Blog

New Evidence in Wrongful Conviction of Peter Wilson

The job of the District Attorney is two fold. To prosecute criminals and assure that all evidence is presented to the defense including exculpatory evidence. So why is it that Peter Wilson has been in prison since 1996 for a murder that was impossible for him to have committed, and the legitimate suspect William Coleman was able to leave the country to never be seen again?

The document below is a confession given, the morning the body was discovered, to Palo Alto Police Officer J. Verna from William Coleman. This confessions puts Hak Joo Kim alive based on the events described by William Coleman; however, the DA Linda Condron presented to the jury that Peter Wilson had killed her between 12:58 - 1:48pm on 3-30-1996.

William Coleman worked on Saturday 3-30-1996 and didn't return home until 8-8:30pm, had dinner with Hak Joo Kim per his testimony at the first trial of Peter Wilson, and in this document claims they had consensual sex that evening.

The question now becomes, why wasn't this information given to the jury? Why didn't Officer J. Verna stand up to correct the record based on this confession? Why did arresting Officer Michael Yore remove it from the police file as indicated by his handwriting, "Removed From File 31 March 96 96-091-010"? This plus alibi evidence taken from Peter Wilson's backpack and removed from the official police file by Officer Yore screams conspiracy to falsify evidence, exclude exculpatory evidence, and at a minimum mislead the DA. Or, was the DA part of this agenda to secure her seat as a judge the year she achieved the wrongful conviction of Peter Wilson? 400k was at the heart of this conspiracy. Follow the money to figure out who participated... 

Peter Wilson has filed for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, and should rightfully be given his day in court. Nothing will make up for the loss of almost 30 years of his life, but his peace of mind and freedom can be returned. See the "Free Peter Wilson" link under Podcast Tab to see more evidence in this case.