The Prosecutors - Case File Revisited: Scott Peterson 3

Summary

---

The Prosecutors - Case File Revisited: Scott Peterson 3

Podcast: The Prosecutors
Hosts: Brett and Alice
Air Date: July 23, 2026
Case: The Murder of Laci Peterson (Part 3)

---

Episode Overview

This episode is the third installment in the Prosecutors’ deep dive into the Scott Peterson case, focusing on the crucial timeline and prosecution’s theory of the day Laci Peterson disappeared (December 24, 2002). Brett and Alice, both prosecutors, meticulously reconstruct Scott’s movements, scrutinize inconsistencies, and consider the impact of media and public perception on the trial. They begin introducing the prosecution’s case and circumstantial evidence, while questioning Scott’s behavior and dissecting the key points that would eventually define the trial.

---

Timeline of December 24, 2002: Scott Peterson’s Day

Recap of Prior Episodes ([04:17])

• Brett: Recaps episodes 1 and 2, with episode 1 detailing the background and episode 2 exploring the timeline up until Scott leaves the marina.
• Last episode ended with Scott’s voicemail to Laci at ~2:15 PM.

Events & Timings

3:25–4:12 PM: The Chevron Stop and the Warehouse

• 3:25 PM: Scott buys gas at Chevron in Livermore ([05:17])
• 3:52 PM: Scott calls Laci again but doesn’t leave a message.
• 4:13–4:23 PM: Returns to warehouse (48-minute drive per Yahoo Maps). Claims to unhook boat, spend five minutes in the office, see a fax timestamped 11:28 AM, then heads home. ([05:17]–[07:47])
  • Brett: Questions Scott’s detailed memory of the fax, but continual forgetfulness in removing umbrellas from his truck.

4:24–4:45 PM: Arrival Home

• Scott finds the dog (Mackenzie) in the backyard with leash still on.
• Leash is placed on the patio table—matches neighbor’s earlier report.
• Neighbor found Mackenzie at ~10:18 AM, meaning the dog was outside with leash on for nearly 7 hours. ([08:36])
  • Alice: Notes it’s odd for a dog to be left this long, especially with leash on.
  • Brett: Agrees, finding it strange Scott didn’t think this odd.

At the House

• Scott enters home, empties mop bucket due to concern for cats, places bucket and mops outside.
• Laci’s car is in the driveway, but she isn't home—Scott assumes Laci left with her mother without telling him.
  • Brett ([11:47]): “A normal person in a normal relationship would be very concerned at this point … I would be kind of freaking out at that point.”
  • Alice: Notes Christmas Eve is a family event, would expect better communication from Laci if plans changed.

Other Details

• Scott washes wet clothes immediately, citing his typical habits with chemical-laden work clothes. Gets out leftover pizza and a glass of milk. ([13:44])

  • Alice: Finds it unusual he would eat just before a big family dinner.
  • Brett: Suggests eating might signal he isn’t expecting a family dinner—potentially significant.

• After showering, Scott listens to voicemail messages, including the one he left Laci at the marina.

  • Alice ([15:30]): Suggests unplayed voicemail would raise alarms about Laci's absence.

First Signs of Alarm

• Laci’s stepfather leaves a message about “bring whipped cream,” but if Laci was with them they wouldn’t call their house.
• 5:17 PM: Scott calls Laci’s parents; learns Laci is not with them.
• Search for Laci begins—Scott, Sharon (Laci's mom), and Ron (stepfather) take various actions; Ron calls 911 at 5:47 PM. ([16:34])
• Scott gives police his first interview that night.
• Laci and baby Connor’s bodies are found months later, leading to Scott’s arrest.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Dog and Leash Oddity

• Multiple minutes spent on the unusual detail of Mackenzie’s leash being left on—and how neither neighbor nor Scott seemed troubled by it. This seemingly minor observation becomes a recurring point for the hosts as an example of something "off" in the scenario. ([08:36]–[10:19])

Scott’s Emotional Detachment

• Brett ([11:47], [14:15]): Expresses that Scott’s lack of alarm on seeing the car, unplayed messages, and Laci’s absence is not how a typical spouse would react.
• Alice ([11:22]): Notes the presumption that Laci departed unannounced is implausible.

The Role of Media in the Case ([17:34])

• The hosts discuss how the Scott Peterson case became a media circus, impacting the possibility of an unbiased jury.
  • Alice ([19:15]): “Hometown was the entire world. This was truly on just about every news channel. It was impossible to get away from it.”
  • Brett: Points out rumors/fabrications like the "house smelling of bleach" that became “facts” in the public mind.

Circumstantial Evidence: How the Case Was Built ([23:52])

• The prosecution’s theory: Scott killed Laci on December 23, disposed of her body on December 24.
• Emphasis that there’s no direct evidence—everything is circumstantial: timelines, behaviors, and physical findings.
  • Alice ([27:18]): “A lot of People retort, direct evidence is better than circumstantial evidence, and that’s just not the case.”
  • Brett ([27:43]): Challenges the idea that circumstantial evidence is weak—sometimes stronger than eyewitness testimony.

The Media & Scott’s Avoidance ([28:37])

• Scott notably avoids media appearances, unlike typical family members in missing persons cases (e.g., Fred Murray in Maura Murray case).
  • Alice ([28:37]): "He avoids the media completely… covers his face, looks down."
  • Rush to judgment arose in the absence of a “grieving husband” narrative seen by the public.

Scott’s Demeanor

• Noted lack of emotion or concern in police interviews and around family during search for Laci ([33:13]):
  • Alice: "He's drinking coffee … you can tell his hands aren’t shaking. He’s totally relaxed."
  • Family members later recall Scott avoiding eye contact and emotional displays, becoming withdrawn, though these impressions surfaced only after suspicion arose.

Conflicting Stories & Perplexing Statements ([38:56]–[44:53])

• Scott tells some he went fishing, others that he went golfing (even telling neighbors he’d gone golfing all day).
• Odd comment to neighbor: “I wouldn’t be surprised if they find blood on my truck because I cut my hands all the time.”
  • Alice ([44:16]): “Why her? She’s not one of the family members... No one said anything about blood.”

The Boat and Fishing Trip

• Scott recently bought a cheap, small, 14-foot fishing boat on December 9, never previously used in saltwater.

  • Alice ([45:39]): “Not impossible to take this kind of boat out into San Francisco Bay, it would be dangerous for someone who’s not an expert.”

• Prosecution calls fishing expert: Scott had the wrong gear for sturgeon fishing—his rods were set up for freshwater bass, not suitable for saltwater or sturgeon; one rod wasn’t even functional. There was no usable anchor or proper rope ([48:07]–[50:16]).

  • Brett: “If this boat was actually a boat he was planning on using regularly in places like the San Francisco Bay, this is not the boat for him.”

• Prosecution questions why Scott traveled so far to fish in the Bay when there were over a dozen lakes closer to home more suitable for his equipment ([50:32]):

  • Alice: “As a juror, I would be very interested in this piece of information.”
  • Defense points out: a secluded lake would have been a better (less risky) dumping ground, but Bay presents advantages (size, animal predation, tides).

The Clothes Laci Was Wearing ([53:38])

• Scott told police Laci was wearing a white blouse and black pants (her clothes from the 23rd).
• When Laci’s remains were found, she was wearing tan pants; her blouse and black pants were found hanging at home.
  • Brett ([56:59]): “So you can’t have it both ways. Either she was wearing the clothes, or she wasn’t. And if she wasn’t wearing those clothes, then all of those sightings... become much more suspect.”

Other Notable Details

• In the spare bedroom, duffel bags were pulled down and lying on the floor, possibly hinting at argument or preparations to leave ([57:54]).
  • Brett: Suggests possible scenario where Laci discovers something upsetting and starts to pack.

Scott’s Alibi: Plausibility Problems ([60:21])

• Scott claims he skipped golf due to cold weather, opted for fishing instead—even though fishing in the Bay would be colder, windier, and more unpleasant ([61:08]).
• Only three people used the marina that day—highlighting how unusual it would be for Scott to go fishing then (absent another motive).
  • Alice ([62:49]): “Scott leaves all day, one and a half hours away from home when his wife is eight months pregnant with their first child. This is completely inconsistent with anything I can imagine anyone doing.”
  • Brett ([63:29]): “She was starting to have problems... it makes you wonder if maybe in reality, the reason he was fine driving an hour and a half away is because there wasn’t anybody waiting at home.”

---

Notable Quotes & Moments

• On circumstantial evidence:
  • “You gotta think about this case in total. You gotta think about all these little pieces of evidence and whether or not, at the end of the day… you can say that Scott killed his wife or not.” — Brett ([24:45])
• On Scott’s demeanor:
  • “He is relaxed… you would never know this is a man whose eight month pregnant wife is missing, drinking a cup of coffee.” — Brett ([33:13])
• On media influence:
  • “You could have moved this case to another state. I don't think it would have mattered the amount of coverage that this case got.” — Alice ([20:24])
• On the fishing alibi:
  • “People who play golf are just really committed to the sport... And number two, if it’s too cold to play golf, how cold do you think it’s going to be on a boat in San Francisco Harbor? ... Scott was just one of three people there that day, and the employee called it a gray, drizzly, nasty day.” — Alice ([61:08])
• On the clothing discrepancy:
  • “…if she wasn’t wearing those clothes, then all of those sightings that you’ve heard about suddenly become much more suspect.” — Brett ([56:59])
• On trial narratives:
  • “If you’re swayed so far by the prosecution, that’s normal. But don't forget, there's another side of the story. So make sure to come back for that.” — Alice ([66:36])

---

Key Timestamps

• [04:17] Recap and transition back to timeline
• [05:17] Chevron gas stop; warehouse timeline
• [08:36] Discussion: Mackenzie the dog and leash
• [11:47] Brett: “A normal person would be concerned…”
• [14:15] Alice: Pizza before dinner—strange detail
• [15:30] Voicemail system and unplayed message
• [16:34] Search for Laci begins
• [19:15] Media’s role and jury bias
• [23:52] Prosecution’s theory: circumstantial case explained
• [28:37] Scott’s aversion to the media and public perception
• [33:13] Scott’s demeanor in police interview
• [38:56] Conflicting stories: fishing or golfing
• [45:39] Fisherman expert: Scott’s wrong tackle, small boat not suited for Bay
• [50:32] Why SF Bay? Prosecution questions Scott’s fishing location choice
• [53:38] Laci’s clothing discrepancy and implications for case
• [57:54] Duffel bags in spare bedroom—possible argument scenario
• [61:08] Scott’s implausible alibi: cold weather excuse and timing
• [62:49] Unlikely behavior for expectant father
• [66:36] Alice: Jury process reminder; episode conclusion

---

Tone and Language

Brett and Alice maintain a thoughtful, analytical, and often conversational tone. There is regular use of humor and “playful prosecutor” banter, but both are careful to frame speculation, present both sides, and encourage critical thinking—often reminding listeners not to leap to conclusions before the defense’s case is presented.

---

Conclusion & Cliffhanger

The episode ends with the promise to cover Amber Frey’s involvement and Scott’s post-disappearance actions in the next segment. Listeners are reminded that they’ve mainly heard the prosecution’s case so far, with assurances that the defense side is coming—mirroring real trial procedure.

---

For Listeners

This episode masterfully weaves the timeline, evidence gaps, and prosecution strategy while interrogating both mundane and extraordinary aspects of Scott Peterson’s actions. If you haven't kept up with prior episodes, you'll still get a granular sense of where the case stands after Laci’s disappearance and why public and legal fascination endure in this high-profile case.

---

[Episode-specific artwork by Hannah Hill. Find more at @serious_moonlite on Instagram.]

Transcript

[Progressive Insurance Announcer]

Insurance isn't one size fits all. That's why customers have enjoyed Progressive's name your price tool for years now. With the name your price tool, you tell them what you want to pay, and they'll show you options that fit your budget. So whether you're picking out your first policy or just looking for something that works better for you and your family, they make it easy to see your options. Visit progressive.com, find a rate that works for you with the name your price tool. Progressive Casualty Insurance company and affiliates Price and coverage match limited by state law.

[Sleep Number Announcer]

If the world were like a sleep number mattress, everything would adapt for your comfort. Your coffee would never get cold, your flight would always be on time, and your mattress would always respond to you and your unique sleep needs. Sleep number mattresses are designed to respond to your body and shift with your changing life, helping you fall asleep faster and stay asleep longer. To experience a whole new world of comfort, visit a sleep number store or go to sleepnumber.com sleep number to a good life. Sleep.

[Alice]

Mom, can you tell me a story?

[Carvana Announcer]

Sure. Once upon a time, a mom needed a new car.

[Cachava Announcer]

Was she brave?

[Carvana Announcer]

She was tired mostly. But she went to Carvana.com and found a great car at a great price. No secret treasure map required.

[Alice]

Did you have to fight a dragon?

[Carvana Announcer]

Nope. She bought it 100% online from her bed, actually.

[Alice]

Was it scary?

[Carvana Announcer]

Honey, it was as unscary as car buying could be.

[Alice]

Did the car have a sunroof?

[Carvana Announcer]

It did, actually.

[Cachava Announcer]

Okay, good story.

[Carvana Announcer]

Car buying you'll want to tell stories about. Buy your car today on Carvana. Delivery fees may apply.

[Brett]

I'm brett.

[Alice]

And I'm alice.

[Brett]

And we are the prosecutors. Today on the prosecutors, we continue our investigation into the murder of Lacey Peterson. Hello, everybody, and welcome to this episode of the Prosecutors. I'm Brett and I'm joined as always, with my inspiring co host, Alice.

[Alice]

Thanks, Brett. Man, I had just been complaining to you. So you made me change my mood.

[Brett]

Well, you inspire me to complain, so it works out.

[Alice]

That's not good. Well, I'm just kidding, Alice. I'm working in my last bits of, like, the holiday season, I baked another batch of pumpkin chocolate chip cookies just to, like, get it all in.

[Brett]

Wow. Pumpkin chocolate chip cookies.

[Alice]

Oh, they are good.

[Brett]

Sounds amazing.

[Alice]

It's. I'm not gonna pat myself.

[Brett]

Wish I was going to work tomorrow. I know. Make you bring some to me.

[Alice]

Sorry.

[Brett]

Maybe I should go into work. Are you going into work tomorrow?

[Alice]

I think so. Yeah.

[Brett]

Huh. Are you bringing cookies?

[Alice]

Yeah.

[Brett]

You gonna come I'm gonna have to swing by. Yes. Alice and I, as we are recording, it is almost the new year, you guys. By the time you hear this, we'll be well into 2021, and you'll know whether or not it's better than 2020. Let's cross our fingers. January is not looking great, guys, but, you know, I'm gonna hope. I'm gonna hope that it gets better. We are on, you know, the cusp of another roaring twenties when everybody's leaving behind this pandemic. And it's going to be one long celebration and prosperity and happiness and everything else. So let's all hope for that, that that's, you know, this is our. You got to go through the pain before you see the. See the gain or whatever.

[Carvana Announcer]

I don't know.

[Brett]

That's my hope. That's my hope for the new year. My New Year's wish to you guys. But good, bad or indifferent, you still got our podcast. And we are still talking about the murders of Scott. Oh, not Scott. The murders of Lacy and Connor Peterson. This is our third episode. The first two episodes. The first episode was more background, sort of setting up the story for you. And last episode, we really got into the timeline, particularly as to the day that Lacy disappeared. At this point, Scott has left the marina. He has called Lacy. We played a voicemail message that he left for Lacy and spent some time talking about that last time. So I think the best thing to do is just to jump right back in with the timeline on that day, December 24, 2002.

[Alice]

Right. So to remind you, that voicemail we last heard was about 2:15pm on Christmas Eve. Now at about between 3:25 and 4:12pm we know that Scott said he pulled over for gas at a Chevron in Livermore. And yeah, he called Lacey again. Bank records show this purchase was at 3:25pm Scott makes another call to Lacey's cell phone at 3:52pm but this time, he doesn't leave a message. And it's a 48 minute drive from the Chevron to his warehouse, according to Yahoo Maps. And if you guys want to check that out for yourselves, you can plug these in to Yahoo or Google Maps. The Chevron is located at 2186 Las Positas Court in Livermore, California. And his warehouse is located at 1027 Emerald, Modesto, Emerald Street, Modesto. Now that places Scott getting back to his warehouse at around 4:13pm now, this next segment from about 4:13 to 4:23pm we know that Scott arrives back at the warehouse around 4:13, 4:15pm he says that he unhooked the boat and estimated spending no more than five minutes in the office. And he thinks this is when he sees a fax regarding an incoming shipment. Scott tells the police that he remembers seeing the fax because he was disappointed that the shipment was arriving when it was. And Scott says he then headed home. The incoming fax was time stamped 1128 Pacific Standard Time. So the facts came sometime after Scott had left for the marina.

[Brett]

I just want to reiterate, this is yet again, Scott, you know, he remembers everything about this facts. But this is like the third time he's forgotten to take the umbrellas out of the back of his car or his truck. I mean, he's. He's unhooked the boat. Presumably in doing that, he's looked into the back of the truck and thought, huh, there's those umbrellas that I've been carrying around this whole time that I brought with me specifically to leave them here at the warehouse. But, oh, well, I guess I'll just take them back home. But he remembers exactly the facts and everything he thought about the facts. It's just. I don't know, I can't understand why he never takes the umbrellas out the back of his truck.

[Alice]

I got nothing for you.

[Brett]

Yeah, I don't know if anybody does. Okay, so now things get even more interesting. It's around 4:24 when he leaves his. The warehouse. And he estimates that he gets back home between 4:30 and 4:45, which would be consistent with the amount of time it takes him to drive from the warehouse. He enters through a side gate and he finds the dog, McKenzie with his leash on. Scott removes the leash and puts it on the patio table. Now, remember, this is consistent with what the neighbor said, that she found the dog wandering around. She took it back inside the patio, closed the gate, and now Scott is finding the dog in that location.

[Alice]

So one thing I have to note, Brett, I know you have a dog, but. So Karen found Mackenzie first. So let's keep in mind that the neighbor said that she found Mackenzie with her leash on at 10:18am and this is about six hours later, almost seven hours later, that Scott comes back and finds that the leash is still on Mackenzie outside. My initial thought is that the dog's been outside for about seven hours. Probably, you know, at least he's outside so he can go to the bathroom, but he probably doesn't have food or water out there. Maybe some water. But when I leave my dogs that I'VE had in the past out for that long, they start barking, they start making a ruckus. Especially if they're not typically outdoor dogs.

[Brett]

Yeah. I mean, I don't really know what was going on with Mackenzie that day. I guess. You know, Mackenzie's often presented as an older dog. I don't know how old Mackenzie actually was, but maybe Mackenzie just sort of laid around all day in the. In the. On the patio, waiting for somebody to come back. The interesting thing, once again to me is Scott shows up and. And there's the dog with its leash on. And I know there are some people, and people are gonna ride in and be like, well, I leave my leash on my dog sometimes. Okay, fine. But that's not that normal a thing to do. You don't normally just leave the leash on the dog as it wanders around outside. This is not something you would typically do. So you would.

[Alice]

Because it drags the leash through the mud, it gets it dirty. The dog gets tangled in it. If there's, like, a metal piece, if they swing their head, it can really hit them and hurt them. It's just an annoyance. Right. That even the dog wants off.

[Brett]

Right. And you think Scott, when he saw that, would think that was weird. I mean, I thought, frankly, that the neighbor would think the same thing, but here it's even worse. It's his dog. He would know. Whether this is an ordinary thing for Mackenzie to be wandering around with his leash on, it certainly strikes me as strange. It doesn't seem as though it struck Scott as strange necessarily. In any event, he enters the home. The dog runs inside. They also apparently had some cats. Cats run into. Scott sees the mop bucket, which he empties. He says he was afraid the cats might drink out of the mop bucket. I'd be more concerned the dog would drink out of the mop bucket. But that's just me. In any event, he pours the water out and puts the bucket in the mops on the front walkway near the door. He grabs the mail. Lacy's car is in the driveway, but Lacy's not home. He assumes that Sharon had picked up Lacy and that she was at her mom's preparing for Christmas Eve dinner.

[Alice]

Hey, Brett, that's an interesting thing, right? I mean, Christmas Eve is a pretty big holiday, and you would think that Lacey would have called him to say, hey, by the way, don't wait for me. My mom's picking me up to go prepare for dinner. It just seems like a very big assumption that he wouldn't be surprised or be concerned that Lacy never said anything about going over because likely they were going to drive over together.

[Brett]

A normal person in a normal relationship would be very concerned at this point. You know, this story does not go the way I think it should go. If it were me, and I had called my wife multiple times and not heard from her, number one. Number two, she's eight months pregnant. Number three, I come home and my dog is wandering around outside with his leash on, and her car's in the driveway and she's not in the house. I would be really worried. I'd be kind of freaking out at that point. You know, there's no reason for him not to be concerned. You know, this isn't. You remember Amy Bechtel's husband? When he got home from rock climbing, he. He did not necessarily think that Amy should be there because he knew she was going to go on a long run. But it wasn't very long before he started to get concerned that she was missing. And he even. He turned down some offers to go have pizza and various other things because he wanted to wait for her to get home. He didn't want to freak out about it, but he was getting concerned, Scott. You know, he. He. He doesn't seem to have any concern even at this point. He's gone inside, she's not there, even though her car's there. He assumes she's with her mom, but like you said, never called him back, never let him know what she was doing. And so he just goes about his business. His clothes are a little wet, presumably from being out in the bay. So he takes them off, he throws them in the washer. While he's doing that, he's, you know, removing some rags that had been in the washer. He's throwing in the soap and everything else. This is something he apparently often did. He'd wash his clothes when he got home because he worked with so many chemicals. This obviously had more to do with him being wet than anything else. Or if you think he killed somebody. To take care of any evidence that might have been there. He goes in, he gets the pizza out from the last night, gets himself a glass of milk.

[Alice]

Okay, okay, so I gotta stop you there for a second. We know it's Christmas Eve dinner. I get. Maybe he hasn't eaten all day, but it is a little strange to me that he's going to eat pizza right before he's supposed to go over to Christmas dinner. Which Christmas Eve dinner? Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve, Any big meal. I usually actually basically fast for the day. So I can eat as much as possible. So this. This strikes me as strange. I get that he was out and he probably didn't eat lunch, but I still find it strange that he's eating cold pizza before a fancy meal.

[Brett]

That's a good point. If you think he did it, then he knows he's not gonna be eating dinner anytime soon, so he needs to get some pizza, I guess. I don't know. It's possible. Like you said, he just hadn't eaten anything and he was starving to death. And so he wanted a couple pieces of pizza before he got ready, but he definitely. The pizza box is on the counter when the police show up later on, and this is the story he tells. So as far as he's concerned, he's eating pizza, big dinner or not. He takes a shower, he gets dressed, he goes back into the kitchen. He listens to some phone messages. He listens to the message that he left Lacy when he was leaving the marina.

[Alice]

So I don't know what kind of voicemail system they have here, but if he's listening to a message at the home, I assume it's one of those, like, box recordings, right? It's not. He's not listening to her cell phone. It's like one of those you press play. And back in the day, I remember, you know, I had one, you could tell if a message had not been played before. So I don't know if he had this feature. But if he's listening to the voice when he left Lacy and he could tell that hadn't been listened to, that is another thing that would make me start to worry.

[Brett]

Yeah, the little red light would be flashing on it if you had messages that you hadn't listened to yet. And apparently that's what's going on here, is he called their landline when he called Lacy. The first thing that seems to tip Scott off to the fact there might be a problem is he says he listens to a message by Lacy's stepfather asking for them to bring whipped cream over, which this, I guess, makes, he thinks, is weird because somebody had to pick Lacy up. So why is he calling their house? At this point, he calls Lacy's parents home, and this is at about 5:17pm he asks if Lacey is there and is told that she is not. At this point, Scott tells Sharon, who's Lacy's mom, that her car is still in the driveway and she's not home. And Sharon asks if Mackenzie was in the yard. And Scott. This triggers, I guess, for Scott, the fact that the Leash was still on the dog when he found the dog.

[Alice]

So at about 5:18pm this is when the search for Lacey began. Over the next half hour, Scott exchanged two more calls with Lacey's mom and Ron Scott began knocking on neighbors doors, calling neighbors and friends. And he heads to the park with Mackenzie. Sharon told Scott they would begin calling hospitals so he could check the park. While he checked the park and Ron called 911 at 5:47 to report Lacey as missing. Scott gives his first interview with police that night. And there is video of this in the documentary. You can probably pull it up somewhere and watch it. And over the next few months, a number of things would happen that would become important in the case and we'll discuss those later. But for the most part, that is the timeline of the day that Lacey disappeared.

[Brett]

And it's going to be another four months before we get any kind of resolution to what happened to Lacy and Connor. But in April, April 13, 2003, some people walking near the San Francisco Bay will find the bodies of both Lacey and Connor and Scott will be arrested soon thereafter, charged with their murders and eventually tried for those murders. That's pretty much the timeline at least as we're going to discuss it up to this point. There are going to be other things we're going to talk about, as Alice said, but we're going to do that in this sort of as we walk through the prosecution's evidence and we talk about the things that the prosecution highlighted during their trial. Before we get into that though, I do think it's worth talking about the sort of elephant in the room when it comes to this case. And that's the sensationalization, sensationalization of murder trials. And this one in particular, if you guys have seen the documentary on the Scott Peterson case, it's as much about the media and the role that the media plays in this case as it is about the facts and the murders and the trial itself. And it's, it's really interesting in the, the damage and damage may be too pejorative, but certainly how the media can affect a trial, prevent a fair trial and maybe prevent justice. What do you think about that, Alice?

[Alice]

Yeah, absolutely. I mean, this case reached all ends of the world, right? This was not just in Modesto, California. It was on news channels basically 24 hours a day from Christmas Eve on. And your jury pool are usually people who live within the community and they watch tv, they have family members talk. I mean, this was the topic of conversation among friends at the water cooler for months. And so it is hard to have a jury pool that isn't infected when the media has such a far reach. And the media also has a narrative. From the beginning, they were tearing Scott apart well before there was an arrest warrant signed by a judge to arrest him. Now, typically when you have a jury pool that could be tainted, what you do is you move cities, and that's typically enough. You can just move down the road and you get out of the kind of hometown feel that may infect the jury. But here, hometown was the entire world.

[Carvana Announcer]

Everyone.

[Alice]

I mean, this was truly on just about every news channel. It was impossible to get away from it. So you could have moved this case to another state. I don't think it would have mattered the amount of coverage that this case got. There was a narrative out there, and it was being pushed hard, and it was that Scott was a murderer.

[Brett]

Yeah, you might be able to try it today and find people who've never heard of Scott Peterson, though even that would be difficult, but you certainly couldn't do it at the time. I mean, this was the birth of 24 Hour Media was really the OJ case. It was really interesting to look into that and how that was just when 24 hour news coverage was coming into its own. And CNN and all these other stations that are just always on and they needed content. And all of a sudden OJ Happened. And I think a lot of those same people saw in this another opportunity to have something to fill the television that wasn't the Iraq war. I mean, that's basically the only thing that was going on at the time was the beginning of the Iraq war, which obviously got a lot of coverage, but this was very different. And it was something that you could change things up and you could fill as much time you wanted. But in doing that, you get a lot of speculation and you get a lot of rumor and a lot of innuendo and a lot of false facts come out. People believed one of the ones they point to in the documentary so much is that the whole house smelled of bleach when the police showed up. And apparently there's no record of that. You know, nobody actually ever said that, so nobody knows where that came from. And it's probably just an outgrowth of the fact there were some mops. And so somebody said, oh, the whole house smelled of bleach. And that became part of the story. And if you're a juror and you're walking in and you're trying to stay unbiased and you want to give this man a Fair trial. But in the back of your mind, you're thinking about that bleach, and you're thinking, well, you know, I'm gonna give him fair trial. But, man, the whole place smelled a beach bleach. He was probably. There's a reason there's no physical evidence, the bleach. Right. And it's difficult to get past this. I'll say this. I think juries try really hard and jurors try really hard to set aside those things, but I don't. I don't know that it's impossible. I don't know that it's possible to do it entirely. It's just not human nature to be able to segregate facts in your mind that effectively. But be that as it may, Scott was going to have a trial, and one way or the other, the state was going to put on its case, and he was going to put on his defense. And it took jury selection in this case, took forever for this very reason, because they were attempting as best they could to get a jury that was not biased. And we're going to talk about the jury a good bit in this case. It becomes important as we go along. It's the cornerstone, really, of some of Scott's appeals in this case. Whether or not that really affected his trial is something we'll get to later. For now, let's go ahead and talk about the trial itself. And we're going to start off very much from the perspective of the prosecution, what the prosecution put on, what the defense said in response. And then at some point, I don't know that we'll get finished with this today, we'll move on to the defense side and talk about some of the defense arguments that the defense made in trial.

[Alice]

Right. So the prosecution's case against Scott is a pretty simple theory. Their general theory is that Scott murdered Lacey on December 23, and then he dumped her body into the marina the next day. And that's basically it. Now, the problem is there isn't a lot of direct evidence of. Of that taking place. Right. We have Scott speaking to the police the night of December 24, and he has an alibi, and he also has corroborating evidence. Right. Remember that timestamped receipt from when he bought a parking ticket at the marina? He has the voicemail timestamping his day, his. His day throughout the day. And there's just not much known about that day except for what. What Scott says.

[Brett]

And we're going to talk about, as we walk through this, some of the concrete evidence, some of which is actually concrete that the prosecution had in this case. But maybe this is something to talk about at the very beginning. We've talked about this in other episodes, but for those of you who haven't listened religiously to all our episodes, this is not a direct evidence case. There are no witnesses who saw, you know, Scott dumping a body into the bay or murdering Lacy. And the circumstantial evidence that we have here is of really the traditional variety of circumstantial evidence. So DNA, blood, fingerprints, those are all circumstantial evidence. Those are pieces of circumstantial evidence. Usually all circumstantial evidence is. Is evidence from which you have to draw an inference. So if you see someone shoot someone, you don't have to draw an inference from that. You just saw them shoot them, right? So that's direct evidence. If you get up and testify about that, that's direct evidence. If someone's fingerprint is at the scene, the inference you draw from that is, since their fingerprints are there, they were there, you didn't see them there. But you can assume that's true because you see their fingerprint. The example people use again and again, and we've used it before, is the. You're in an office building, There are no windows. You know, you're working one of those terrible jobs in a closet, and as you. As you get ready to leave, everybody who's walking into the building is soaking wet. You don't have to see it raining outside to know that. That it's raining. That's what's happening, and that's circumstantial evidence. And in this case, this case, trials can be all sorts of things. Trials can be just like one huge piece of evidence. You got the video of the person committing the crime. That's a huge piece of evidence. And you just sort of put that out there and say, look, here's the huge piece of evidence. Do what you will. This case is more like a mosaic. It's all these little pieces of evidence that when you put them together, the prosecution wants you to see a picture. And the picture they want you to see is that Scott Peterson killed his wife. And that's what you have here. So you have to think about this case in total. You got to think about all these little pieces of evidence and whether or not, at the end of the day, when you put them all together, you can say that Scott killed his wife or not. Right?

[Alice]

And, you know, Brett, I think you've already said this, but again, a lot of People retort. Direct evidence is better than circumstantial evidence, and that's just not the case. And in most cases, we just don't have direct evidence. And now in this case, we have kind of a patchwork of circumstantial evidence. And we'll walk through it with you, and you can decide for yourself. If you were sitting in the jury seat, what would you think? Is there enough beyond a reasonable doubt?

[Brett]

I just want to say one thing about that because I think it's such a good point to make about the whole direct versus circumstantial evidence thing. You know, you guys know we are fans of Maggie Freeling's Unjust and Unsolved podcast. If you listen to her show, the number of cases in which they have direct evidence that the person did it, they have an eyewitness, they have an identification that later falls apart. It's almost all of her episodes. So, you know, this notion that a circumstantial case is somehow inferior to a direct evidence case, it's just wrong. It is fundamentally wrong. And when you hear a defense attorney, because it's usually defense attorneys on one of these podcasts or documentaries saying, well, all they had was circumstantial evidence, you know, they're playing you, because they know as well as we do that circumstantial evidence can be very powerful and legally, justice sufficient. Absolutely.

[Alice]

And so we started off by talking about the sensationalization of murder trials by the media. Now, this is very interesting because there's another element to this case, and the prosecution harp on this, and that's Scott's aversion to the media. We've talked about how difficult it is to predict how someone is going to act in the most important or most stressful times in their lives. But ordinarily, when someone has a missing family member, they want to be in front of the cameras as much as possible. Take Fred Murray, for example. Fred Murray is Maura Murray's father. He is a very introverted guy, but he was in front of the camera for Maura because he was trying to draw attention to Maura's case, trying to plead for information to get the interest up for her case so that hopefully more resources would flow in or. Or tips would come in that would lead to her discovery. And Scott doesn't do this. This is his wife and child. They go missing. And ordinarily, people would expect that he'd be in front of the cameras, probably distraught, probably crying, begging, lacy, come home. Or if you have Lacy, let her go. This is my whole life. This is my child. This is my wife. But he doesn't do any of that. Instead, he avoids the media completely. When he walks out of his house, the media are camped in front of his house. He covers his face, he looks down, kind of like you see celebrities do when they're trying to avoid the paparazzi. So what people do is they draw inferences based on nothing, and all they have is him walking to and from his house. And the media starts putting their own narrative. Look how cool and calm and collected he seems. And that's really hard because we'll see this later. But even if Scott talked to the media, they're going to warp it to fit their narrative as well. So it's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't sort of situation. I don't know, Brett. I mean, in this case, I really do think it hurt him from the beginning because he never had the initial sympathy factor. And so the media turned on him on a dime. Right.

[Brett]

And, you know, I kind of leave it to you guys out there to decide what you think about this. The fact of the matter is, we have said this a lot of times, and I think it's true. And we're not backtracking on this. It's just really difficult to draw anything from the way people act. As Alice said, there certainly became a point for Scott where it didn't matter what he did. Whatever he did was going to be bad. I do think, arguably in those first few days, Scott was not in that position. He was still. He still could have been the grieving husband looking for his wife. Now he never plays that role. I don't know how that cuts, because you could say, look, that shows he's not guilty, because why would he act that way if he murdered her? If he murdered her, he'd be all crying in front of the cameras or whatever. And I think that's one reason. It's really hard. It's really hard to put any value on this or not. But I think Alice is right. This. From the very beginning, the media in particular started to hone in on Scott and say that he was guilty. And they did it as much on feeling as anything else. And you see that. If you've seen any of the coverage of this case, I mean, you can see that again and again and again. And maybe the media was right. But we're going to talk about a lot of evidence in this case, and I think if you're going to decide whether or not Scott did this Better to decide based on that evidence than how he acted in front of the media. The other thing that the prosecution put on that we also have talked about and can be problematic is Scott's general demeanor in those first few days. And once again, we're just going to present this to you how he acted. You can decide how much weight you think it has. And if this is just one of those examples of how people act differently in different circumstances, or if you think this is a situation where you really can read something into Scott's behavior. If you've seen the video of the interview that he has with the police, he is, he is relaxed. The. There's no question about it. You know, you watch that video, he does not. You would never know. This is a man whose eight month pregnant wife is missing drinking a cup of coffee. Yeah, he's just drinking a cup of

[Alice]

coffee, you know, and again, you know, we, obviously, we've talked a lot about this. Everyone acts differently. But you know, one thing that I try to avoid doing when I'm in a stressful situation in court. So for oral arguments or if I'm, you know, up at the podium speaking trial, whatever it is, if I know I'm going to be nervous, I actually make it a point not to have any cups near me because if I'm nervous, my voice may not seem nervous, but my. I know my hands will shake and water will, Will show the slightest movement. Exactly. Or no, even just the slightest movement. Because I don't want anyone to perceive me as nervous. Even if I look calm, I know that any amount of movement will move that water. So I myself actually avoid having cups of water or cups of liquid around me when I have to give speeches or appear in court during a stressful situation. And I just find that interesting because he's drinking coffee and from it you can tell his hands aren't shaking. He's totally relaxed now. Maybe he needs coffee. That's. I live on coffee, so I can sympathize with that. But that is a very relaxed mood to take. Think about it this way, Brett. If you are going to talk to our boss or someone important, maybe an elected official, someone who's more important than me. Right. I don't, I don't wear hats. I don't. I don't carry drinks or food during it because I'm trying to be as professional as possible.

[Brett]

This is really important. You know, this is a conversation about your missing wife. It's important for two reasons. Number one, Scott's no fool. He knows if something happened to Lacy. He's going to be the first suspect whether he did anything or not. And number two, he wants to find his wife, assume he's completely innocent. Even more reason for this to be critical. You know, this is like a pound the table, why are we in here? Let's go find my wife type situation once again. Maybe he just reacts differently, different circumstances. The coffee thing's interesting. When you're in court, they give you these little carafes of water and little cups and you can pour the water from the carafe into the cup. And I never do that for the same reason Alice was talking about. Because if I do it, you can see like my hand shaking when I, when I have it because court's nerve wracking and I've got to think this is nerve wracking. But you do not see that from him. We'll see if we can pull the video and throw it up. So if you're on YouTube, you may be watching this right now, but you just don't see it from him. You know, he's, he's drinking the coffee, he's, he's sort of relaxed, he's kind of leaning back, not showing a lot of emotion in this video. He doesn't show a lot of emotion at the press conference. Once again, he could be a stoic guy, but he never breaks down. It never seems as though he cries or upset. He's not grilling the police about what they are doing and whether they have updates. And honestly, if you've watched the documentaries, his or Lacy's non blood relatives. So like his relatives, his sister in law, they seem more upset to this day that Lacy was missing than Scott did at the time, for whatever that's worth. And it becomes a thing and it's a thing that's testified to in court. So that night you got December 24th, this is the first search when they're first looking for Lacey. And I don't know what Sharon was thinking, Lacey's mom, I don't know what she was thinking at the time. I don't know if she had any, if she suspected Scott or not, but she certainly noticed that he wasn't acting how she would expect. She talks about during the search is starting and she first sees him and she goes up to give him a hug, comfort him, and that he kind of moved away from her, he didn't want her to touch him. And she also said that he avoided eye contact with her. Lacy's brother talks about how Peterson sort of wandered off by himself and also Wouldn't make contact with him. Peterson and Lacy's brother had a really good relationship. They were really good friends. But Peterson, Scott, he never spoke to him that night. It's weird, you know, other family members talked about this, how he wouldn't look at them, even though he had always been, he had been sort of this boisterous guy who had had a connection with these family members. This could go one of two ways. Either it's because he feels guilty or he didn't have time for that. That's a possibility. He just, he's so focused on finding Lacy that he's not going to be doing these sort of things. He's not there for chit chat, he's not there for hugs. He's there to find Lacy.

[Alice]

And I will note that, you know, to give him the benefit of the doubt, these things were not brought up by the family immediately. Right at first they were on, you know, we are united front. Scott had nothing to do with this. Sharon never mentions this. And it isn't until Scott really becomes a suspect or really, I think his continued lack of emotion that Sharon and Lacey's brother Brent then look back on the night that Lacy went missing and said, you know what, he was acting weird that night. So I do point out that they didn't say immediately that he wasn't acting in the way that they expected. It wasn't until later on and it might be hindsight 2020 or might be shaded by the fact they now think that he is guilty of killing their daughter and sister.

[Brett]

Now one conversation that I think is a little bit more solid and you can draw something from is a conversation that Scott had with his father in law, who was Lacy's stepfather, Ron Gransky. Now interestingly about Ron, Ron's a fisherman. Ron likes to fish, he knows about fishing. So even Scott has said that in subsequent years that one of the reasons he bought the boat was because he thought he could get closer to Ron and they could go boating together or something along those lines. In any event, that night Ron asked Scott if he had gone golfing that day because he knew that had been Scott's plan. And Scott told him to Kapalz and said, no, I actually went fishing instead. And he told him what time he left to go fishing and what time he was at the marina. And this surprised Ron. This is something Ron remembered because as a fisherman he was like, what in the world would you be fishing for at that time of day? For those of you who are fishermen, you know, it's kind of like the best times to fish are early in the morning and late at night or right as the sun's rising and right as the sun's setting. If you've ever been out on a lake, you can actually see the fish sort of come to the surface at those times. And so that's a really good time to fish. But, you know, Peterson's out there in the middle of the day, which, whatever. But it struck Ron as strange. And when he asked him what he was fishing for, Scott just walked away from him and didn't respond.

[Alice]

And, Brett, you know, to talk about the time of day, this is where if the best times of day are when it's darker outside, it would also make sense that would be a better time to dump a body. There are fewer people maybe there. You know, it's harder to see out there. It is Christmas Eve, so maybe earlier in the morning, fewer people are out there. I guess it could cut the other way that if that's the best time to fish, there are more boats out on the water. But it would be pretty risky to be dumping a body into the bay in the middle of the day, broad daylight, right?

[Brett]

Yeah. If you think Scott did it, you have to assume that his thought process was, if I take my boat out in the middle of the night or early in the morning, maybe somebody will think, oh, you were definitely dumping a body. But if I go out there in the middle of the day, I can sort of get away with it without anybody. Who would. Who would do that? Right. Like, there's so many things that happen in this case that I don't know if they cut against Scott being the killer or if they just show how premeditated the this was. There are so many moments they're like, who would do that? Who would kill their wife and then leave this message saying, like, hey, sweetie. Hey, beautiful. You know, do this, do that. Like, who would do that if you just dumped your wife's body in the bay? And the answer is a calculating killer who's really playing this out and wants to make sure he doesn't get caught. So, I don't know. I think it is an interesting question. It is. It seems to me to be an incredibly dangerous thing to take a body into the middle of the bay in the middle of the day and dump it. Now, it was Christmas Eve. There wasn't anybody else out on the water. But you're right there. You would think if you're going to dump a body, you wouldn't do it at essentially noon. In addition to that, another Interesting thing about this is Peterson tells Ron that he went fishing, and he tells the police that he went fishing, but for reasons that are unclear and are kind of confusing if you think he's some master criminal. He tells Sharon's cousin Harvey, who was also there looking, that he went golfing that day. And he also told a couple neighbors that he was golfing all day, which is unusual. It's unusual that he would. That he would mix that up. Right. Like, why would he tell people he went golfing? Why would he tell half the people he went golfing and then the important people that he went fishing? I don't know how significant this is, honestly. It seems like more of a mix up to me. I don't. I just don't understand what his criminal motive would be for telling some people he went golfing.

[Alice]

It's just a weird mix up. You don't mix those things up.

[Brett]

That's true, but especially if you've already

[Alice]

told the story, if you've already talked to the police, if you've already told Ron, you wouldn't. It's. It's a story you've told a couple of times. Not like you have to remember what the story is. Unless he told those people that he went golfing earlier in the day, and then later on when he starts getting interrogated, he's like, I can't be caught until in a lie. I need to tell them what I was actually doing. That's a possibility, too.

[Brett]

There was another individual who was there that day, a neighbor, Sandy Rickard, who said that Peterson just kind of walked up to her, put up his hands and volunteered. I wouldn't be surprised if they find blood on my truck because I cut my hands all the time. And then he said something about how, you know, I'm an outdoorsman and that's what happens when you're an outdoorsman. And Sandy remembered this because she found it completely perplexing that he wouldn't just walk up to her and volunteer this information. Right.

[Alice]

Like, why her? She's not one of the family members. She's not the police. No one said anything about blood. If anything, they would be worried about Lacy's blood, not his blood.

[Brett]

Yeah, I wish I had, like, committed a crime or was a more regular liar. So I could give you some sort of insight. This is why we need a criminal on the podcast. We need a criminal co host who can come in and be like, yeah, you do that because you're nervous and that's what happens. Or something like that. Right.

[Alice]

But all to Say it's perplexing. Multiple things he does is perplexing. And that's certainly one of the most perplexing things.

[Brett]

And you got to remember, I mean, if he killed her, this is why this is so hard. Because one of two things are going on with him. Either he murdered his wife or his wife, who he loves. Even though he's having an affair, he still loves her, and he still loves his son, his unborn son missing. And he's incredibly worried about her. And he's probably also a little concerned the police are gonna think he did something to her. And you can sort of think that either one of those are sort of overloading his mind and causing him to do things that appear to be weird and unusual and strange. And maybe that's all there, all there is to it. But it's hard to say which thing is motivating him and which thing is causing him to behave in this unusual manner.

[Alice]

The next thing the prosecution brings up is the boat, the boat that Scott Peterson had recently bought and that he took out on December 24th. The boat was a 14 foot aluminum fishing boat. That's a class A boat, one of the smallest boats you can buy. And the prior owner had never used it in saltwater, only on calm, fresh water lakes. Scott had paid $1,400 for the boat, including the trailer, on December 9th. And although it's not impossible to take this kind of boat out into San Francisco Bay, it would be dangerous for someone who's not an expert because it is so small and can tip relatively easily, which is why the prior owner really only used it in calm lakes.

[Brett]

Yeah, this. Look, I think the boat's really interesting and what you think about the boat and how, why he was doing that. So the defense is going to use the boat. They're going to attempt to use the boat to their advantage later on. They're gonna say the boat is so small and San Francisco Bay is so choppy and so dangerous that he couldn't even. He couldn't even dump a body out of the boat without sinking the boat. That's how unstable this boat is. And they do some tests and, and we'll talk about those later. But here's the thing. It's a good point. This is a really small boat. It is a cheap, small boat. This is, this is. He's saying he's doing this so he can go fishing with his, his stepfather. I mean, his stepfather's not gonna. Not his stepfather, but Lacy's stepfather. He's not gonna want to go out with him on this boat. He's gonna be like, just get in my boat. We don't need to take her little crappy boat out into the San Francisco bay. And we know before Scott even bought this boat, he was searching online for all sorts of things about the San Francisco bay. He was aware of the tides and the currents and everything else. So to me, it is weird that he would buy this boat if what he really wanted to do. And this is what he claimed. He claimed that what he enjoyed doing was saltwater fishing. And that's why he wasn't going to take it to freshwater. He wasn't going to take it to these freshwater lakes near Modesto. He wanted to go saltwater. Why'd he buy this boat if he was going to do that? If this boat was actually a boat he was planning on using regularly in places like the San Francisco bay, this is not the boat for him. He should not have bought this boat in the first place.

[Alice]

And let's talk about what you are supposed to use that boat for. Fishing. Scott was, by all accounts, a terrible fisherman. Scott said that he was taking the boat out to do some sturgeon fishing. Now, the prosecution called an expert fisherman to testify about that type of fishing. And the expert stated that Scott's rod was not rigged for sturgeon fishing. It was rigged for freshwater bass. And the line weight was wrong. The rod was wrong. In fact, one of Scott's rods didn't even have a handle on it, and therefore, it wasn't functional. And another rod had no line on it. Really quick, Brett, what an interesting thing, because I know we throw the word expert out there, but truly, you can call an expert for anything. I've never had a fisherman expert before. All you really have to do is show that they have an expertise in whatever they are testifying about. And there probably is a fight about whether that person is, in fact, an expert and should be allowed to testify. But you can see how it's really helpful to have an expert who knows what they're talking about here. Because I can't look at a fishing pole. I could probably notice that there's no line in it, But I wouldn't know how it was rigged for purposes of, you know, saltwater fishing or freshwater fishing. And this is all very helpful, because he gets it all wrong, is what we hear from the expert.

[Brett]

And this expert's great, by the way. This is actually, if you're going to read some. Some of the testimony, his testimony is way more interesting than most of the testimony in this case. Because it actually was kind of interesting to hear from this expert fisherman talk about all this stuff, Right?

[Alice]

And, you know, he goes further. The expert reviewed Scott's tackle box, and he testified that it was filled with equipment to fish for freshwater bass. Moreover, the anchor would not work in the bay. It was just too small, and it wouldn't be able to dig into the ground. And there was no long rope in the boat for the anchor. So if your anchor can't dig into the ground and it can't even reach the ground, there's really no use for that anchor. Right.

[Brett]

And you remember Scott said that he was trolling that day, so, you know, he's like, well, I mean, I was just sort of threw the line out back and kind of motored around the bay. And essentially he would have to do that because he didn't have a functioning anchor.

[Alice]

And finally, the prosecution raised this. There's the question of why Scott would go all the way out to the San Francisco Bay. The prosecution put on evidence of at least a dozen places much closer to his home in Modesto where he could have fished, that it would. That would be more suitable for his boat and purposes than the San Francisco Bay. By the way, I think that's a really effective strategy for the prosecution to do this. To show you have a boat that's fit for a certain type of water. Here are 12 different places that you can go instead of the San Francisco Bay. Why did you go out of your way to go where your boat is not fit for and you didn't have the equipment for? As a juror, I think I would be very interested in this piece of information. This information cuts the other way, too, right? The fresh water around Modesto was likely more secluded and perhaps a better place to dump a body. San Francisco Bay was the closest saltwater fishery to Scott. Though if Scott preferred saltwater fishing, one wonders why he had freshwater tackle.

[Brett]

You know, one of the reasons I like this case, and although I do not recommend spending the rest of your life attempting to read the transcripts, it is worth looking at some of this because you have a really good defense attorney, and you really see the ebb and flow of a good trial, because the prosecution, they call this expert witness, this fisherman, he gets on the stand, he tells all this great stuff. They talk about the fact that there are all these other lakes nearby, and then the defense attorney gets up and basically says, well, yeah, but aren't they more secluded than the San Francisco Bay? Wouldn't it be better. Wouldn't it be less likely for people to see you if you went out to the freshwater lakes as opposed to going out to San Francisco Bay. And it's a good point, right? I mean, it's like, yeah, that's a good point. That would be better. You have to wonder, though, and if you were the prosecution, I don't know if they ever made this point, but it's a point to make. If you were going to dump a body, dumping it in the San Francisco Bay has a number one, it's bigger. Number two, it's possible that the body will just be washed out to sea. There are more animals in the bay that might eat the body. So there are reasons to prefer the bay. But it was a good job by the defense pointing out this other possibility.

[Alice]

Right. And what you said is so, so apt for the situation. You said the ebb and flow of trial. You're right. It is so much more fun to have opposing counsel who are good counsel, because you do want that ebb and flow. Because even if the defense doesn't point it out, there is probably a juror who's thinking it. And you want that ebb and flow to come out so that you can respond to it as the prosecution, as the defense. You want them to basically lobby it up so that you can then give your answer as to why that's not true. Right. So Brett just did that right there. So, sure, it's more secluded, but it's also closer to their home, more suspect. Why would. Those are probably the first places that would be searched because they're close to the home, whereas the San Francisco Bay is farther away.

[Brett]

And you also have to wonder if Scott did this. It's possible he made sort of a decision that day. It's possible that initially he did not plan on telling the police that he. That he went to San Francisco Bay and that's where he was. It's possible that he did not intend to do that, but maybe people saw him there or he made a decision at some point, they'll never find the body. It's better just to say I was out there. Because then nobody, nobody can question that. Nobody can say, we saw Scott Peterson down at the bay. Right? And so I don't know exactly how that came about and how him admitting that came about, but if initially he intended to stick to some story about he was playing golf, then it makes even more sense to go all the way to San Francisco, dump the body, because like you said, it's farther away from you, it's farther from home. It's easier to Explain maybe the body turns up than if it turns up in the secluded lake where you're the only person who was there. So a couple interesting things that we're going to talk about, and then we're going to go ahead and shut down for today. And this one is really important, and it's something I want you to think about both through the rest of this and podcast and whenever you're watching or listening to people talk about this case. And it's the clothing that Lacy was wearing that day. On the 24th, Scott told the police that Lacy was wearing a white blouse and black pants, which is what she was wearing on the 23rd. But when her body was found, she was wearing tan pants. Now, what's interesting about that is most of the stories that you hear from people, one thing we're going to talk about at some point is all the sightings of Lacey and how people always say, how could Scott have killed Lacy when she sighted in all these different places after he supposedly killed her? And in almost all those stories, the people who claim to have seen her say that she was wearing a white blouse and black pants. It fits with what Scott says, but it doesn't fit with what Lacey was wearing when her body was found. And you have to wonder, if Lacey wasn't wearing those clothes that day, then what's the story? What does that say about those sightings? How did she change clothes? Was she wearing those clothes and then suddenly the burglars or whoever kidnapped her allowed her to change clothes into her tan pants? But here's another interesting thing. The black pants and blouse were found in Lacey's home. Hanging up. And in fact, the defense used this fact as an argument that she wasn't murdered on the 23rd because those were the clothes she was wearing then. And if she had been murdered then, she would have been wearing those clothes when her body was found. So you can't have it both ways. Either she was wearing the clothes or she wasn't. And if she wasn't wearing those clothes, then all of those sightings that you've heard about suddenly become much more suspect.

[Alice]

Yeah, I don't know what to do with that fact, Brett, except that she was wearing those clothes on the 23rd. But according to Scott, they did quite a few things once they got home. Right? They ate pizza, they watched a football game, and. And they watched a movie. And if she's wearing a blouse, it's probably not lounge clothes and even not pregnant. The first thing I do when I get home is change into lounge clothes.

[Brett]

And we know what she was wearing because Scott told us he was wearing her blue sweatpants.

[Alice]

That's right.

[Brett]

Or his blue sweatpants. So there you go.

[Alice]

I don't know what that says, except that, yes, she was wearing those clothes on the 23rd, and she probably took it off as soon as she got home, as many people do. Right. Not just pregnant people. When they get home, they change out of their work clothes for the day and get into something more comfortable. That's. I'm sitting in more comfortable clothes right now after wearing more formal clothes to work today.

[Brett]

Right. And I don't know. And we don't know, and we'll never know when she was killed, if she's killed on the 23rd or 24th. And we don't know why she was wearing tan pants, whether she had put them on the morning of the 24th, or she had put them on after taking these clothes off and hanging them up on the 23rd. But one thing I think we can say for sure, and she wasn't wearing those clothes when she. When she disappeared. She wasn't wearing those clothes when whatever happened to her happened to her. And so she probably wasn't wearing them walking the dog that morning. The last thing that's kind of interesting. I don't know how much it means, but in the closet in the spare bedroom, the door was open, and there were some duffel bags that appear to have been pulled off the shelf, and one was lying upside down on the floor. Now, look, you come over to my house, you're gonna see stuff all over the place. And if I got killed, maybe you would draw all sorts of conclusions from that. But one thing that this makes you wonder. It's possible if you're trying to figure out what happened here and what led to this murder. If Scott did it, and let's say it wasn't planned, it could have been one of those things that was spontaneous. It could have been one of those things where maybe that morning, we know that Lacy assumed that Lacy was on the computer looking at sunflower umbrellas. And maybe the person who logged into Scott's email right after that search wasn't Scott. Maybe it was Lacy. And imagine that she sees something in that email. This kind of reminds you of the Michael Peterson case, the other Peterson. Right. One of the theories is that Kathleen Peterson logs into his email, sees the emails between him and people he's having an affair with, and snaps, and that leads to the murder. The same thing could have happened here. And you could imagine a circumstance in which Lacy Starts pulling down these duffel bags. She's saying, I'm going to leave you. She's gonna pack her clothes and leave. And Scott snaps, and maybe he does something, and all of a sudden, now Lacy's dead, and he's got to deal with it. That is something you could imagine happening. Also possible that the spare bedroom door was just open and the duffel bags are on the floor. And this doesn't mean anything, but it was something. When I was reading through the transcript and reading through the police officers describing the home and how they found was something that I thought was interesting.

[Alice]

Yeah, that's a really good theory, Brett, as to what may have happened if she was alive the morning of the 24th. This is the last thing we'll cover before shutting down for the day. And we'll have you back next week for more of the story, but we'll leave you with Scott's alibi as presented at trial. See, during an interview with the police, Scott says that he abandoned his initial plans for the day to play golf because it was too cold. Instead, Scott says he decided to go fishing. We've already discussed this. This is just absurd. You know, we've said that the cold doesn't stop people from playing golf who like to play golf. Right. People who play golf are just really committed to the sport they will play no matter what. They're crazy people.

[Brett]

I mean, I love you golfers, but you're crazy. You're insane.

[Alice]

And number two, if it's too cold to play golf, how cold do you think it's going to be on a boat in San Francisco Harbor? It's going to be colder out there. It's going to be windier. And one of the employees at the harbor testified that hardly anyone came down to the marina that day because of how cold it was. Scott was just one of three people there that day, and the employee called it a gray, drizzly, nasty day.

[Brett]

And I think this is significant, the fact there are only three people there, because some people are going to say, well, it was Christmas Eve. How many people would be out on Christmas Eve? I mean, I just got to tell you, that's prime time for a lot of people to go out because they're off work and they can get away, you know, go down to the golf course on any holiday. And it's not. It's packed, right? So the reason there are only three people out on the water that day is because it's a terrible day to go out on the water. Only people who love fishing and are insane or have a body to dump, you would think would go out on the water that day particularly. And I know we're harping on this and we've already hammered this a little bit, but it's worth hammering. Scott has said he didn't go play golf because it was too cold. So it's not like he's some manly man who the cold doesn't matter to him and he's going to go fish because that's what you do. You know, he's hardy and he's gonna go fishing. No, it was too cold to play golf. And he wants you to believe that it wasn't too cold for him to be one of three people. Three people to use that marina that day to go out on the water.

[Alice]

Right. Well, moreover, Scott leaves all day, one and a half hours away from home when his wife is eight months pregnant with their first child. This is completely inconsistent with anything I can imagine anyone doing. I mean, it really is obvious. I mean, go ahead, Brett. You, you can talk to that. You've been in this situation before with an eight month pregnant wife and with your first child. The jitters that come with that of not knowing when she's going to go into labor or just wanting to be protective, wanting to be close by in case she needs help with the mopping bucket.

[Brett]

Right. And look, Lacy was having, she was having a tough pregnancy. It wasn't, you know, terrible. She wasn't in the hospital or anything, but she was having issues where she was having difficulty walking. She was having some problems with dizziness and just issues that somebody, they're having their first baby, they're eight months along. These are the kind of things, these are the kind of problems that people have. So it wasn't as if she was out running marathons while she was waiting to have this baby. She was starting to have problems. Scott even says at some point there's this question about they went to Disney World, I guess, or Disneyland, I should say. And she was in a situation where she actually had to be pushed around in a wheelchair because she just couldn't, she could not walk that much. It was just too much for her. She couldn't do it. And Scott and Scott's defense when this comes out in trial tries to say, oh, well, that was just Scott being nice because Scott recognized how difficult a time she was having. And so he did that as a courtesy to her so he could take care of her. Well, he's taking care of her at Disneyland and then he's leaving her two months later for an entire day to go an hour and a half away to go fishing while she's eight and a half months pregnant or eight months pregnant. It's just one of these things. Does not compute. Either. Either Scott's this considerate husband who was really worried about her and the problem she was having, or he's not. And like we said last time, maybe he's just a jerk. But him being a jerk just, it has to do so much work in this case. And it makes you wonder if maybe in reality, the reason he was fine driving an hour and a half away is because there wasn't anybody waiting at home and there wasn't anybody that he was worried about. He was only worried about covering up the thing that he had done. So that brings us to Amber Frey. And Amber Frey probably deserves an entire episode, but she certainly deserves more time than we could dedicate to her today. So we're going to go ahead and stop for now. We will be back with you next week and we'll talk more about this case and we'll talk about Amber Fry, and we'll talk about the things that Scott was doing while his wife is missing. And we'll talk about some of the other stuff in this case, including some of the more concrete pieces of evidence that may point to Scott's guilt. And then we'll give you an overview of what the defense said when it was their turn, when they had an opportunity to put on a case and talk about whether or not the evidence that they presented is compelling as well. Well, Alice, it's been a pleasure, as always, to talk with you about this case. Do you have anything else you want to add before we call it a day?

[Alice]

No. I hope you guys are enjoying this ride and, you know, putting yourself in the seat of the juror. And obviously, this is what happens in trial two. The prosecution gets to go first. There's cross examination, but the prosecution is really the one to put the story out there first. So if you're swayed so far by the prosecution, that's normal. But don't forget, there's another side of the story. So make sure to come back for that.

[Brett]

Yeah, you can't make any decisions yet because the defense still has still has its time. If you guys have thoughts or comments you want to make, feel free to email [e-mail] we're prosecutors pod and all your various social media networks. We're on patreon, we're on YouTube, so check us out there as well. I do want to give a shout out a lot of you guys have been noticing the fantastic art we have for each one of our episodes. That is all courtesy of Hannah Hill, who has been doing art for us and is really just amazing. If you guys have not checked out all of the different things she's done for us, we post a lot of this stuff on Instagram so you can check it out there. Her Instagram page is serious moonlight. Look her up. She's got some great stuff and we are so happy to have her doing art for these episodes. Well, I think that's all we have for today. We will be back next time with more on the Scott Peterson case. But until then, I'm Brett.

[Alice]

And I'm Alice and we are the prosecutor. So we kept waiting for each other to be ready. And when you were like we were waiting for each other, all I could think of was my favorite comedian. Do you know Mike Birbiglia?

[Brett]

No.

[Alice]

He has this show that is actually on Netflix, I think, called the new one. And he's talking about going to yoga and how deferential everyone is. And so, like, people really want to put their mat certain places. And he's like, we just all become deferential whales. Like, no, you go. No, you go.

[Brett]

No, you go.

[Alice]

And I felt like that's what we were doing. Like, maybe Brett's busy, maybe Alice is busy. We'll just see when someone is ready to.

[Brett]

What am I going to call you today? What do you want me to call you? Do you have any words that you want to be called?

[Alice]

Just Fat Al. Big Al. That's what my brothers used to call me. Big altogether Nice.

[Wayfair Announcer]

It.

[Progressive Insurance Announcer]

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever think about switching insurance companies to see if you could save some cash? Progressive makes it easy to see if you could save when you bundle your home and auto policies. Try [e-mail] Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states.

[Cachava Announcer]

When maintaining your daily wellness rituals is important to you, the change in routine during the summer can feel daunting. Cachava's new travel packs help you stick to your daily ritual even when you're on the go. Just one packet of Cachava's all in One Nutrition Shake provides complete nutrition with 25 grams of protein, 6 grams of fiber, greens, adaptogens and much more. So you'll be fueled and ready for wherever life or your summer adventures take you. No fillers, no nonsense. Just the good stuff your body craves. Plus, it actually tastes delicious. But you can try it for yourself because the variety pack includes all six delicious fan favorites chocolate, vanilla, chai, matcha, coconut, acai, and strawberry. So instead of worrying about sticking to your daily ritual, simplify it with Kachava. Go to kachava.com and use code smoothie for 15% off. That's K A C H-A-V A.com code smoothie

[Wayfair Announcer]

back to school is busy enough. The last thing you need is shopping. That makes it harder. Whether you're moving into a dorm, your first apartment, or just getting organized for the semester, Wayfair makes it easy to get everything you need in one place furniture, bedding, storage, decor, study essentials all at prices you'll love with fast shipping. Before move in day, get everything you need for back to school season. Shop wayfair.com today. Wayfair every style, Every home.