Skip to main content

California | Scott Peterson's ex-girlfriend Amber Frey speaks out after retrial decision

Amber Frey, the ex-girlfriend of Scott Peterson who later testified against him, is speaking out exclusively to Fox News Digital after a judge denied his bid for a new trial, saying among other things: "The truth doesn't change over time."

Just one day after California Superior Court Judge Anne-Christine Massullo announced that she was not granting Peterson a new trial in the murders of his wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner, Frey, who was revealed to have had an extramarital affair with Peterson, is breaking her silence.

"It's relieving to hear Scott Peterson will not get a new trial," she said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital by her longtime attorney, Gloria Allred. "I would have been willing to testify again. However, I am relieved that my testimony will not be necessary. If I were called to testify, I would give truthful testimony again, for the truth doesn't change over time."

Massullo ruled that a new trial was not warranted despite allegations of a biased and deceptive juror. She issued the long-awaited decision on Tuesday, when she wrote in her 55-page decision that the juror accused of wrongdoing had acted out of emotion, rather than a bias against Peterson, and she had made "honest mistakes."

"The Court finds that several of the answers provided by Juror No. 7 on her juror questionnaire were false in certain respects," she wrote. "The Court concludes that Juror No. 7’s responses were not motivated by pre-existing or improper bias against Petitioner, but instead were the result of a combination of good faith misunderstanding of the questions and sloppiness in answering."

Laci Peterson's mother, Sharon Rocha, did not respond to Fox News Digital's requests for comment. Pat Harris, Scott Peterson's attorney, wrote in the statement provided to Fox News Digital that he was "disappointed" in the ruling, but the case was "far from over."

"Just in the last few months, we have learned new information that will prove Scott Peterson did not murder his wife, Laci. And we are going to continue to push forward until he is freed," he wrote. "As for the ruling, the judge does concede that Juror #7 committed misconduct but excuses that misconduct by writing that her background, her contentious relationship with her boyfriend and her frequent memory lapses are all excuses for her misconduct. We respectfully disagree."

Janey Peterson, Peterson's sister-in-law and outspoken advocate, told Fox News Digital that Scott "is innocent" and "did not have an impartial jury."

"We will not stop fighting until Scott is free and we find who murdered Laci and Conner," she wrote in a message after Tuesday's news. "20 years ago this week, Laci Peterson was seen alive walking her dog after Scott had left for the day. Sometime after that walk, the evidence shows she encountered men burglarizing the home across the street. Those men kidnapped her and later killed her."

Saturday will mark 20 years to the day since Laci Peterson disappeared.

Meanwhile, Peterson, now 50, is currently serving a life sentence at California’s Mule Creek State Prison.

He was convicted in 2004 in the murders of his 27-year-old wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner. Prosecutors argued at the time that he killed Laci and disposed of her body on Christmas Eve 2002 in San Francisco Bay.

Frey not only testified against Peterson, but worked with law enforcement as a police informant and ultimately helped to convict him of first-degree murder in Laci’s death and second-degree murder for the killing of Conner.

The California Supreme Court overturned Peterson’s death sentence in 2020 after news that prospective jury candidates were improperly dismissed came to light, but the court maintained his conviction.

Peterson's attorneys had argued that a new trial is warranted because juror Richelle Nice was biased and lied in her questionnaire to get on the jury. Meanwhile, prosecutors have argued that Nice "did the best that she could when faced with a 23-page questionnaire that had 163 questions.

"She's inconsistent on her answers," prosecutor David Harris previously told the court. "But being wrong does not necessarily make it false or make her a liar. It just might be that she's really bad at filling out forms."

Nice previously testified that she did not have any bias against Peterson until after hearing the evidence presented at trial.

Source: Fox News, Staff, December 22, 2022





🚩 | Report an error, an omission, a typo; suggest a story or a new angle to an existing story; submit a piece, a comment; recommend a resource; contact the webmaster, contact us: deathpenaltynews@gmail.com.




Opposed to Capital Punishment? Help us keep this blog up and running! DONATE!



"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted." -- Oscar Wilde

Most viewed (Last 7 days)

Gov. Mike DeWine calls for Ohio to abolish the death penalty

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) — Gov. Mike DeWine Tuesday morning called on Ohio to abolish the death penalty, citing data that he said proves it is no longer a deterrent to violent crime. “For the state to take a human life, there must, in my opinion, there must be evidence that in doing so it will help protect the public, that the threat of that action will deter someone from committing murder,” DeWine said. “I do not believe that argument today can be successfully made.” DeWine cited data showing a decline in the last four decades of executions being carried out and an increase in the time inmates spend on death row.

I watched Ohio's last execution. Here's what it was like

As Gov. DeWine calls for Ohio to end capital punishment, the state’s last execution remains the one I witnessed in 2018 Inside Ohio's death house, there is a room for executions and separate witness rooms: one for those connected to the victim and another for those connected to the inmate. Windows separate the death chamber from those watching, the condemned from the living. I was there on July 18, 2018 – during Ohio’s most recent execution. Robert Van Hook was put to death that day for killing David Self in 1985. He sat on death row for three decades. I was one of three media witnesses to the execution.

Kansas AG urges governor to deny clemency to 8 sentenced to death

TOPEKA — Attorney General Kris Kobach on Tuesday urged the governor to deny clemency to Kansas inmates who have been sentenced to death. Eight of nine people sentenced to death in Kansas formally filed clemency requests in May, according to a press release from the Attorney General’s Office. Kobach urged Gov. Laura Kelly to reject them.

20 Minutes to Death: Witness to the Last Execution in France

The following document is a firsthand account of the final moments of Hamida Djandoubi, a convicted murderer executed by guillotine at Marseille’s Baumettes Prison on September 10, 1977. The record—dated September 9—was written by Monique Mabelly, a judge appointed by the state to witness the proceedings. Djandoubi’s execution would ultimately be the last carried out in France before capital punishment was abolished in 1981. At the time, President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing—who had publicly voiced his "deep aversion to the death penalty" prior to his election—rejected Djandoubi’s appeal for clemency. Choosing to let "justice take its course," the President allowed the execution to proceed, just as he had in two previous cases during his term:   Christian Ranucci , executed on July 28, 1976 and Jérôme Carrein , executed on June 23, 1977. Hamida Djandoubi , a Tunisian national, was sentenced to death for killing his former lover, Elisabeth Bousquet. He was execu...

New Mississippi billboard warns criminals: ‘Firing squad is legal’

DESOTO COUNTY, Miss. (WREG) — A billboard standing on Interstate 55 southbound as you cross the Tennessee state line and enter Mississippi from Memphis is sending a grim message to those coming into the state. DeSoto County District Attorney Matthew Barton recently announced the new billboard campaign, which features the sign reading, “WELCOME TO MISSISSIPPI. WHERE THE FIRING SQUAD IS LEGAL. THINK TWICE.” It references Mississippi’s law permitting execution by firing squad under certain circumstances for inmates sentenced to death. Barton says this campaign is aimed at deterring violent crime and sends a direct message to criminals entering Mississippi.

SCOTUS: Alabama can’t execute Jeffery Lee by nitrogen; Thursday execution called off

After a week of legal volleyball, Alabama death row inmate Jeffery Lee’s execution—scheduled for Thursday evening—was called off after federal courts called the state’s nitrogen gas execution method “likely unconstitutional.” The state took the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court, hoping Lee could still be put to death tonight.  In an order issued at 8:10 p.m., the U.S. Supreme Court ordered that it would not lift a ban on Alabama executing Lee via nitrogen . In a short court order, the justices denied Alabama’s motion to go ahead with the execution.  Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch would have granted the appeal and let the execution proceed, according to the order. 

With nitrogen gas blocked, Alabama seeks to execute inmate by lethal injection

Jeffery Lee, who successfully challenged his scheduled Thursday execution by nitrogen gas, argued that execution by firing squad would be less painful. The Alabama Attorney General’s Office Friday sought to put an Alabama death row inmate to death by lethal injection a day after the U.S. Supreme Court rebuffed the state’s attempt to execute him by nitrogen gas. In a filing with the Alabama Supreme Court Friday afternoon, the state sought an expedited motion to set a new execution date for Jeffery Lee, 49. The state said that with a permanent injunction in place against nitrogen gas, the method by which the state intended to execute Lee on Thursday, it could execute him by lethal injection or the electric chair.

Alabama | Judge bars nitrogen gas execution, says method is unconstitutionally cruel

MONTGOMERY, Ala. -- A federal judge on Tuesday permanently blocked Alabama from executing an inmate with nitrogen gas after declaring it violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment. U.S. District Judge Emily Marks issued the ruling hours after an appeals court reversed her initial finding that the method was constitutional. Marks permanently enjoined the state from executing Jeffrey Lee, 49, by nitrogen gas. He was scheduled to be executed Thursday. The decision, for now, blocks the use of the controversial new execution method that the state has championed since 2024, but the issue will likely end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.

Idaho will soon turn to firing squad executions. Police will pull the triggers

Trained members of Idaho law enforcement with demonstrated firearms proficiency are expected to fill slots for carrying out the death penalty by firing squad as the state prison system transitions to the controversial execution method next month.  Six volunteers certified for no less than three years apiece through Peace Officer Standards and Training, or POST, will be recruited to ensure the Idaho Department of Correction is ready to comply with a state law that prioritizes shooting prisoners to death over lethal injection starting July 1.  No one on the team may have faced disciplinary action over firearms, use of force, or related conduct over the prior year, according to new execution protocols the prison system released this week. 

Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch wanted an execution that a Trump judge deemed illegal

The Supreme Court these days is generally in the business of helping executions go forward. But on Thursday night, the court did something notable: It told Alabama no. Even then, the court wasn't unanimous. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented from the refusal to let the nitrogen gas execution of Jeffery Lee proceed. What prompted the rare rejection? In line with the typical shadow docket practice, the court didn't explain itself. Nor did the dissenters, who merely noted their disagreement. But a deeper look at the case helps us understand why a majority of the court was unwilling to help the state this time.