More than two decades after Scott Peterson was convicted for murdering his wife Laci and their unborn son Conner, many people remain unconvinced that he is guilty. [1] The new documentary series titled 'Scott Peterson: The New Evidence' has reignited debate about the original investigation, which concluded in 2003. The show claims to present fresh evidence that suggests Peterson may not have been involved in the killings. It highlights what it describes as significant errors and omissions made during the initial trial, including a lack of DNA testing on key items at the crime scene. [1] Critics argue these issues could have led to an incorrect verdict. The documentary series has sparked renewed interest among those who believe Peterson is innocent. However, supporters of his conviction maintain that the evidence presented in the original case was sufficient and reliable. They point out that no new physical evidence has emerged since 2003 to support a different conclusion. [1] [2] The New York Post also covered this story, but its coverage leaned more towards supporting Peterson's innocence, using alarmist language to emphasize the alleged mistakes in the original investigation.