The Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office filed a response last week to a motion calling for further DNA testing , which has the potential of granting a new trial for Scott Peterson in the decades-old case of his slain wife, Laci Peterson.
The over 500-page document was in response to the L.A. Innocence Project’s 141-page request for further DNA testing to be done on 14 items collected as evidence during the investigation of Laci’s murder.
The 14 items the L.A. Innocence Project wants DNA testing on five items from the burned van that was found, three items from a Target shopping bag found near where Laci’s body was discovered, three items related to duct tape, a black tarp, a work glove and a hammer.
Scott Peterson, her husband, was convicted of her murder in 2004.
Many of the requests for further testing from the defense are rooted in its theory that Laci was abducted and that it was not Scott who killed her. The L.A. Innocence Project points to the burned van, found less than a mile from the Petersons’ home around the time she went missing, as one example of evidence supporting this theory.
The “orange van theory” suggests that Laci was abducted by being pushed into a van at La Loma Park while walking her dog. The defense argued the van she was abducted in was the same stolen, later burned one found by the Modesto Police Department, according to the defense’s DNA request.
The van was found with a bloodstained mattress inside, which previously was tested for DNA. The L.A. Innocence Project says it should be tested for what type of DNA it is, arguing that it could be Laci’s. The DA’s Office strongly refutes this.
“This item was tested and a male profile was developed. There is no legitimate DNA test that will turn the male profile into a match for Laci. This item was taken from a stolen orange van which was never connected to the Peterson case and the prior DNA testing has eliminated any possibility of any connection, but testing is still requested,” read the DA’s response. “This demonstrates a fishing expedition in search of a boat.”
The DA’s Office response stated that further DNA testing on all of the items requested, like many of the other requests by the L.A. Innocence Project, already has been done — either before Scott’s 2004 conviction or during one of his post-conviction hearings. In addition to this, the response lays out numerous legal arguments as to why the DA’s Office believes further testing is unnecessary.
“(The) defendant’s claims in support of a third DNA testing post-conviction have almost all been presented to one court if not multiple courts,” reads the D.A’s Office response. “In light of the overwhelming evidence that supports the defendant’s conviction, his failure to establish a chain of custody for several of these items — let alone actual evidence that the items even exist — and the prior fruitless DNA testing that has already been done, the People ask this Court to deny defendant’s motion forthwith.”
Peterson is scheduled to appear at the San Mateo Superior Courthouse via Zoom for his defense’s DNA testing motion hearing on May 29.
Most Popular
Comments / 0