Can You Feel the Excitement? Kamala Is Back and in the Lead!
Lefty Trump Supporter Wrecks the Political Class' Whining About Trump at Davos on...
Watch One of the Most Brutal Candidate Interviews of the 2026 Cycle. And...
Nasty Women: Crusty Old White Libs Harass and Denigrate Black ICE Agent
Resurrected Clip of Don Lemon Getting Owned by a Woman When Discussing Immigration...
Bad News: Abigail Spanberger Is Governor of Virginia. Good News: A Savior Might...
The AI Race Needs a Little More ‘I’ in It
Here Are the Details of President Trump's Greenland Deal
A Republican Who Wants to Raise Taxes
Welcome to the Old World Order
The Midterms: It's Not About 'Affordability' -- It's About Trump Hatred
Pro-Abortion James Talarico's Factless Campaign for the Senate
How America First Policies Can Lead to Even More Growth in 2026
If You Own It, You Should Be Able to Fix It
Minnesota Malfeasance Is a Preview of Biden-Era Fraud and Waste
Tipsheet

California Supreme Court Overturns Scott Peterson's Death Sentence

AP Photo/Justin Sullivan, Pool

The California Supreme Court has overturned the death sentence for Scott Peterson, who was accused of murdering his pregnant wife Laci in 2002. She was eight months pregnant with their unborn son, Conner, and found washed ashore on the San Francisco Bay months after the disappearance. The case captured the country's attention for months. And at the end of the trial, in November 2004, the jury found Peterson guilty of first-degree murder for killing Laci, and second-degree murder for killing Conner. He received the death penalty and has been waiting on death row at San Quentin State Prison ever since. Through it all, Peterson maintained his innocence.

Advertisement

Fifteen years later, Justice Leondra Kruger has reversed the ruling because, she argued, the trial judge at the time "made a series of clear and significant errors in jury selection" that robbed Peterson of an impartial jury.

“Before the trial began, the trial court made a series of clear and significant errors in jury selection that, under long-standing United States Supreme Court precedent, undermined Peterson’s right to an impartial jury at the penalty phase,” Kruger wrote.

“While a court may dismiss a prospective juror as unqualified to sit on a capital case if the juror’s views on capital punishment would substantially impair his or her ability to follow the law, a juror may not be dismissed merely because he or she has expressed opposition to the death penalty as a general matter."

The 47-year-old Peterson has also insisted that he received an unfair trial because of the massive amount of publicity the case received. He'll received a new trial, but only one that will take a look at his punishment.

The reactions to this surprising turn of events were mixed. 

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos