An Interview with Michael Fleeman – Author of “Laci – Inside the Laci Peterson Murders” by the late Bill Bickel – former Managing Editor of Crime, Justice and America magazine. Originally published in 2004 and reposted with permission from Crime, Justice and America magazine
On May 17, assuming no further delays, Scott Peterson will stand trial for the murders of his wife Laci and their unborn child Conner. Laci Peterson, a 27-year-old substitute teacher with a month and a half to go on her first pregnancy, was reported missing on December 24, 2002. Her husband Scott claimed he’d returned to their Modesto, California home from a fishing trip and found her gone.
Within a month, a variety of circumstantial evidence (Scott’s demeanor, the fact that he’d taken out an insurance policy on Laci, Amber Frey coming forward and telling police she and Scott had had an affair) turned Scott into the prime (his attorney claims only) suspect. He was arrested days after Laci and Conner’s bodies were found washed ashore off San Francisco Bay.
How do you write a book about an ongoing case? And what’s the point in reading it? I’ll be speaking with Mr. Fleeman about the first question in the moment; but as to the second… This book won’t tell you who killed Laci Peterson, of course; but no matter how much you think you know about this case, you will know more – and understand it all better – after reading Mr. Fleeman’s book. A reporter for People magazine, Mr. Fleeman gives us a complete and very readable account of everything that happened between Christmas Eve 2002 and the August 2003 funeral for Laci and Conner from which Scott’s family was banned (along with necessary flashbacks and a history of Modesto that helps explain in part why this case has attracted so much media attention). If you’re following this case, and the trial, this might be the best “background material” you’re going to find.
Mr. Fleeman, let’s start with the obvious question: Why has Laci Peterson been front-page news for over a year and not other missing women, or even other missing pregnant women?
Certainly, the fact that she was young, beautiful and had that radiant smile played a large part. She exuded, in life, and then, sadly, in death — from all those missing persons posters — a magnetic personality. People wanted to be in her world. But I think it’s more. She was very much the favorite daughter of this very typical, small, agricultural city. She grew up in Modesto and, unlike many others, did not leave as soon as she could to pursue her dreams, a la George Lucas, but came back to Modesto — that’s where her dreams lay. The story came at the right time in history. America was gearing up for war, and people were looking for something, and somebody, to care about. Finally, and most important, it was the way her family, and to a lesser degree Scott’s family, conducted themselves. They opened their hearts to America, giving emotional news conferences and letting us into this very private, very horrible ordeal. It was as if Americans were an extension of the family.
How did you come to write this book? You seem to have a lot of knowledge about Modesto. Did you go to St. Martin’s Press and say, “I have a special interest in this case”? Or did you get assigned it as one of their regular writers?
I had already two books by St. Martin’s out — If I Die … and The Stranger in My Bed — a third was being edited and I had just signed a contract for a fourth when the publisher asked if I would be interested in doing a book about the Peterson case. The catch was that St. Martin’s wanted the book quickly — less than 100 days — and before the case was litigated. I quickly went through the clips and talked to a few people involved to see whether there was not only enough here for a story, but there was a story itself. Was there a beginning, middle, end — when there wasn’t even a verdict yet? The turning point was when I realized that one could build the book around the emotional arc: a family and a town betrayed. That’s when I agreed to do it. I spent time in Modesto and read the local history. I went to the local historical museum and found a number of very good books.
Since this is an ongoing case, you sometimes had to walk a tightrope when describing events, in order not to call Scott either innocent or guilty. I got the sense, though, and maybe I’m reading too much into subtleties, that you think Scott may be innocent.
For this book, I didn’t come to a conclusion either way on his guilt or innocence — not that I wouldn’t do that, but because all the evidence has not been presented. I didn’t want to give the impression he was innocent, but I did want to make clear that, as you read this book, there isn’t enough to convict. Not yet. There’s still more to come at trial, and then one can decide. It is a bit of a tightrope, but as I built the story around the theme of betrayal, it didn’t really matter whether he was innocent or guilty; people felt betrayed by many other things he did, from his aloof behavior, to having a mistress, to the circumstances of his arrest. Also, remember, the book is about how his family felt betrayed by Laci’s family, for taking her stuff, for shutting them out of the funeral. These are issues that have nothing to do with guilt or innocent but make, I hope, interesting reading.
Brent Rocha said, the day the Rocha family went public with the information about Amber Frey, “Since Scott is no longer communicating with anyone in Laci’s family… I am no longer supporting him.” It was my sense at the time, though, that it was Laci’s family that broke ties with Scott.
It’s both. Scott did stop communicating with the family, just as his communication with police was sporadic. But you’re right, the major rift came with the Amber revelation. From then on, Laci’s family did not communicate directly with him.
Where would this case be today if Amber Frey hadn’t come forward?
That’s an interesting question that may only be answered at trial. Do they have more forensic evidence that makes Amber less important? My guess is that the prosecution will actually try to downplay Amber’s involvement; her past could come back to haunt her on the witness stand. Certainly, from a news standpoint — and from a book standpoint — it propelled the case.
In the earliest days of this case… Did it seem to you that the media turned on Scott, started treating him more as a suspect than as a victim, when he wouldn’t “co-operate” by giving them statements?
The media was the first (actually, police were probably the first) to question Scott’s role in this. Most reporters have covered enough domestic violence cases to know that no matter how handsome and seemingly wonderful the husband/boyfriend is, the chief suspect in a domestic violence case is always the man closest to the woman. So at one of the first news conferences, the media were openly questioning police — while Scott was in the room — about whether he was a suspect. I don’t think his lack of cooperation had an impact; if anything, when he did open his mouth, it just got him into more trouble.
If you could ask Scott to explain one thing about his version of events, what would it be?
What did he really do between the last time Laci talked to her mother the night of December 23 and the morning he left to go fishing. That whole night is a blank — and it’s when police believe he killed her.
English 
Español de México