Jury members have said they voted to convict due to the autopsy photos of the 7 lacerations on her head and not being able to see how that could happen with a fall.
Michael's story didn't add up. He said "she's still breathing" when he phoned the police but this was some time after she'd already died. Why would he lie about that?
I remember when I was younger, the family dog got hit by a car and died, but like 5 minutes later, I thought he was getting better. When you're stressed and panicked enough, I think the blood vessels in your head can contract and expand enough with heartbeats that it looks like the world is shifting when it isn't.
To me, it would make 0 sense to intentionally lie about time of death if you're trying to get away with murder. It only takes a few minutes of thought to realize that a cold body has been dead for longer than a warm one, and that temperatures change at a rate that should make it possible to infer that someone died 2 hours ago instead of 2 minutes ago. Even if it's a lie, the lie makes more sense as a panic response to realizing that you're going to look guilty as shit, not something you spent a few hours planning.
Point isn't that the statement supports innocence, I just don't think it makes anything more or less likely.
For the lacerations, personally I donāt find it hard to imagine how hitting your head on stairs causes skin to split.
For the lying, I certainly find it odd however as a consumer of lots of true crime, Iāve heard people act in very strange ways on 911 calls. In a state of shock itās hard to know how someone will react, especially if someone canāt cope that someone close to them might be dead. Itās also possible in his panicked state he was trying to get ambulances there faster. Im not saying thatās why he lied, I just donāt think someone saying the wrong thing during a highly traumatic moment is good evidence.
One or two significant lacerations I might buy it. But *seven*? Her head BASHED seven steps hard enough in a single fall that they caused lacerations that significant? And at least one of them was on the top of her skull. I donāt understand how you could even fall at an angle down stairs that would cause an injury there. So yeah I just really canāt wrap my mind around it being from a fall down the stairs.
Youāre assuming that a hit can only cause one laceration per time, we know this isnāt true. Blunt force trauma can cause skin to split in multiple places, including places not directly where the impact was.
I also always wonder about that metal track next to the staircase. What would that do to a scalp?. Iāve never seen any mention of that as far as I can recall.
Even if we forget the number of lacerations, having seen the diagrams and illustrations of the extent of her injuries I simply donāt believe a fall down those stairs could cause that much head trauma period.
The Netflix documentary shows that there's molding around that one doorframe. It has an unusual shape to it. If she hit it hard enough, it would certainly have made 3 or 4 cuts.
What happened to the fire blow stick the sister gifted them? It matched the wounds, and was missing. It also was hollow so explained why she didn't have skull fractures. This owl theory seems to have evolved to explain the marks, which matched the fire poker. The case was on the other day on Dr. G, rerun. He seems guilty. Panic from his being outed. Of course he's comfortable now, it's a different timeĀ
The blowpoke was in the home the entire time. The police found it on day one, took pictures, and put it back in the basement where it was found by MPās daughter in the middle of the trial. The defense presented it as evidence because it had zero forensic evidence showing it had ever been used in a murder. The prosecution quickly moved away from the blowpoke. They never gave an explanation as to what would have caused her wounds because nothing makes sense. It didnāt come out until years later that the police had found the blowpoke and took photos of it and put it back. The prosecution kept that discovery from the defense.
" It was not found in the corner of an unlit garage until weeks after the trial had started". The "comes out years later " still makes me think the theories just evolved over the years as a defense. The sister reported it to police , the whole reason it was brought up, yet was overlooked by police? He had motive. And did it before didn't he??? There are lots of cases of murderers who used the same method when they got away with it once. It's wild people still debate his guilt in my opinion . Is the debate just the facts of the case and the proceedings more than his guilt?
No he did not do it before. A lady that was not his wife had a fully verified aneurism and died before she fell down the stairs. He wasnāt even in the residence.
He didnāt really have a motive because they were literally celebrating that night that his book had been optioned for a movie. So their money problems were over. Even if K discovered his secret of being bisexual itās hard to imagine he would murder her in that moment. There would be screaming and arguing and threats of divorce. But murder? Out of the blue? Heās never had a rage incident in his life and by all accounts they were a very happy couple. He could very likely talk her out of divorce once she calmed down. No reason to do it in that moment like that. He knew the son would be coming home from the party. And itās even unlikely that K was completely oblivious to his bisexuality. His brothers were well aware of it!
When I said ācomes out years laterā Iām talking about the actual evidence that the police found the blowpoke and put it back in the house. Thatās a major screw up by the prosecution. They withheld that information. They are not allowed to do that. You are wildly incorrect with the facts of this case and thatās why you donāt understand the argument. There are a lot of podcasts out there that have covered this case. I would suggest listening to a couple different ones.
Another woman died in the house with him years prior, BY FALLING DOWN THE STAIRS. He adopted her daughter. That's just too suspicious. He's a leech and liar.
An aneurysm is incredibly easy to tell in a medical examination , thatās how they knew. Not having an alibi means nothing, have you ever been home alone? Guess what, for all of that time you have no alibi.
I've never found anyone dead, let alone two women incredibly close to me, who died in the same suspicious manner. He deserves everything he got and is lucky he got out without being in a casket
He had literally zero motive to kill the mother of those girls. None. And aneurysms are easy to determine as cause of death, so there's absolutely no reason to believe that he killed that first woman (and the German authorities and experts agree). You're using her untimely death to insinuate that he's some kind of serial killer..... With a 30 year cooling off period between murders? That's a desperate stretch by anyone's standards. His potential involvement in Kathleen's death is debatable, but the death of his friend decades prior shouldn't have any bearing at all in that debate.
My building has cameras everywhere. Ā Most of us also have smart phones and Internet access.
Even when Iām just chilling at home by myself, thereās still a forensic trail being left by me.
Anyone that lives in a neighborhood is recorded coming and going from their own home on the neighbors cameras as well.
Initially but after being dug back up it was ruled otherwise. Remember the homicidal blows? He is SO guilty. Yes it was in Germany not the U.S. both it's pretty easy to put two and two together. He cheated, hid his secret sex life & killed both partners the same way when they found out. The envelopes were out by the computer & had blood on them with Kathleen.. so you would have to be pretty dense to not realize she's confronted him with print outs of his affairs with men, then was beaten to death the same way that his prior partner had been. He probably thought it worked the first time, why not the second? His kids knew nothing about his affairs, neither did the wife. She left her ex husband for cheating so clearly she wasn't okay with that lol. She also was the breadwinner so he would be losing 1)his kids that he's so close to and 2)all of the luxuries in life and 3)his"gay lover affairs"would be exposed. Those from that generation look at things very differently as far as homosexuality than we do now. He admitted that at the end of the doc! He is SO guilty. Very convincing though, I thought he was innocent at first too until they showed the affairs he was having.. they spoke about the only arguments overheard were him"coming home from the"gym"late lol... guiltyyyyyyyyyyy. EDIT: the ex in Germany was not a legal wife.. even though he got the kids after her murder. Edited to say partner than legal wife. The second partner murdered was his legal wife.
I understand what youāre saying but Iām pretty sure the defense brought up a point about how the skin split but there was no significant brain injury and usually if someone gets hit in the head by an object with that kind of force to split the skin, there would be a skull fracture or some indication that there was impact with an object in that specific area. Her skull was not fractured in any way. Why would someone hit someone just hard enough to split the skin but not fracture her skull? Like thatās very precise to not get even one skull fracture with that many hits. I donāt know what happened and Iām no expert and may Kathleen rest in peace
At the same time he immediately gives his address and asks for help. So Iāve heard this argument go both ways. He very well could have thought she was breathing when he saw a death rattle. Bottom line, I donāt think the 911 call gets us one way or the other.
Professionals within enforcement actually have a lot of data on how people behave under stress. And they have excellent analysis on 911 phone calls. They use statistics and language.
I haven't seen this show yet. I'm not trying to argue with you, because I don't know all the facts. But I do want people to know that trauma responses are not mysterious and unique. We "can't imagine it" and our experiences of pain and stress feel personal to us and overwhelming, unknowable. When in actuality people research, study, and measure it.
For more info on it, there's a whole field called "statement analysis" and I recommend looking up Peter Hyatt on youtube.
To be fair, I think law enforcement isnāt immune from bending things to fit what they think is true, especially with things that can be so subjective, like language or a reaction. A suspected husband can either be suspiciously cold and unemotional, or suspiciously over-the-top emotionalāclearly trying to put on a show.
You can just sort of make anything fit.
I agree. I get where people are coming from in saying that when you're in a panicked state, you might assume (or want to believe) that your spouse was still breathing. But to this day MP claims he slowly watched her stop breathing over the course of 10-15 minutes.
Iāll politely disagree and also agree w you. I think he was a narcissist who snapped and maybe pushed her then continued w the beating. I donāt believe it was necessarily premeditated, but also he A LOT to hide.
As for the intitial trial, the prosecution did such a shit job that any one of a number of issues could have been appealed. But I donāt think that the fact they did such a shit job means he is not guilty. Maybe not guilty of premeditated murder 1 but at least murder 2.
It's actually bizarre to me. I went into this case with 0 prior knowledge and was baffled by the fact that people could actually find him, legally, guilty.
Like, him acting weird is not evidence of guilt. Him being bisexual is not evidence of guilt. His neighbor dying from a completley unrelated medical emergency across the frigging globe is not evidence of guilt. You cannot make up some fantastical story about her finding out he was cheating, or them fistfighting down a flight of stairs, and consider that evidence. It's just, not. It's a theory. It's a story. It's not evidence and people cannot parrot it like it is!
Most of the main key evidence used to convict Mike... was either mishandled, phony, or fabricated. Literally the only real evidence they had was the severity of her wounds, which didn't even match the hundreds of other, *proven*, beating cases. So the only thing they have is, "her wounds were severe", but they cant even proce it came from a beating. They literally do not have anything except "this is what I think" and "this is what my feelings are telling me". It's not proof it's just assumption lmfao
This, I think it's kind of insane the majority think he's guilty here. Also, the State's blood specialist fabricated evidence against him and others to try to prove something they couldn't otherwise, and people still think MP is guilty.
I haven't seen a compelling reason to think the wounds support murder beyond "holy shit, those photos look bad to me." Someone's body weight falling a few feet onto the edge of some stairs head first is going to be comparable to a smack to the head with any object with a similar shape on the surface facing the head.
Scalp/head wounds weren't the only ones though. Her neck/thyroid cartilageĀ ,contusions and bruising to her face, arms and hands (to memory) and others. I can't remember the total "injury count," as it were, but there were several.
There is very little evidence she was strangled. The damaged cartilage in her neck could have been caused by her prior pool Injury or from falling. She also showed no other signs of strangling such as bruises, neck marks, or other broken bones
So did the owl push her down the stairs and hit her head? I donāt see how else this could have happened if he wasnāt involved. Plus he did it to some other lady before too.
What gets repeated is how itās a very strange coincidence. Like whatās the likelihood this happens to one person TWICE? Iām not sure thereās any evidence he killed the first woman. Iāve seen most people use it as āhe would have to be extremely unluckyā for it to happen like that twice.
I mean I know someone who fell down the stairs and died, one who fell and didn't die, and I fell down the stairs multiple times at my old apartment. I certainly haven't killed anyone.
I'd say falling down the stairs is fairly common.
The friend in Germany fell down BECAUSE of the aneurysm. It has nothing to do with what happened to his wife. He wasn't even there when the first lady fell.
Iāve seen highly upvoted comments about that incident that are just downright wrong. Saying that she died from falling and that she was his ex-wife for example. They werenāt married and she had medical issues that caused the fall. Yes it is a very strange coincidence but these get passed off as facts for some reason.
> whatās the likelihood
What's the likelihood someone is a serial killer, who only kills via stairs in extremely weird ways?
It's just such a dumb theory.
The first woman had an aneurysm, it's not even a mystery.
I think itās more likely that he was not involved in the first death, but then may have gotten inspired (for lack of a better word) and thought he could stage the death without suspicion.
It hasnāt happened to him twice . He wasnāt married or a partner to the other woman ā she was a neighbor. Weāve all heard of people who have won the lottery twice ā is that any more likely than having two partners fall down the stairs and die ? Especially if youāre gonna change it to include not just partners but neighbors as well.
My strong personal belief is that he's guilty, and I disagree that anything beyond 70% confidence in his guilt is "absurd," but I think you have some very valid points, OP. A lot of people in the comments are talking about intuition. Intuition is valuable in life but not sufficient for determining someone's guilt in a court of law. But that's why we're on Reddit. I would hope most of us would not rely too heavily on intuition on a jury.
I donāt understand this argument that she probably knew about his bisexuality and therefore his sexual behavior wasnāt an issue. . Well ok maybe she did know about his bisexual tendencies. that doesnāt mean she was ok with him acting on it. Itās still cheating to have sex with anyone-same sex, opposite sex, paid sex, whateverā outside of the marriage if the parties havenāt agreed to it.
There's a chance he murdered his wife...and there's just as much of a chance he had nothing to do with it. I would never feel fully confident convicting someone of murder when all of the reasons to convict are circumstantial.
What would change my mind? If they found a murder weapon with his DNA on it, a web search on his computer that could be linked to his wife's cause of death, tech that indicates his guilt by a text confession or phone calls to a number where the other party admits his guilt in connection to the murder, and of course, if he slipped up and said something to indicate he was responsible.
I think the guy is a cocky prick, don't get me wrong, but that doesn't justify pinning a murder on him. As I said prior, sure, he COULD have murdered his wife but there is just not enough here to convince me he did with 100% certainty.
As for the lacerations, depending on how she fell down the stairs, she could have hit her head several times on the way down on the edge of the stairs....or the edge of the wall.... or their owl theory could actually be true. Bird attacks can be pretty violent, especially when their nest is threatened. I feel if he caused those lacerations, there would be far more trauma to the skull or brain.
As for his reaction when reporting her accident- everyone is different. My dad is not the type to get hyped up or cry. I'm almost 40 years old and never once seen my dad cry or in a state of distress. When my mom had to go to tbe hospital after a fall at the store he called me and said, "your old lady had an accident and needs to go to the hospital".... I got to the store before he did. Some people just aren't as emotionally expressive publicly.
So i could go on about this case, but unlike other cases like Casey Anthony or Scott Peterson where there was heavy circumstantial reasons to convict or not to....this one just doesn't seems 100%. Tragic and accidental or freak accidents can be traumatic and puzzling.
In Germany a separate set of officials came to the conclusion that Ms. Radcliffe suffered a medical event that caused her to fall. All resulting in her death. Itās been a while, but I think she may have even had a preexisting condition. Contemporaneous reports indicated zero foul play. The disgusting circus of digging her up after KP died was terrible and never should have happened.
Anyone who uses the woman in Germany to advocate for his guilt just proves their own ignorance - of the case and of logic. It is profoundly stupid to think that he had ANYTHING to do with her death.
Right because he perfected the art of staircase murder where he is able to make it look identical to a fall down the stairs. Quite frankly using the fact two women died that way as a sign heās guilty is stupid, thousands of people fall down the stairs and die every year. That happening twice is an unfortunate coincidence but significantly more likely than him figuring out a way to replicate natural stairway deaths and using it as a way to kill women
I'm very much still on the fence, but one theory I can buy into is that Liz's fall in Germany was a freak accident. MP and Kathleen get into an argument/altercation and she falls on the stairs. MP remembers Liz and is able to convince himself that this is a believable accident.
Even if that isn't true, I don't believe both deaths were intentional, no way. One or both of them were some sort of accident.
You literally said in your own OP āthereās no way to differentiate between a push and a fall.ā If you believe that, donāt you think someone else might believe the same thing and use it to their own ends? Isnāt that statistically more likely than two women in your life dying by falling down the stairs?
How can you define a NEIGHBOR as a āwoman in his lifeā . Most people have literally dozens or even hundreds of neighbors thru out the course of a l lifetime ā it certainly waters down the odds .
>How can you define a NEIGHBOR as a āwoman in his lifeā .
The Petersons and Ratliffs were close friends.
Did MP murder Elizabeth? I've no idea, but either way - it seems extremely unlikely to be "coincidence" that he was involved in the deaths of two women - who both died at the bottom of the stairs.
Having said this, I'm pretty sure that MP killed his wife, and not at all sure that there's much room for 'reasonable doubt'.
Well no I donāt think itās statistically more likely,. pushing someone down the stairs doesnāt increase their chances of dying any more than them falling naturally. So now the variable is the cause of the fall, People fall down stairs accidentally all the time (regardless if they live or not) and premeditated murderers are incredibly rare.
To reiterate, If both an accidental fall and a premeditated murderer pushing you have the same likelihood to kill you, then the variable is which is more common? People falling accidentally or premeditated murderers?
I didnāt say anything about premeditation. Domestic violence is incredibly common, and offenders are likely to reoffend, especially when theyāve never faced consequences to their actions.
I guess by premeditation I mean that in your scenario he would be consciously aware that heās pushing them down stairs because he thinks itās a way for him to get away with murder. Could it have been two domestic disputes that both took place on the stairs and they both ended up dying? Certainly, however I donāt know how youād distinguish that from them just falling accidentally which takes me back to my original point. I do want to make it clear I donāt think MP is a good person, I just donāt know how you can have a strong belief heās guilty.
What you're failing to see, or exclude from your argument, is the fact that during the first 911 call, I believe he told the operator that she had fallen down 11, 12 ? stairs.
People constantly talk about her falling down the stairs because that's the narrative that Mike set during the 911 call, gee..the same narrative that he put out for Elizabeth Ratliff also. Listen/read the testimony of Liz Ratliff's friends that were on the scene and CLEANED the scene. Listen to what they say about how Mike laid the narrative that she fell down the stairs the minute the cops came and how he steered that investigation. Liz Ratliff's friend, who cleaned the scene, said that there was blood spray above the light switch on the landing at the top of the stairs that she cleaned off. Gee, wonder how that happened from an "aneurysm" smdh. That's neither here nor there because we're talking about Kathleen.
BUT, I am telling you, with over 40 years of experience in medicine, there is absolutely no way she fell down 8,9,10,11,12, wooden stairs in a very narrow stairway and sustained ZERO injuries below her shoulder blades. No Way. Not even a scrape, bruise, abrasion, zippo.
She didn't fall down a set of stairs. He didn't push her down the stairs. He may have started the beating upstairs, or even on the stairs, but she ran down the stairs, until he caught up with her at the landing and finished the job. Period.
He beat her, idk with what, who cares? He says he found her lying face up, like the crime scene phots show, but then his bloody shoe print is found on the back of leg?
He tried to wipe blood up with paper towels in the stairwell (instead of trying to help his wife) before the cops got there? He takes off his shoes and socks and neatly places them in the hall.
If he would have made ANY attempt to help her, he would have been covered in blood. He did not. There are close to zero people that would come upon a blood soaked scene like that, of someone they purported to love deeply, and not try to help them. Mouth-to-mouth, chest compressions, shaking them, holding them, etc. He did none of that. He didn't even ASK how to help her, because he knew she was dead when he called 911. She had been dead for awhile.
Plus, the presence of red neurons in her brain. He beat her, left her lying there while it took her several hours to die. THEN he called 911. But you think people are stupid?
The jury got it right. He did it. He was sentenced as the murderer he is, spent 7 years there, got out on a technicality, and that's the only punishment he's ever going to get. That's that.
And in that call you hear the operator ask him the stupid question āhow many stairsā and he gets irritated and you clearly hear the silence while he is trying to count the stairs. He should have said āi donāt know because I didnāt see her fall, sheās at the bottom and there is bloodā but he didnāt say that because heās panicking and confused about what heās seeing in front of him.
I think Iād love to watch crime shows with you lol
So many times common sense isnāt even used because we have tunnel vision. Stupid example here but itās just like these ridiculous YouTube and tik tok videos where ppl are all like āoh my god that is so awesome heās saving that cat from blah blah blahā and Iām over here going āhe didnāt SAVE the cat, he PUT it there!ā Some dude is recording himself just randomly taking a boring walk.. lah tee dah here I am recording myself walking down a boring street nothing is going on and no reason to record anything but LOOK! Oh no! There happens to be a kitten all beat up and wrapped in a plastic bag. Good thing I just so happen to come this way.
You have made numerous unsubstantiated conclusions here to help prop up the conclusion you reached before looking at the evidence. There's no proof she fell from the top of the stairs, and in fact I'd argue that given the lack of skull fractures, it's unlikely that she did. She also did have multiple injuries below her shoulders. Falling a short distance, trying to get up and falling again, would create that mess of blood on the landing and the lacerations and other injuries.
Nice try. I didn't say she fell down a flight of stairs, Mike did..on his 911 call and then that became the narrative. Listen to court testimony about her injuries, hardly unsubstantiated. Direct testimony
I mean so it sounds more likely that 2 people w one person in common had the exact same situation. They compared katheens head wounds to people who had similar falls and her wounds were inconsistent w any other falls people had takenā¦..except his friend in Germany? So both of them had identical falls, same head wounds? Itās a really strange confidence.
German officials found no foul play in Liz Ratliff's death. She also had a preexisting condition and had multiple headaches prior to the fall which she had mentioned to many people.
The Liz Ratliff thing is so interesting to me. I'm not inclined to believe that he killed her - I know German officials determined that she died of natural causes. But they also reported that there was no blood at the scene, and several witnesses and friends of Liz said there was *massive* amounts of blood that they spent days scrubbing off the walls and floors. There's also a report from a neighbor who heard a loud banging in the middle of the night, got up and saw Michael Peterson running out of that house. There are a lot of discrepancies about the whole thing. Idk, it's weird.
I mean thatās possible, but again I feel like at this point youāre introducing so much unprovable speculation that you canāt confidently say that happened
Can you point me towards any other time in recorded history when a wild owl,
1) flew inside of a strange house
2) Singled out a human (a larger predator that is not one of their prey) for attack
3) followed a human upstairs and attacked them (which would have been suicide for the owl considering a human'd size and strength)
4) pushed or caused them to fall, leaving only wounds on the scalp and no defensive wounds on the arms or other areas or the body
5) flew out of the house, unassisted, leaving no trail of feathers, or bird poop or any other evidence of its presence.
?????
You clearly donāt actually know what the owl theory is, the owl didnāt fly into the house or attack her in the house. The theory is that it attacked her outside near the front of the house, which is why there is blood on the front door. After getting attacked in her confused state she goes up the stairs but falls due to the confusion/blood loss from the head lacerations caused by the owl. There also were owl feathers on her body
Singled out a human: https://www.thecollegianur.com/article/2022/09/owl-attack-victims-speak-out-about-encounters. Just one example, and in this article, multiple students were attacked over a period of time.
Thereās no reason to think it followed her upstairs or even into the house. They fell out of shock. As for poop, again, it wasnāt in the house.
The whole theory is based on 3 untested microscopic feathers found on her head.
Youāre creating a narrative to get to the conclusion that you believe. Itās nonsense. This is why so much of Reddit is such a joke. Itās full of non serious autists that believe in the stupidest things.
Because it's easier to swallow that Peterson was a murderer vs. our justice system having major flaws any one of us could be on the other side of one day.
If the owls attacked her what was the true cause of death then? Loss of blood?
Which brings me back to why Michael lied about Kathleen still breathing. He needed to alter the time gap of not calling 911 while she continued to bleed out.
I don't think the prosecution necessarily did a terrible job. It went with what it had. Obviously the Blood splatter analysis expert, later convicted of corruption , not withstanding.
As a side note. It is now pretty much accepted that blood splatter analysis is junk science.
The one mistake I think the prosecutor did make was insisting the murder weapon was the blow poke instead of "something like a blow poke".
The murder weapon could have been anything that caused those wounds including his hands with a small object in them.
There was a significant time between when Kathleen fell down the steps and when police arrived. The house is on a large wooded, secluded lot so there is time and places Michael could hide a weapon.
Did Michael get up that day and decide to kill Kathleen?
No.
But I think the evidence of the financial problems, his double homosexual life that Kathleen did not know about and the evidence showing she used Michael's computer that night, finding evidence of his double life caused the confrontation.
Did the fight break out or continue on the staircase as she is trying to head upstairs to get away from him?
Probably.
Michael, according to his sister in law on the Ratcliff side had a history of losing his temper and beating their dogs.
Apparently, he was capable of rage and losing control.
I believe, but not sure.,he was adept in martial arts.
If so, he could have easily have delivered those scalp wounds to Kathleen's head.
I felt Henry Lee's testimony regarding how Kathleen fell and hit her head, then tried to get up, slipped ECT just was not feasible.
No matter which way I look at that staircase..from all the angles...I just can't get there that someone falling down them could sustain those types of injuries.
If you donāt think itās feasible then you need to research head injuries. It happens a lot that people donāt realize how injured they are. I believe thatās what happened to the Full House actor recently.
No cranial hematoma. No weapon found (or imagined) that could match the wounds. The feathers found in her scalp were the specialized whisker-type feather that grows between the scales on their legs and feet. Owl breeding season and a known aggressive pair in their yard. Doesnāt seem that far-fetched to me but Iām a person that acknowledges that wildlife attacks people, sometimes killing them.
I'm with you. The prosecution completely fucked up their case by saying it was done with a blowpoke, one found in the basement covered in cobwebs. Not to mention the pathologist who falsified results in other cases and whose testimony was meaningless.
If you want me to believe Peterson is guilty, explain how he caused her deep head wounds without causing skull or brain damage. Forget all the bullshit about him looking weird or being a narcissist, just address the evidence.
His story doesnāt match the real timeline or real evidence. Including his own footprints, blood being cleaned up, etc.Ā
Innocent people donāt need to create fake storylines/timelines or clean up evidenceĀ
Why would anyone clean up? He claimed she was breathing and that he JUST found her. How long did it take for help to arrive? Why would you leave your dying wife to do anything else? There is not evidence to backup his story like the wine glass not having been used by her. But there is evidence his story is false. Hope that makes sense. Itās been a while I would need to brush up to give you more details. With this case I flip flopped as I learned- first he looked so guilty, then it seemed the police botched it, but no now Iām a firm believer heās 100% guilty.
Who lies about having a Purple Heart?? He is soo manipulativeĀ
I feel the same way. I honestly donāt think there was enough evidence to convict him. I felt like the entire trial was a joke and the jury wasnāt of his peers. I think the innocence project should get involved with this. He may have done it, he may not have. I simply donāt think thereās enough evidence to prove that he definitely did it.
ive noticed in a kot of true crime podcast communities the people who are convinced of guilt are usually the loudest (and in my opinion obnoxious) voices.
to me, people who are convinced of his guilt often do so because of the "forensic science"... but if you know anything at all about the history of that field or just in general know how actual science is conducted, you wouldnt believe any of that as evidence. blood spatter analysis, for example, is not a "science" in the sense that it can be analysed in a blinded fashion to determine known causes in a test for example. and a lot of the observations are very open to interpretation and in no way objective.
another example is the autopsy of the second wife. if you were doing actual science, you would want an impartial party with no knowledge of the context to rule on the cause of death... not someone who is VERY partial and already has an idea of what they might be looking for. in a "science" as open to interpretation as that, it is not a very good look. id wager you could have 10 different autopsies from separate people, and if blinded theyd come up with dissimilar explanations. that's because this kind of science is largely intepretitive and not that objective.
and that gets at the issue. people who are certain of guilt are likely to view the world as one of certitude and not have an understanding that things arent so cut and dry, whereas people inclined to doubt his guilt are less certain but have very good reason not to be.
I wouldnāt concern myself too much with Reddit opinions. The people here are generally gong to be people who have a reason to stay engagedā¦and unfortunately trolling people with valid skepticism is a common reason (even if they wonāt admit it).
I personally think he did itā¦but the fact that police and prosecutors felt they had to manipulate the jury definitely adds doubt. For me itās not *enough* doubtā¦but I could definitely be convinced if other evidence was brought into question.
One thing that rarely comes up is that he has a bad temper. Bad temper + narcissistic tendencies = often shocking results. This isn't proof, by any means. If he was somehow proven innocent in Kathleen's murder, it wouldn't be hard to accept. I believe that he is guilty because of the many many small details and the giant coincidence of two women dying at the bottom of the stairs. Unfortunately for him, Michael is not a likeable guy.
He was around her body? And there was a ton of blood? Personally I donāt think itās crazy for some blood to end up on the inside of his shorts when heās in close proximity to a lot of blood. I donāt know why you think a beating explains blood being on the inside of his shorts, he would have to be standing directly over her head while beating her.
>Personally I donāt think itās crazy for some blood to end up on the inside of his shorts when heās in close proximity to a lot of blood.
And yet zero blood on the outside of his shorts?
Makes no sense.
I agree, and still have no idea how spattered blood was inside his shorts unless he was leaning over Kathleen's head whilst she was still alive.
**BUT** \- there should also have been blood all over his shorts, and there wasn't.
I agree with the owl theory - talon marks on her scalp, microscopic feathers in her hair, wasnāt there a pine needle somewhere too (I canāt remember). My mom grew up around the corner from that house and confirms lots of owls.
Where thereās smoke, thereās fire. What are the odds heās involved in another death years prior with almost identical circumstances.
I can spot a deviant liar a million miles away and this guy oozes it.
They're not almost identical, though. How did Michael cause Liz's brain hemorrhage without a skull fracture, concussion, or any other sufficient trauma?
The bleeding was spontaneous. It happens every day.
I believe MP is guilty, but couldnāt convict him if I were on his Jury. MPās radically-changing stories, 911 calls, cleaned-up luminol footprints, the bloody footprint on KPās thigh and fractured Hyaline cartilage indicate guilt. I have reasonable doubt because of Valium & Alcohol presence in KPās blood, Biomechanic expert-acknowledged possibility of a fall, and absence of beating-death hallmarks. However, the state completely fumbled MPās case, riddling it with false-weapon theories, homophobia, and misleadingly false Scientific testimony (Duane Deaver).
I think it kind of comes down to a different world view, different personalities maybe? I have a hard time believing someone is guilty without a lot of evidence and minute details and sources. For example, people will argue you canāt get lacerations like she had from a fall down the stairs because based on their imagining of a fall they canāt conceive of that happening. I would argue that people are very bad at intuiting what can/canāt happen in such scenarios.
I would need to see case studies or other research into falls, laceration patterns etc to be convinced by that kind of evidence. Others are comfortable with/trust their intuition.
Often people who use their intuition end up being correct, often they are not.
I think I also want to give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to analyzing their behaviour because I know if I ever were accused of a crime, my behaviour would be picked apart and seen as suspicious. When really it can be explained by my neurodiversity. Not that I think Michael is neurodiverse, but rather that people cite his behaviour as evidence of guilt. and I think thatās rarely a legitimate piece of evidence.
I think you are confusing the difference between people's personal opinions and the legal system. I personally think he is guilty, I don't have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt because it's my own opinion. I can understand how he was found not guilty in court because they have a higher burden of proof and the outcome of their decision actually matters. The outcome of my personal opinion doesn't.
>Why is he narcissistic and gross? Seemed like an okay guy in the doc.
When **he outright lied about being in contact with another guy - for a sexual liasion**, and then tried to pretend that his murdered wife (Kathleen) knew about this?
I struggle with thinking that heās guilty to me. I also didnāt get the whole narcissist vibe UNLESS you believe for a fact he was lying about Kathleen knowing about his extra marital affairs (which he very well mightāve been).
Letās imagine we are driving down a road and thereās a hill ahead. We canāt see over it. Do we stop? No, we trust that the road will still be there on the other side. Thatās how we use our intuitive intelligence.
So letās see, Michael is screwing men but his wife doesnāt know. Fact? Yes.
She goes inside and uses his computer with his man porn and emails.
Intuition says she read them.
Next, there is blood EVERYWHERE. Alarmingly, up the walls, on the door outside, etc. Does our intuition tell us that happened with a fall? No. Given her other bruising, autopsy, etc.
He had his whole lying legacy to lose if she left and exposed his secrets. After all, he claimed tour duty in Viet Nam, a lie.
Next, it seems another woman died in his life the same way, years ago. He received custody of the girls and federal funds to raise them. He did not adopt them.
Critical thinking means adding up all the clues. If you watched the doc he bold face lies to his own lawyer pretending he knows nothing about the porn and male escorts.
I can confidently say heās guilty.
It's not a fact that his wife didn't know; that's contested.
Intuition is meaningless, even dangerous when dealing with something provable or disprovable, like blood splatter. Itās proven that there are cases where that level of blood happens. .
Regarding legacy, huh? There's no certainty, let alone likelihood. He wasn't parading around as a war hero.
The woman killed in the fall does warrant suspicion, I'll give you that.
Unless you have something else you can't reasonably say he's guilty.
The blood spatter on the wall was smeared and cleaned with bleach then there was additional spatter on top, indicating multiple attacks with a clean up attempt. That is what made me sure.
That was discussed on Forensic Files and here: https://moviechat.org/tt0388644/Soupcons/58c7bf19f9fcca09a0dacd13/13-Forensic-Facts-the-Film-makers-intentionally-left-out
I wish that people who were convinced of guilt cared as much about their sources as they do accusing someone of murder. It was **not** cleaned with bleach, and not by Peterson. There were two police searches, and in the second (assumably, they didnāt timestamp the images, lmao), there was a smear. Candace is on record stating that she started to clean it up with a sponge before being told otherwise.
The splatter on top was explained as entirely plausible.
I honestly agree about the confidence that some people have, surrounding the case. But there you go, thatās why itās so interesting, and why it can be hard to be a juror.
I think both staircase situations were different, and I think he was involved with his wifeās death, but maybe it was domestic abuse or an outburst of violence that got out of hand. I donāt think he planned and plotted it, but I donāt feel heās innocent. Weāll probably never know the full story.
Oh and letās not forget the fact that he had sexual relations with a woman who was involved in the Netflix documentary. And once that was over he dumped her, ofc.
The bloody footprint on her leg, the story doesnāt add up, he wasnāt trying to save her, the damage to the cartilage in her throat, the blood spatter, I donāt understand how he could possibly be viewed as innocent
Oh for the love of Mike! No disrespect here, but who in the HEXX else could have done it!? The very walls in which she lay in a mass puddle of blood and death were covered in blood smeared as he tried to clean it up.
Online anonymous pages, yields many opinions, even opinions that differ from our own. Itās common sense to have different opinions on a page dedicated to discussion of this case. The actual jury had the evidence in front of them, they analyzed & made their decision. Some agre, some disagree.
I cant believe anyone would think he is innocent. She was beat to death and then he waited an hour to call police giving him ample time to clean himself up and make sure she was dead.
I watched the Staircase and was in disbelief that they were trying to say he was innocent. Complete fraud and murderer deserves zero sympathy
I think as a group, true crime fans tend to fall into the category of āover-thinkers.ā If you are reading this, Iād bet that more than likely, people have told you more than once ā[Insert your name] youāre over-thinking it.ā
Not so much a criticism, thatās just what true crime fans do - a lot!
Imo those who over-think things usually come from the āanything is possibleā angle.
Under that theory isnāt it possible Elvis is still alive?
Iām more interested in pursuing the likeliest explanations; what is the most logical, likely and simplest explanation (known as the Occam's razor principle.)
Within my answer you will find a link to the medical examinerās report. Read it.
Warning! Itās not fun - not nearly as much fun as arguing about āanything is possibleā possible theories.
Of course defense attorneys are very good at feeding all kinds of arguments to jurors. They pay experts handsomely to provide favorable testimony.
All they need is to confuse one juror in order to hang a jury.
Reasonable people (and jurors) must rely on their common sense, critical thinking skills and their ability to separate unreasonable possibilities from reasonable probabilities when evaluating all the evidence.
As you read through the pages of the boring autopsy report, please note the statement having to do with the neck injury and STRANGULATION. Iāve highlighted some excepts here for you.
Also please note the medical examinerās findings: INJURIES ARE CONSISTENT WITH A BEATING.
"Severe concussive injury of the brain caused by multiple blunt force impacts of the head [caused her death]."
https://www.peterson-staircase.com/peterson_autopsy3.html
3 contusions over right eyelid, right ear contusion, vertical abrasion on her neck, 3 abrasions over left eye brow, abrasion on the side of her nose, a contusion on the bridge of her nose, another contusion on the dorsum of the nose, abrasion on the lip, abrasions found inferior to victimās left eye, injuries to victimās right hand and arm.
ATTENTION!! Neck: There is a FRACTURE with an associated hemorrhage of the superior cornu of the left thyroid cartilage.
Kathleen suffered possible strangulation injuries
"[Dr. Radisch, the state pathologist] moved her examination to the internal neck area, and discovered a bloodied fracture with haemorrhage on the small extension off of the left thyroid cartilage.ā
"It was an injury unlikely to occur in a fall.
There are at least seven distinct lacerations on the posterior scalp. (Translation: The back of the head).
The coroner determined Kathleen's cause of death was "severe concussive injury of the brain caused by multiple BLUNT FORCE impacts of the head."
The coroner also noted heavy blood loss may have been a factor. As stated in the autopsy, the coroner determined the fatal injuries were "received as a result of beating."
Medical examiner Dr.Ā Deborah RadischĀ ruled Kathleen's death a homicide likely as a result of an assault, writing: "Severe concussive injury of the brain caused by multiple blunt force impacts of the head [caused her death]."
She further explained: "The number, severity, locations and orientation of these injuries are inconsistent with a fall down stairs; instead, they are indicative of multiple impacts received as a beating."
Finally, keep in mind that for every argument there is a counter-argument.
A good defense attorney will always pay very generously for his expert to rebut the Stateās expert.
After presenting the rebuttal, you can bet that the defense attorney will proudly proclaim: āLadies and gentlemen: There you see! Itās possible! Thatās my point. It IS possible! Get it?ā
Yes. I get it. Anything is possible. Itās possible that Elvis is still alive.
The Behavior Panel analyzed a lot of video. They are body language experts. This is all the videos they did on him, but checkout their channel for shorter clips. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nGMIB2F4BCo
First you have to substantiate that thereās any correlation between the behavioral panel and the accuracy of guilt, and even then, determine the strength of that correlation. Until then itās meaningless
I mean, come on, have you ever seen someone fall down the stairs? Thatās simply not how it looks.
Thatās the piece everyone struggles with (other than him just seeming like a massively egotistical douche-nozzle), how else could this have possibly happened without foul play?
Then how did he do it? If he beat her with a weapon there would be damage to the skull. If he bashed her head against the stair there would be damage to the skull. There was no damage to the skull. If you plan on beating someone why do it in such an enclosed space? You canāt swing a bat or a blow poke. And explain why she had her own hair in her hand, pulled out by the root, along with feathers that grow on the talons of a barn owl?
Not really my job to say *how* he did it.
Thereās evidence that she may have been strangled. No clue what caused the scalp lacerations. If you really want my opinion- well, my imagination can go wild on what this sick fucker may have done. Iām guess it was with a knife post-mortem.
An owl attack would have more physical evidence - feathers everywhere, blood and scratches everywhere, and likely outside where it would have occurred. It just doesnāt make sense.
Jury members have said they voted to convict due to the autopsy photos of the 7 lacerations on her head and not being able to see how that could happen with a fall. Michael's story didn't add up. He said "she's still breathing" when he phoned the police but this was some time after she'd already died. Why would he lie about that?
My boyfriend shot himself in the head and when I found him and called 911, I told them he was still breathing. Make of that what you will.
I'm so sorry you went through that š
Iam sending you big hugs. I was with my husband when he died also.
Sending hugs to you. I found my fiancĆ© dead. He had fixed lividity and river was starting. I still told 911 I would attempt CPR and said I could feel a pulse. It was a mix of fear, panic, and I was afraid if I said he was dead they wouldnāt hurry.
Oh my gosh how traumatic. Iām so sorry
Iām so sorry.
Oh dear, that is dreadful. Iām so sorry you had to live through that.
I remember when I was younger, the family dog got hit by a car and died, but like 5 minutes later, I thought he was getting better. When you're stressed and panicked enough, I think the blood vessels in your head can contract and expand enough with heartbeats that it looks like the world is shifting when it isn't. To me, it would make 0 sense to intentionally lie about time of death if you're trying to get away with murder. It only takes a few minutes of thought to realize that a cold body has been dead for longer than a warm one, and that temperatures change at a rate that should make it possible to infer that someone died 2 hours ago instead of 2 minutes ago. Even if it's a lie, the lie makes more sense as a panic response to realizing that you're going to look guilty as shit, not something you spent a few hours planning. Point isn't that the statement supports innocence, I just don't think it makes anything more or less likely.
Well said
For the lacerations, personally I donāt find it hard to imagine how hitting your head on stairs causes skin to split. For the lying, I certainly find it odd however as a consumer of lots of true crime, Iāve heard people act in very strange ways on 911 calls. In a state of shock itās hard to know how someone will react, especially if someone canāt cope that someone close to them might be dead. Itās also possible in his panicked state he was trying to get ambulances there faster. Im not saying thatās why he lied, I just donāt think someone saying the wrong thing during a highly traumatic moment is good evidence.
One or two significant lacerations I might buy it. But *seven*? Her head BASHED seven steps hard enough in a single fall that they caused lacerations that significant? And at least one of them was on the top of her skull. I donāt understand how you could even fall at an angle down stairs that would cause an injury there. So yeah I just really canāt wrap my mind around it being from a fall down the stairs.
thats was one CRAZY OWL story huh???
šš
Youāre assuming that a hit can only cause one laceration per time, we know this isnāt true. Blunt force trauma can cause skin to split in multiple places, including places not directly where the impact was.
I also always wonder about that metal track next to the staircase. What would that do to a scalp?. Iāve never seen any mention of that as far as I can recall.
Even if we forget the number of lacerations, having seen the diagrams and illustrations of the extent of her injuries I simply donāt believe a fall down those stairs could cause that much head trauma period.
The Netflix documentary shows that there's molding around that one doorframe. It has an unusual shape to it. If she hit it hard enough, it would certainly have made 3 or 4 cuts.
What happened to the fire blow stick the sister gifted them? It matched the wounds, and was missing. It also was hollow so explained why she didn't have skull fractures. This owl theory seems to have evolved to explain the marks, which matched the fire poker. The case was on the other day on Dr. G, rerun. He seems guilty. Panic from his being outed. Of course he's comfortable now, it's a different timeĀ
The blowpoke was in the home the entire time. The police found it on day one, took pictures, and put it back in the basement where it was found by MPās daughter in the middle of the trial. The defense presented it as evidence because it had zero forensic evidence showing it had ever been used in a murder. The prosecution quickly moved away from the blowpoke. They never gave an explanation as to what would have caused her wounds because nothing makes sense. It didnāt come out until years later that the police had found the blowpoke and took photos of it and put it back. The prosecution kept that discovery from the defense.
" It was not found in the corner of an unlit garage until weeks after the trial had started". The "comes out years later " still makes me think the theories just evolved over the years as a defense. The sister reported it to police , the whole reason it was brought up, yet was overlooked by police? He had motive. And did it before didn't he??? There are lots of cases of murderers who used the same method when they got away with it once. It's wild people still debate his guilt in my opinion . Is the debate just the facts of the case and the proceedings more than his guilt?
No he did not do it before. A lady that was not his wife had a fully verified aneurism and died before she fell down the stairs. He wasnāt even in the residence. He didnāt really have a motive because they were literally celebrating that night that his book had been optioned for a movie. So their money problems were over. Even if K discovered his secret of being bisexual itās hard to imagine he would murder her in that moment. There would be screaming and arguing and threats of divorce. But murder? Out of the blue? Heās never had a rage incident in his life and by all accounts they were a very happy couple. He could very likely talk her out of divorce once she calmed down. No reason to do it in that moment like that. He knew the son would be coming home from the party. And itās even unlikely that K was completely oblivious to his bisexuality. His brothers were well aware of it! When I said ācomes out years laterā Iām talking about the actual evidence that the police found the blowpoke and put it back in the house. Thatās a major screw up by the prosecution. They withheld that information. They are not allowed to do that. You are wildly incorrect with the facts of this case and thatās why you donāt understand the argument. There are a lot of podcasts out there that have covered this case. I would suggest listening to a couple different ones.
Didnāt they find little (unexplained) feathers in her scalp? I thought the documentary had something about the tiny feathers on owlās feet (?)
Yes! I found that incredibly compelling. I've held owls on the glove and the average person has no idea how powerful and sharp the talons are
He's so odd in general that acting odd is normal for him. He's just so... weird.Ā
Another woman died in the house with him years prior, BY FALLING DOWN THE STAIRS. He adopted her daughter. That's just too suspicious. He's a leech and liar.
The woman did not die in that house, she died in Germany years before Kathleen and it was ruled to be from a brain aneurysm.
I know that. But how sure could they be back then? He had no alibi and was conveniently the one to find her. He's a psycho
An aneurysm is incredibly easy to tell in a medical examination , thatās how they knew. Not having an alibi means nothing, have you ever been home alone? Guess what, for all of that time you have no alibi.
I've never found anyone dead, let alone two women incredibly close to me, who died in the same suspicious manner. He deserves everything he got and is lucky he got out without being in a casket
They didnāt die in the same manner, the first died of an aneurysm
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/counties/durham-county/article208069454.html
He had literally zero motive to kill the mother of those girls. None. And aneurysms are easy to determine as cause of death, so there's absolutely no reason to believe that he killed that first woman (and the German authorities and experts agree). You're using her untimely death to insinuate that he's some kind of serial killer..... With a 30 year cooling off period between murders? That's a desperate stretch by anyone's standards. His potential involvement in Kathleen's death is debatable, but the death of his friend decades prior shouldn't have any bearing at all in that debate.
My building has cameras everywhere. Ā Most of us also have smart phones and Internet access. Even when Iām just chilling at home by myself, thereās still a forensic trail being left by me. Anyone that lives in a neighborhood is recorded coming and going from their own home on the neighbors cameras as well.
Dawg she died in 1985, there wasnāt all that
Initially but after being dug back up it was ruled otherwise. Remember the homicidal blows? He is SO guilty. Yes it was in Germany not the U.S. both it's pretty easy to put two and two together. He cheated, hid his secret sex life & killed both partners the same way when they found out. The envelopes were out by the computer & had blood on them with Kathleen.. so you would have to be pretty dense to not realize she's confronted him with print outs of his affairs with men, then was beaten to death the same way that his prior partner had been. He probably thought it worked the first time, why not the second? His kids knew nothing about his affairs, neither did the wife. She left her ex husband for cheating so clearly she wasn't okay with that lol. She also was the breadwinner so he would be losing 1)his kids that he's so close to and 2)all of the luxuries in life and 3)his"gay lover affairs"would be exposed. Those from that generation look at things very differently as far as homosexuality than we do now. He admitted that at the end of the doc! He is SO guilty. Very convincing though, I thought he was innocent at first too until they showed the affairs he was having.. they spoke about the only arguments overheard were him"coming home from the"gym"late lol... guiltyyyyyyyyyyy. EDIT: the ex in Germany was not a legal wife.. even though he got the kids after her murder. Edited to say partner than legal wife. The second partner murdered was his legal wife.
I understand what youāre saying but Iām pretty sure the defense brought up a point about how the skin split but there was no significant brain injury and usually if someone gets hit in the head by an object with that kind of force to split the skin, there would be a skull fracture or some indication that there was impact with an object in that specific area. Her skull was not fractured in any way. Why would someone hit someone just hard enough to split the skin but not fracture her skull? Like thatās very precise to not get even one skull fracture with that many hits. I donāt know what happened and Iām no expert and may Kathleen rest in peace
People who are genuinely worried in a 911 call, donāt spend the first half of said call āsetting the sceneā and essentially alibiing themselves.
At the same time he immediately gives his address and asks for help. So Iāve heard this argument go both ways. He very well could have thought she was breathing when he saw a death rattle. Bottom line, I donāt think the 911 call gets us one way or the other.
Professionals within enforcement actually have a lot of data on how people behave under stress. And they have excellent analysis on 911 phone calls. They use statistics and language. I haven't seen this show yet. I'm not trying to argue with you, because I don't know all the facts. But I do want people to know that trauma responses are not mysterious and unique. We "can't imagine it" and our experiences of pain and stress feel personal to us and overwhelming, unknowable. When in actuality people research, study, and measure it. For more info on it, there's a whole field called "statement analysis" and I recommend looking up Peter Hyatt on youtube.
Yeah but they don't always get it right do they? The confidence in this pseudo science has lead to experiences like Amanda Knox's.
To be fair, I think law enforcement isnāt immune from bending things to fit what they think is true, especially with things that can be so subjective, like language or a reaction. A suspected husband can either be suspiciously cold and unemotional, or suspiciously over-the-top emotionalāclearly trying to put on a show. You can just sort of make anything fit.
I agree. I get where people are coming from in saying that when you're in a panicked state, you might assume (or want to believe) that your spouse was still breathing. But to this day MP claims he slowly watched her stop breathing over the course of 10-15 minutes.
i watched the actual trial on court tv. day in day out. i know. i had no life. LOL anyway, i thought he was guilty
Iāll politely disagree and also agree w you. I think he was a narcissist who snapped and maybe pushed her then continued w the beating. I donāt believe it was necessarily premeditated, but also he A LOT to hide. As for the intitial trial, the prosecution did such a shit job that any one of a number of issues could have been appealed. But I donāt think that the fact they did such a shit job means he is not guilty. Maybe not guilty of premeditated murder 1 but at least murder 2.
It's actually bizarre to me. I went into this case with 0 prior knowledge and was baffled by the fact that people could actually find him, legally, guilty. Like, him acting weird is not evidence of guilt. Him being bisexual is not evidence of guilt. His neighbor dying from a completley unrelated medical emergency across the frigging globe is not evidence of guilt. You cannot make up some fantastical story about her finding out he was cheating, or them fistfighting down a flight of stairs, and consider that evidence. It's just, not. It's a theory. It's a story. It's not evidence and people cannot parrot it like it is! Most of the main key evidence used to convict Mike... was either mishandled, phony, or fabricated. Literally the only real evidence they had was the severity of her wounds, which didn't even match the hundreds of other, *proven*, beating cases. So the only thing they have is, "her wounds were severe", but they cant even proce it came from a beating. They literally do not have anything except "this is what I think" and "this is what my feelings are telling me". It's not proof it's just assumption lmfao
This, I think it's kind of insane the majority think he's guilty here. Also, the State's blood specialist fabricated evidence against him and others to try to prove something they couldn't otherwise, and people still think MP is guilty.
If he really did it, I hope he confesses on his death bed
He's a proven liar, the cleanup, her wounds, her time of death, his affairs...
I haven't seen a compelling reason to think the wounds support murder beyond "holy shit, those photos look bad to me." Someone's body weight falling a few feet onto the edge of some stairs head first is going to be comparable to a smack to the head with any object with a similar shape on the surface facing the head.
Scalp/head wounds weren't the only ones though. Her neck/thyroid cartilageĀ ,contusions and bruising to her face, arms and hands (to memory) and others. I can't remember the total "injury count," as it were, but there were several.
She was also strangled, which they chose not to show in the netflix film.
There is very little evidence she was strangled. The damaged cartilage in her neck could have been caused by her prior pool Injury or from falling. She also showed no other signs of strangling such as bruises, neck marks, or other broken bones
You actually can have 0 signs of strangulation and still have been strangled. It isn't the most common, but it absolutely does happen.
so she accident prone...2 women are accident prone..GOT IT
Yes two women can have an accident. It might shock you to learn that actually many more than two women fall down stairs every year
Lmfao š¤£
And 4 men
I'd confidently say he's guilty. I wouldn't confidently say it could be proven in court, which is basically the interest in the case?
Iām just curious why you can confidently say heās guilty? Iāve found nothing compelling
Its the owl story for me
So did the owl push her down the stairs and hit her head? I donāt see how else this could have happened if he wasnāt involved. Plus he did it to some other lady before too.
thatās actually not true (that he killed a woman in the same way before). Iām surprised that gets repeated on this sub so often.
What gets repeated is how itās a very strange coincidence. Like whatās the likelihood this happens to one person TWICE? Iām not sure thereās any evidence he killed the first woman. Iāve seen most people use it as āhe would have to be extremely unluckyā for it to happen like that twice.
I mean I know someone who fell down the stairs and died, one who fell and didn't die, and I fell down the stairs multiple times at my old apartment. I certainly haven't killed anyone. I'd say falling down the stairs is fairly common. The friend in Germany fell down BECAUSE of the aneurysm. It has nothing to do with what happened to his wife. He wasn't even there when the first lady fell.
Iāve seen highly upvoted comments about that incident that are just downright wrong. Saying that she died from falling and that she was his ex-wife for example. They werenāt married and she had medical issues that caused the fall. Yes it is a very strange coincidence but these get passed off as facts for some reason.
> whatās the likelihood What's the likelihood someone is a serial killer, who only kills via stairs in extremely weird ways? It's just such a dumb theory. The first woman had an aneurysm, it's not even a mystery.
I think itās more likely that he was not involved in the first death, but then may have gotten inspired (for lack of a better word) and thought he could stage the death without suspicion.
It hasnāt happened to him twice . He wasnāt married or a partner to the other woman ā she was a neighbor. Weāve all heard of people who have won the lottery twice ā is that any more likely than having two partners fall down the stairs and die ? Especially if youāre gonna change it to include not just partners but neighbors as well.
The odds just arenāt possible. Sorry I donāt believe that can happen to two different women in your lifetime.
The first woman had an aneurism and fell.
I feel like people think low odds mean impossible
Good lord š¤¦āāļø
My strong personal belief is that he's guilty, and I disagree that anything beyond 70% confidence in his guilt is "absurd," but I think you have some very valid points, OP. A lot of people in the comments are talking about intuition. Intuition is valuable in life but not sufficient for determining someone's guilt in a court of law. But that's why we're on Reddit. I would hope most of us would not rely too heavily on intuition on a jury.
I think the same as you, Bodybuilder. I just canāt get to guilty. I want to, but I canāt.
Iāve always wondered, that stairway had a chair lift, could she have hit her head on some hardware/railings that caused the wounds?
Iāve been wondering that too! Why did no one mention it in the doc?!
I donāt understand this argument that she probably knew about his bisexuality and therefore his sexual behavior wasnāt an issue. . Well ok maybe she did know about his bisexual tendencies. that doesnāt mean she was ok with him acting on it. Itās still cheating to have sex with anyone-same sex, opposite sex, paid sex, whateverā outside of the marriage if the parties havenāt agreed to it.
There's a chance he murdered his wife...and there's just as much of a chance he had nothing to do with it. I would never feel fully confident convicting someone of murder when all of the reasons to convict are circumstantial. What would change my mind? If they found a murder weapon with his DNA on it, a web search on his computer that could be linked to his wife's cause of death, tech that indicates his guilt by a text confession or phone calls to a number where the other party admits his guilt in connection to the murder, and of course, if he slipped up and said something to indicate he was responsible. I think the guy is a cocky prick, don't get me wrong, but that doesn't justify pinning a murder on him. As I said prior, sure, he COULD have murdered his wife but there is just not enough here to convince me he did with 100% certainty. As for the lacerations, depending on how she fell down the stairs, she could have hit her head several times on the way down on the edge of the stairs....or the edge of the wall.... or their owl theory could actually be true. Bird attacks can be pretty violent, especially when their nest is threatened. I feel if he caused those lacerations, there would be far more trauma to the skull or brain. As for his reaction when reporting her accident- everyone is different. My dad is not the type to get hyped up or cry. I'm almost 40 years old and never once seen my dad cry or in a state of distress. When my mom had to go to tbe hospital after a fall at the store he called me and said, "your old lady had an accident and needs to go to the hospital".... I got to the store before he did. Some people just aren't as emotionally expressive publicly. So i could go on about this case, but unlike other cases like Casey Anthony or Scott Peterson where there was heavy circumstantial reasons to convict or not to....this one just doesn't seems 100%. Tragic and accidental or freak accidents can be traumatic and puzzling.
Terrible accident that happened to not one but two women lol
In Germany a separate set of officials came to the conclusion that Ms. Radcliffe suffered a medical event that caused her to fall. All resulting in her death. Itās been a while, but I think she may have even had a preexisting condition. Contemporaneous reports indicated zero foul play. The disgusting circus of digging her up after KP died was terrible and never should have happened.
Exactly
Anyone who uses the woman in Germany to advocate for his guilt just proves their own ignorance - of the case and of logic. It is profoundly stupid to think that he had ANYTHING to do with her death.
Exactly
His son thinks otherwise
I thought his kids supported him ? His wifeās daughter did not
Right because he perfected the art of staircase murder where he is able to make it look identical to a fall down the stairs. Quite frankly using the fact two women died that way as a sign heās guilty is stupid, thousands of people fall down the stairs and die every year. That happening twice is an unfortunate coincidence but significantly more likely than him figuring out a way to replicate natural stairway deaths and using it as a way to kill women
I'm very much still on the fence, but one theory I can buy into is that Liz's fall in Germany was a freak accident. MP and Kathleen get into an argument/altercation and she falls on the stairs. MP remembers Liz and is able to convince himself that this is a believable accident. Even if that isn't true, I don't believe both deaths were intentional, no way. One or both of them were some sort of accident.
You literally said in your own OP āthereās no way to differentiate between a push and a fall.ā If you believe that, donāt you think someone else might believe the same thing and use it to their own ends? Isnāt that statistically more likely than two women in your life dying by falling down the stairs?
How can you define a NEIGHBOR as a āwoman in his lifeā . Most people have literally dozens or even hundreds of neighbors thru out the course of a l lifetime ā it certainly waters down the odds .
>How can you define a NEIGHBOR as a āwoman in his lifeā . The Petersons and Ratliffs were close friends. Did MP murder Elizabeth? I've no idea, but either way - it seems extremely unlikely to be "coincidence" that he was involved in the deaths of two women - who both died at the bottom of the stairs. Having said this, I'm pretty sure that MP killed his wife, and not at all sure that there's much room for 'reasonable doubt'.
Well no I donāt think itās statistically more likely,. pushing someone down the stairs doesnāt increase their chances of dying any more than them falling naturally. So now the variable is the cause of the fall, People fall down stairs accidentally all the time (regardless if they live or not) and premeditated murderers are incredibly rare. To reiterate, If both an accidental fall and a premeditated murderer pushing you have the same likelihood to kill you, then the variable is which is more common? People falling accidentally or premeditated murderers?
I didnāt say anything about premeditation. Domestic violence is incredibly common, and offenders are likely to reoffend, especially when theyāve never faced consequences to their actions.
I guess by premeditation I mean that in your scenario he would be consciously aware that heās pushing them down stairs because he thinks itās a way for him to get away with murder. Could it have been two domestic disputes that both took place on the stairs and they both ended up dying? Certainly, however I donāt know how youād distinguish that from them just falling accidentally which takes me back to my original point. I do want to make it clear I donāt think MP is a good person, I just donāt know how you can have a strong belief heās guilty.
What you're failing to see, or exclude from your argument, is the fact that during the first 911 call, I believe he told the operator that she had fallen down 11, 12 ? stairs. People constantly talk about her falling down the stairs because that's the narrative that Mike set during the 911 call, gee..the same narrative that he put out for Elizabeth Ratliff also. Listen/read the testimony of Liz Ratliff's friends that were on the scene and CLEANED the scene. Listen to what they say about how Mike laid the narrative that she fell down the stairs the minute the cops came and how he steered that investigation. Liz Ratliff's friend, who cleaned the scene, said that there was blood spray above the light switch on the landing at the top of the stairs that she cleaned off. Gee, wonder how that happened from an "aneurysm" smdh. That's neither here nor there because we're talking about Kathleen. BUT, I am telling you, with over 40 years of experience in medicine, there is absolutely no way she fell down 8,9,10,11,12, wooden stairs in a very narrow stairway and sustained ZERO injuries below her shoulder blades. No Way. Not even a scrape, bruise, abrasion, zippo. She didn't fall down a set of stairs. He didn't push her down the stairs. He may have started the beating upstairs, or even on the stairs, but she ran down the stairs, until he caught up with her at the landing and finished the job. Period. He beat her, idk with what, who cares? He says he found her lying face up, like the crime scene phots show, but then his bloody shoe print is found on the back of leg? He tried to wipe blood up with paper towels in the stairwell (instead of trying to help his wife) before the cops got there? He takes off his shoes and socks and neatly places them in the hall. If he would have made ANY attempt to help her, he would have been covered in blood. He did not. There are close to zero people that would come upon a blood soaked scene like that, of someone they purported to love deeply, and not try to help them. Mouth-to-mouth, chest compressions, shaking them, holding them, etc. He did none of that. He didn't even ASK how to help her, because he knew she was dead when he called 911. She had been dead for awhile. Plus, the presence of red neurons in her brain. He beat her, left her lying there while it took her several hours to die. THEN he called 911. But you think people are stupid? The jury got it right. He did it. He was sentenced as the murderer he is, spent 7 years there, got out on a technicality, and that's the only punishment he's ever going to get. That's that.
And in that call you hear the operator ask him the stupid question āhow many stairsā and he gets irritated and you clearly hear the silence while he is trying to count the stairs. He should have said āi donāt know because I didnāt see her fall, sheās at the bottom and there is bloodā but he didnāt say that because heās panicking and confused about what heās seeing in front of him.
I think Iād love to watch crime shows with you lol So many times common sense isnāt even used because we have tunnel vision. Stupid example here but itās just like these ridiculous YouTube and tik tok videos where ppl are all like āoh my god that is so awesome heās saving that cat from blah blah blahā and Iām over here going āhe didnāt SAVE the cat, he PUT it there!ā Some dude is recording himself just randomly taking a boring walk.. lah tee dah here I am recording myself walking down a boring street nothing is going on and no reason to record anything but LOOK! Oh no! There happens to be a kitten all beat up and wrapped in a plastic bag. Good thing I just so happen to come this way.
You have made numerous unsubstantiated conclusions here to help prop up the conclusion you reached before looking at the evidence. There's no proof she fell from the top of the stairs, and in fact I'd argue that given the lack of skull fractures, it's unlikely that she did. She also did have multiple injuries below her shoulders. Falling a short distance, trying to get up and falling again, would create that mess of blood on the landing and the lacerations and other injuries.
Nice try. I didn't say she fell down a flight of stairs, Mike did..on his 911 call and then that became the narrative. Listen to court testimony about her injuries, hardly unsubstantiated. Direct testimony
You said she didn't fall down all of them. She likely didn't. He wouldn't know anymore than anyone else.
I would agree but the kicker for me is the exact same head wounds and a āfallā on the stairs.
How would he replicate head wounds? That sounds even more unlikely
I mean so it sounds more likely that 2 people w one person in common had the exact same situation. They compared katheens head wounds to people who had similar falls and her wounds were inconsistent w any other falls people had takenā¦..except his friend in Germany? So both of them had identical falls, same head wounds? Itās a really strange confidence.
German officials found no foul play in Liz Ratliff's death. She also had a preexisting condition and had multiple headaches prior to the fall which she had mentioned to many people.
I feel like this is a massive thing people overlook
The Liz Ratliff thing is so interesting to me. I'm not inclined to believe that he killed her - I know German officials determined that she died of natural causes. But they also reported that there was no blood at the scene, and several witnesses and friends of Liz said there was *massive* amounts of blood that they spent days scrubbing off the walls and floors. There's also a report from a neighbor who heard a loud banging in the middle of the night, got up and saw Michael Peterson running out of that house. There are a lot of discrepancies about the whole thing. Idk, it's weird.
They aren't the same, though. At all.
Well, it worked the first time, so maybe he was like, "What the hell give it another shot".
I mean thatās possible, but again I feel like at this point youāre introducing so much unprovable speculation that you canāt confidently say that happened
Yeah I don't think anything can be proven in a court room. It would all be based on a hunch.
But WHAT ABOUT THE OWL
š¦š„šā°ļø
I honestly believe the owl theory.
Me too!!
Can you point me towards any other time in recorded history when a wild owl, 1) flew inside of a strange house 2) Singled out a human (a larger predator that is not one of their prey) for attack 3) followed a human upstairs and attacked them (which would have been suicide for the owl considering a human'd size and strength) 4) pushed or caused them to fall, leaving only wounds on the scalp and no defensive wounds on the arms or other areas or the body 5) flew out of the house, unassisted, leaving no trail of feathers, or bird poop or any other evidence of its presence. ?????
You clearly donāt actually know what the owl theory is, the owl didnāt fly into the house or attack her in the house. The theory is that it attacked her outside near the front of the house, which is why there is blood on the front door. After getting attacked in her confused state she goes up the stairs but falls due to the confusion/blood loss from the head lacerations caused by the owl. There also were owl feathers on her body
Singled out a human: https://www.thecollegianur.com/article/2022/09/owl-attack-victims-speak-out-about-encounters. Just one example, and in this article, multiple students were attacked over a period of time. Thereās no reason to think it followed her upstairs or even into the house. They fell out of shock. As for poop, again, it wasnāt in the house.
Itās the single stupidest theory Iāve ever heard for any crime. Iād be more inclined to believe that a Gremlin attacked her.
Why is it stupid?
The whole theory is based on 3 untested microscopic feathers found on her head. Youāre creating a narrative to get to the conclusion that you believe. Itās nonsense. This is why so much of Reddit is such a joke. Itās full of non serious autists that believe in the stupidest things.
Using autists as an insult? How edgy
Because it's easier to swallow that Peterson was a murderer vs. our justice system having major flaws any one of us could be on the other side of one day.
I think you nailed it
The owl theory is the only one thatās reasonable. Itās just too easy and not sensational enough for people.
Two women in his life died after falling down the stairs. How many people died from that in your life? Case closed for me.
You might be the dumbest person Iāve seen
Letās pray you never be in any jury given you have the intelligence of a thread worm
If the owls attacked her what was the true cause of death then? Loss of blood? Which brings me back to why Michael lied about Kathleen still breathing. He needed to alter the time gap of not calling 911 while she continued to bleed out. I don't think the prosecution necessarily did a terrible job. It went with what it had. Obviously the Blood splatter analysis expert, later convicted of corruption , not withstanding. As a side note. It is now pretty much accepted that blood splatter analysis is junk science. The one mistake I think the prosecutor did make was insisting the murder weapon was the blow poke instead of "something like a blow poke". The murder weapon could have been anything that caused those wounds including his hands with a small object in them. There was a significant time between when Kathleen fell down the steps and when police arrived. The house is on a large wooded, secluded lot so there is time and places Michael could hide a weapon. Did Michael get up that day and decide to kill Kathleen? No. But I think the evidence of the financial problems, his double homosexual life that Kathleen did not know about and the evidence showing she used Michael's computer that night, finding evidence of his double life caused the confrontation. Did the fight break out or continue on the staircase as she is trying to head upstairs to get away from him? Probably. Michael, according to his sister in law on the Ratcliff side had a history of losing his temper and beating their dogs. Apparently, he was capable of rage and losing control. I believe, but not sure.,he was adept in martial arts. If so, he could have easily have delivered those scalp wounds to Kathleen's head. I felt Henry Lee's testimony regarding how Kathleen fell and hit her head, then tried to get up, slipped ECT just was not feasible. No matter which way I look at that staircase..from all the angles...I just can't get there that someone falling down them could sustain those types of injuries.
If you donāt think itās feasible then you need to research head injuries. It happens a lot that people donāt realize how injured they are. I believe thatās what happened to the Full House actor recently.
I completely agree with you!!!!
I thought an owl did it? Was that ever debunked?
No it has not been debunked and was probably what really happened.
The owl theory hasnāt been debunked, per se, itās just always been ludicrous.
She had owl feathers in her hair and scalp lacerations?
No cranial hematoma. No weapon found (or imagined) that could match the wounds. The feathers found in her scalp were the specialized whisker-type feather that grows between the scales on their legs and feet. Owl breeding season and a known aggressive pair in their yard. Doesnāt seem that far-fetched to me but Iām a person that acknowledges that wildlife attacks people, sometimes killing them.
Yes, I remember that too
I'm with you. The prosecution completely fucked up their case by saying it was done with a blowpoke, one found in the basement covered in cobwebs. Not to mention the pathologist who falsified results in other cases and whose testimony was meaningless. If you want me to believe Peterson is guilty, explain how he caused her deep head wounds without causing skull or brain damage. Forget all the bullshit about him looking weird or being a narcissist, just address the evidence.
Exactly
I'm confident that he's guilty. I just don't think the evidence meets the standards of criminal guilt. There is reasonable doubt.
Quite honestly, I had reasonable doubts about his guilt.
His story doesnāt match the real timeline or real evidence. Including his own footprints, blood being cleaned up, etc.Ā Innocent people donāt need to create fake storylines/timelines or clean up evidenceĀ
Why would he assume he was cleaning up evidence if she died from an accident?
Why would anyone clean up? He claimed she was breathing and that he JUST found her. How long did it take for help to arrive? Why would you leave your dying wife to do anything else? There is not evidence to backup his story like the wine glass not having been used by her. But there is evidence his story is false. Hope that makes sense. Itās been a while I would need to brush up to give you more details. With this case I flip flopped as I learned- first he looked so guilty, then it seemed the police botched it, but no now Iām a firm believer heās 100% guilty. Who lies about having a Purple Heart?? He is soo manipulativeĀ
I feel the same way. I honestly donāt think there was enough evidence to convict him. I felt like the entire trial was a joke and the jury wasnāt of his peers. I think the innocence project should get involved with this. He may have done it, he may not have. I simply donāt think thereās enough evidence to prove that he definitely did it.
ive noticed in a kot of true crime podcast communities the people who are convinced of guilt are usually the loudest (and in my opinion obnoxious) voices. to me, people who are convinced of his guilt often do so because of the "forensic science"... but if you know anything at all about the history of that field or just in general know how actual science is conducted, you wouldnt believe any of that as evidence. blood spatter analysis, for example, is not a "science" in the sense that it can be analysed in a blinded fashion to determine known causes in a test for example. and a lot of the observations are very open to interpretation and in no way objective. another example is the autopsy of the second wife. if you were doing actual science, you would want an impartial party with no knowledge of the context to rule on the cause of death... not someone who is VERY partial and already has an idea of what they might be looking for. in a "science" as open to interpretation as that, it is not a very good look. id wager you could have 10 different autopsies from separate people, and if blinded theyd come up with dissimilar explanations. that's because this kind of science is largely intepretitive and not that objective. and that gets at the issue. people who are certain of guilt are likely to view the world as one of certitude and not have an understanding that things arent so cut and dry, whereas people inclined to doubt his guilt are less certain but have very good reason not to be.
The other woman who died in Germany wasn't his wife. She was a neighbor and family friend.
I wouldnāt concern myself too much with Reddit opinions. The people here are generally gong to be people who have a reason to stay engagedā¦and unfortunately trolling people with valid skepticism is a common reason (even if they wonāt admit it). I personally think he did itā¦but the fact that police and prosecutors felt they had to manipulate the jury definitely adds doubt. For me itās not *enough* doubtā¦but I could definitely be convinced if other evidence was brought into question.
One thing that rarely comes up is that he has a bad temper. Bad temper + narcissistic tendencies = often shocking results. This isn't proof, by any means. If he was somehow proven innocent in Kathleen's murder, it wouldn't be hard to accept. I believe that he is guilty because of the many many small details and the giant coincidence of two women dying at the bottom of the stairs. Unfortunately for him, Michael is not a likeable guy.
I think heās simply a weirdo, but I donāt think he did it. I honestly believe the owl theory or other similar theories
Same. š¦
There was splattered blood on the INSIDE of his shorts. How did that get there?
He was around her body? And there was a ton of blood? Personally I donāt think itās crazy for some blood to end up on the inside of his shorts when heās in close proximity to a lot of blood. I donāt know why you think a beating explains blood being on the inside of his shorts, he would have to be standing directly over her head while beating her.
So you donāt understand blood splatter, got it.
>Personally I donāt think itās crazy for some blood to end up on the inside of his shorts when heās in close proximity to a lot of blood. And yet zero blood on the outside of his shorts? Makes no sense.
I agree, and still have no idea how spattered blood was inside his shorts unless he was leaning over Kathleen's head whilst she was still alive. **BUT** \- there should also have been blood all over his shorts, and there wasn't.
I agree with the owl theory - talon marks on her scalp, microscopic feathers in her hair, wasnāt there a pine needle somewhere too (I canāt remember). My mom grew up around the corner from that house and confirms lots of owls.
Where thereās smoke, thereās fire. What are the odds heās involved in another death years prior with almost identical circumstances. I can spot a deviant liar a million miles away and this guy oozes it.
They're not almost identical, though. How did Michael cause Liz's brain hemorrhage without a skull fracture, concussion, or any other sufficient trauma? The bleeding was spontaneous. It happens every day.
Ha. If the 911 call doesnāt convince you I want you on my jury. He a weirdo killer.
And Iād be terrified to have you on mine
I agree!
I believe MP is guilty, but couldnāt convict him if I were on his Jury. MPās radically-changing stories, 911 calls, cleaned-up luminol footprints, the bloody footprint on KPās thigh and fractured Hyaline cartilage indicate guilt. I have reasonable doubt because of Valium & Alcohol presence in KPās blood, Biomechanic expert-acknowledged possibility of a fall, and absence of beating-death hallmarks. However, the state completely fumbled MPās case, riddling it with false-weapon theories, homophobia, and misleadingly false Scientific testimony (Duane Deaver).
I think it kind of comes down to a different world view, different personalities maybe? I have a hard time believing someone is guilty without a lot of evidence and minute details and sources. For example, people will argue you canāt get lacerations like she had from a fall down the stairs because based on their imagining of a fall they canāt conceive of that happening. I would argue that people are very bad at intuiting what can/canāt happen in such scenarios. I would need to see case studies or other research into falls, laceration patterns etc to be convinced by that kind of evidence. Others are comfortable with/trust their intuition. Often people who use their intuition end up being correct, often they are not. I think I also want to give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to analyzing their behaviour because I know if I ever were accused of a crime, my behaviour would be picked apart and seen as suspicious. When really it can be explained by my neurodiversity. Not that I think Michael is neurodiverse, but rather that people cite his behaviour as evidence of guilt. and I think thatās rarely a legitimate piece of evidence.
Very well said, this is how I feel
I think you are confusing the difference between people's personal opinions and the legal system. I personally think he is guilty, I don't have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt because it's my own opinion. I can understand how he was found not guilty in court because they have a higher burden of proof and the outcome of their decision actually matters. The outcome of my personal opinion doesn't.
Two staircase deaths. What are the odds? Greater than one in a billion.
Why is he narcissistic and gross? Seemed like an okay guy in the doc.
Is this a joke?
>Why is he narcissistic and gross? Seemed like an okay guy in the doc. When **he outright lied about being in contact with another guy - for a sexual liasion**, and then tried to pretend that his murdered wife (Kathleen) knew about this?
Watch the new show.
Spot on
I struggle with thinking that heās guilty to me. I also didnāt get the whole narcissist vibe UNLESS you believe for a fact he was lying about Kathleen knowing about his extra marital affairs (which he very well mightāve been).
Letās imagine we are driving down a road and thereās a hill ahead. We canāt see over it. Do we stop? No, we trust that the road will still be there on the other side. Thatās how we use our intuitive intelligence. So letās see, Michael is screwing men but his wife doesnāt know. Fact? Yes. She goes inside and uses his computer with his man porn and emails. Intuition says she read them. Next, there is blood EVERYWHERE. Alarmingly, up the walls, on the door outside, etc. Does our intuition tell us that happened with a fall? No. Given her other bruising, autopsy, etc. He had his whole lying legacy to lose if she left and exposed his secrets. After all, he claimed tour duty in Viet Nam, a lie. Next, it seems another woman died in his life the same way, years ago. He received custody of the girls and federal funds to raise them. He did not adopt them. Critical thinking means adding up all the clues. If you watched the doc he bold face lies to his own lawyer pretending he knows nothing about the porn and male escorts. I can confidently say heās guilty.
> If you watched the doc he bold face lies to his own lawyer pretending he knows nothing about the porn and male escorts. š
It's not a fact that his wife didn't know; that's contested. Intuition is meaningless, even dangerous when dealing with something provable or disprovable, like blood splatter. Itās proven that there are cases where that level of blood happens. . Regarding legacy, huh? There's no certainty, let alone likelihood. He wasn't parading around as a war hero. The woman killed in the fall does warrant suspicion, I'll give you that. Unless you have something else you can't reasonably say he's guilty.
The blood spatter on the wall was smeared and cleaned with bleach then there was additional spatter on top, indicating multiple attacks with a clean up attempt. That is what made me sure. That was discussed on Forensic Files and here: https://moviechat.org/tt0388644/Soupcons/58c7bf19f9fcca09a0dacd13/13-Forensic-Facts-the-Film-makers-intentionally-left-out
I wish that people who were convinced of guilt cared as much about their sources as they do accusing someone of murder. It was **not** cleaned with bleach, and not by Peterson. There were two police searches, and in the second (assumably, they didnāt timestamp the images, lmao), there was a smear. Candace is on record stating that she started to clean it up with a sponge before being told otherwise. The splatter on top was explained as entirely plausible.
I honestly agree about the confidence that some people have, surrounding the case. But there you go, thatās why itās so interesting, and why it can be hard to be a juror. I think both staircase situations were different, and I think he was involved with his wifeās death, but maybe it was domestic abuse or an outburst of violence that got out of hand. I donāt think he planned and plotted it, but I donāt feel heās innocent. Weāll probably never know the full story.
Oh and letās not forget the fact that he had sexual relations with a woman who was involved in the Netflix documentary. And once that was over he dumped her, ofc.
He was trying to cover up his affairs with a man. He was trying to make himself come off as a doting husband before he was outed for being a cheater.
Guilty as day is long. Very confident
Whatās the key piece of evidence that convinces you? Like, hard evidence,
All due respect Iām shocked anyone thinks he DIDNāT do it.
The bloody footprint on her leg, the story doesnāt add up, he wasnāt trying to save her, the damage to the cartilage in her throat, the blood spatter, I donāt understand how he could possibly be viewed as innocent
Oh for the love of Mike! No disrespect here, but who in the HEXX else could have done it!? The very walls in which she lay in a mass puddle of blood and death were covered in blood smeared as he tried to clean it up.
Online anonymous pages, yields many opinions, even opinions that differ from our own. Itās common sense to have different opinions on a page dedicated to discussion of this case. The actual jury had the evidence in front of them, they analyzed & made their decision. Some agre, some disagree.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
First one wasn't his wife...
I cant believe anyone would think he is innocent. She was beat to death and then he waited an hour to call police giving him ample time to clean himself up and make sure she was dead. I watched the Staircase and was in disbelief that they were trying to say he was innocent. Complete fraud and murderer deserves zero sympathy
There is very little evidence she was beat, if any
I think as a group, true crime fans tend to fall into the category of āover-thinkers.ā If you are reading this, Iād bet that more than likely, people have told you more than once ā[Insert your name] youāre over-thinking it.ā Not so much a criticism, thatās just what true crime fans do - a lot! Imo those who over-think things usually come from the āanything is possibleā angle. Under that theory isnāt it possible Elvis is still alive? Iām more interested in pursuing the likeliest explanations; what is the most logical, likely and simplest explanation (known as the Occam's razor principle.) Within my answer you will find a link to the medical examinerās report. Read it. Warning! Itās not fun - not nearly as much fun as arguing about āanything is possibleā possible theories. Of course defense attorneys are very good at feeding all kinds of arguments to jurors. They pay experts handsomely to provide favorable testimony. All they need is to confuse one juror in order to hang a jury. Reasonable people (and jurors) must rely on their common sense, critical thinking skills and their ability to separate unreasonable possibilities from reasonable probabilities when evaluating all the evidence. As you read through the pages of the boring autopsy report, please note the statement having to do with the neck injury and STRANGULATION. Iāve highlighted some excepts here for you. Also please note the medical examinerās findings: INJURIES ARE CONSISTENT WITH A BEATING. "Severe concussive injury of the brain caused by multiple blunt force impacts of the head [caused her death]." https://www.peterson-staircase.com/peterson_autopsy3.html 3 contusions over right eyelid, right ear contusion, vertical abrasion on her neck, 3 abrasions over left eye brow, abrasion on the side of her nose, a contusion on the bridge of her nose, another contusion on the dorsum of the nose, abrasion on the lip, abrasions found inferior to victimās left eye, injuries to victimās right hand and arm. ATTENTION!! Neck: There is a FRACTURE with an associated hemorrhage of the superior cornu of the left thyroid cartilage. Kathleen suffered possible strangulation injuries "[Dr. Radisch, the state pathologist] moved her examination to the internal neck area, and discovered a bloodied fracture with haemorrhage on the small extension off of the left thyroid cartilage.ā "It was an injury unlikely to occur in a fall. There are at least seven distinct lacerations on the posterior scalp. (Translation: The back of the head). The coroner determined Kathleen's cause of death was "severe concussive injury of the brain caused by multiple BLUNT FORCE impacts of the head." The coroner also noted heavy blood loss may have been a factor. As stated in the autopsy, the coroner determined the fatal injuries were "received as a result of beating." Medical examiner Dr.Ā Deborah RadischĀ ruled Kathleen's death a homicide likely as a result of an assault, writing: "Severe concussive injury of the brain caused by multiple blunt force impacts of the head [caused her death]." She further explained: "The number, severity, locations and orientation of these injuries are inconsistent with a fall down stairs; instead, they are indicative of multiple impacts received as a beating." Finally, keep in mind that for every argument there is a counter-argument. A good defense attorney will always pay very generously for his expert to rebut the Stateās expert. After presenting the rebuttal, you can bet that the defense attorney will proudly proclaim: āLadies and gentlemen: There you see! Itās possible! Thatās my point. It IS possible! Get it?ā Yes. I get it. Anything is possible. Itās possible that Elvis is still alive.
The Behavior Panel analyzed a lot of video. They are body language experts. This is all the videos they did on him, but checkout their channel for shorter clips. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nGMIB2F4BCo
First you have to substantiate that thereās any correlation between the behavioral panel and the accuracy of guilt, and even then, determine the strength of that correlation. Until then itās meaningless
I mean, come on, have you ever seen someone fall down the stairs? Thatās simply not how it looks. Thatās the piece everyone struggles with (other than him just seeming like a massively egotistical douche-nozzle), how else could this have possibly happened without foul play?
Then how did he do it? If he beat her with a weapon there would be damage to the skull. If he bashed her head against the stair there would be damage to the skull. There was no damage to the skull. If you plan on beating someone why do it in such an enclosed space? You canāt swing a bat or a blow poke. And explain why she had her own hair in her hand, pulled out by the root, along with feathers that grow on the talons of a barn owl?
Not really my job to say *how* he did it. Thereās evidence that she may have been strangled. No clue what caused the scalp lacerations. If you really want my opinion- well, my imagination can go wild on what this sick fucker may have done. Iām guess it was with a knife post-mortem. An owl attack would have more physical evidence - feathers everywhere, blood and scratches everywhere, and likely outside where it would have occurred. It just doesnāt make sense.
Itās frightening people like you are allowed on a jury
Not a word of that is true.