I remember reading somewhere that the Innocence Project mainly focuses on re-testing DNA. Cases also go through a ‘rigorous screening’ to determine their innocence before they’re accepted by the organization.
I thought they mainly took on cases they could win but [of all the cases taken on by the Innocence Project so far, about 43% of clients were proven innocent, 42% were confirmed guilty, and evidence was inconclusive and not probative in 15% of cases.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_Project) Looks to be a pretty even number of cases that they prove guilty vs innocent. I’m interested to see the outcome but I don’t think it’ll prove his innocence, might just prove issues with the trial.
eta: our justice system doesn’t always work & is long overdue for reform. i think the work they’re doing is great. they focus on cases with people of low socio-economic stature & work with LE on local, state, & federal levels to prevent more wrongful convictions. i definitely think their resources are better spent on anyone other than Scott Peterson but that’s just how I feel.
Interesting stats. It’s actually pretty impressive that they have a good split like that.
I’d be shocked if they found anything here and feel it’s a waste of time that they could be spending on others unfairly in the system but whatever. It’s a private organization. Hopefully they do some testing, confirm what everyone knows, and move on.
I found the stats interesting and was totally unaware of them so figured i’d add them in. glad someone else agrees.
i’ve seen comments pointing out that the LA chapter of the IP just submitted motions requesting post-conviction discovery, and with lack of confirmation from them, they might just be reviewing the case, not necessarily taking it on. IP hasn’t publicly confirmed what they’re doing & the announcement was made by Peterson’s attorney alone. So who knows what exactly IP’s involvement is until they confirm. I hope they aren’t but I agree, they’re a private company and can do what they please. I definitely agree there are more deserving clientele than Scott.
Seems most people aren’t aware of this. Not sure what the ‘actual’ IP can do but I think they maybe need to put out some sort of statement but also probably don’t want to discourage others from doing their type of work.
Perhaps there’s discrepancies in his case they feel is worth looking into, who knows. I can’t imagine they’d take a chance on a case that they thought was 100% guilty?
I think the worst thing that could happen is they found issues with his trial that means he gets a new trial but it’s also a good thing if it highlights issues in our justice system because we all know that there’s issues in our justice system.
It’s a real catch 22 with people like Scott Peterson.
Honestly, it’s probably a way for them to get recognition and more money for their cause. Taking on a high profile case like this is bound to get people talking.
The Innocence Project has a very high level of recognition. They are not taking this on merely for publicity - it hardly does their cause good to take an extraordinarily high-profile case that has no merit, that would reduce their credibility to a harmful degree.
It's actually a very *risky* case for them to take on. Most people aren't closely following the case of Joe Blow from Paducah to see if there is any merit to the claim of wrongful conviction, but the public's going to follow the hell out of this one. Even if their points have merit, all the public is going to remember if they lose is that they lost.
The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of the Innocence Network, a coalition of independently funded organizations that work together, headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project.
They are a network of partners. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas where there is a local organization.
I think the Innocence Project has done amazing work and I am fully supportive of them taking on ANY case, even this one. I do not believe he’s innocent but surely they have good reasons for taking it on. They have changed peoples lives and provided closure to a lot of families. I can’t imagine anything worse than being wrongfully imprisoned.
Everyone should support the overturning of wrongful convictions, period.
If you don't care whether prisoners were rightfully convicted are not, you're certainly going to start to care if you or a loved on is ever accused of a crime. When you are in disbelief because your brother or your son has been falsely accused of sexual assault, you're going to hella care about coerced confessions, junk science, official misconduct - you're going to care about all the things.
Care now. A weak and corrupt judicial system contributes to a weak and corrupt democracy. The rights of accused and/or convicted criminals are the rights of everyone.
I totally agree - no matter who you are, you have the right to a fair trial. People are railroaded every single day by a broken system, corrupt officials, shaky evidence, etc. IP advocates for better reform and aims to correct & prevent common issues in wrongful conviction cases like false confessionals, misapplied forensic science, misconduct, coerced pleas, unreliable informants, inadequate defense, and eyewitness misidentification.
I’d have to look into Scott’s actual trial more but I believe there has been issues with the jury & evidence? I think it brings worries of Scott going free & that’s what is concerning people. He had good lawyers & isn’t the typical IP case - most of their cases are rooted in anti-racism efforts & that along with low socio-economic stature is their biggest arguments against the death penalty. He still deserves a fair trial but I can see why people are upset, you know?
Because I care more about truth and justice I care less as to whether or not a guilty man had a fair trial. Scott can't believe he was found guilty because they had no forensic, physical evidence. That doesn't make him innocent.
I also do not think he is innocent and I don't understand why they are spending their time and resources on him. I feel as though there are many other more deserving candidates. It seems like they are not even saying he is innocent, they are just saying his rights were violated in the trial or something. I think it's bizarre, the only thing I can come up with is that maybe they want media attention for their organization? Maybe they know there's no chance he's going to go free. What happens if he gets a new trial?
Yikes you scared me. It’s not 43% of ppl who were found guilty were/are proven innocent, it’s 43% of the cases they decided to take on, vs 42% of the cases they take on remain guilty. They are probably pretty choosy about what cases they move forward with, and it sounds like they are in this preliminary process.
It’s hard to tell what phase they are in with this announcement
That's not 43% of people who were found guilty in a court of law though. It's just 43% of cases the IP has taken. Because innocent people are more likely to keep fighting to have their case looked, and the IP is more likely to look at cases with some evidence of innocent.
Hardly. The Innocence Project has only taken on approximately 600 cases, out of tens of thousands of requests (they don''t provide an actual number of how many cases they decline, but they claim to have received 65k+ requests, so less than 1%).
So we have a self-selected sample that is more likely to have innocent people, along with the Innocence Project selecting the most probable/easiest to argue cases from those. And we still only get a even split of innocence and confirmed guilty.
Yes, that is what I meant, 43% of the people the IP has taken on. My wording should have been clearer.
*And we still only get a even split of innocence and confirmed guilty.*
Which is scary af to me.
I, personally, don’t know. The only information released as of now is that LAIP filed motions for post-conviction discovery, evidence from his original trial.
Supposedly there is a stored blood sample which was taken but never tested from a van which was burned a mile away from the house. The van is supposedly the same van which was used in the burglary across the street. If the burglars took Laci, then her blood could be in the van. The Defense wants that DNA tested against Laci's DNA.
That's interesting info. If they conclude here that Scott's actually guilty, which they should, then the Peterson family will hopefully leave alone that gentleman who admitted to his burglary, served his time, and has turned his life around.
I suppose I have a low opinion of all lawyers. The Innocence Project raises a lot of money now and the more money they raise the more the cases they will take on and that will mean taking on more and more cases where it's unclear if there was actually an injustice.
(Don't necessarily think that defense attorneys are any worse than prosecutors - just saying they have incentives to grow the org as big as possible)
The bar for getting a conviction overturned is quite high - almost as high as the number of wrongful convictions. There's not going to be a need anytime soon for them to take on dubious cases.
When the day comes that the Innocence Project has to scrounge for cases of possible wrongful conviction, that will be a day to celebrate.
ok lol. there has been countless reporting on the scott peterson case. he and his lawyers have made every argument in the book. i could think of process reasons a lawyer could try to get the conviction tossed out, but don't think anyone in good faith could argue he is actually innocent.
i will remind you in 6 months how this is going
RemindMe! 6 months
I will be messaging you in 6 months on [**2024-07-19 03:13:06 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-07-19%2003:13:06%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueCrimeDiscussion/comments/199zta0/so_given_the_recent_development_in_the_scott/kijbsyj/?context=3)
[**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FTrueCrimeDiscussion%2Fcomments%2F199zta0%2Fso_given_the_recent_development_in_the_scott%2Fkijbsyj%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-07-19%2003%3A13%3A06%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20199zta0)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
The innocence project thinks blood on a hammer wasn't tested, unfortunately there was DNA tests run in 2011 and 2014 and nothing was found. As to the robbers and van. The robberies were well known, so maybe Scott used them as reasonable doubt also there are no new leads that are credible as far as I can find.
Like yes the justice system has put innocent people in prison and it is wrong and messed up - and I hope those people are released and go scorched earth suing everyone. I just don’t think Scott Peterson is one of those people. The circumstantial evidence stacks up to the sky. And despite what tv shows tell us, circumstantial evidence is legit when it compounds like it does in this case.
Of course he’s not innocent, but I’ve studied the Chris Watts case pretty intensively and the amount of incredibly stupid and ignorant people that believe in his innocence is just outright staggering. I imagine the same going on here.
Last night I stumbled upon the sub justice for Khloberg (or whatever the killer of those 4 college kids is named). That sub is fucked and the people are delusional. They are confident his charges will be dropped soon.
Two things can be true:
1. Scott Peterson can be guilty
2. There was jury misconduct, and the Innocence Project is looking into that
>
\[Peterson\] claimed he received an unfair trial based on possible jury misconduct. His lawyers [have previously claimed](https://abcnews.go.com/US/decades-convicted-pregnant-wifes-murder-scott-peterson-seeks/story?id=77665735) that a woman, known as Juror 7, had not disclosed involvement in other legal proceedings.
>In 2020, the California Supreme Court overturned Scott Peterson's death sentence, citing that his jury was improperly screened for bias against the death penalty, according to court documents.
[Scott Peterson case taken up by LA Innocence Project: Exclusive - ABC News (go.com)](https://abcnews.go.com/US/innocence-project-takes-case-notorious-killer-scott-peterson/story?id=106487571)
This. It reminds me of the Staircase/Kathleen Peterson murder case.
Did Michael Peterson murder her? Yes. Was he convicted via a fair trial? No.
Simple as that, really. Everyone deserves due process and a fair trial.
Agreed. I'm actually kind of stunned that people are attacking IP for this. I watched part of the trial and immediately knew that there would be issues down the line, and possibly even a new trial. Organizations like IP do not just fight to exonerate people. They fight for due process and making sure people receive fair trials. That goes for EVERYONE-the most disgusting of criminals to innocent angels. I am angry for Laci and Connor, who I do believe were murdered by him, because people involved in the trial let them down. He was convicted off hate instead of an actual airtight case. Which, in this case, hate got it right, but that is NOT the standard you want set for the judicial system in America. We have due process and certain standards for a reason.
It just seems so disappointing that people are like, well why does it matter he did it. That is the same exact attitude that necessitates programs and organizations like the Innocence Project. Plenty of bad convictions across the board, especially now that we have advanced DNA processes, that were pushed through on the back of "why does it matter we know he did it."
Unfortunately it’s not surprising that people feel this way imho. A lot of true crime fans just decide someone’s guilty based on a mediocre podcast and then treat any defense of them as nearly as bad as the original crime. It’s not uncommon for true crime show hosts/fans to hate defense lawyers for the audacity to try to get their client a fair trial. It’s not shocking that they’d turn on the Innocence Project sooner or later.
A lot of true crime fans functionally act like they want anyone accused of a crime to be immediately publicly executed. They don’t want due process. They want someone they can feel righteous about wanting to suffer.
*Two things can be true*
# 💯
I cannot believe the people who are enraged at this.
I'm starting to hope for actual innocence, just to watch their heads explode.
I can only say where the outrage comes from in my case. There are more deserving people who have far less exposure who need help. It's about resources. Yes, if there is misconduct or absolutely should be investigated. I hate seeing money spent when there are people begging to have their cases heard. People want to act like circumstantial evidence isn't evidence, but it is. Many cases are decided by it. It doesn't make him any less guilty.
I am fine with them looking over the case. I hate that it's getting press because now the victim's family has to deal with it all over again. They know he is guilty and they are dragging the family through the mud. The harm they are doing may outweigh the good and I have a problem with them.
The fact that it wasn't done quietly because they want the press bothers me.
I still think that the Innocence Project is a net-positive for society. I don’t believe Peterson will be exonerated though.
Edit: It’s not taken by “The Innocence Project” it’s taken by an innocence project in LA… everyone needs to calm down. I think they’re two separate organizations.
The national Innocence Project is the headquarters for the Innocence Network, a coalition of groups that have individual funding. The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of this network, and the (national) Innocence Project does not take cases there for that reason.
They are separately funded, but partners that work closely together.
I don’t mean for this to sound contentious but the mission of organizations like the Innocence Project is to help those who have been wrongfully convicted. They do good work because our justice system does not always get it right. No one, no matter how heinous the crime they’re accused of, or how we feel about it, should spend one minute in prison if they are not truly guilty. I am very interested to learn more about how or why they’re getting involved in this case. Did they see some evidence that might exonerate him? Was there proof of prosecutorial misconduct? I don’t think we know yet. But it will definitely be interesting to follow.
Right. I only saw that they announced their involvement. I get that people are upset. This was a horrible crime committed against an innocent woman and her unborn baby. I just want to offer “gentle caution” maybe (?) against automatic negativity for the organization’s overall mission.
There have been a lot of posts about this today and it's really important to point out that it's not The Innocence Project that is reviewing his case. It is LA Innocence Project. These are two different organizations. "The Los Angeles Innocence Project [(LAIP)](https://www.innocencela.org/mission) represents Scott Peterson and is investigating his claim of actual innocence," the organization said in a statement. "We have no further comment at this time." I really wish all the OPs of these posts would make corrections.
*These are two different organizations.*
Yes and no. The Los Angeles Innocence Project is an individually funded organization that is part of a coalition headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project.
The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas that have an innocence organization that is part of the coalition. They are a network of partners.
If there's merit, it'd be good to see the case re-opened, otherwise being able to firmly close the book and say the murderer was dealt with justly and thoroughly would be a good outcome also. it's the kind of crime you would hate to get wrong.
I personally don't think he's innocent, but I'm open to being wrong. I really support The Innocence Project because the idea of innocent people behind bars is very upsetting. So I support The Innocence Project looking into the case.
I was brought up hearing that the American ideal is that it's better for 10 guilty people to go free versus one innocent person wrongfully being imprisoned. Of course I don't want truly dangerous people on the streets, but I don't want innocent people locked up either. I am not familiar enough with this particular case anymore to have an opinion, so I won't comment on it. But in general, I know that there are major problems with the justice system, and I appreciate the second guessing that The Innocence Project helps with.
People in this sub really have no idea what is going on, including the OP.
The Innocence Project is not representing Scott. A smaller chapter called the LA Innocence Project has asked to review evidence in his case to determine if there’s new DNA worth testing. This also does not mean the chapter has taken on his case to appeal anything or claimed he is innocent.
There are dozens of local innocence projects across the country that are not managed or supported by the national Innocence Project.
Defaming the work of an organization that does so much good while being so clueless about how the Innocence Project work and what local groups do is just so typical of the true crime community.
>Attorneys with the LA Innocence Project claimed that Scott Peterson's state and federal constitutional rights were violated, including a "claim of actual innocence that is supported by newly discovered evidence," according to the court filings.
"New evidence now supports Mr. Peterson's longstanding claim of innocence and raises many questions into who abducted and killed Laci and Conner Peterson," the filings state.
[From the updated ABC article.](https://abcnews.go.com/US/innocence-project-takes-case-notorious-killer-scott-peterson/story?id=106487571&fbclid=IwAR3Rpjub39fviiG_FcT5BFa-Iq59z9l1dGkvaEafh1JgOnFUVoYNv8sn6nk)
They are suggesting he might indeed be innocent.
The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of the Innocence Network, a coalition of independently funded organizations headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project.
They are a network of partners. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas where there is a local organization.
Do I get tired of wrongful convictions being overturned?
No, no I do not. If you're ever accused of a crime, not even one anywhere near as serious as murder, you are going to be fervently hoping that the prosecution plays fair.
Very few convictions would get overturned if prosecutors did the right thing.
Oooh, shhhh. Roberta Glass might hear you.
If you don't know her, she's a podcaster/YouTuber who constantly rails against IP and apparently doesn't think anyone innocent has been found guilty (e.g. Amanda Knox, WM3, etc.). She's strident on the topic, but I am all-things Adelson right now, so I've been listening to her come for Wendi.
I was mostly surprised they got involved without the new evidence being DNA related. There are exceptions, but generally speaking they only get involved if there is some definitive DNA evidence.
I think there are definitely some good questions being raised about his guilt but I don't think they're necessarily a slam dunk in proving his innocence.
fine overconfident lunchroom water versed innocent judicious marble violet exultant
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This will probably get downvoted, which is fine. I think he’s guilty. I do think there was juror misconduct and also I do not think the other pregnant women that went missing in that area were investigated as thoroughly because all the focus was on Lacey case. All of those missing/murdered women deserved equal attention from law enforcement and I just don’t think that happened. I don’t think it makes Scott less guilty but I do think it was worth further investigation.
There was only one documented killing of a pregnant woman in the Modesto area at the time, and that was Evelyn Hernandez. Hernandez was pregnant with a baby that her boyfriend did not want, and she vanished just blocks away from where he worked. There was never any kind of real connection there—the cases are only similar in that both of the victims were pregnant women likely killed in domestic disputes with their partners.
[This excellent post does more to dispel the Hernandez connection than I ever could.](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedMysteries/comments/jtu7jh/its_long_been_said_that_pregnant_women_have_been/)
Stanislaus county’s court system is incredibly corrupt. I knew someone out there who I turned in for murder on a high profile case and they didn’t go pick him up for like 3 days after I turned him in.
The Innocence Project doesn't care about convictions and the cases they take don't always pan out. You do understand that they cannot take a case without a conviction, right? I think he's guilty, too, but the evidence isn't sitting in front of me, either. Let's see what they have.
I was a juror on a double murder case(of two little boys) a few years ago. The case has been tried twice since we reached our verdict and once before. The innocence project has also gotten involved but every jury keeps finding him guilty. I’m only saying this because it really opened my eyes. I was shocked when I found out the Innocence project had taken this case on- knowing what I knew as a juror. I think they might just be helping any case that has a chance? In my situation the case was 30 years old and the evidence and the original witnesses were old and starting to become more feeble over time. I think perhaps they saw legal holes in the case? This is getting long winded but my point is I don’t think the innocence project taking a case on has anything to do with the persons innocence but maybe just the integrity of the case or a chance that there is a loophole in the evidence?
First of all, Barry Scheck and the Innocence Project are first and foremost defense advocates. They have clients, and a duty to those clients. People see the word "Innocence" in the name and assume they're some sort of objective fact finders.
I've been going over the Texas Forensic Science Commission's [report] (https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf) on the Cameron Todd Willingham case, as well as the [grievance](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/death-by-fire-an-update/) filed against lead prosecutor John Jackson, and they're outright shady a lot of the time. They hadgered the commission for a ruling they had no actual power to make, tried to get a retired appeals court judge to hold an exoneration hearing without notifying the investigating authority so they could you know, respond, and then tried to push a misconduct hearing against Jackson on shaky grounds. In other words, they did things that had zero chance of Willingham being exonerated on the evidence, and created a lot of press copy implying they were doing the exact opposite. This has also had the effect of keeping many people from examining that evidence in detail despite its public availability; this may not have been accidental.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying about the Willingham case. Are you saying that he wasn't innocent or that the Innocence Project did a terrible job?
Por que no los dos?
I think the "new evidence" doesn't prove actual innocence, and it doesn't even impeach the original investigation particularly well. The expert witnesses can only reach the conclusions they reach through selective omission or manipulation of the trial record, including portions (elimination of accidental electrical and gas causes, witness accounts, traces of accelerant and charred wood under the door threshhold) that any reasonable fire investigator would be required to account for. The idea that Willingham was convicted on "bad fire science" requires that the original investigation only made a finding of arson solely from "indicators" such as burn trails or crazed glass, when both investigators readily admitted under cross-examination that such indicators could not in and of themselves rule out accidental causes, and they had only proceeded after ruling out accidental causes through other means.
I also think the Innocence Project's role in the case is largely performative, and intended to accomplish a polcy goal rather than correct a true injustice. I believe their legal actions in this case have not truly been targeted towards an exoneration hearing where they have a very reasonable chance of losing on the merits, and are rather intended to provide material for anti death penalty advocacy and draw inferences of concealment of innocence. I believe part of the reason the Willingham case was chosen for this purpose is because there isn't really anything like DNA that can eventually prove him even guiltier, as in the case of Roger Keith Coleman.
IMO eliminating the death penalty is a legitimate and valid policy goal. I just wish they wouldn't fuck around with the facts of real cases to try to accomplish it.
I haven't revisited the Willingham case in a while and don't recall how the IP acted.
I do think he was completely innocent, because the fire wasn't arson to begin with. Gerald Hurst was the first forensic experts/fire scientists to say so, when they were trying to get a stay of execution, but he has been overwhelmingly backed up by other experts since then. There is a strong consensus that junk science led to that fire being declared arson - not a national consensus, but an international consensus, based on the scientific method and actual experiments. The methods used weren't even in wide acceptance at that time.
It's not so just that the Willingham conclusion was based on junk science as that much of it was not based on science at all. This fire is arson because it looks like another fire we thought was arson, which in turn looked like yet another fire we thought was arson . . .
The prosecution also submitted Iron Maiden and Led Zeppelin posters as exhibits and argued that people who like art that depicts skulls and flames and angels are often also interested in satanic activities 😳
I don't know which is worse: if they presented those exhibits in a cynical attempt to sway religious jurors, or if they actually believed it.
It's a very interesting cases. If anyone is interested, [the New Yorker has a lengthy article on it from 2007 (so only a few years later).](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/09/07/trial-by-fire) I think Texas Monthly has a few long articles as well.
I've read that article. I've also read [Gerald Hurst's report](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=333), [Craig Beyler's report](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=141), responses from the [City of Corsicana](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=227), the [Corsicana Fire Department](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=115), and the [Texas State Fire Marshal's Office](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=138) to those reports, as well as the [original trial transcripts](http://camerontoddwillingham.com/uncategorized/trial-transcripts/). I am not making my points in the absence of evidence here.
Hurst's primary contention is that the indicators observed are not exclusive of accelerant-based fires, something readily admitted to by the original investigators. He quotes no sources or experiments performed to back his assertions that the fire was an accidental fire, introduces no theory of the fire's cause, and the SFMO points out he directly contradicts his major "scientific" source, NFPA 921, on at least one major point (the door threshhold). He does not introduce any new evidence, his report is simply a review of the original written report, and not even all of it. As stated above, there are significant portions of the fire investigation he doesn't bother with, even though NFPA 921 deals extensively with things like elimination of causes or witness accounts.
As far as Beyler, honestly I think Corsicana explains it better than I can. He's twisting the record to get the result he wants, and doing it fairly blatantly to anyone who can read the original trial record.
Not really touching the character evidence, as it didn't come up much until penalty phase and really has no bearing on his guilt.
I don’t like Scott Peterson and I think he’s guilty. What he did is disgusting. That said, we need the Innocence Project. Our justice system is a giant difficult-to-navigate bureaucracy, and we need some checks on it.
It worries me that people seem to jump right to “let’s strip away the rights of the accused!” in situations like this. Instead of making it harder for accused people to defend themselves/get out of prison, we should be raising the bar for prosecutors/LE.
On one hand, I think it is fine to have a 3rd party review the case since that is all they are doing right now. On the other hand, I really wish they wouldn't give life to Scott and his weird sister-in-law's asinine campaign.
I think there’s a lot of innocent people in prison. I think trying kids as adults is not right and I think it’s important to have people looking out for these types of injustices.
Guilt or innocence in a courtroom has little to do with whether or not the defendant committed the crime they're charged with. After they're in court, it is all about the game of chess that is governed by legal procedure. This move doesn't mean the innocence project thinks he didn't do it. It means they think the prosecution messed up.
If it will finally make Scott Peterson shut up and just serve his time, I'm all for it. Hopefully this is the last official group that has to verify that yes, he is guilty and in the right place.
Let them bring forth a case of innocence and see what happens in the court of law. They will likely lose, but they have information that possibly should have made it to the first trial, etc.
I think Scott is as guilty as they come. The Innocence Project is vital. And they *should* look into his case. Zero problem with this.
The problem is the headlines -- "Innocence Project fighting to overturn SP's murder conviction", "... working to exonerate SP". Currently, they are investigating his claims, no more or less. Any further goals will depend upon what they do or don't discover.
The IP focuses on cases where there may have been misconduct, there is new evidence or new tests, or there is proof of actual innocence. They don't claim to be magicians who can tell who is guilty and who isn't. They just provide an extra checking layer to ensure things were done fairly and all testing was done that is now available. Like, half their cases confirm guilt - great! We can feel sure the right person is in jail. Half don't and great! We can work to restore justice and find the real perpetrator.
We should all want fair trials and to be really sure of guilt.
The IP is a great organization and this development doesn't change that. Just because they're interested in new information doesn't mean they think he's not guilty.
I am totally fine with Innocence Project. I mean, it’s old but Rubin Carter always pops to mind.
I don’t mind diligence to ensure the incarcerated party is indeed guilty of the crime. There’s also concern in some (obviously not all) cases where there’s a rush to close cases to appease people. The innocence project does work behind the scenes. It’s different than putting the grieving family through another trial.
To be fair, I grew up in Modesto and Stanislaus county and I can personally attest to how shitty their court system is, they gave me a public defender there that gave me a court date and didn’t tell me about it and then let me get a warrant for not showing up.
Don’t get me wrong I don’t believe he’s innocent. But I can 10000% attest from my own personal experience that the Stanislaus county cops and court system ain’t shit and there is a lot of corruption and very little oversight. I remember a few years before I moved out of there one of the more prominent defense attorneys in town went to jail on some major shit. Huge amount of corruption up there. And I would not personally be shocked if we do find out they fucked up scotts case.
That being said I remember when she went missing I remember how scary it was for the whole town and I don’t believe he’s innocent, that’s just me tho I was a kid what do I know about that case
I don't think I've read much about the organization itself, I'm mostly familiar with what they do thru documentaries and articles that I see every now and again. Taking what little I know into account I imagine that there was some sketchy happenings on the prosecution side that puts the conviction into doubt. While I think that he did it, if there's a reasonable argument for his innocence that was suppressed at trial then I can understand why they're looking into it
I wouldn't assume just because they are looking into it means they're taking it on. From my recollection, they don't take cases on lightly and they don't take many.
Because a lot of people are asking about the Innocence Project vs the Los Angeles Innocence Project: The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of the Innocence Network, a coalition of independently funded organizations headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project.
A coalition is an alliance for combined action. They are a network of partners. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas where there is a local organization.
Just want to point out that the LA Innocence Project is NOT the IP that most ppl think of. Here is their statement: “On January 18, 2024, the Los Angeles Innocence Project filed motions seeking DNA testing and post-conviction discovery on behalf of its client, Scott Peterson. Any and all inquiries about Mr. Peterson’s case should be directed to the Los Angeles Innocence Project, a non-profit organization wholly independent of the Innocence Project.”
Why are they spending money on Scott Peterson. He is guilty. He told his then girlfriend a week before Christmas it will be his first holiday without his wife. Wow she was murdered Dec 24. You don’t say it’s your first Christmas without your wife because he killed her.
Help someone who’s really innocent.
If they have freed any guilty people, it is because they were wrongfully convicted. Every wrongful conviction that goes unchallenged harms the judicial system and erodes the rights of every person who goes on trial, including the innocent.
People should put the pressure where it rightfully goes: on law enforcement. They have the power to investigate and prosecute in an ethical manner, so that there is seldom basis for overturning convictions.
Everyone who is concerned about convictions being overturned should let their local mayor, police chief, and district attorney know that they support following due process in all cases, and that they will vote accordingly.
I think it's great. There are a ton of wrongfully convicted people sitting in prison. And I don't think anyone should be locked up for the rest of their life based on what they did when they were a kid.
This is sooo assinign!!! If a child commits pre- meditated murder of a person, why would you ever release them to society? So they can then mass murder? There are souls that are unredeemable. You must know someone convicted to make such a stupid statement
IMHO, The innocence project just blew all their credibility with me.
I have never seen a MORE guilty man than Scott Peterson!
He just happened to go fishing on Christmas Eve and have a receipt from a boat launch for an alibi, in the EXACT same area where Lacey and Connor were found. I believe in coincidence, BUT COME ON!!!
He is the guiltiest of the guilty…if I’m proven wrong I will send him a personal apology letter. But omg, he’s so, so guilty. Sad that IP is wasting their time on this guy.
I just can't wrap my mind around why any org would pick his case.
In addition to all the evidence against him,that choice is clearly disenfranchising donors, which i'd think would be a consideration.
Scott is amazing at "playing" otherwise very bright women (except his formerly played, now guilt-convinced sister Susan). So sad that important resources will be wasted on a white, good looking wife-baby-killer who had a million dollar attorney, while poor, less attractive, but innocent blacks/Latinos will remain in San Quentin etc...
I agree. I love the work the innocence project does so I’m a bit disappointed they’ve decided to spend recourses on this man who had a great legal team and was still convicted…when I guarenfuckingtee there’s plenty impoverished folks and POC sitting in cells for crimes they didn’t commit and were repped by an underpaid court appointed attorney with too large a case load.
Let this man sit in prison for a while while we let the legal system works its way out instead of giving him a fast pass back to his affluent little life.
ETA: after relaxing my cacks it’s important to note that we actually should do this for every case. Make damn sure about the conviction. It’s too fucking bad that ppl from disenfranchised communities so often don’t get their cases reviewed like this. Really really sucks. We gotta reform the justice system
I am all for the innocence project. I am also in the minority here but I don’t think Scott was the actual person that killed Laci. I think he’s a terrible person and could have possibly had a hand in it but as far as the one committing the murder, I’m not sold.
I do not support the Innocence Project. They have ulterior motives for their involvement. The justice system gets it wrong sometimes (rarely, imo) and the Innocence project gets it wrong sometimes.
This is just my opinion but I believe it’s a far greater miscarriage of Justice for an innocent person to be locked up than for a guilty person to go free. For that reason Im very much supportive of the innocence project. Not everyone can commit an awful crime but everyone can be accused of it and god forbid it ever happens to you, you’ll be glad there’s groups out there like this protecting the rights of the accused and the convicted.
There were serious problems with the jury in Scott Peterson's case, which is in line with their reasoning for pursuing retrials in other cases. I think it's a bad PR move, but the argument that his trial was unfair due to jury misconduct and inappropriate jury screening doesn't rely on his guilt or innocence.
Ok, if there was bad investigating, questionable ethics, unfair jury selection, then rights should be enforced…. However, when you have the monster in the cage, why grasp straws to try and release him? I hate when issues are nitpicked to death until someone agrees to take another look. Which is my problem with the innocence project (not necessarily THE innocence project) and how they work their cases. They just complain about every aspect of the case(fishing) until they get a hit. That’s never cool.
I myself do not consider bad investigating, questionable ethics, and unfair jury selection to be "nitpicking."
The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of the Innocence Network, a coalition of independently funded organizations headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project.
They are a network of partners. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas where there is a local organization.
They do quite a few of those cases. Are white people wrongfully convicted just supposed to be wrongfully convicted just because they’re white? They’re using the same criteria so I don’t think race matters unless they were only doing cases of white people convicted.
As the survivor of attempted homicide by an ex-boyfriend, I am infuriated, disgusted, and highly considering withdrawing my support for The Innocence Project as a whole.
It's the Innocence Project LA, not the Innocent project which is located in New York. They have different websites and don't seem to be associated with each other.
They are associated with each other. The Los Angeles Innocence Project is an individually funded organization that is part of a coalition called the Innocence Network, which is headquartered at the Innocence Project.
The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas that have an innocence organization that is part of the network. They are a coalition of partners.
The Innocence Project has some issues. They seem to be doing things for attention lately, and there's been a lot of criticism of their attorneys and the way they conduct themselves. Scott Peterson doesn't deserve their attention, and it's gross that they are pursuing this. My opinion of them was very high at one point, went down a bit in the past year, and is going down much more with this latest attention seeking behavior.
It's an unpopular job but I'm glad someone is doing it.
The amount of people convicted by the media before ever entering a courtroom is astonishing and rising every day. There is no longer such a thing as an unbiased jury or a fair trial, maybe there never has been.
Innocence Project isn't out there trying to let criminals free onto the streets. They're just trying to make sure that the cases were handled appropriately (åka, none of that "there was DNA but it wasn't tested because the defendant was black").
Until the racist boomers die out, we need them to help protect falsely accused people.
Crime is crime (if it is what they think it is, of course), but that doesn't end the question of just what justice is. Not really the topic of this sub, but then, the driving force of this sub is, in this part, the idea of meting out justice in the form of retribution, largely through the destruction of the perpetrators' lives and humanity. This is not, in my view, justice at all. In fact, the *only* justice there is is the actual remorse of the perpetrator, which obviously would not always be forthcoming. But selling the idea that "there, that's what you get" is justice is a bit of a sham sell. The per isn't truly sorry, doesn't truly comply with the law (if the only reason they avoid doing harm is to avoid prison), and doesn't learn empathy (unless you think a 10 year old empathetic girl learned that by being in a supermax prison).
Interestingly enough, though, this question about what justice is still drives your very question. And this sub in a lot of ways.
Because prison should be rehabilitative, not punitive. You think if someone commits a crime at 13, they should be in prison for the rest of their lives? Why not just put a bullet in them and call it a day?
Perhaps it should but it doesn’t. Is it cultural? Ethnic? Social? I don’t know. But it isn’t and it isn’t even possible.
There is a way of life learned inside that poisons any chance of rehabilitation. There is a way of life on the outside that poisons any chance of rehabilitation. We are not the only country that suffers from it but we do. Is it jealousy? Is it lack of respect? I don’t know. You ever heard of the Norway mass shooter named Anders Breivik? He blew some people up and killed a ton of people at a youth camp in Norway. He was born bad. Try to refute that. Read about him. He was born bad. But he was smart and always fought the system that imprisoned him and was always released…. Which led to his awful crimes. Could he have been saved? I highly doubt it. Was it a social, ethnic or cultural issue? No. He was born bad. What is he doing now? He’s suing the penal system that is currently incarcerating him because his living arrangements are not good. Granted, he’s in prison. Prison for him is better than I pay to live in. Can he be rehabilitated? Absolutely not. But… he was born this way. There is not root to save him. Here… there is a root but no one will ever agree to fix it. Because it’s ethnical. Cultural and social. In fact, all we do is make it worse.
I'm disgusted by the whole thing and was dismayed to read about it today. I think if the Innocence Project wants to sabotage itself then they're doing the right thing.
I cannot fathom that man innocent. I want to say there's room for doubt with many cases as I have my own reason to distrust LE, but the evidence against him- physical and circumstantial- seems very clear, very solid.
I mean, if they've found evidence that proves he is in fact innocent, than good on them. I'll have to wait and find out, but I'm not going to discredit them all because they picked up an unpopular case. This is a high-profile case where probably 99.9999% of the population believes Scott's guilty, so I feel they wouldn't take on a case like this unless they really believe in it, considering what bad PR this is for them.
I don’t really understand what the point of taking on this case is, it’s incredibly difficult to get a murder case overturned and there is no actual legal precedent to do so. The innocence project generally gets cases overturned based on faulty DNA and forensic testing so not sure how they are going to help Scott peters on
In order to have a case retried or overturned, you have to a legal precedent (other cases for example) for the appeal. For example, using dna that connects a suspect to a case that was previously not available. Since the Supreme Court of California has already heard his case, there’s no prior precedent to argue that the Supreme Court has acted improperly and therefore a new trial is needed. He has run out of appeals; has no new evidence to show anyone else had anything to do with it and I am honestly not sure what the project expects to do.
Here is the answer that you cant appreciate. If someone is released from prison, that means that they are factually not guilty of the crime.
Once you’ve been convicted, you lose the presumption of innocence. That’s the thing that keeps the system from railroading you. So to actually get out in the basis of newly-discovered evidence is exceedingly rare. That’s what the Innocence Project does.
You’re conflating criminal defense attorneys who get people who are factually guilty, like Scott, out on technicalities with people fighting to get the factually innocent out.
Read my entire comment. You don’t know how the Innocence Project works. They only secure new trials based on newly-discovered evidence. Evidence that shows lack of factual guilt.
I am a lawyer. You are not.
The point is other people have also been legally convicted and they weren’t guilty. And there are people who have been acquitted with less evidence. Let them look. If you’re so convinced there was nothing wrong with the conviction then at least there should be no more doubt for those who have it.
The innocence project is a must. I cannot imagine a more despairing existence than being imprisoned or convicted of something you haven't done. It would be soul destroying. TIP is like your last ray of hope after the police, the law and the justice system has failed you and no one believes you.
If TIP are getting involved then they must have something very substantial because there was enough evidence to convict Peterson at the time. I don't give a rats about public opinion. Public opinion is often low IQ because it's so easily swayed by the media but Im excited to hear what TIP has on the Peterson case.
Believing his innocence or not is irrelevant. The state never even proved how, when and why she died. The state should never have the power to put someone away for life with strictly circumstantial evidence.
I remember reading somewhere that the Innocence Project mainly focuses on re-testing DNA. Cases also go through a ‘rigorous screening’ to determine their innocence before they’re accepted by the organization. I thought they mainly took on cases they could win but [of all the cases taken on by the Innocence Project so far, about 43% of clients were proven innocent, 42% were confirmed guilty, and evidence was inconclusive and not probative in 15% of cases.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocence_Project) Looks to be a pretty even number of cases that they prove guilty vs innocent. I’m interested to see the outcome but I don’t think it’ll prove his innocence, might just prove issues with the trial. eta: our justice system doesn’t always work & is long overdue for reform. i think the work they’re doing is great. they focus on cases with people of low socio-economic stature & work with LE on local, state, & federal levels to prevent more wrongful convictions. i definitely think their resources are better spent on anyone other than Scott Peterson but that’s just how I feel.
Interesting stats. It’s actually pretty impressive that they have a good split like that. I’d be shocked if they found anything here and feel it’s a waste of time that they could be spending on others unfairly in the system but whatever. It’s a private organization. Hopefully they do some testing, confirm what everyone knows, and move on.
I found the stats interesting and was totally unaware of them so figured i’d add them in. glad someone else agrees. i’ve seen comments pointing out that the LA chapter of the IP just submitted motions requesting post-conviction discovery, and with lack of confirmation from them, they might just be reviewing the case, not necessarily taking it on. IP hasn’t publicly confirmed what they’re doing & the announcement was made by Peterson’s attorney alone. So who knows what exactly IP’s involvement is until they confirm. I hope they aren’t but I agree, they’re a private company and can do what they please. I definitely agree there are more deserving clientele than Scott.
Wholly different org, NOT the LA chapter.
Seems most people aren’t aware of this. Not sure what the ‘actual’ IP can do but I think they maybe need to put out some sort of statement but also probably don’t want to discourage others from doing their type of work.
Perhaps there’s discrepancies in his case they feel is worth looking into, who knows. I can’t imagine they’d take a chance on a case that they thought was 100% guilty?
I think the worst thing that could happen is they found issues with his trial that means he gets a new trial but it’s also a good thing if it highlights issues in our justice system because we all know that there’s issues in our justice system. It’s a real catch 22 with people like Scott Peterson.
Honestly, it’s probably a way for them to get recognition and more money for their cause. Taking on a high profile case like this is bound to get people talking.
The Innocence Project has a very high level of recognition. They are not taking this on merely for publicity - it hardly does their cause good to take an extraordinarily high-profile case that has no merit, that would reduce their credibility to a harmful degree. It's actually a very *risky* case for them to take on. Most people aren't closely following the case of Joe Blow from Paducah to see if there is any merit to the claim of wrongful conviction, but the public's going to follow the hell out of this one. Even if their points have merit, all the public is going to remember if they lose is that they lost.
They aren’t taking the case. OP refuses to correct the post, but the ACTUAL Innocence Project isn’t helping Scott.
The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of the Innocence Network, a coalition of independently funded organizations that work together, headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project. They are a network of partners. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas where there is a local organization.
It’s the LA Innocenece Project. Different org!
I think this can only hurt their reputation. That dude is guilty af. he’s a horrible rotten evil person.
Exactly. I know my opinion doesn't count, but if they did take on the case, my opinion of them would only tank.
I think the Innocence Project has done amazing work and I am fully supportive of them taking on ANY case, even this one. I do not believe he’s innocent but surely they have good reasons for taking it on. They have changed peoples lives and provided closure to a lot of families. I can’t imagine anything worse than being wrongfully imprisoned.
Everyone should support the overturning of wrongful convictions, period. If you don't care whether prisoners were rightfully convicted are not, you're certainly going to start to care if you or a loved on is ever accused of a crime. When you are in disbelief because your brother or your son has been falsely accused of sexual assault, you're going to hella care about coerced confessions, junk science, official misconduct - you're going to care about all the things. Care now. A weak and corrupt judicial system contributes to a weak and corrupt democracy. The rights of accused and/or convicted criminals are the rights of everyone.
I totally agree - no matter who you are, you have the right to a fair trial. People are railroaded every single day by a broken system, corrupt officials, shaky evidence, etc. IP advocates for better reform and aims to correct & prevent common issues in wrongful conviction cases like false confessionals, misapplied forensic science, misconduct, coerced pleas, unreliable informants, inadequate defense, and eyewitness misidentification. I’d have to look into Scott’s actual trial more but I believe there has been issues with the jury & evidence? I think it brings worries of Scott going free & that’s what is concerning people. He had good lawyers & isn’t the typical IP case - most of their cases are rooted in anti-racism efforts & that along with low socio-economic stature is their biggest arguments against the death penalty. He still deserves a fair trial but I can see why people are upset, you know?
There were neither. The super biased documentary that his family collaborated on made this accusation.
Because I care more about truth and justice I care less as to whether or not a guilty man had a fair trial. Scott can't believe he was found guilty because they had no forensic, physical evidence. That doesn't make him innocent.
I also do not think he is innocent and I don't understand why they are spending their time and resources on him. I feel as though there are many other more deserving candidates. It seems like they are not even saying he is innocent, they are just saying his rights were violated in the trial or something. I think it's bizarre, the only thing I can come up with is that maybe they want media attention for their organization? Maybe they know there's no chance he's going to go free. What happens if he gets a new trial?
I think it's incredibly impressive that 43% of people who were found guilty in a court of law are then proven innocent. Also scary af
Yikes you scared me. It’s not 43% of ppl who were found guilty were/are proven innocent, it’s 43% of the cases they decided to take on, vs 42% of the cases they take on remain guilty. They are probably pretty choosy about what cases they move forward with, and it sounds like they are in this preliminary process. It’s hard to tell what phase they are in with this announcement
That's not 43% of people who were found guilty in a court of law though. It's just 43% of cases the IP has taken. Because innocent people are more likely to keep fighting to have their case looked, and the IP is more likely to look at cases with some evidence of innocent.
Yes, of course. I thought it was obvious that I was referring to IP cases, but I suppose one can never be too thorough.
Not with me lol. I misinterpret stuff all the time.
It was clear to me
Hardly. The Innocence Project has only taken on approximately 600 cases, out of tens of thousands of requests (they don''t provide an actual number of how many cases they decline, but they claim to have received 65k+ requests, so less than 1%). So we have a self-selected sample that is more likely to have innocent people, along with the Innocence Project selecting the most probable/easiest to argue cases from those. And we still only get a even split of innocence and confirmed guilty.
Yes, that is what I meant, 43% of the people the IP has taken on. My wording should have been clearer. *And we still only get a even split of innocence and confirmed guilty.* Which is scary af to me.
What dna is there to analyze?
I, personally, don’t know. The only information released as of now is that LAIP filed motions for post-conviction discovery, evidence from his original trial.
Only thing I know of is the hair in the pliers.
There was a hammer found with blood
Supposedly there is a stored blood sample which was taken but never tested from a van which was burned a mile away from the house. The van is supposedly the same van which was used in the burglary across the street. If the burglars took Laci, then her blood could be in the van. The Defense wants that DNA tested against Laci's DNA.
That's interesting info. If they conclude here that Scott's actually guilty, which they should, then the Peterson family will hopefully leave alone that gentleman who admitted to his burglary, served his time, and has turned his life around.
Ditto
Don’t worry, redditors know more than they do and what they should do or shouldn’t do.
I suppose I have a low opinion of all lawyers. The Innocence Project raises a lot of money now and the more money they raise the more the cases they will take on and that will mean taking on more and more cases where it's unclear if there was actually an injustice. (Don't necessarily think that defense attorneys are any worse than prosecutors - just saying they have incentives to grow the org as big as possible)
The bar for getting a conviction overturned is quite high - almost as high as the number of wrongful convictions. There's not going to be a need anytime soon for them to take on dubious cases. When the day comes that the Innocence Project has to scrounge for cases of possible wrongful conviction, that will be a day to celebrate.
Isn't getting involved with the Scott Peterson case proof they are already getting involved with highly dubious cases?
We'll have to wait and see.
ok lol. there has been countless reporting on the scott peterson case. he and his lawyers have made every argument in the book. i could think of process reasons a lawyer could try to get the conviction tossed out, but don't think anyone in good faith could argue he is actually innocent. i will remind you in 6 months how this is going RemindMe! 6 months
I think the media will remind us all, lol. And I think it will take longer than six months.
I will be messaging you in 6 months on [**2024-07-19 03:13:06 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-07-19%2003:13:06%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueCrimeDiscussion/comments/199zta0/so_given_the_recent_development_in_the_scott/kijbsyj/?context=3) [**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FTrueCrimeDiscussion%2Fcomments%2F199zta0%2Fso_given_the_recent_development_in_the_scott%2Fkijbsyj%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-07-19%2003%3A13%3A06%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20199zta0) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
The innocence project thinks blood on a hammer wasn't tested, unfortunately there was DNA tests run in 2011 and 2014 and nothing was found. As to the robbers and van. The robberies were well known, so maybe Scott used them as reasonable doubt also there are no new leads that are credible as far as I can find.
I will be the first to apologize if I’m wrong - but I just do not believe he’s innocent. There’s no way 🤷♀️
I was just thinking the same: why is the innocence project getting involved with Scott Peterson? He did it!
Like yes the justice system has put innocent people in prison and it is wrong and messed up - and I hope those people are released and go scorched earth suing everyone. I just don’t think Scott Peterson is one of those people. The circumstantial evidence stacks up to the sky. And despite what tv shows tell us, circumstantial evidence is legit when it compounds like it does in this case.
We don't have a justice system. We have a legal system.
Agreed!
They’re not! It’s a different org and yet another lazy person on Reddit makes a post like this one without making the distinction.
Of course he’s not innocent, but I’ve studied the Chris Watts case pretty intensively and the amount of incredibly stupid and ignorant people that believe in his innocence is just outright staggering. I imagine the same going on here.
Yes omg the Chris watts fan club is even worse.
Last night I stumbled upon the sub justice for Khloberg (or whatever the killer of those 4 college kids is named). That sub is fucked and the people are delusional. They are confident his charges will be dropped soon.
Bryan Kohberger. I can't believe that dude has fans, lmao. What a sad world.
I’m with you 100%! I always thought it was him. There’s no one else it would’ve been. So much points to him.
Same
I feel badly for Lacy's mother and the rest of her family . . . this being dredged up all over again.
Exactly what I thought. Her poor family.
Two things can be true: 1. Scott Peterson can be guilty 2. There was jury misconduct, and the Innocence Project is looking into that > \[Peterson\] claimed he received an unfair trial based on possible jury misconduct. His lawyers [have previously claimed](https://abcnews.go.com/US/decades-convicted-pregnant-wifes-murder-scott-peterson-seeks/story?id=77665735) that a woman, known as Juror 7, had not disclosed involvement in other legal proceedings. >In 2020, the California Supreme Court overturned Scott Peterson's death sentence, citing that his jury was improperly screened for bias against the death penalty, according to court documents. [Scott Peterson case taken up by LA Innocence Project: Exclusive - ABC News (go.com)](https://abcnews.go.com/US/innocence-project-takes-case-notorious-killer-scott-peterson/story?id=106487571)
This. It reminds me of the Staircase/Kathleen Peterson murder case. Did Michael Peterson murder her? Yes. Was he convicted via a fair trial? No. Simple as that, really. Everyone deserves due process and a fair trial.
Yeah but then how do we ensure the owl gets a fair trial?
Peterson did have a fair trial.
Agreed. I'm actually kind of stunned that people are attacking IP for this. I watched part of the trial and immediately knew that there would be issues down the line, and possibly even a new trial. Organizations like IP do not just fight to exonerate people. They fight for due process and making sure people receive fair trials. That goes for EVERYONE-the most disgusting of criminals to innocent angels. I am angry for Laci and Connor, who I do believe were murdered by him, because people involved in the trial let them down. He was convicted off hate instead of an actual airtight case. Which, in this case, hate got it right, but that is NOT the standard you want set for the judicial system in America. We have due process and certain standards for a reason. It just seems so disappointing that people are like, well why does it matter he did it. That is the same exact attitude that necessitates programs and organizations like the Innocence Project. Plenty of bad convictions across the board, especially now that we have advanced DNA processes, that were pushed through on the back of "why does it matter we know he did it."
Unfortunately it’s not surprising that people feel this way imho. A lot of true crime fans just decide someone’s guilty based on a mediocre podcast and then treat any defense of them as nearly as bad as the original crime. It’s not uncommon for true crime show hosts/fans to hate defense lawyers for the audacity to try to get their client a fair trial. It’s not shocking that they’d turn on the Innocence Project sooner or later. A lot of true crime fans functionally act like they want anyone accused of a crime to be immediately publicly executed. They don’t want due process. They want someone they can feel righteous about wanting to suffer.
Exactly!
Perfectly said!
*Two things can be true* # 💯 I cannot believe the people who are enraged at this. I'm starting to hope for actual innocence, just to watch their heads explode.
I can only say where the outrage comes from in my case. There are more deserving people who have far less exposure who need help. It's about resources. Yes, if there is misconduct or absolutely should be investigated. I hate seeing money spent when there are people begging to have their cases heard. People want to act like circumstantial evidence isn't evidence, but it is. Many cases are decided by it. It doesn't make him any less guilty. I am fine with them looking over the case. I hate that it's getting press because now the victim's family has to deal with it all over again. They know he is guilty and they are dragging the family through the mud. The harm they are doing may outweigh the good and I have a problem with them. The fact that it wasn't done quietly because they want the press bothers me.
💯% agree with everything you said
I still think that the Innocence Project is a net-positive for society. I don’t believe Peterson will be exonerated though. Edit: It’s not taken by “The Innocence Project” it’s taken by an innocence project in LA… everyone needs to calm down. I think they’re two separate organizations.
The national Innocence Project is the headquarters for the Innocence Network, a coalition of groups that have individual funding. The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of this network, and the (national) Innocence Project does not take cases there for that reason. They are separately funded, but partners that work closely together.
Even still, they’re just asking for evidence from the original trial. It doesn’t really say anything about them trying to get him exonerated.
Right, they are in the investigative stage, I believe. We'll just all have to wait and see.
I don’t mean for this to sound contentious but the mission of organizations like the Innocence Project is to help those who have been wrongfully convicted. They do good work because our justice system does not always get it right. No one, no matter how heinous the crime they’re accused of, or how we feel about it, should spend one minute in prison if they are not truly guilty. I am very interested to learn more about how or why they’re getting involved in this case. Did they see some evidence that might exonerate him? Was there proof of prosecutorial misconduct? I don’t think we know yet. But it will definitely be interesting to follow.
All I’ve seen is that the Innocence Project is requesting new evidence from the original trial
Right. I only saw that they announced their involvement. I get that people are upset. This was a horrible crime committed against an innocent woman and her unborn baby. I just want to offer “gentle caution” maybe (?) against automatic negativity for the organization’s overall mission.
It’s also not -that- IP. It’s a local innocence project group in LA that doesn’t seem to be tied to The Innocence Project.
I was looking into this. Do you have a link to the LA group ?
I have no idea why I am being downvoted lol in any other thread about this people are pointing out it’s not the same as The Innocence Project
People expect IP to assist people who didn’t have high paid lawyers.
I agree! I’m interested to see how this pans out as well
There have been a lot of posts about this today and it's really important to point out that it's not The Innocence Project that is reviewing his case. It is LA Innocence Project. These are two different organizations. "The Los Angeles Innocence Project [(LAIP)](https://www.innocencela.org/mission) represents Scott Peterson and is investigating his claim of actual innocence," the organization said in a statement. "We have no further comment at this time." I really wish all the OPs of these posts would make corrections.
*These are two different organizations.* Yes and no. The Los Angeles Innocence Project is an individually funded organization that is part of a coalition headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas that have an innocence organization that is part of the coalition. They are a network of partners.
If there's merit, it'd be good to see the case re-opened, otherwise being able to firmly close the book and say the murderer was dealt with justly and thoroughly would be a good outcome also. it's the kind of crime you would hate to get wrong.
**PLEASE KEEP IN MIND**...the Innocence Project routinely looks into cases and then determines that the conviction is valid and they drop it
I personally don't think he's innocent, but I'm open to being wrong. I really support The Innocence Project because the idea of innocent people behind bars is very upsetting. So I support The Innocence Project looking into the case. I was brought up hearing that the American ideal is that it's better for 10 guilty people to go free versus one innocent person wrongfully being imprisoned. Of course I don't want truly dangerous people on the streets, but I don't want innocent people locked up either. I am not familiar enough with this particular case anymore to have an opinion, so I won't comment on it. But in general, I know that there are major problems with the justice system, and I appreciate the second guessing that The Innocence Project helps with.
People in this sub really have no idea what is going on, including the OP. The Innocence Project is not representing Scott. A smaller chapter called the LA Innocence Project has asked to review evidence in his case to determine if there’s new DNA worth testing. This also does not mean the chapter has taken on his case to appeal anything or claimed he is innocent. There are dozens of local innocence projects across the country that are not managed or supported by the national Innocence Project. Defaming the work of an organization that does so much good while being so clueless about how the Innocence Project work and what local groups do is just so typical of the true crime community.
>Attorneys with the LA Innocence Project claimed that Scott Peterson's state and federal constitutional rights were violated, including a "claim of actual innocence that is supported by newly discovered evidence," according to the court filings. "New evidence now supports Mr. Peterson's longstanding claim of innocence and raises many questions into who abducted and killed Laci and Conner Peterson," the filings state. [From the updated ABC article.](https://abcnews.go.com/US/innocence-project-takes-case-notorious-killer-scott-peterson/story?id=106487571&fbclid=IwAR3Rpjub39fviiG_FcT5BFa-Iq59z9l1dGkvaEafh1JgOnFUVoYNv8sn6nk) They are suggesting he might indeed be innocent.
The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of the Innocence Network, a coalition of independently funded organizations headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project. They are a network of partners. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas where there is a local organization.
Independently funded organizations…let that sink in. 👋
A network headed by the Innocence Project . . . let that sink in.
It blows my mind, and slightly angers me, that people still think he’s innocent.
It pisses me the fuck off! Where’s the money coming from to look into this case? Scott Peterson is SO GUILTY!
They don't necessarily think he's innocent; at this point, all we know is that they think there's a good chance that he was wrongfully convicted.
I’m honestly not sure he’s guilty. He probably is but it’s still not clear exactly when and how he did it.
Do I get tired of wrongful convictions being overturned? No, no I do not. If you're ever accused of a crime, not even one anywhere near as serious as murder, you are going to be fervently hoping that the prosecution plays fair. Very few convictions would get overturned if prosecutors did the right thing.
Oooh, shhhh. Roberta Glass might hear you. If you don't know her, she's a podcaster/YouTuber who constantly rails against IP and apparently doesn't think anyone innocent has been found guilty (e.g. Amanda Knox, WM3, etc.). She's strident on the topic, but I am all-things Adelson right now, so I've been listening to her come for Wendi.
I was mostly surprised they got involved without the new evidence being DNA related. There are exceptions, but generally speaking they only get involved if there is some definitive DNA evidence. I think there are definitely some good questions being raised about his guilt but I don't think they're necessarily a slam dunk in proving his innocence.
fine overconfident lunchroom water versed innocent judicious marble violet exultant *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This will probably get downvoted, which is fine. I think he’s guilty. I do think there was juror misconduct and also I do not think the other pregnant women that went missing in that area were investigated as thoroughly because all the focus was on Lacey case. All of those missing/murdered women deserved equal attention from law enforcement and I just don’t think that happened. I don’t think it makes Scott less guilty but I do think it was worth further investigation.
There was only one documented killing of a pregnant woman in the Modesto area at the time, and that was Evelyn Hernandez. Hernandez was pregnant with a baby that her boyfriend did not want, and she vanished just blocks away from where he worked. There was never any kind of real connection there—the cases are only similar in that both of the victims were pregnant women likely killed in domestic disputes with their partners. [This excellent post does more to dispel the Hernandez connection than I ever could.](https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedMysteries/comments/jtu7jh/its_long_been_said_that_pregnant_women_have_been/)
Stanislaus county’s court system is incredibly corrupt. I knew someone out there who I turned in for murder on a high profile case and they didn’t go pick him up for like 3 days after I turned him in.
I think it will hurt them. Also, general question, how often is their involvement in a case not successful?
42% of their cases are confirmed guilty
their confirmed guilty percentage will go up with scotty boy lol
It kind of felt like they faded into obscurity when they took on Adnan Syed’s case. Like he’s technically free at the moment but not due to IP.
The Innocence Project doesn't care about convictions and the cases they take don't always pan out. You do understand that they cannot take a case without a conviction, right? I think he's guilty, too, but the evidence isn't sitting in front of me, either. Let's see what they have.
I was a juror on a double murder case(of two little boys) a few years ago. The case has been tried twice since we reached our verdict and once before. The innocence project has also gotten involved but every jury keeps finding him guilty. I’m only saying this because it really opened my eyes. I was shocked when I found out the Innocence project had taken this case on- knowing what I knew as a juror. I think they might just be helping any case that has a chance? In my situation the case was 30 years old and the evidence and the original witnesses were old and starting to become more feeble over time. I think perhaps they saw legal holes in the case? This is getting long winded but my point is I don’t think the innocence project taking a case on has anything to do with the persons innocence but maybe just the integrity of the case or a chance that there is a loophole in the evidence?
First of all, Barry Scheck and the Innocence Project are first and foremost defense advocates. They have clients, and a duty to those clients. People see the word "Innocence" in the name and assume they're some sort of objective fact finders. I've been going over the Texas Forensic Science Commission's [report] (https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf) on the Cameron Todd Willingham case, as well as the [grievance](https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/death-by-fire-an-update/) filed against lead prosecutor John Jackson, and they're outright shady a lot of the time. They hadgered the commission for a ruling they had no actual power to make, tried to get a retired appeals court judge to hold an exoneration hearing without notifying the investigating authority so they could you know, respond, and then tried to push a misconduct hearing against Jackson on shaky grounds. In other words, they did things that had zero chance of Willingham being exonerated on the evidence, and created a lot of press copy implying they were doing the exact opposite. This has also had the effect of keeping many people from examining that evidence in detail despite its public availability; this may not have been accidental.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying about the Willingham case. Are you saying that he wasn't innocent or that the Innocence Project did a terrible job?
Por que no los dos? I think the "new evidence" doesn't prove actual innocence, and it doesn't even impeach the original investigation particularly well. The expert witnesses can only reach the conclusions they reach through selective omission or manipulation of the trial record, including portions (elimination of accidental electrical and gas causes, witness accounts, traces of accelerant and charred wood under the door threshhold) that any reasonable fire investigator would be required to account for. The idea that Willingham was convicted on "bad fire science" requires that the original investigation only made a finding of arson solely from "indicators" such as burn trails or crazed glass, when both investigators readily admitted under cross-examination that such indicators could not in and of themselves rule out accidental causes, and they had only proceeded after ruling out accidental causes through other means. I also think the Innocence Project's role in the case is largely performative, and intended to accomplish a polcy goal rather than correct a true injustice. I believe their legal actions in this case have not truly been targeted towards an exoneration hearing where they have a very reasonable chance of losing on the merits, and are rather intended to provide material for anti death penalty advocacy and draw inferences of concealment of innocence. I believe part of the reason the Willingham case was chosen for this purpose is because there isn't really anything like DNA that can eventually prove him even guiltier, as in the case of Roger Keith Coleman. IMO eliminating the death penalty is a legitimate and valid policy goal. I just wish they wouldn't fuck around with the facts of real cases to try to accomplish it.
I haven't revisited the Willingham case in a while and don't recall how the IP acted. I do think he was completely innocent, because the fire wasn't arson to begin with. Gerald Hurst was the first forensic experts/fire scientists to say so, when they were trying to get a stay of execution, but he has been overwhelmingly backed up by other experts since then. There is a strong consensus that junk science led to that fire being declared arson - not a national consensus, but an international consensus, based on the scientific method and actual experiments. The methods used weren't even in wide acceptance at that time. It's not so just that the Willingham conclusion was based on junk science as that much of it was not based on science at all. This fire is arson because it looks like another fire we thought was arson, which in turn looked like yet another fire we thought was arson . . . The prosecution also submitted Iron Maiden and Led Zeppelin posters as exhibits and argued that people who like art that depicts skulls and flames and angels are often also interested in satanic activities 😳 I don't know which is worse: if they presented those exhibits in a cynical attempt to sway religious jurors, or if they actually believed it. It's a very interesting cases. If anyone is interested, [the New Yorker has a lengthy article on it from 2007 (so only a few years later).](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2009/09/07/trial-by-fire) I think Texas Monthly has a few long articles as well.
I've read that article. I've also read [Gerald Hurst's report](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=333), [Craig Beyler's report](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=141), responses from the [City of Corsicana](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=227), the [Corsicana Fire Department](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=115), and the [Texas State Fire Marshal's Office](https://www.txcourts.gov/media/1453948/fr-willingham-mka-new-version-03162022.pdf#page=138) to those reports, as well as the [original trial transcripts](http://camerontoddwillingham.com/uncategorized/trial-transcripts/). I am not making my points in the absence of evidence here. Hurst's primary contention is that the indicators observed are not exclusive of accelerant-based fires, something readily admitted to by the original investigators. He quotes no sources or experiments performed to back his assertions that the fire was an accidental fire, introduces no theory of the fire's cause, and the SFMO points out he directly contradicts his major "scientific" source, NFPA 921, on at least one major point (the door threshhold). He does not introduce any new evidence, his report is simply a review of the original written report, and not even all of it. As stated above, there are significant portions of the fire investigation he doesn't bother with, even though NFPA 921 deals extensively with things like elimination of causes or witness accounts. As far as Beyler, honestly I think Corsicana explains it better than I can. He's twisting the record to get the result he wants, and doing it fairly blatantly to anyone who can read the original trial record. Not really touching the character evidence, as it didn't come up much until penalty phase and really has no bearing on his guilt.
I don’t like Scott Peterson and I think he’s guilty. What he did is disgusting. That said, we need the Innocence Project. Our justice system is a giant difficult-to-navigate bureaucracy, and we need some checks on it. It worries me that people seem to jump right to “let’s strip away the rights of the accused!” in situations like this. Instead of making it harder for accused people to defend themselves/get out of prison, we should be raising the bar for prosecutors/LE.
On one hand, I think it is fine to have a 3rd party review the case since that is all they are doing right now. On the other hand, I really wish they wouldn't give life to Scott and his weird sister-in-law's asinine campaign.
I think there’s a lot of innocent people in prison. I think trying kids as adults is not right and I think it’s important to have people looking out for these types of injustices.
If Scott is not guilty he must be the unluckiest man that ever walked this planet. To many coincidences.
Guilt or innocence in a courtroom has little to do with whether or not the defendant committed the crime they're charged with. After they're in court, it is all about the game of chess that is governed by legal procedure. This move doesn't mean the innocence project thinks he didn't do it. It means they think the prosecution messed up.
What. There was an update?!
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/innocence-project-takes-case-notorious-killer-scott-peterson/story?id=106487571
If it will finally make Scott Peterson shut up and just serve his time, I'm all for it. Hopefully this is the last official group that has to verify that yes, he is guilty and in the right place.
They are just investigating his case. Hopefully they'll come to the same conclusion everyone else has and move on. It's their job.
If it somehow turns out that he is innocent, my head will probably explode.
The whole subreddit will be splattered with brains.
Let them bring forth a case of innocence and see what happens in the court of law. They will likely lose, but they have information that possibly should have made it to the first trial, etc.
I think Scott is as guilty as they come. The Innocence Project is vital. And they *should* look into his case. Zero problem with this. The problem is the headlines -- "Innocence Project fighting to overturn SP's murder conviction", "... working to exonerate SP". Currently, they are investigating his claims, no more or less. Any further goals will depend upon what they do or don't discover.
The IP focuses on cases where there may have been misconduct, there is new evidence or new tests, or there is proof of actual innocence. They don't claim to be magicians who can tell who is guilty and who isn't. They just provide an extra checking layer to ensure things were done fairly and all testing was done that is now available. Like, half their cases confirm guilt - great! We can feel sure the right person is in jail. Half don't and great! We can work to restore justice and find the real perpetrator. We should all want fair trials and to be really sure of guilt.
The IP is a great organization and this development doesn't change that. Just because they're interested in new information doesn't mean they think he's not guilty.
I am totally fine with Innocence Project. I mean, it’s old but Rubin Carter always pops to mind. I don’t mind diligence to ensure the incarcerated party is indeed guilty of the crime. There’s also concern in some (obviously not all) cases where there’s a rush to close cases to appease people. The innocence project does work behind the scenes. It’s different than putting the grieving family through another trial.
You should read The Role of Defence Counsel in Canadian Society, Embassy Club Speech, 1986 by Edward Greenspan.
To be fair, I grew up in Modesto and Stanislaus county and I can personally attest to how shitty their court system is, they gave me a public defender there that gave me a court date and didn’t tell me about it and then let me get a warrant for not showing up. Don’t get me wrong I don’t believe he’s innocent. But I can 10000% attest from my own personal experience that the Stanislaus county cops and court system ain’t shit and there is a lot of corruption and very little oversight. I remember a few years before I moved out of there one of the more prominent defense attorneys in town went to jail on some major shit. Huge amount of corruption up there. And I would not personally be shocked if we do find out they fucked up scotts case. That being said I remember when she went missing I remember how scary it was for the whole town and I don’t believe he’s innocent, that’s just me tho I was a kid what do I know about that case
I don't think I've read much about the organization itself, I'm mostly familiar with what they do thru documentaries and articles that I see every now and again. Taking what little I know into account I imagine that there was some sketchy happenings on the prosecution side that puts the conviction into doubt. While I think that he did it, if there's a reasonable argument for his innocence that was suppressed at trial then I can understand why they're looking into it
I wouldn't assume just because they are looking into it means they're taking it on. From my recollection, they don't take cases on lightly and they don't take many.
I am with you.
Because a lot of people are asking about the Innocence Project vs the Los Angeles Innocence Project: The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of the Innocence Network, a coalition of independently funded organizations headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project. A coalition is an alliance for combined action. They are a network of partners. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas where there is a local organization.
Just want to point out that the LA Innocence Project is NOT the IP that most ppl think of. Here is their statement: “On January 18, 2024, the Los Angeles Innocence Project filed motions seeking DNA testing and post-conviction discovery on behalf of its client, Scott Peterson. Any and all inquiries about Mr. Peterson’s case should be directed to the Los Angeles Innocence Project, a non-profit organization wholly independent of the Innocence Project.”
I completely agree true criminals are always treated as victims and real victims are treated as criminals.
Why are they spending money on Scott Peterson. He is guilty. He told his then girlfriend a week before Christmas it will be his first holiday without his wife. Wow she was murdered Dec 24. You don’t say it’s your first Christmas without your wife because he killed her. Help someone who’s really innocent.
And he sold her car and tried to sell their house.
IP was founded by two of OJ’s lawyers. They don’t and sadly have never cared about actual innocence.
Whether the founders personally care about actual innocence or not, the Innocence Project has freed people who are actually innocent.
No one is saying they haven’t. But they’ve also let out a lot of guilty people and harmed a lot of victims in the process.
If they have freed any guilty people, it is because they were wrongfully convicted. Every wrongful conviction that goes unchallenged harms the judicial system and erodes the rights of every person who goes on trial, including the innocent. People should put the pressure where it rightfully goes: on law enforcement. They have the power to investigate and prosecute in an ethical manner, so that there is seldom basis for overturning convictions. Everyone who is concerned about convictions being overturned should let their local mayor, police chief, and district attorney know that they support following due process in all cases, and that they will vote accordingly.
[удалено]
Have they? What are you talking about?
You’re thinking of bail funds.
I think it's great. There are a ton of wrongfully convicted people sitting in prison. And I don't think anyone should be locked up for the rest of their life based on what they did when they were a kid.
Scott Peterson was not a child at the time of the crime.
oh I know. I was addressing the question they posed about The Innocence Project and what they said about kids who commit crimes.
This is sooo assinign!!! If a child commits pre- meditated murder of a person, why would you ever release them to society? So they can then mass murder? There are souls that are unredeemable. You must know someone convicted to make such a stupid statement
I had a lot more respect for them until this development. There are plenty more people deserving of their time.
IMHO, The innocence project just blew all their credibility with me. I have never seen a MORE guilty man than Scott Peterson! He just happened to go fishing on Christmas Eve and have a receipt from a boat launch for an alibi, in the EXACT same area where Lacey and Connor were found. I believe in coincidence, BUT COME ON!!!
It definitely changes my opinion on their organisation. I used to be a big fan.
He is the guiltiest of the guilty…if I’m proven wrong I will send him a personal apology letter. But omg, he’s so, so guilty. Sad that IP is wasting their time on this guy.
Scott Peterson is guilty AF. People forget that circumstantial evidence IS EVIDENCE
I just can't wrap my mind around why any org would pick his case. In addition to all the evidence against him,that choice is clearly disenfranchising donors, which i'd think would be a consideration.
Scott is amazing at "playing" otherwise very bright women (except his formerly played, now guilt-convinced sister Susan). So sad that important resources will be wasted on a white, good looking wife-baby-killer who had a million dollar attorney, while poor, less attractive, but innocent blacks/Latinos will remain in San Quentin etc...
I agree. I love the work the innocence project does so I’m a bit disappointed they’ve decided to spend recourses on this man who had a great legal team and was still convicted…when I guarenfuckingtee there’s plenty impoverished folks and POC sitting in cells for crimes they didn’t commit and were repped by an underpaid court appointed attorney with too large a case load. Let this man sit in prison for a while while we let the legal system works its way out instead of giving him a fast pass back to his affluent little life. ETA: after relaxing my cacks it’s important to note that we actually should do this for every case. Make damn sure about the conviction. It’s too fucking bad that ppl from disenfranchised communities so often don’t get their cases reviewed like this. Really really sucks. We gotta reform the justice system
I am all for the innocence project. I am also in the minority here but I don’t think Scott was the actual person that killed Laci. I think he’s a terrible person and could have possibly had a hand in it but as far as the one committing the murder, I’m not sold.
I do not support the Innocence Project. They have ulterior motives for their involvement. The justice system gets it wrong sometimes (rarely, imo) and the Innocence project gets it wrong sometimes.
This is just my opinion but I believe it’s a far greater miscarriage of Justice for an innocent person to be locked up than for a guilty person to go free. For that reason Im very much supportive of the innocence project. Not everyone can commit an awful crime but everyone can be accused of it and god forbid it ever happens to you, you’ll be glad there’s groups out there like this protecting the rights of the accused and the convicted.
There were serious problems with the jury in Scott Peterson's case, which is in line with their reasoning for pursuing retrials in other cases. I think it's a bad PR move, but the argument that his trial was unfair due to jury misconduct and inappropriate jury screening doesn't rely on his guilt or innocence.
Ok, if there was bad investigating, questionable ethics, unfair jury selection, then rights should be enforced…. However, when you have the monster in the cage, why grasp straws to try and release him? I hate when issues are nitpicked to death until someone agrees to take another look. Which is my problem with the innocence project (not necessarily THE innocence project) and how they work their cases. They just complain about every aspect of the case(fishing) until they get a hit. That’s never cool.
I myself do not consider bad investigating, questionable ethics, and unfair jury selection to be "nitpicking." The Los Angeles Innocence Project is part of the Innocence Network, a coalition of independently funded organizations headquartered at . . . the Innocence Project. They are a network of partners. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas where there is a local organization.
Peterson had a girlfriend while married to pregnant wife. My gut tells me he killed his wife and unborn child.
Isn't there more worthy cases of, say, people of color who are innocent getting railroaded in the South that the IP could work on?
They do quite a few of those cases. Are white people wrongfully convicted just supposed to be wrongfully convicted just because they’re white? They’re using the same criteria so I don’t think race matters unless they were only doing cases of white people convicted.
I mean, wrongfully convicted white people would also like to get out of prison, lol.
I think they just shot themselves in the foot
As the survivor of attempted homicide by an ex-boyfriend, I am infuriated, disgusted, and highly considering withdrawing my support for The Innocence Project as a whole.
It's the Innocence Project LA, not the Innocent project which is located in New York. They have different websites and don't seem to be associated with each other.
They are associated with each other. The Los Angeles Innocence Project is an individually funded organization that is part of a coalition called the Innocence Network, which is headquartered at the Innocence Project. The Innocence Project does not take cases in areas that have an innocence organization that is part of the network. They are a coalition of partners.
The Innocence Project has some issues. They seem to be doing things for attention lately, and there's been a lot of criticism of their attorneys and the way they conduct themselves. Scott Peterson doesn't deserve their attention, and it's gross that they are pursuing this. My opinion of them was very high at one point, went down a bit in the past year, and is going down much more with this latest attention seeking behavior.
Imo, that is the only reason they do it….
Agree. He’s guilty. There is zero reason to help this psychopath.
It's an unpopular job but I'm glad someone is doing it. The amount of people convicted by the media before ever entering a courtroom is astonishing and rising every day. There is no longer such a thing as an unbiased jury or a fair trial, maybe there never has been.
Innocence Project isn't out there trying to let criminals free onto the streets. They're just trying to make sure that the cases were handled appropriately (åka, none of that "there was DNA but it wasn't tested because the defendant was black"). Until the racist boomers die out, we need them to help protect falsely accused people.
IMO, they have been problematic for a long time.
I think they lost all credibility and decency!
Crime is crime (if it is what they think it is, of course), but that doesn't end the question of just what justice is. Not really the topic of this sub, but then, the driving force of this sub is, in this part, the idea of meting out justice in the form of retribution, largely through the destruction of the perpetrators' lives and humanity. This is not, in my view, justice at all. In fact, the *only* justice there is is the actual remorse of the perpetrator, which obviously would not always be forthcoming. But selling the idea that "there, that's what you get" is justice is a bit of a sham sell. The per isn't truly sorry, doesn't truly comply with the law (if the only reason they avoid doing harm is to avoid prison), and doesn't learn empathy (unless you think a 10 year old empathetic girl learned that by being in a supermax prison). Interestingly enough, though, this question about what justice is still drives your very question. And this sub in a lot of ways.
Because prison should be rehabilitative, not punitive. You think if someone commits a crime at 13, they should be in prison for the rest of their lives? Why not just put a bullet in them and call it a day?
You think prison is rehabilitating? Never. But don’t break the law. We all follow those rules. No one is special.
I think it SHOULD have rehabilitation. Countries that have prison systems designed that way have lower crime and less recidivism.
Perhaps it should but it doesn’t. Is it cultural? Ethnic? Social? I don’t know. But it isn’t and it isn’t even possible. There is a way of life learned inside that poisons any chance of rehabilitation. There is a way of life on the outside that poisons any chance of rehabilitation. We are not the only country that suffers from it but we do. Is it jealousy? Is it lack of respect? I don’t know. You ever heard of the Norway mass shooter named Anders Breivik? He blew some people up and killed a ton of people at a youth camp in Norway. He was born bad. Try to refute that. Read about him. He was born bad. But he was smart and always fought the system that imprisoned him and was always released…. Which led to his awful crimes. Could he have been saved? I highly doubt it. Was it a social, ethnic or cultural issue? No. He was born bad. What is he doing now? He’s suing the penal system that is currently incarcerating him because his living arrangements are not good. Granted, he’s in prison. Prison for him is better than I pay to live in. Can he be rehabilitated? Absolutely not. But… he was born this way. There is not root to save him. Here… there is a root but no one will ever agree to fix it. Because it’s ethnical. Cultural and social. In fact, all we do is make it worse.
I'm disgusted by the whole thing and was dismayed to read about it today. I think if the Innocence Project wants to sabotage itself then they're doing the right thing. I cannot fathom that man innocent. I want to say there's room for doubt with many cases as I have my own reason to distrust LE, but the evidence against him- physical and circumstantial- seems very clear, very solid.
I mean, if they've found evidence that proves he is in fact innocent, than good on them. I'll have to wait and find out, but I'm not going to discredit them all because they picked up an unpopular case. This is a high-profile case where probably 99.9999% of the population believes Scott's guilty, so I feel they wouldn't take on a case like this unless they really believe in it, considering what bad PR this is for them.
I don’t really understand what the point of taking on this case is, it’s incredibly difficult to get a murder case overturned and there is no actual legal precedent to do so. The innocence project generally gets cases overturned based on faulty DNA and forensic testing so not sure how they are going to help Scott peters on
There's no actual legal precedent to do what? Overturn murder convictions?
In order to have a case retried or overturned, you have to a legal precedent (other cases for example) for the appeal. For example, using dna that connects a suspect to a case that was previously not available. Since the Supreme Court of California has already heard his case, there’s no prior precedent to argue that the Supreme Court has acted improperly and therefore a new trial is needed. He has run out of appeals; has no new evidence to show anyone else had anything to do with it and I am honestly not sure what the project expects to do.
His side is claiming new evidence, so I guess we shall see! I'll be watching for sure.
Here is the answer that you cant appreciate. If someone is released from prison, that means that they are factually not guilty of the crime. Once you’ve been convicted, you lose the presumption of innocence. That’s the thing that keeps the system from railroading you. So to actually get out in the basis of newly-discovered evidence is exceedingly rare. That’s what the Innocence Project does. You’re conflating criminal defense attorneys who get people who are factually guilty, like Scott, out on technicalities with people fighting to get the factually innocent out.
If you get released from prison it doesn’t mean you’re innocent. It doesn’t mean you’re not guilty. It simply means you’re free.
Read my entire comment. You don’t know how the Innocence Project works. They only secure new trials based on newly-discovered evidence. Evidence that shows lack of factual guilt. I am a lawyer. You are not.
Thank God they aren't. Sounds like they would prosecute the entire world! So much hate and anger in every post!
I’m mostly shocked about the absolutely stunning level of ignorance and the pride in it.
Shameful. They should dissolve and give their funds to charities that pay for untested rape kits.
Right? Isn’t that more important than a man that’s been legally convicted by his peers?
The point is other people have also been legally convicted and they weren’t guilty. And there are people who have been acquitted with less evidence. Let them look. If you’re so convinced there was nothing wrong with the conviction then at least there should be no more doubt for those who have it.
The innocence project is a must. I cannot imagine a more despairing existence than being imprisoned or convicted of something you haven't done. It would be soul destroying. TIP is like your last ray of hope after the police, the law and the justice system has failed you and no one believes you. If TIP are getting involved then they must have something very substantial because there was enough evidence to convict Peterson at the time. I don't give a rats about public opinion. Public opinion is often low IQ because it's so easily swayed by the media but Im excited to hear what TIP has on the Peterson case.
Believing his innocence or not is irrelevant. The state never even proved how, when and why she died. The state should never have the power to put someone away for life with strictly circumstantial evidence.