If you grew up in the late 90s early 2000s, you remember some really prominent criminal cases in the media.  I remember Jon Benet; my grandmother was convinced there was a crazy maniac coming from Colorado to get me because I looked like her (EYE ROLL).  Then there was OJ.  I still remember the slow speed, media crazed police chase plastered all over our TVs, and then of course, “if the glove don’t fit, you must acquit”.    I think cases like this in the media really impacted women of my age group.  We are all what I feel are true crime junkies. 

With that, I recently watched the new Hulu docu series about Scott Petersen.  The MOST hated husband of the early 2000s.  I remember the case vividly because we were on Christmas break when his wife Lacey went missing.  To remind you, she was the beautiful, petite, dark hair, dark eyed beauty that was 8-months pregnant at the time of her disappearance.  Scott was the handsome, smooth-talking, pathological liar who lacked emotion, which ultimately got him convicted.

This case was ALL over our TVs.  Morning, noon, night, local news, specials, and more.  There wasn’t a tabloid that did not have their faces on it; especially after he was found to be a lying, cheating, snake, with a dead wife and child that happened to be located in the exact same location he was at the day Lacey went missing.  I think this is the case that took Nancy Grace and put her on the map, in terms of crime news. 

While watching this docuseries, a couple of really big things stood out to me regarding the case.

1)      The lack of physical evidence.  Still to this day 20+ years later, they still have no idea how Lacey was killed. The manner, the location, how she was transferred to the location she was found.  During the trial, the prosecution presented numerous “facts” and every turn, the defense provided counters that, even the jurors today said made them question the case that the prosecution had put together. 

Mark Geragos, the high-profile lawyer for Scott, was sure this was a slam dunk for either a not guilty or hung jury, until Amber Frey took the stand.  To bring everyone up to speed, Amber was Scott’s mistress for all of 6 weeks, prior to Christmas.  She became an informant to the police and shared multiple recorded conversations with the investigative team.

These recordings were extremely damning; however, not once did Scott admit to anything.  The recordings were horrible.  He is an absolute piece of shit husband, but was he a murderer?  Honestly, I don’t know.  If I had been on that jury, I do not know how I would have interpreted the information presented to me.

2)      The Media influence upon the conviction.  Since the 1st day of this case, the media played a huge part in the coverage and the narrative that was presented not only to the public, but also to those intimately involved with the case.  The media had Scott convicted from the beginning; and don’t get me wrong-I am very aware that you marry the person that is most likely to be your murderer should you be murdered, but to remove the media coverage and influence presents a much different case in my opinion.  Does it potentially change whether or not he committed the crime?  I don’t know because I am not here to say he did or didn’t do it.  I am here to write that his trial was pretty messed up.

3)      The jury.  This jury was a hot-mess from the beginning.  The choosing of the jury was unethical.  Multiple jurors were released throughout the course of the trial, leading up to the day before they convicted Scott Peterson.  Multiple jurors noted that they were exposed to the media coverage, even though they were told to remain uninfluenced and not partake in such media. 

The jury almost bullied its way into the verdict and narrative that it wanted.  This documentary really brings this to light.  Multiple jurors noted that the prosecutions case was messy.  It was inconclusive.  It was full of holes and unknowns.  The defense was able to block MULTIPLE prosecution theories and evidence throughout the beginning of the case.  The jurors even stated that they did not feel that Scott was guilty based on what had been presented, until the Amber Frey testimony and evidence. 

Once behind closed doors, the jury essentially picked off anyone 1 by 1 who did not feel that he was guilty; and ultimately a hung jury swung to a guilty jury very quickly.

4)      The Judge.  The judge in this case certainly appears to have Scott convicted.  This is based on how he managed the case, the prosecution, the evidence that was admissible, and how he managed the jury. 

5)      The police investigation.  The main police investigator created a narrative for this case, and he followed the leads that lead him to the conclusions that he made.  This created him a slam-dunk case.  The police also saw the media attention and knew they could not fail…I mean with the amount of attention their unit and investigation team was getting, it would look bad if they didn’t nail the “bad guy”, but to do so they ignored a lot of “what ifs” along the way.

Multiple people said they saw lacey on Christmas eve walking her dog in the morning, while Scott was gone to the bay.  This was not fully investigated to create a timeline of events.  There was a robbery in the neighborhood during the time lacey was walking, this was not fully investigated for potential connections.  The police released the “alibi” for Scott to the public, which led to the information being plastered on multiple news outlets, to which a potential secondary source could have used to formulate a plan to dump Lacey’s body. 

The police did not deliver any physical evidence tying Scott to the murder, and only provided questionable circumstantial evidence to tie things together.  And, as a crime junkie for many, many years; I understand circumstantial evidence can be just as critical in a conviction.  Just providing some food for thought. 

It was also very damming that in multiple instances he would provide information to the police, and they would find that odd, but on the other hand if he couldn’t provide evidence, it was odd.  Example: receipts-he provided a receipt from the boat dock but couldn’t provide a gas receipt.  They really contradicted themselves on items like this.

6)      The public.  The public became crazed with this case.  They were enraged a man would kill his pregnant wife, rightfully so; but they were holding court outside the courthouse daily.  They were participating in raffles to attend each day of the trial.  When Scott was convicted the celebrations that occurred were almost embarrassing, there were chants and victory parties.  It was almost like every person in the US joined a judicial cult.  It was like nothing the country had ever seen for a non-celebrity case.

All of this to say, I don’t know if Scott killed Lacey.  Is it probable?  Sure!  Was he a crappy husband, cheater and pathological liar?  For Sure!   Does it mean that he is a murderer?  That is where the question continues to lie. At minimum, based on sheer principal, I am shocked that there has not been a retrial to date…based on this docuseries alone, I would say there is certainly due cause. 

This is one of those groundbreaking cases, what’s your thoughts on the Scott Peterson trial and docuseries.  If you haven’t watched it head on over to Hulu and stream the 6 episodes.

Mariah