Founder and Managing Partner
The lawyers representing Scott Peterson, whose conviction in his wife and unborn son’s 2002 murder is now being questioned, sought to have the names of some witnesses sealed from the public. At a San Mateo County courthouse on Tuesday, a hearing focused on the request by Peterson’s lawyers. Their motion stated that “the sole purpose for sealing the requested information is to protect the privacy of potential witnesses and to protect the integrity of post-conviction counsel’s ongoing investigation.”The state expressed confusion as to why a motion to seal names was filed when no one knows some of the witnesses, who are listed as anonymous.The motion mentioned a single exhibit containing redacted information limited to names of witnesses obtained from police reports during the original investigation.It said, “Mr. Peterson is simply attempting to protect these witnesses, who may need to testify one day at an evidentiary hearing, from media harassment, and to preserve any material information and memory they may still have from contamination by pressure from outside sources.”Judge Elizabeth Hill questioned the motion.”What are you seeking to seal since everything you’re asking for already has redactions?”Peterson’s attorney Paula Mitchell said they want the redactions to stay in place. The defense ultimately agreed to withdraw that exhibit.Legal analyst Paula Canny called this an “unnecessary motion.”The criminal defense attorney has been closely following the Peterson case for two decades. Canny said even though nothing changed in the case, this hearing is important in the long run of Peterson’s fight to be exonerated.”It’s all these baby steps that have to be done properly before you reach the culmination, which is going to be a defense’s motion for a new trial,” she said. This is Peterson’s second court appearance with the Los Angeles Innocence Project, which took up his case last year and requested to look at some of the evidence used in his trial.The group is also seeking to look at evidence not previously tested that it believes could implicate someone else in Laci and unborn child Conner’s murders. Some of the items requested by the defense are to go along with the theory that Scott’s death was connected to home burglaries in the couple’s Modesto neighborhood. According to the theory outlined in court documents, Scott’s wife Laci witnessed a crime in progress, was abducted and then her body was put in the bay near where Scott had been fishing to implicate him based on information in the media.Peterson’s death sentence was overturned in 2020, but he’s still serving a life sentence while maintaining his innocence and hoping for a new trial.A judge denied Peterson’s request in December for a new murder trial, who argued that a juror lied about her own history of abuse to get on the panel that initially sent him to death row. Peterson will be back in court by Zoom again from the Mule Creek State Prison in Ione for a May 29 hearing. The judge will hear arguments over DNA motions. The defense has a long list of evidence it wants to be tested.
REDWOOD CITY, Calif. —
The lawyers representing Scott Peterson, whose conviction in his wife and unborn son’s 2002 murder is now being questioned, sought to have the names of some witnesses sealed from the public.
At a San Mateo County courthouse on Tuesday, a hearing focused on the request by Peterson’s lawyers. Their motion stated that “the sole purpose for sealing the requested information is to protect the privacy of potential witnesses and to protect the integrity of post-conviction counsel’s ongoing investigation.”
Advertisement
The state expressed confusion as to why a motion to seal names was filed when no one knows some of the witnesses, who are listed as anonymous.
The motion mentioned a single exhibit containing redacted information limited to names of witnesses obtained from police reports during the original investigation.
It said, “Mr. Peterson is simply attempting to protect these witnesses, who may need to testify one day at an evidentiary hearing, from media harassment, and to preserve any material information and memory they may still have from contamination by pressure from outside sources.”
Judge Elizabeth Hill questioned the motion.
“What are you seeking to seal since everything you’re asking for already has redactions?”
Peterson’s attorney Paula Mitchell said they want the redactions to stay in place.
The defense ultimately agreed to withdraw that exhibit.
Legal analyst Paula Canny called this an “unnecessary motion.”
The criminal defense attorney has been closely following the Peterson case for two decades. Canny said even though nothing changed in the case, this hearing is important in the long run of Peterson’s fight to be exonerated.
“It’s all these baby steps that have to be done properly before you reach the culmination, which is going to be a defense’s motion for a new trial,” she said.
This is Peterson’s second court appearance with the Los Angeles Innocence Project, which took up his case last year and requested to look at some of the evidence used in his trial.
The group is also seeking to look at evidence not previously tested that it believes could implicate someone else in Laci and unborn child Conner’s murders.
Some of the items requested by the defense are to go along with the theory that Scott’s death was connected to home burglaries in the couple’s Modesto neighborhood. According to the theory outlined in court documents, Scott’s wife Laci witnessed a crime in progress, was abducted and then her body was put in the bay near where Scott had been fishing to implicate him based on information in the media.
Peterson’s death sentence was overturned in 2020, but he’s still serving a life sentence while maintaining his innocence and hoping for a new trial.
A judge denied Peterson’s request in December for a new murder trial, who argued that a juror lied about her own history of abuse to get on the panel that initially sent him to death row.
Peterson will be back in court by Zoom again from the Mule Creek State Prison in Ione for a May 29 hearing. The judge will hear arguments over DNA motions. The defense has a long list of evidence it wants to be tested.
(source)