Judge to determine DNA testing guidelines in Scott Peterson's retrial bid
Convicted murderer Scott Peterson returned to court virtually on Thursday with the Los Angeles Innocence Project in his effort to be granted a retrial.
Peterson was convicted in 2004 of killing his wife Laci Peterson and their unborn child Conner Peterson. The victims' decomposed remains were found in the San Francisco Bay months after pregnant Laci went missing.
Peterson's death sentence was overturned in 2020 and he is now serving a life sentence without parole in Mule Creek State Prison.
"This is a capital case. The prosecution wanted to execute my client," said Paula Mitchell, Peterson's defense attorney and director of the Los Angeles Innocence Project. The project is a nonprofit legal organization that aims to exonerate wrongfully convicted criminals.
His attorneys filed motions earlier this year seeking that DNA evidence be retested. Judge Elizabeth Hill of the San Mateo County Superior Court only granted one of 14 requested pieces of evidence to be retested—a piece of duct tape found on Laci's remains during her autopsy.
Thursday's hearing covered technicalities, including which laboratory will be selected to handle the testing.
The defense originally proposed that the court use the Serological Research Institute (SERI) laboratory to conduct the testing. On the other hand, the prosecution requested that the court designate the Central Valley Bureau of Forensic Sciences.
Hill, however, noted concerns with both proposed labs. She had issue with SERI's history of testing errors and Central Valley Bureau of Forensic Science's restrictive policies toward allowing outside experts to observe their testing procedures.
The defense and prosecution came to a middle ground after discussion. They proposed that a different lab, Pure Gold Forensics, is another possibility, and the judge concurred that it might be an option.
"I think that Pure Gold might be an option that covers all of the concerns that the court has had," Hill said.
Hill deferred her decision until Monday on the lab selection.
"I want to give both parties an opportunity to investigate the compromise alternatives that have been discussed between their parties during their meet and confer and give me their final positions on Monday," Hill said. "Then I will make a final ruling at that point."
