Another witness in Scott Peterson case hires attorney, refuses to testify

The witness in Scott Peterson’s bid for a new trial whose comments last month prompted a two-week delay in the proceedings refused to testify Thursday after initially cooperating with his attorneys.

Shareen Anderson was the executive producer of the A&E documentary “The Murder of Laci Peterson,” which highlighted different theories that someone other than Peterson killed his wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner.

For the film, Anderson interviewed Peterson Juror Richelle Nice, who is at the center of a claim that Peterson did not receive a fair trial when he was convicted of the murders in 2004.

Peterson’s attorneys claim in his petition for habeas corpus that Nice committed juror misconduct when she gave false answers on a juror questionnaire during the jury selection process.

Nice obtained an attorney, who said she would refuse to testify by invoking her right against self-incrimination unless she was granted immunity from prosecution. She ultimately was granted immunity and testified last month.

Anderson initially was scheduled to testify March 1. But during a Zoom trial-preparation session with Peterson’s attorneys on Feb. 28, she said Nice had mentioned getting into a possible book deal before the trial concluded, which would impeach Nice’s testimony that she didn’t discuss a book deal until after the trial.

The trial was continued for two weeks to give the prosecution time to prepare for the last-minute information.

Then on March 3, during her interview with the DA inspector, Anderson backed off her statement, saying her memory about the timing of the book deal is “fuzzy” and she is “not certain” it was during the trial.

‘Little man’ nickname at issue

Peterson’s attorneys withdrew their request to the court to question Anderson about any conversation regarding a book deal but had hoped she would still testify Thursday about a photo she saw in Nice’s home of a baby wearing a onesie that had the words “little man” on it.

According to testimony last month, “little man” was a nickname Nice had used for Laci and Scott’s unborn son, Conner. She referenced the nickname on her first day in the deliberation room when she said Peterson should pay “for killing the ‘little man,” as well as in letters she wrote to Peterson after the trial, according to testimony.

“Ms. Anderson’s testimony would show that the nickname ‘Little Man’ was not random, it was personal,” according to a court briefing filed by Peterson’s attorneys.

But at some point during the two-week break, Anderson also retained an attorney, who on Wednesday notified Peterson’s counsel that she will refuse to testify, invoking a law that protects journalists. The shield law gives journalists immunity from testifying about certain sources or information obtained during the news gathering process.

“There is a certain irony to Ms. Anderson’s current position,” Peterson’s attorneys argued in the brief filed Wednesday.

They pointed out that Anderson was subpoenaed to testify in January, she voluntarily spoke with defense counsel about her observations after the Richelle Nice interview, and she voluntarily participated in a videotaped interview with a district attorney inspector March 3.

In court Thursday, Peterson attorney Cliff Gardner said that Anderson had interviewed him for the documentary as well and that she “volunteered to be a witness” in Peterson’s evidentiary hearing.

Outside the courtroom, Anderson’s attorney, Tenaya Rodewald, told reporters that Anderson never really wanted to testify but didn’t know her full rights as a journalist. “That’s sort of how we got a little bit into this muddle,” she said.

A resident of New York, Anderson wasn’t aware of the full protections in California until finding the First Amendment Coalition, which referred her to Rodewald.

Rodewald gave arguments in court about why Anderson should be protected under California’s shield law, and Peterson’s attorneys gave arguments about why she shouldn’t. But ultimately, Peterson’s and prosecutors from the Stanislaus County District Attorney’s Office, which are the respondents to the juror misconduct claim in the habeas petition, agreed to a stipulation.

Stanislaus County District Attorney Birgit Fladager said the parties agreed to stipulate that if she had testified, Anderson would have said she interviewed Nice at her home in 2017. She would have testified that, as she was leaving, she saw a photograph on a wall of a small child that was wearing clothing that had the words “little man.”

This story was originally published March 24, 2022 at 12:33 PM.

Erin Tracy

The Modesto Bee

209-578-2366

Erin Tracy covers criminal justice and breaking news. She began working at the Modesto Bee in 2010 and previously worked at papers in Woodland and Eureka. She is a graduate of Humboldt State University.