Laci Peterson and what makes a true crime case indelible

The crime
On or about December 24, 2002, Laci Peterson – eight months pregnant with her husband Scott's first child, a son they had already named Conner – disappeared in Modesto, California. Laci and Conner's bodies were discovered a mile apart in April 2003, just as suspicions were mounting with increasing intensity around Scott.

Scott Peterson was convicted of murdering his wife and son in 2004. Following his conviction, various support efforts are still ongoing. Scott has never doubted his complete innocence.

The story
American Murder: Laci Petersona three-part Skye Borgman film that came out on Netflix a few days ago is classic Borgman, which I called in a review of “pretty typical Borgman content” Girl in picture from 2022: “A wild and disgustingly dirty story, professionally constructed to keep the viewer hooked before they even think about Googling the case.”

It is unlikely that anyone Needs to google this case, of course, but for viewers who do not know the details or do not remember them well, AM:LP is also typical Borgman content in that it's an expertly put-together and well-paced overview. Typically, however, Borgman takes the audience through a lesser-known case; Laci and Conner's murder is probably in the top ten most searched true crime stories of all time. I actually wondered what attracted them to such a high-profile story.

But That is no big secret (it's her job, that's what the money is for, etc.), so I started wondering how she would approach it other Stories about important cases – especially those with which the Peterson case intersects, each in a different important aspect that helped make it a cultural issue. In chronological order:

The Lizzie Borden case // Apart from the fact that they are murders, the two cases have almost nothing in common – neither the means, nor the time period, nor the outcome of the trial – but what they Do share is a “Schrödinger’s prime suspect” quality. In other words, in both cases it cannot be the accused, but it also cannot not be the accused at the same time. In both cases, there are fuzzy timelines, clues that don't fit anywhere, inappropriate emotions that don't add up to evidence… and the absence of any other credible suspects.

Various Redditors, not to mention Scott Peterson’s family, would disagree with this last claim, and they might be right; in both cases, the alternative theories sound far-fetched, but not The much more absurd than the majority view of what happened.

The Jeffrey MacDonald case // This case overlaps a little further; both cases involve pregnant victims and defendants who may have felt a deep and disturbed ambivalence toward the kids/dogs/picket fences they'd bashed. (Not to mention the in-laws who were determined to keep believing them despite “off-label” expressions of grief.) Jeffrey MacDonald isn't the only other fraudulent narcissist in a serious case who made up a bullshit story he couldn't summarize and then put it on TV because he thought he could control the narrative, and was sorely mistaken.

But when it comes to a murder case that goes supernova in the culture, never underestimate the power of a boring, good-looking idiot who seems to have no idea how he is perceived. It's not against the law to be an asshole, but if you Are an asshole and you go to court for something that Is against the law, never underestimate the ability of a jury to pull the thread through the eye of the needle, and not in your favor.

The case of JonBenét Ramsey // Both stories involve children, and they happened at Christmastime. They don't say much more than that, but John Douglas and others have noted that this is one of the reasons the media has seized on every tragedy – there isn't much else to report at this time of year, and the holidays multiply the tragedy. I found it remarkable that a profiler who AM:LP said Scott Peterson “sincerely believed” that Laci's friends and family would “lose interest” in her disappearance after a few weeks. I've never heard it expressed that way before, and it partly explains his decisions in hindsight.

But to think that And to believe that her disappearance during the most family and community-oriented time of the year would simply pass… until Martin Luther King Day?

None of these overlaps indicate per se that Borgman should take on this or similar cases – I'm just pondering what makes a particular crime story viable while another might not, and the overlap between those qualities and the qualities of a Borgman project.

And none of The really tells you whether you should bother with American Murder: Laci Petersonso I'll do that now – if you've been following the case closely, it's redundant, but if you need to catch up before this week's Peacock series, it's Borgman's usual solidly entertaining production.

True crime reporting in your inbox

Subscribe to the Best Evidence newsletter: