I've seen the bombshell new evidence that PROVES Scott Peterson did not murder his pregnant wife: Lawyer reveals bloodied mattress secret that could blow open case

By RUTH BASHINSKY, US SENIOR NEWS REPORTER Published: 19:58, 13 July 2026 | Updated: 20:04, 13 July 2026 Celebrity defense attorney Mark Geragos has represented some of America's most infamous clients. He defended Michael Jackson during the singer's 2003 child molestation trial and represented Chris Brown after the singer was charged with assaulting his then-girlfriend Rihanna in 2009. Geragos, 68, was also hired by Jussie Smollett after the actor was accused of staging a fake hate crime attack against himself in 2019. One of Geragos's most enduring cases, however, is not a celebrity scandal at all, but a murder conviction that continues to consume him more than two decades later. Scott Peterson, 53, was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife Laci Peterson and their unborn son Conner in Modesto, California, on Christmas Eve in 2002. The case became a national obsession after it emerged that, while his wife was missing, Peterson had been having an affair with his mistress Amber Frey, whom he had told he was a widower. It has remained a subject of fascination for more than two decades, fueled by Peterson's repeated appeals and a hit 2024 Netflix docuseries, which introduced the case to a new generation of viewers. Peterson, who has spent more than half of his life behind bars, has always maintained his innocence. Celebrity defense attorney Mark Geragos believes Scott Peterson is innocent   Peterson, 53, was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife Laci Peterson and their unborn son Conner  And, despite leaving Peterson's legal team after his guilty conviction in December 2004, Geragos still stands by him. Geragos has continued to publicly defend Peterson despite the obvious reputational risk of standing behind one of the most reviled figures in American true crime history. In fact, in an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail, the attorney says he still believes Peterson is innocent and that new evidence could eventually lead to a new trial. 'It was an investigation that was determined to prove him guilty not to find out who did it,' Geragos said. He said that he remains close with Peterson's family and also described his relationship with his former client as 'close.' 'I would characterize it as avuncular, in the sense that I spent an inordinate amount of time with him and I believed truly and still do in his innocence. 'I care for him and I adored his family. It's almost unimaginable that he could be charged, let alone convicted, of this crime, because to know him is to know that he's utterly incapable of this.' Prosecutors argued that Peterson killed Laci at their home before transporting her body to a marina in Berkeley, California Peterson and Judge Elizabeth Hill during a status conference at San Mateo County Superior March 2024 When asked how his former client was coping, Geragos said: 'He wants to find out what happened to his family and have that person apprehended.' Geragos said there were multiple alleged Brady violations by prosecutors, referring to claims that evidence favorable to the defense was not properly disclosed. 'They didn't bother with all the facts in this case. They can't tell you where. They can't tell you when. They can't tell you how,' he said. Peterson was convicted largely on circumstantial evidence rather than direct proof such as eyewitness testimony or a confession. Prosecutors argued that a series of events pointed to Peterson's guilt, including his affair, his lies about his personal life, his behavior after Laci disappeared, his decision to go fishing on Christmas Eve and the discovery of Laci and Conner's remains near the location where Peterson had taken his boat. Geragos has long argued those circumstances were not enough to prove Peterson committed the murders and that investigators focused on him while failing to properly pursue other leads. The attorney will feature in the two-part A&E documentary, Scott Peterson: The New Evidence, which airs July 16 and July 17. The documentary aims to 'stress test' 14 new evidentiary claims made in Peterson's latest petition, which was filed by the Los Angeles Innocence Project in April and denied by a judge. His lawyers plan to appeal that decision.  Amber Frey called Modesto police to disclose the affair she had with Peterson and later worked with prosecutors to record phone calls  The film explores claims that police failed to fully investigate a burglary and burned-out van near the Peterson home and overlooked witnesses who said they saw Laci alive after prosecutors said she was already dead. It also includes challenges to the prosecution's theory that Peterson dumped Laci's body near his fishing spot, while notes allegedly written by Laci about the couple's boat could undermine claims that Peterson secretly bought it as part of a murder plan. The documentary also touches on the claim that newer fetal growth analysis could challenge the prosecution's timeline of when Laci and Conner died, which they argue could affect whether Peterson could have been responsible.  Prosecutors argued that Peterson killed Laci at their home before transporting her body to a marina in Berkeley, California, where they said he dumped her from his 14-foot fishing boat into San Francisco Bay. At the time of her disappearance, Peterson was cheating on his wife with Frey, who later became a key prosecution witness after secretly recording conversations with Peterson for investigators. Months later, Laci and her unborn son's remains washed ashore on the California coastline. Peterson was subsequently arrested and charged. Geragos said the prosecution's case began to unravel during the five-month trial, claiming prosecutors struggled to explain key parts of their theory and even brought in a third attorney to help present their case. 'People forget that the case was falling apart,' he said, describing it as one of his 'most frustrating trials he's ever done in 43 years.' He said his biggest regret remains his decision not to push for cameras in the courtroom. 'I agreed with prosecutors not to have this case televised,' he said.  'I thought it would damn down the kind of interest in this thing but it had the opposite effect. Not having a sequestered jury (the jury was only sequestered during deliberations) and not having this televised was a disaster.' 'People thought he [Peterson] had no emotion. They could not see what was going on in this court.  He added: 'If this case had happened today he would never have been convicted.' Peterson's defense has long argued that Laci may have encountered burglars while walking her dog and that she could have been abducted after confronting them. Her dog was later found alive by a neighbor. One of the witnesses speaking out in the new A&E two part series Scott Peterson: The New Evidence The defense has also pointed to a burned-out van found near the airport containing a bloodied mattress, arguing the evidence was never properly tested. Geragos said he had been contacted by a retired analyst from the California Department of Justice after watching one of the documentaries about the case and claimed a van recovered shortly after Laci disappeared contained DNA and other biological material. Geragos said the analyst claimed investigators were instructed not to disclose the findings. 'They didn't disclose any of this,' said Geragos. 'They were sitting on biological material and we could have tested it in real time.' 'They focused on Scott to the exclusion of any lead,' he added. 'They were determined they were going to get a conviction and didn't bother with the facts in the case.' Prosecutors have argued the defense has repeatedly tried to link unrelated events to the case without evidence.  Prosecutors maintain the burglary across the street occurred on December 26, after Laci disappeared, undermining the defense theory that she interrupted it on Christmas Eve. In a lengthy filing opposing Peterson's latest habeas petition, prosecutors argued that the new evidence claims, including those involving the van, either had already been considered, lacked merit or would not have changed the outcome of the trial.