of married life and impending fatherhood. This narrative was bolstered by his affair with Frey, which became a focal point during the trial. Peterson’s defense, however, maintains that the prosecution's case lacked substantial evidence and hinged on these circumstantial details without direct proof of his involvement in the murders.

The Los Angeles Innocence Project took interest in Peterson's case in January, advocating for a reassessment of the evidence and looking into potential new leads. Their efforts aim to address claims that the initial investigation may have overlooked critical information that could point to Peterson's innocence. The organization is working to achieve a new trial, asserting that fresh scrutiny of evidence could yield different conclusions.

Recent judicial actions have also provided openings for re-examining the case. A California judge ruled in May 2024 that DNA found on duct tape attached to Laci Peterson's pants could be retested, potentially introducing new insights into the case. This decision is part of a larger set of legal developments that have kept the story alive in public discourse.

Peterson's sister-in-law, Janey Peterson, offers an alternate theory of the crime. She suggests that Laci may have had a fatal encounter with burglars who were robbing a house across the street from the Peterson home on the day she went missing. Janey Peterson has been a vocal advocate for Scott's innocence, continuously pushing for a re-evaluation of the evidence and discovery of new leads.

In 2020, the California Supreme Court overruled Peterson's death sentence, citing concerns about judicial errors during the jury selection process. He has since been resentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. This legal twist has brought renewed attention to the case, sparking multiple media productions aiming to explore and perhaps reinterpret the sequence of events and the evidence presented.

Adding to the public conversation is a three-part docuseries on Peacock that is set to launch soon. This series seeks to present Peterson's perspective and scrutinize the original investigation and trial. The documentary aims to bring a more nuanced view to the case, featuring interviews and insights from individuals close to the investigation and trial.

Peterson’s story is one that continues to stir public curiosity and judicial scrutiny. As the Los Angeles Innocence Project conducts its investigation and the judicial system re-examines physical evidence, the debate around Peterson's guilt or innocence remains highly active. Whether these efforts will lead to a new trial or any significant breakthroughs is still an unfolding narrative.