Success in Iran Causing Plunging Oil Prices Is Bad News
Can We All Finally Admit Democrats' Gun Control Schemes Do Not Work?
My Ancestor Fought for Islam at the Battle of the Alamo?
Detroit Mayor, Police Chief Outline Plan to Almost Address Crime at Roots
You Don't Have to Agree With Me Politically to Work Here
Misguided ‘Repair the World’ Climate Philanthropy
The End of the Charade: IOC Enforces Biology in Women's Sports and Restores...
Get to the Root of America’s Health Crisis: Start With Food in Hospitals
Crime, Depression, and What to Do About It
Fix the Problem, Not the Blame
Five Arrested in Multi-State COVID-19 Relief Fraud Totaling $1.6 Million
Fake ID Factory: Michigan Man Pleads Guilty After Stealing Identities of 250+ People
Trump Vows a 'New Dawn for Cuba' at Phoenix Rally
New York Times Story About Deported Drug Suspect Backfires Spectacularly on Social Media
Florida Couldn't Buy Better Advertising Than Mamdani's NYC Tax Announcement
Tipsheet

California Supreme Court Overturns Scott Peterson's Death Sentence

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

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement