Response to The State of California vs.. Scott Peterson

In the trial The State of California vs Scott Peterson, Scott Lee Peterson was charged with two counts of homicide for the deaths of Laci and Conner Peterson. These counts brought on by the violation of section 187 of the California Penal Code also involved the allegations of premeditation and the special circumstance brought on by section 190.2 (a) 3 which states an increased penalty for the conviction of more than one offense of murder in the first or second degree. 

On December 13, 2005, a twelve-person jury found that corpus delicti and causation had been properly established by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt and recommended a death sentence for Peterson. Causation had been established by the motive presented by the prosecution which stated that Scott murdered his wife in order to be with his extramarital lover, Amber Frey, and to collect life insurance money. They found that Scott Peterson was guilty of premeditated murder of Laci Peterson because of several key pieces of evidence provided by the prosecution. These include the fact that Laci was found with several body parts missing and with cracked ribs scientifically proven to have been broken during or shortly after the killing. The testimony by Ralph Cheng, a tidal expert, argued with probable but not precise findings that the body was have probably dropped within the area that Scott had been boating the day of Laci’s disappearance. Also, the fact that Scott added two hardcore pornography television channels to his cable service only days after his wife’s disappearance suggested that he knew his wife would not be coming back. For the death of Laci Peterson, Scott was charged with first degree premeditated murder however the jury did find the murder of the unborn fetus to be of second degree and without premeditation. The fact that Scott was charged with first degree murder allowed the court to sentence him to death and the fact that the special circumstances were met ensured that Scott could not be given the option of parole if sentenced to life in prison.

If the bodies of Laci and Conner Peterson had not been discovered, the trial of The State of California vs Scott Peterson would have gone very differently. Yes, the prosecution would have been able to press charges because of several pieces of evidence and the court would have allowed the trial, but a guilty ruling would have been very difficult to prove. Without the bodies, the evidence the prosecution would bring forth would be very much circumstantial and although the prosecution would argue for a murder conviction it would be nearly impossible to rule beyond a reasonable doubt without evidence of an actual murder. In the most rational scenario, corpus delicti would not have been established and thus Scott would have had to have been proven not guilty.