Crime Stories with Nancy Grace - Scott Peterson Murders Pregnant Laci: "I'm an A-hole" in Bid For New Trial

Episode Date: August 27, 2024

After years in prison, Scott Peterson is speaking out for the first time about the murder of his wife, Laci. In the Peacock network's "Face To Face with Scott Peterson," he continues to assert that he did not kill the mother of his unborn child and presents an alternative theory. Peterson suggests that the heavily pregnant Laci may have gone across the street to confront thieves. Peterson says he expected to be home after court until the verdict was read. Responding to allegations that he killed Laci because he didn't want to be married, Peterson states, "That's so offensive, that's so disgusting. I just don't get that argument, and it's absolutely not true." He admits to regretting his infidelity, acknowledging that he was an "a--hole," but insists he did not kill his wife. JOINING NANCY GRACE TODAY: Troy Slaten – Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney, Slaten Lawyers, APC; X: @TroySlaten Caryn L. Stark – Psychologist, Renowned TV and Radio Trauma Expert and Consultant; Instagram: carynpsych/FB: Caryn Stark Private Practice Sheryl McCollum – Cold Case Investigative Research Institute Founder & Host of New Podcast: “Zone 7;” X: @149Zone Eric Faddis – Partner at Varner Faddis Elite Legal, Former Felony Prosecutor and Current Criminal Defense and Civil Litigation Attorney; Instagram: @e_fad @varnerfaddis; TikTok: @varnerfaddis Susan Hendricks – Journalist, Author of “Down the Hill: My Descent into the Double Murder in Delphi;” IG @susan_hendricks, X @SusanHendicks“ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Crime Stories with Nancy Grace. Scott Peterson convicted of murdering his pregnant wife, Lacey, and their unborn child, Connor, now speaks out from behind bars. What happened to testifying at trial? Oh yeah, you can't get cross-examined now. And his big reveal, quote, I'm an a-hole. That's going to help him get a new trial. I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories. Thank you for being with us. Cops searched the home of Scott and Lacey Peterson twice after Lacey's disappearance. The second search left them in shock.

The second search leaves them in shock. In the last days, a release, a release of Scott Peterson speaking out. I'm sorry, maybe I've got this fast backwards, but to you, Cheryl McCollum, director of the Cold Case Research Institute, forensic expert, host of a brand new hit series, Zone 7 podcast, just now speaking out. Really? Shouldn't he have done that when Lacey went missing? Remember all the vigils where he wouldn't speak because he didn't want his mistress to see him on TV? Wouldn't that have been a great time to speak out? Or how about when he was at trial? Wouldn't that have been a wonderful time to tell what really happened to Lacey? Nancy, while his wife was

missing, would have been a great time to make an outcry. During the trial, he had all of that time to come forward. He's had the last 20 years, 20 years to come out and tell us what happened, who he thinks did it, where the police aren't looking. He has failed at every turn to lead law enforcement on the right track. You know, let me throw a technical legal term at you, Cheryl McCollum. There have been a crap ton of theories floated out there by the defense, including Mark Geragos, high profile lawyer that represented Peterson at trial and others, including his family. Do you remember there was the Hawaiian gang that they said got Lacey? There was the gang that wanted to get Lacey and cut the baby out of her stomach. There was that one. Now they're really honing in on the burglars across the street. I'm referring to the burglars that police found behind bars and questioned and polygraphed those burglars.

So he's honing in on one specific defense now, 20 plus years later. But at the time, all sorts of defenses were floated as a possibility and then retracted. So it's like they're fishing. They're fishing. They're always looking for the BBD, the bigger, better deal. Well, they were going to let the idea that somebody cut the baby out. They murdered her because they wanted the baby until the baby washed up with her. Well, then they had to abandon that.

Well, now it's going to be this orange van. And the van was found a mile from her home. But keep in mind, that means they would have had to have kidnapped Lacey, driven her to the Bay of San Francisco, dumped her and the baby, then drove back to the scene of the crime, basically. Nobody's going to believe that happened. Hold on. You left out something. All that's correct, Cheryl McCollum to Troy Slayton, high profile defense attorney joining us from the California jurisdiction. Troy Slayton, they would have to the real killer. Oh, I feel like I'm talking about OJ Simpson again. Troy Slayton, the real killer that Cheryl was referring to would have had to have done all that with Lacey's body

at the San Francisco Bay. At the same time, Scott Peterson is there fishing. Wow. What a coinkydink. Well, wouldn't it be nice, Nancy, if the police did a full and complete and accurate investigation in this case and didn't withhold any evidence from the court or the defense team. What we know, and you've discussed many times, a Brady violation. In this case, there was an eyewitness who saw a pregnant woman being put into a van and that wasn't introduced at trial. Don't you think that's an important, itsy bitsy fact, a pregnant woman being put into a van. Speaking of, let me put you through a lightning round. That's a quick Q&A where you say yes or no.

Troy Slayton, isn't it true that the defense under our jurisprudence has the right to call witnesses, question them, cross-examine the state's witness, and more specifically, bring on their own scientific evidence, if they've got any. Isn't that true? Under the Sixth Amendment, yes, no. That is true, but wouldn't it be nice, and it's the government's responsibility to test all the evidence. And there's a big issue now, Nancy, as you know, that there's some DNA evidence that wasn't even tested in this case. Guess what I saw yesterday? I saw a van on the side of I-85. It was abandoned. You know what? You can go get that van and test it too. There's all sorts of vehicles out there

that could be connected to Lacey Peterson's death, but they're not. I can't believe you're pinning false hopes on a van that was concocted in the area around the time Lacey went missing. You know what? Go ahead. Do the DNA testing. I'd be mad if you didn't because you know what? It's not going to have Lacey Peterson or Scott Peterson's DNA on it. Why? Because it's not related back to the special that is special that has just dropped. Um, take a listen guys to our friends at Peacock. Why did you keep talking to Amber Frye after Lacey disappeared? I was searching for my family. I wanted to search to stay in contact with Amber I thought and she wouldn't get into the picture complicated really the search for a reason. Joining me is investigative reporter and journalist Susan Hendricks, who covered Scott Peterson's trial every single day,

author of a brand new book, Down the Hill, My Descent into the Double Murder in Delphi, regarding the murder of the two little girls, Abby and Libby, in Delphi. We're waiting for that trial to start. Susan Hendricks, did you hear what Scott Peterson said in the special? For those of you that can't see me, I'm definitely using air quotas on Peacock. He says, question, why did you keep talking to Amber Fry after Lacey disappeared? Answer, I was searching for my family. No, he wasn't. I don't recall him ever searching, going out on any search for Lacey. Next, I wanted the search to continue.

Stay in contact with Amber, I thought, and she wouldn't get into the picture, complicate it, and ruin the search for Lacey and Connor. So by telling the truth, what did he think? That Lacey's family would stop searching for her? This doesn't even make any sense. Even now, under no threat of cross-examination, Peterson is still lying. You know what? Just tell the truth. I was having a sex affair. I didn't want anybody to know because then they think I did it. That's the answer. Yeah, absolutely. He doesn't stop lying. And what stood out to me, because I believe that Amber Fry really was the key to this

case and those phone calls that the jurors were able to hear, he's still lying. Throughout the documentary, I found that he had an answer for everything with a smile on his face, by the way. And that first slide that we just showed Nancy with Lacey in the chair with the red outfit on. I watched both documentaries. There's also another one out that really focuses on Lacey. This picture here. What we realize is that she was at a Christmas party with her friends the same night that Scott Peterson took that infamous photo now with Amber Fry. And a jerk came out and said, look, as soon as I saw Scott,

I thought there's no way this guy's guilty. There's no way he's capable of this. But then he said a story was built and it was circumstantial. But wow, he said that Amber Frye in those phone calls really showed what a liar he was and continues to be. What did you observe in the new Peacock special? What did you observe about his demeanor, Susan Hendricks? It was the same tone to me. I always remember his voice with Diane Sawyer of, oh yeah, just low tone, like he's sad, but he's not really sad. There are no tears. Now it was

like a joker smirk and had an answer for everything and pinning it on the cops as they do in the investigators. Seemed formulaic to me, just with a joker smile this time with the backdrop of prison. You know, Cheryl McCollum joining me. And I want Karen Stark to jump in on this. Don't worry, Dr. Easton, I'm circling back to you. Cheryl, just yesterday, you and I and others were with the mother of Melissa Wolfenbarger. Melissa Wolfenbarger was murdered many, many years ago. It's a cold case that just got cracked.

Her mother and I were sitting there and we both broke into tears. I gathered myself because I didn't want to cry in front of her. But I was crying because she was crying. I felt so bad for her. And Melissa's sister was there just stone-faced.

I've never seen even a tangential victim of murder joke about it or smirk about it now that's anecdotal in other words i don't have statistics on this but i know what i've seen after prosecuting literally thousands of violent felonies i've never seen anyone joke or smirk about it ever. You know, I go back to the first thing that I ever heard him kind of list out for everybody. And that's what he did the day she was missing. He gets home from fishing. Her car is there. The dog is out in the yard on the leash. He goes in the house. Her purse is there. Her phone is there.

Her car keys are there. And what does he do, Nancy? Does he panic immediately? Does he start calling friends and family? No. He takes a shower. He makes pizza and eats it. He walks around and starts a load of laundry, only his clothes, incidentally.

And then he calls her mom and almost casually says, Lacey's missing, not is Lacey there, but he doesn't call the police. He's not in a panic. He's not out in the street calling her name, running up and down the street with neighbors. He's letting other people go look for her. From the minute this happened, he never freaked out, never showed concern. I mean, you know, here's the thing to you, Troy Slayton, does he think we're all idiots? Maybe he does because I've only so far I've played what three sentences that he said and already I can cut him to shreds with a butter knife. It's not even hard. You know, in kindergarten, they give the children the glue and a pair of

those little bitty scissors and they're rounded on the edge. I can shred them to pieces with a set of those. Already after three sentences, he's lying. He didn't go search for her. He's lying about why he didn't reveal about Amber Frye. He made a big lie about why he stayed in contact with Amber Frye after Lacey went missing. He's already told three lies in three sentences. So he's admittedly an a-hole, Nancy, and that's why he wouldn't want a prosecutor with your skills. I don't care if he's a red rashy a-hole. I care if he's lying, because if he's lying, he's covering something up. If he testifies and you bring these things out, then it's all about what a horrible man he is because he's an adulterer. And it ceases to be about the dead woman and the dead baby.

So this is why he didn't use his constitutional right to testify in trial. But he says he regrets it. He gives him his interview now. He says he wishes that he could. And if he gets a new trial, I bet you will see him testify. Oh, I bet he, no, he will never testify because in three sentences, I've got him in three lies. And again, you're hiding the truth. Why? Because you don't want to. The truth is who cares if he is cheating?

Nobody cares. Nobody cares if he is an a-hole. I can name off 20 a-holes on the top of my head right now. What matters is that he is lying. Okay, you know what? It's just Karen Stark

lying. You can do a poll right now and I would just guess 35-40% of husbands have cheated. Do I like it? No. Are they killers? No. Exactly. But when your wife is missing and now all these years later, you're still lying. Why? Because you're covering something up. I don't know what Peacock's thinking. He's a pathological liar, Nancy. That's who he is. He's a narcissist, a pathological liar. And do we really want to believe when he keeps talking about his family, my family, I wanted to be with my family. What family? He was telling Amber Fry,

as he kept lying to her, that they were going to have a relationship forever. And then in this, when we're listening to him, he says, I don't know why she thought we were having a relationship. You know, I was just sleeping with her. He was lying over and over again. That is just who he is. It's his nature. He can't help himself. Investigators were alarmed by the state of the Peterson home. They noted the disorder did not reflect a husband or father who was ready for his family to return home.

Yes, the home was completely shambolic. And I can tell you, I have looked inside the home at the time and it looked like a little dollhouse. Not big, but it was perfectly appointed on the inside. I could tell Lacey had gone to great, oh, great lengths to make it beautiful, beautifully decorated. Everything was in place. But when cops get there, all hell's broken loose. Now, in the last days, Peacock, in their wisdom, has released a so-called special. And Scott Peterson speaks out. You know, at first I was totally irritated by this.

Why speak now when you could have spoken at the time she went missing? He didn't. Didn't want Amber Frye, his mistress, and maybe others to see he was married on local TV. But now I'm kind of glad he did because if there ever is, God forbid, a new trial, everything he says can be used in evidence. Now, we just heard him in three sentences. I got him in three lies. And he was trying to explain on the Peacock special why he wanted to keep Amber Fry a secret. Well, OK, this is what happened at trial. Sit down. Listen. Amber!

Hi! Amber! I can hear you! Amber! I can hear you! Amber, you can hear me. It's Dears! I know! I can hear you too. Amber, Dears here! Are you there? Amber!

Hey! Happy New Year! Happy New Yes, I have a good time. Amber, hey, happy New Year's. Happy New Year's. I wanted to call you. Thank you. Amber, you there? I'm here. Amber. I wish you could hear me. I'm on the, I think you're there.

I'm near the Eiffel Tower, New Year's celebration is unreal. The crowd is huge. The crowd is huge. The crowd's huge? Amber. Yes, I'm here. Amber, you're there. I can't hear you right now, but I'll call you on your New Year's. Okay, I'll be there for you then.

Amber. Amber, I'll meet you. I'll see you soon. Okay. I hope I'm there. So let me understand something, Cheryl McCollum. Constantly calling Amber Frye. And by the way, that phone call was during the vigil for his wife and unborn son. They were holding a candlelight vigil for Lacey. And he's, I guess, backstage.

Amber! And he said her name like 50 times. Why? I don't know. But wait a minute. He's saying here that he is in Paris, the Eiffel Tower, Paris. I thought he was in Brussels, Belgium and Maine. So what was he taking? A whirlwind world tour? Is that what he told Amber Fry? You know, it sticks out for me, Nancy, of all the things he could have done. He picked a new year celebration. That is a celebration of new beginnings. And he didn't mention, I'm sad that I'm here by myself. He didn't say I'm missing my family. I'm missing my home country. He says, Amber, I'm missing you. But yet he's celebrating. He's out near the Eiffel Tower, just having a good

old time ringing in the new year and then says, I'll call you. Have you lost your mind? Is that a vigil for his wife? Listen to more. He told me this elaborate lie about her missing and this tragedy and that this will be the first holidays without her. I never said, Amber, I don't want to fight with you. You know that I never said tragedy or missing. Oh, yes, you said you've lost your wife. No. Yes. Obviously without me saying much.

I said that I lost my wife. Yes, you did. I did. And that it would be the first Christmas without her. And then suddenly that came true. Who is Amber Fry? I will tell you, I've spent time with Amber. She's a perfectly nice person.

Very nice. Who had no idea what she was getting involved with. And remember, she recorded these calls what she was getting involved with. And remember, she recorded these calls. She was working with police while Scott Peterson was walking free. Remember, he wanted her to meet him at a remote cabin. Why? Why did he want to get her away from home, away from her child during this time? Did he want to silence her also? Listen. I met Scott Peterson November 20th, 2002. I was introduced to him. I was told he was unmarried. Scott told me he was not married. We did have a romantic relationship.

When I discovered he was involved in the Lucy Peterson disappearance case, I immediately contacted the Modesto Police Department. Although I could have sold the photos of Scott and I to tabloids, I knew this was not the right thing to do. For fear of jeopardizing the case or the police investigation, I will not comment further. So out of three lines, straight out of the chute, he's caught in multiple lies. I actually am glad Peacock created this special because it's got Scott Peterson now talking. He was afraid to do that at the time of his trial, wouldn't do it,

would not put one toe on the sand. As a matter of fact, listen to this. During my trial, I was indignant. I was so angry at the media because the reports just weren't factual. I strive not to show any emotion to the courtroom because I didn't want to see them break me. Okay, straight out to Susan Hendricks joining us, investigative reporter and author who covered the trial from the beginning. What do you make of him stating that he was angry at the media? I mean, I've never ever heard him say, I'm angry at the person that took my wife. I'm angry at the person that killed my wife and son. All I wanted was to hold Connor in my arms and be a family.

Never once. Now he's angry at the media. Obviously using that as his excuse to not feel any emotion. And what stood out to me, and I thought Peacock did a great job of laying out the timeline and talking about what he did after throwing his pregnant wife away and what was going on inside of that house and how he was able to, once he was arrested with the goatee, the orange goatee and the orange hair, they went to In-N-Out and he ordered a double hamburger, a vanilla shake, French fries. It took me back to Joran van der Sloot with Stephanie Flores and the Danish.

And you just spoke about what was he capable of doing, right? Was Amber Fry at risk? I think so when you mentioned that. And also in the other documentary I watched, what was so shocking, Connor's room when they did that second search, filled, used as storage. He was not waiting for his pregnant wife to, certified forensic pathologist and consultant. Dr. Eason, thank you so much for being with us. Many, many weeks had passed before Lacey's body washed ashore. About 24 hours between the two bodies, the baby's body. Baby Connor washed ashore. Lacey's body was largely decomposed. Not so for Connor. Why? That's because the body was protected. The baby was protected within the uterus or in the womb while Lacey was decomposing. And so what happened was while the body was being protected, Lacey started to decompose.

The skin of the abdomen started to disintegrate. And then the baby was then later expelled from her torso into the water. But she had to decompose first for that to happen. You know, Cheryl McCollum, day after day after day, Scott Peterson was traced going and looking out over the San Francisco Bay. Little did he know that at some point, Lacey and Connor's bodies, respectively, would wash ashore. I guess that's what he was looking for. I think absolutely. He was waiting to see if law enforcement had discovered anything. And it's just crazy to me that, you know, first he tells everybody he's going to go golfing.

When he's looking for Lacey that first day, he tells a neighbor he went golfing. But he put himself there. He's the one that gave law enforcement that ticket that showed he put his boat in the water. So the very place where he put himself is where they washed up. And I believe December 9th shows his premeditation. December 9th is when he bought the boat. December 9th is when he told Amber Fry his wife is missing. That's when he says, you know, by Christmas, we can maybe be together. Whatever he says to her, December 9th to me. No, I don't think he told her his wife was missing. At first he said he lost his wife and this would be her the first Christmas without her. And then it was only after the vigil around New Year's Eve that he actually came clean. Of course, she already knew Lacey was missing.

But I've got another question based on what we just heard to not only Sheryl McCollum, but Susan Hendricks. And then I want to go to Karen Stark about his demeanor in the Peacock special. Susan Hendricks, recall the hair of Lacey's, absolutely Lacey's hair, that was proven. It wasn't just a transfer onto those needle nose pliers. The hair wasn't just on the needle nose pliers. It was intertwined, tangled up in the pliers. And then there was the issue of the homemade cement blocks. Do you recall that testimony, Susan? Absolutely. And I remember the hair, of course, could be explained away with the defense attorney if it's just sitting in the boat, right? It's intertwined in that plier. So the theory is from the prosecution that he was adhering those anchors, putting them onto pregnant Lacey,

eight months pregnant, his wife, and throwing her into the San Francisco Bay. And they were able to show, based on that storage facility, they believed that there were five anchors that were made. They only found one in the boat, and that boat didn't have a rope. So you have an anchor with no rope. Where are the other anchors, which he said weren't made? And where's the rope? Nothing made sense, but they couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. But again, you said, and that is very important with the hair being intertwined in the pliers, not just on the boat somewhere.

Troy Slayton, high profile defense attorney joining us out of the Scott Peterson jurisdiction of California, Troy Slayton, what would be your response to a question relating to Lacey's hair, absolutely her hair, not just a transfer of her hair onto needle-nose pliers on his boat that she did not know about, but intertwined, tangled up in the pliers. What did he give her a trim? I would say, oh my goodness, a wife's hair is on her husband's tool. I mean, her hair is probably all over his shirt. Her hair is all over him. I mean, isn't that how a woman who catches her adult husband is by the hair on his clothing? Just cut his mic. I'm going to try again. The response is a subtle but important distinction,

Troy Slayton. Her hair was not on the needle nose pliers. Her hair, it's her hair. There's a nucleus attached. Her hair was tangled up in the needle nose pliers, twined into it. It was not a transfer. That is my question. I'm not asking about a transferal of hair. I would say that in and of itself doesn't prove anything. Where's the rest of the crime scene? Where's her blood? Where's the evidence of a struggle? Where's all the other things that would be necessary for a murder and disposal of a body to take place? But a single hair caught up in a pliers, that hair could have gotten there by any number of reasons. There are infinite possibilities.

Nancy, can I jump in? Please. Nancy, those pliers were also found in the boat. The reason there wasn't other evidence is because those anchors weighed down her arms and her legs. That is the reason her arms and legs were no longer attached to the torso, because she was being held down. There wouldn't be a chance for any other evidence to come about. Peterson leaves Lacey a gushy voicemail on the day she disappeared, saying he would see her soon on his way home from the marina.

Scott insists that was normal for them, but detectives think it was staged to make things seem normal. Oopsie, I thought I was playing golf. Okay, let's hear it from the horse's mouth. Take a listen to Scott Peterson quote, speaking out as if he didn't have that chance to trial or that chance when Lacey was missing and all the vigils and all the press requests for him to make a statement to help aid the search for Lacey and Connor, that didn't happen. But now, 20 plus years later, he is, quote, speaking out. Of course, not subject to cross-examination.

Take a listen to Peacock's face-to-face with Scott Peterson. Yeah, there was a burp. He asked us to speak from our home. There were a lot of people home. And I believed that Lacey went over there to see what was going on. Many viewers have been, according to reports, appalled. Their words, not mine. Appalled at Scott Peterson's demeanor throughout the Peacock special because he was constantly smiling. I guess that's rule number one, Troy Slayton. You tell your client charged with murdering his wife, don't smile and giggle in front of anybody killers. Okay,

that's a whole nother can of worms. But don't giggle and smile in front of the jury, I guess, because nobody apparently told him that at Peacock. Every single thing that you say, every single thing that you do can be used against you I mean that's why everyone is given the famous Miranda warning you have the right to remain silent but oftentimes I've had many clients who get diarrhea of the mouth and suddenly say all sorts of things that might be helpful or might be harmful but in this case he's asking for a new trial and the famed Los Angeles Innocence Project based based in Los Angeles, they do cases nationwide,

has taken him as a client and are trying to get him a new trial. Many viewers also stated that there is no emotion in his face or body language. In fact, one viewer states, I think his brain should be scientifically looked into. He's a strong case of psychopathy. I think he's pretended his whole life like he's a normal human being. And Troy Slayton, I'm glad to hear you tell your clients no smiling or giggling when you're charged with murder. Let's address the heart of what Peterson was saying. He says, well, he's asked if you didn't do it, who did? That burden is not on a defendant. They don't have to prove who did it. But he goes so far as to say there was a burglary across the street from our house.

Okay. Susan Hendricks and Cheryl McCollum, both of you have carefully researched that evidence and how it was brought forward at trial. What can you tell me, Susan Hendricks, about the burglary? Is he talking about those three guys that were tracked down behind bars and questioned and polygraphed? Those guys? Exactly. There is some discrepancy in the investigation where I see where the defense would, of course, pick up on that. But side note, it was never and it was not in trial. So Geragos decided to leave it out for some reason. But the day that this occurred on, there was some sort of discrepancy there. And I think what you were just speaking of with Scott Peterson, the reason why he's smiling and acting weird, he doesn't know how to connect the right feelings, I believe,

because he has none. But he is able to pull the wool over people's eyes, including his sister-in-law, who has dedicated her life to setting him free, even got her law degree. To Troy Slayton, high-profile defense attorney in this jurisdiction. Troy, I'm sure that you, like I, am familiar with Mark Geragos. Would you state that he's an excellent lawyer? Absolutely, yes. Won a lot of cases, right? Absolutely, yes, he has. And don't you believe, since you believe Mark Geragos is an excellent trial lawyer, that if he had evidence that Scott Peterson was innocent, he would have put it up in front of the jury specifically. He knew about the burglars. He knew their names. We know that. But he, Mark Geragos, chose not to bring it into evidence. Why? There are many reasons why you wouldn't want a person to testify or you

wouldn't want to bring up something that the jury might think is a distraction. Here, there was an admitted burglary across the street, and it may have appeared to the jury if Mark Garagos is bringing that in, if the defense team is bringing that in, that it wouldn't seem as credible as if the government brought in that evidence. So there's a lot of reasons why you may not bring it in. I think you've got another career. I think you've got a secret career as a tap dancer, because you actually came up with an answer about how if Garagos had a witness that could show that this burglary was related to Lacey's disappearance, you're saying he would not have put that up because he didn't want to distract the jury. Okay.

Noted. I'm saying that he doesn't have enough evidence to know that that was exactly what happened. But it's Scott Peterson's theory that his wife went over there not to interrupt a burglary, but saw a disturbance across the street, checked to see what was going on and was suddenly kidnapped. Peterson claims investigators did not turn over key evidence to his defense that could have cleared him of his pregnant wife's murder during the trial. In the last weeks, a judge has allowed more DNA testing for Scott Peterson. In the meantime, our friends at Peacock have released face-to-face with Scott Peterson.

But here is what Scott Peterson said to our friend back at the time when Lacey was missing. This is Gloria Gomez speaking to him at KOVR CBS 13. In the mornings when down there alone, you know, I feel closer to her. Maybe that's an attempt to communicate or something. You know, it can make you feel really close to your wife, not cheating. That can help. attempt to communicate or something. You know, it can make you feel really close to your wife, not cheating. That can help. You know, here's more of Scott Peterson speaking with Gloria Gomez, K-O-V-R.

To keep the media here, to keep them hungry for, you know, an interview with me or a picture so that they would keep coming back so this story won't fall through the cracks. And isn't that exactly what he's doing right now, Susan Hendricks, right now, keeping his words to keep the media hungry, to keep them coming back. Why? His voice is like nails on a chalkboard to me, Nancy. It's hard for me to listen to that sound. And you would think after 20 plus years, right, he's trying. He has a new strategy. He even said about the robbery across the street that maybe they should have brought it in. He's second guessing certain things.

But I will say he seems almost chipper joking for a moment in the Peacock special with the journalists like, oh, I don't want to cry here because, you know, I'm in prison. I don't know what's going to happen. Alluding to the fact that I'm not going to be seen as tough by crying. There's an excuse for all of his lack of emotion, but the bottom line, he doesn't have it. It doesn't exist. He's not sorry. Dr. Eric Eason is joining me, a renowned forensic pathologist. Dr. Eason, you have performed autopsies on many pregnant women. And when you see a guy who's been convicted of the murder of a mom and her baby, does that have any effect on you at all? Or do you just try to put that out of your mind while you perform the autopsy? Yeah, I've got to put it out of my mind.

You have to separate the emotions from what you're seeing. My job is to determine the cause of death, and I entirely focus on that whenever I handle an autopsy case. I've got to keep the emotions out of it. Somebody's got to do it, and it's me. So that's just kind of how I approach it. Well, I don't have to, Cheryl McCollum, and neither do you. Not at all. And Nancy, Nancy, there's been many times we haven't been able to separate. And, you know, this is one of those things where when you watch him and you remind yourself that in the last 20 years, all these appeals have failed. No new witnesses come forward. No new substantial evidence has come about. He is sitting there for 20 years and the best he can come up with is my petite pregnant wife who can't hardly walk went across the street to confront

three criminals. Asinine. Not even close. Well I mean everybody on the panel if you know differently tell me. I've never once heard him say, you know what? Forget about me. I'll stay right here behind bars. Just help me find who murdered Lacey. Who did this? Never once, even in this so-called special by our friends at Peacock, does he say, I want the guy that murdered my wife? Never. He's never looking for the quote, real killer. Susan Hendricks, has he ever asked about Lacey? Never.

It's all about me, me, me, and me. And what stood out to me, the second search warrant of the house, they knew what they had. They were looking around to see what was going on in the house, how he was living. Not one indication that he even missed them. He sold her car.

He wanted to sell the house right away. He wanted that chunk of his life to go away. And so he killed his pregnant wife, threw her in the San Francisco Bay and thought that everyone would just move on with their lives. And they didn't. He's a sociopath and a psychopath. And I feel like he has zero feeling the reason why he didn't mention them and the reason why Lacey's family finally decided, OK, they didn't originally think it was him. Thought, OK, the way he's acting now, we know it's him. Devastatingly so. They

loved him. But he has no emotion because it doesn't exist. You go on, Peterson. Keep giving those interviews. Keep showing up on streaming agents like Peacock, because if you ever do get a new trial, which I doubt, everything you say is going to turn into state's evidence because you are a liar and you murdered Lacey. Nancy Grace signing off. Goodbye, friend. This is an iHeart Podcast.