Ok. Here's your chance to post anything and everything you can find out about this case. If you have come here and you have not yet responded to the Prelminary Crime Scene Investigation post, STOP. Do that one and then come back :)
Tip: googling north carolina v. michael peterson will get you started....from there you are on your own :) See what you can find out!
I found this site "Free Michael Peterson" to be extremely interesting.
http://www.freemichaelpeterson.com/
This site has most of the Michael Peterson trial covered as well as promotes the belief of his innocence throughout. There is even a section where you can donate money to help with the funds for the freeing of Michael Peterson. One of the most intriging things to me was the page of Michael's family. It shows that Michael is backed by his entire family. His sons and daughters all have seperate blogs and comments about their father's innocence. They also all mention their favorite memory of their dad. I feel like that by showing the public and people viewing this page that this guy is just a dad like the rest of us have, they wish to promote his innocence. I can never imagine my dad murdering my mom so this tactic seems to reach out to us by showing us that Michael is just like our dads. The family also stresses numerous times that their father and Kathleen never fought. I feel like this site tries to make us see Michael Peterson as a father and not a suspect of murder. I feel like this methods actually works quite well because after looking at pictures of his family and getting a sense of who they are I feel like I know them. This site ultimately made me question if he really is guilty, when in class the other day I was sure he was guilty after seeing the crime scene photos.
http://www.peterson-staircase.com/
I found a website that discusses a different aspect of the Michael Peterson case. This site talks about a documentary that was made by Jean-Xavier de Lestrade about the Peterson case called "Behind the Staircase." Lestrade's documentary has caused some debate about the intention and balancedness of his documentary. Craig Jarvis, a reporter for North Carolina's News and Observer, says that "...Lestrade's Staircase has "no pretense of offering an even-handed look at the case" and states, "The investigation and trial that unfold in the documentary is not the one I covered for nearly two years as a news reporter." Jarvis also points out that one only needs to read the segment titles of the eight-part project to know Maha's movie is blatantly biased and transparently skewed against the prosecution team. ("Chapter 4 - Prosecution Trickery," "Chapter 5 - A Weak Case," "Chapter 6 - The Prosecution's Revenge")..."
The article also mentions that 650 hours of videotaped time of the Peterson family was taken, and only 6 of those hours were used for the documentary. That doesn't seem like a very fair representation.
This article is trying to show that you can't rely on one source of information, because you never know how much of the truth they're giving you.
http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/trial_m_peterson.html
This collection of articles relating to the Peterson case gives a great interpretation of events as they appear almost six years after the death of Kathleen Peterson. As some of the articles were written as recently as 2007, they re-evaluate old information.
I thought it was very interesting that his family and supporters were so convinced that Michael did not kill his wife, yet there was so much irrefutable evidence that suggests he had been lying and crafting stories for years. Obviously, this was a bigger mess than only one murder. I can't believe how complex and intricate his web of lies were.
I found the website http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/trial_m_peterson.html and found the whole thing pretty disturbing. It's hard to read that he lied and lied to get away with the murder of his wife! It takes a lot for me to imagine anyone committing crimes like that. I learned that Kathleen's daughter, Caitlin, was granted $25 million in a wrongful death lawsuit. I wasn't aware that lawsuits like this happened but I'm glad that they do. Although money doesn't heal the wounds that a parent's death causes, I think Michael Peterson owed something to Caitlin. What was even more unbelievable was that Michael still denied murdering Kathleen and feels no guilt in the act.
From this website, I also learned that Lifetime made a movie about this event - go figure. Although the website claims that it's not very truthful to the real event, I would still be interested in seeing it.
This website is very informational and has all the information ever involved with this case. I recommend it.
http://www.spike.com/video/staircase-chapter-1/2668066
The website above will lead you to a series of "chapters" on Spike about this case. The link goes to chapter one, but the other chapters can be found below the video.
In the first chapter, you will see Mike Peterson talk about the events that happened prior to Kathleen's death as well as hearing the 911 call and police videos of the scene.
In the second chapter, you will see Kathleen's daughter and her opinions about the case. You will also hear from Jim Hardin, a district attorney about Peterson's "secret life." Mike's brother also speaks about Mike's secret life.
Chapter three consists of the death of Ratliff (who coincidentally was also found dead on the bottom of a stair case in Germany several years prior to Kathleen's death; Peterson was the last person to see her alive).
Chapter four deals with autopsy reports from Ratliff's case (the results concluded that it was a homicide). You will also hear from one of Ratliff's daughters (both of which were adopted by Peterson after her death). They also compare the autopsies of both Kathleen and Ratliff.
Chapter five shows some clips of Mike's trial. The 911 dispatcher testifies about the call she received the night that Kathleen died.
In chapter six deals with the persecution's revenge. You will also hear from Kathleen's sister and you will hear a voicemail from the mail escort who was talked about during the trial.
Chapter seven starts with Mike's lawyers talking to him about his case and whether or not he should have a defense.
The final chapter deals with the verdict. It starts with a forensic expert examining the weapon that Kathleen's sister claims was used in the murder. You will also see more trial footage.
This series was actually a lot different than I initially expected. I was thinking it would be more of a documentary about the progression of the case, but it deals more with Mike's side of the case. It has a really weird ending, which I am disappointed in because it doesn't tell you what happened in the end. Even though it doesn't tell you what ends up happening, I though it was interesting and I liked to see the actual trial footage. There were some parts that were more interesting than others, but I would recommend watching it!
While searching for more information about North Carolina v. Michael Peterson, I found that there has been a movie named after this case. "The Staircase," directed by Jean-Xavier de Lestrade, is an 8-part series that chronicles the story of Michael Peterson and the death of his wife, Kathleen Peterson. It might be interesting to watch a few clips in class or maybe watch it for the movie activity project.
http://www.docurama.com/productdetail.html?productid=NV-NVG-9733
This is another sight I found that goes into certain details of the case, such as the murder weapon, the phone call, and what I thought was especially interesting: the story of the 1985 death of Elizabeth Mckee, who was also a previous lover of Michael Peterson. Suspiciously, both Elizabeth and Kathleen died from blows to the head and "mysterious" falls down the staircase. It seems to me like Peterson is definitely guilty and is a repeat offender.
http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/trial_m_peterson4.html
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Michael_Peterson_(author)
This website lays out everything nicely, and shows all the facts. It does not tell as much about Mr. Peterson as I wish, because regardless if you think he committed the murder or not, he is an intriguing person. It drives me nuts that we may never know the true story, and that people are still convinced of his innocence. One of the most interesting things this website had was the fact that Peterson may have been living a life where he was gay, which his wife discovered, and could have been motivation for the murder. It is such a unique twist. Another thing that shocked me was the possibility an owl led to the death of Mrs. Peterson. Please read the website closely, it mentions interesting evidence which supports this claim. I could not believe this, how horrible would it be if you got sentenced for the murder of your wife because by some freak accident an owl attacked your wife? I am not saying I believe that, but you would probably really hate owls if that was true and you were the person convicted. This is just a crazy case.
http://www.aoc.state.nc.us/www/public/sc/opinions/2007/547-06-1.htm
I found this website very informative. It goes into the details of evidence used in court and even some court reports word for word that occured during the trial. Also, what I found very informative was the details it gave behind the admittance of evidence about a previous women (Elizabeth Ratliff) who was murdered and had fell down the stairs too. Just like the death of Michael Peterson's wife there were photographs of a major amount of blood found around Elizabeth's body at the bottom of the stairs. There were 17 similarities found between the death of Elizabeth Ratliff and Kathleen Peterson. To me that is very persuading to think that it is possible Michael Peterson murdered Elizabeth also. It can be quoted from this site, "Additionally, the trial court found that “[s]ubstantial evidence in the form of sufficient similar facts and circumstances exists between the two deaths so that a jury could reasonably find that the Defendant committed both acts,”
The information found on this website helped me understand the trial of Peterson v. North Carolina much more and would be advantageous for anyone to look at to find out all the details pertaining to the trial.
I found a website that talks about all aspects of the trail. It's extremely interesting, and it goes into A LOT of detail (there's even photos). I found it to be most interesting that Kathleen was dead WAY before Michael told paramedics she was (granted, he wouldn't know that much considering he's not a doctor). I also found out that there was no way that all the lacerations on Kathleen's head could of been from falling down the stairs-it just wasn't possible. I don't know how legit this site was, but it also talked about how Michael was bisexual and that could of had something to do with this case.
The site also said how the weapon used to beat Kathleen was never officially found, but they believe that it was a 'blowpoke' that is used for fireplaces. Shockingly the blowpoke of the Peterson's home was missing that night. Fishy, fishy.
http://www.peterson-staircase.com/no_accident.html
I found this website to be very interesting because it told the whole story and how each person testified in the trial. It also had a little bit of the actual words of the judge and the defendents which I thought was really cool. It was very long, but it gave a lot of information that we did not go over in class, such as the families finances and how this case was relevent to another case in 1985.
http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/peterson_appeal2.html
After doing some looking around the this case, I came across something very bizarre. Someone made a brief comment earlier about an owl possibly being the cause of death. I found an article that was published on September 5, 2008, in the Metro magazine September issue. This is an article that goes into more detail about the "Owl Theory".
http://owltheory.blog.lemonde.fr/2008/09/05/feathers-flying-in-michael-peterson-case-by-bernie-reeves/
This is a website I found, and it explains how the court rejected Michael Peterson's appeal.
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/2023433/
Michael Peterson believed that there was an invalid search warrant for his arrest, so he was appealing for a new trial. The court turned down three arguments that he used trying to persuade the courts to give him a new trial, all of which were turned down. More information on it is in the link:)
I was looking online for anything pertaining to the North Carolina vs. Michael Peterson case and came across this website.
The website I found is very informative about the trial process all the way to the sentencing. It includes witness testimonies, the prosecution and witness opening and closing testimonies, even the evidence the jury was shown. This website also tells about the findings of the medical examiner, the death of Elizabeth Ratliff who was a friend of Michael Peterson and died in a stairwell in Germany the exact way Peterson's wife did. It also shows more evidence as it was presented day to day in the trial. It does so by listing what is happening day to day from day 1 of the trial which is when the first witness testified to day 63 when he was found guilty of murder in the first degree.
This website is very informative and was very helpful to me in understanding all of the aspects and legalities of this case. It allowed me to know what happened day to day and how the jurors came to the conclusion of Michael Peterson found guilty of first-degree murder. I hope this information will help anyone who wants to know more about the trial and how the information was collected and presented in the trial.
http://www.wral.com/news/local/asset_gallery/1086816/
http://www.jeffreycreid.com/impressions/Peterson_Durham_shoe.htm
This article discusses a bloody shoe imprint found on the sweat pants that Peterson's wife was wearing the night she was murdered. The article also further discusses the testimony from SBI agent Joyce Petzka about the blood evidence she found that would support the charge of murder against Peterson.
I found it extremely interesting that Peterson's defense attorney did not try to explain how Peterson's bloody shoe print got on the back of his wife's sweat pants.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0901693/
I found this video made in 2007 about this case. The movie was entitled "The Staircase Murders" and from the synopsis it seems that the movie portrays Michael in a light of innocence. I have not seen the movie yet but it might be something I will have to look into doing a movie review about. It is always interesting to see how the media treats high profile cases.
I found a website that was about the civil lawsuit being brought against him by the vicitms only child Kathleen submitted on Oct. 29 2002. Even though at this time I dont think he had been found guilty of murder but was on trial.Kathleen was seeking compensation for: including but not limited to
a. compensation for the pain and suffering of Kathleen Peterson caused by the defendant's fatal assault;
b. the reasonable funeral expenses for Kathleen Peterson;
c. the present monetary value to the plaintiff for the reasonably expected net income of Kathleen Peterson;
d. the present monetary value to the plaintiff for the loss of reasonably expected services, protection care and assistance of Kathleen Peterson;
e. the present monetary value to the plaintiff for the loss of reasonably expected society, companionship, comfort, guidance, kindly offices and advice of Kathleen Peterson; and
f. punitive damages for the murder of Kathleen Peterson.
here is the site it talks about it more in depth http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/103224/
I looked at "staircase" murder trial though the eyes of ABC news. ABC news talks about how panicked he seems when he made the 911 call about his wife. It also talks about the amount of blood on the wall. An autopsy said that Kathleen died of severe beating which caused massive bleeding from her head. The autopsy also stated that Kathleen had lain injured for several hours before finally dyeing. At first all of Petersons five children stood by their father's innocence. The website talks about the photos found on Michael’s computer. The District Attorney's theory of why Michael killed his wife came in two parts. The first one was for the insurance money and the second one was because she found out he was bisexual. The website also goes into the case of Elizabth Ratliff, a friend of Petersons. She also died after falling down the stairs. It also talks about how Peterson's son Clay found the poker in the garage. Police suspected that the poker might have been used in the death of Kathleen. Peterson was convicted of first degree murder. He was sentenced to life in prison with the benefit of parole. The jurors stated after the trial that the autopsy was what really convinced them that Peterson was guilty.
Here is the website about the Peterson case
http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/story?id=96693&page=2
http://petersontrial.info/scott-peterson-summary.php
This website was interesting to me in that is supplied a very good summary of what happen throughout the trial. There is also a picture and short summary of the evidence used in the trial to convict Peterson. The evidence that was not pictured on the site there is a link to so you can see how they compiled the case. This is a good site for people who are not familiar with law but interested in the case. They used laymen terms to explain what happen so that anyone can understand the; who, what, when, where, why and how of the case.
I am a HUGE lifetime sucker, so I wanted to search for the lifetime movie as a link to post.. .the actual lifetime site doesn't have it posted any longer, however I did find a link to the movie through some google searching, I also found the youtube clip for the preview of it.
Movie
http://www.divxden.com/aecoj3cog95w/esd-tsm.flv.html
some ads play during the movie, but just mute them and it works just fine.
Preview
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOzwtuy8k_4
The website i found on the Michael Peterson case briefly explains what the outcome of the trial was and the reasons behind the defense motioning to a new trial. The website explains that there was a unsuccessful search for a tire iron at the Peterson residence. The day after the murder, a person who lives a block from the Peterson home, found a tire iron in his yard and stored it under his home for a several months before notifying authorities! The defense is accusing the prosecution of withholding this information from them. The article also explains various other actions by the state that are in question.
http://www.ncwanted.com/ncwanted_home/story/3943252/
Here is a website that I found that is like a blog website where someone posted a page of information. The attorney is trying to reopen the case because they are pulling a story that says maybe an owl was flying above and believed that the woman was its prey and attacked her. They say that maybe she was getting attacked in the face with tri-pronged lacerations and the bruising on her scalp and arms would be from her trying to pull the owl out of her hair because it possibly got tangled up in it.
http://www.helpfindthemissing.org/forum/showthread.php?t=7309
http://www.metronc.com/article/?id=19
After digging through the vast amount of information available, I finally stumbled upon something original.
This article from Raleigh's Metro Magazine.
It explains what they call the "Owl Theory"
It presents the point that there was lack of evidence for a murder weapon, and says that mainstream media would not post this theory. It pretty much places the blame of the murder on an owl. It seems a bit silly to me because you don't hear much about owl attacks, but I suppose it is something to consider.
I found this website that analyzes the responses to the questions about Michael Peterson from his ex-wife. I thought it was kind of interesting to see what she had to say about Michael. Plus, I wanted to do something a little different than everyone else.
http://www.statementanalysis.com/mpeterson/
I found an article from People Magazine. I think it's interesting because it gives a picture of the crime scene as well as telling some background information about Michael and Kathleen.
http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20137728,00.html
I found an article on dateline that maps out the trial of Peterson vs North Carolina. I like this article because you are able to see the details that were drawn from the crime scene and how they were used in presenting the case to the jury.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15894727/ns/dateline_nbc/page/3/
While searching for websites i came up with pretty much the same ones as the rest of the class or just article that lead back to pretty much all the same articles as this one http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/trial_m_peterson4.html
And also the whole warrent and constitutional rights issue that granted the appeal procces.
http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/peterson_appeal2.html
I found that, other then the fact that Peterson shares a name with a football player and a surfer, the lawsuit over the wrongful death of his wife which initially was for 25 million had been approved by the court on January 31, 2008. The blog then points out that the amount had grown to over 35 million because interest. Regardless it is unlikely that that Peterson will ever pay a dime as he had filed bankruptcy from prison. The full article can be found at http://www.northcarolinainjurylawyerblog.com/2008/02/north_carolina_convicted_murde.html
I found this website from dateline that I thought had a lot of information on the case. They talk about the secrets. Also, it shows some of what the daughter had to say. It was pretty good. I didn't get through it all but what I did read I thought was okay.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15894727/ns/dateline_nbc/page/2/
I found the a video of the channel 14 news in North Carolina, it's about the Mike Peterson case, it also give a brief article about the case that also relates to him back to Germany and a statement from his son Tod Peterson how he believes that his dad is innocent.
htttp://news14.com/charlotte-news-104-content/top_stories/?ARID=587038
http://www.wral.com/news/local/page/3404140/
This is a website I found that gives a brief yet detailed timeline of major events. You are able to click on the 911 call, her autopsy reports, which are very interesting. It also give you the wrongfull death law suite out out by Kathleen's daughter. This is a very helpfull and intersting site.
This is my second time commenting because the first link wouldn't work for some reason but hear is a different link for the same case, enjoy.
There are a total of five videos
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MT1JMXGrGPU
After viewing the rest of the case in class today, I was pleased with the jury's verdict of 'guilty.' I agreed with the guilty verdict because there were a few doubts I had about Michael Peterson's story. I was taken back by the lack of remorse Michael showed throughout the entire case, even when he heard the guilty verdict. He just heard he was sentenced to life in prison without parole and barely changed his expression! I also left class with a few questions about the trial, so if anyone can answer them I would greatly appreciate it.
Why did the defense present its closing arguments last? I thought usually the prosecution went last because they have to prove beyond a resonable doubt the defendant committed the crime.
Could forensics have shown how long the blow poke was in the garage?
Michael's adopted daughters claimed they were upset about losing their mother and sister, but they showed no remorse about either. They didn't seem upset about their mother's death, at all.
Michael claimed that he loved his wife and his bisexuality was purely physical. But if you really love someone, you only want to have sex with that person. His daughters didn't seem upset about the fact that their father was bisexual, I would be furious and disgusted with my father for being unfaithful to my mother.
Immediately after he heard the verdict and was on his way to the prison, he said he didn't want to appeal because he just wanted the whole thing to be over. If I had been wrongly convicted, I would've been counting the days until I could appeal.
I just didn't get the impression that he was innocent by his attitude and actions throughout the entire trial process.
After watching the trial in class, I'd say that I am a little shocked by the verdict. Regardless of my opinions, I believe that both sides, the prosecution and defense did a great job. They were both very convincing and I think if I were a juror on this case, I would have had a really tough time. If I recall right, at the beginning of deliberation, 4 jurors thought he was guilty, 3 thought he was not guilty, and 5 were undecided. Instantly I remembered when we talked about group polarization last class. Since in the end, everybody felt he was guilty, that means that 8 out of 12 jurors polarized. I'm not sure what is typical, but to me, this seems like a lot of people.
I also laughed at the curly-haired lady with the crazy lipstick when she said that she just kept having flash-backs of Liz Ratliff's death. I was a little surprised that the defense didn't talk anything about how faulty her memories were. I think they indirectly eluded to it, but it may have been helpful to clearly state it instead of beating around the bush. The defense didn't seem to care much about the fact that Liz died in the same incident because they felt it was unrelated to the current issue; however, I think even though the jurors stated at the end that it did not influence their decision, it probably did. In class we have talked about how we can't just "forget" evidence this strong. If Mike Peterson really is innocent, the two deaths are a huge coincidence that really hurt him.
Like somebody stated in the documentary, the defense's case rested solely on science. I know that it was the prosecution's role to prove him guilty, but I think the defenses case would have been more convincing if they would have called Peterson's daughters to the stand. If they were to testify about their parents' relationship, I think it would have reinforced to the jury that there was no evident motive to the murder.
One thing that surprised me about the trial was that the attorneys didn't walk around, instead they stayed seated during questioning. I've never been able to see a real trial, so my perceptions of procedures are based off of movies. In the movies, the attorneys basically walk around and get close to the witnesses, but that didn't happen much in this case.
I'm interested in knowing what happened in his appeal!
Today, after viewing the rest of the trial in class I am somewhat happy that Peterson was found "guilty," BUT I don't think that that it was proven beyond reasonable doubt. There was so much doubt on the prosecution's side that there shouldn't, he shouldn't have been 'guilty'. Don't get me wrong I think that he is, but the defense presented the evidence in a way that it did work if she did just accidently fall down the stairs. So, with that I think that the jury didn't really follow the instructions on the terms of reasonable doubt.
I think some of the most important pieces of the case didn't add up. At the end of the video, one of the juror said they didn't take into account the blow poke, and, when that was found, when convicting him! WHAT?! I think that is what the basically the prosecution was going after. Then what was she killed with!? Where is the murder weapon then?! What was the motive?? I believe that should have been more focus, once the murder weapon was found and disproven by the defense, the prosecution should have explained then what could have happened instead of this blow poke instead of what they did. There was so much that just didn't add up on both sides of the case.
I think the jurors should have taken a lot of more of the evidence in to account. I don't know what happened in the jury room but it doesn't seem like they really followed what they should have.
I don't know how she didn't know he was bisexual. I believe his children knew (or I thought that is what I heard in the video). So how didn't she know, and yes I would also be upset if my husband wasn't faithful to me, but if their children knew then I don't know how she didn't.
I think that he was jokes through out the entire case about the trial which had me quesiton he real feelings about the death of his wife. Then again, I have to look at from both sides, people have different ways of showing their emotions especially if they are being watched (ABC news channel was following them). It might be his way of coping with everything.
I'm not trying to say that what happened was okay and didn't need to be investigated especially with it in question the way it was, but I don't think that the prosecution showed that he did it beyond a reasonable doubt, especially when the "murder" weapon was found.
After watching the trial today in class I do not fully understand how the jury could have determined that Peterson was 100% beyond a reasonable doubt guilty. I am glad that the verdict was guilty because in my own opinion I do believe he is guilty. But, the case had so many holes in it. For example, the woman with crazy red hair who talked about having so called "flash-backs" of Liz Ratliff's murder. These flash-backs seemed to mess with her memory of what really happened that day.
Also, another factor that poked holes in the case was the fact that the blow poke was found with dust on it. This is the instrument that the prosecution believed was the murder weapon, yet it seemed to be unused for a long period of time. This was a major break in the case for the defense.
But, since the defense found the blow poke and the murder weapon was still missing or not known, how come the jury did not take this into consideration?
The motive in this case was also missing. Yes Peterson said that he was bisexual, and his kids obviously knew this, but that was not his motive. To fully understand whether a person is guilty or not guilty, shouldn't there be a clear motive for the murder? Although, it did say that he did receive money from his wife's death, but weren't they already rich??
Another aspect of his case that caught my attention was his emotions. Throughout the trial he seemed to have some clear emotions of sadness, or maybe regret(I don't know because I cannot read his mind). But, what really shocked me was when he found out that he was guilty and was sentenced to a life sentence. He did not seem to be extremely surprised, although he was upset. His children seemed to show more emotion at this point in time. When he was allowed to say something in front of the court he decided to tell his kids that "it's ok" this to me seemed like he accepted that he was in fact guilty of murdering his wife, and maybe he was finally admitting it. If he was really innocent as he said he was, I think he would have made a comment on how he did not murder his wife and maybe start to show some more emotion.
All in all, I was really surprised with the fact that the jury did not take into consideration the blow poke that was found dusty with dead bugs in it, and the memory of the witness from Liz Ratliff's murder.
I'm not saying that he should be let free and cleared of all charges. I'm not even saying that he is innocent. I'm just stating the fact that with all of the holes in the prosecution's case, How is it that they came to a guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt?
After finishing the movie covering the Michael Peterson case I would have to say it was very surprising to see that the jury decided he was guilty past a reasonable doubt. Personally, I thought he was guilty too, but I did not think that the jury would reach that verdict. To me I found it very ironic that Peterson's first wife also died from falling down the stairs and I wonder how much the jury read into that. I know one of the jury members stated that the jury looked more into the fact that Peterson's wife's autopsy showed that she died because of blunt force trauma to the head. Also, the jury member said she found herself questioning why there was so much blood at the scene and that since there was more blood Peterson in fact beat his wife when in fact the blood splatter anaylsist said that the amount of blood should prove that he did not beat his wife.
Another aspect that drew my attention to this case was how Peterson's biological children stayed on his side when his adopted daughter stayed on her biological mother's side. Psychologically, I would think that the two biological daughters of Peterson had such an emotional attachment to their father that it was too difficult to imagine their father was a fake all those years and murdered their mother in cold blood. Yet, the biological daughter of Peterson's wife was able to come to the conclusion that he murdered her mother maybe because since they were not biologically related she did not feel the trust of her father like his two biological daughters did.
Last but not least, the question I found myself asking during the trial was what was Peterson's motivation to kill? A testifier during the trial admitted he had planned on having a sexual relationship with Peterson, but was his motivation that he was not sexually satisfied with his wife? That motivation does not seem logical to me since the male testifier stated that Peterson was happy with his relationship. Money did not seem to be a motivator either because Peterson already had a substantial amount of wealth. If I was a juror this would be my only question during deliberation.
Though I do think that Michael Peterson was guilty, I'm going to have to say that I thought the defense made a better argument than the prosecution. I felt that the defense brought in better evidence, and the prosecution was just sort of laid back about the whole case. I was surprised when the jury came to a unanimous vote of 'guilty', and though I agree with it, I didn't think the prosecution did a well enough job of proving that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The thing that doubts me, though, that he is guilty, is where is the murder weapon? I don't think it was the blow poke, because one it had been in the garage for obviously a long time since it had spider webs around it, and two, there was no trace of blood. I just find it suspicious that there was no murder weapon they found, unless Michael disposed of it really well.
One thing that annoyed me about the film was his daughter. I'm not sure what her name was, but she brought about some dumb arguements in my opinion. For example, when they dug up the body of his previous wife, she didn't understand why they were doing that. Well, it was so if they could prove that this woman had been beaten, then it was good evidence for the prosecution that he could have done the same thing to Kathleen. She didn't quite understand that when the reason behind it was quite obvious.
I thought it was interesting also how both of his wives died from falling down a flight of stairs, something that is majorly suspicious in the this case. I think this would have been the main trigger for me in saying that was guilty. And even though I think he is, I still thought the defense brought about a better argument.
After watching the whole Michael Peterson documentary, I'm still confused as to if he's truly guilty or not. Although my gut tells me he's guilty, some of it's hard to believe. There was no murder weapon found anywhere and even though that's not a huge reason to find him not guilty, it's leads to some questions. What did he do with the weapon where no one could find it? How did he get rid of it so well, so fast? Like the jury said, however, there's no way that falling down the stairs would produce those lacerations on her skull. I thought the defense expert that said there's no way blows to the head would cause that much blood was ridiculous. It definitely makes more sense for blows to the head to cause a lot of blood rather than just falling down the stairs. For Peterson's wife to have died the way she did by solely falling down the stairs would be a complete freak accident, and that's unlikely. I'm glad that Peterson was found guilty but the prosecution almost got lucky. If they would have put together a better case against Peterson, I think it would've made more sense for the verdict to be guilty.
After watching "The Staircase" in class I do feel like Michael Peterson is guilty. I have too many suspicions about him to feel otherwise. The similarities between the death of both of his wives are too big to ignore. Obviously if it was Peterson, he got away with murder with his first wife, so why not use the same method to kill his second wife since it had proven successful? And if it wasn't Peterson who killed them, how can anyone explain the coincidences?
I also did not like how the alleged murder weapon magically showed up the night before Peterson's conviction. Didn't the police and investigators try to find the missing blow poke, and if so, how did the investigators miss it? Yes the defense tried to show how it could have been overlooked, but I would think in a murder case, the prosecution and investigators would do a thorough search of the property, more than once.
I was also not impressed by Peterson's daughters. Every new piece of evidence that the prosecution dug up "didn't make sense" to his daughters. Of course they are going to initially believe their father and side with him, but I think they needed to look at the bigger picture. Did they not care that their mother was murdered? Both of their mothers? Did they not have the slightest bit of suspicion? I just thought that their reactions and opinions throughout the entire case were very unrealistic. They didn't even care that their dad pursued homosexual relationships despite being married. HELLOOOO is that not at all embarassing or a smack in the face to your step mother? Now all of national television knows your dad liked anal sex and you thought it was no big deal???? I just didn't understand a majority of their thought processes.
I think the defense did a better job of presenting their case to the jury (except for their expert witness on the head lacerations and blood splatter who said a beating would produce more blood), however I just feel that there were too many holes in Peterson's story to believe that he was innocent. His only real testimony was his "loving" relationship with his wife, but past cases have shown it's not unheard of to kill the one you love.
I think there is definitely
Originally I was sold on Michael Peterson being guilty. But after watching the trial I am definitely leaning the other way. Although, the video depicted him as acting strange and it was weird that he seemed in no way worried that he was being prosecuted for murder. However, I really felt that his lawyer did an amazing job. I feel like the prosecution’s case was strong, but I feel like the defense without a doubt gave enough evidence for some form of reasonable doubt. As I watched the case unfold it was apparent that the prosecution was pulling out all the stops to try and get the jury to look at Michael Peterson in a negative light, which indeed is a great tactic. First it starting with him not being employed for awhile, then with the bisexuality, and finally with the possibility he could have murdered his first wife. I feel like every one of these things were set up to question the character of Michael Peterson and it did just that. It made you really question if Michael Peterson was the loving father he attempted to be, or a cold blooded killer. However, the defense obviously showed that these things should have little to do with whether or not Michael Peterson actually murdered his wife. The defense was focused more on evidence. I find it frustrating that the jury was so easily swayed by these personal factors. The thing that disappointed me the most with this case was the after interviews with the jury. A lot of the people seemed to have their mind made up about Michael Peterson being guilty right off the bat. One woman stated that after seeing the picture of Kathleen’s head she KNEW that could not be caused by something other than someone beating her. I don’t see this as something she should have KNOWN right off of the bat. Another lady explained how the blood was too much to not be a murder. It seemed like their judgments were based on very simplistic and first impression thoughts. I don’t find this fair toward the defense. I feel like the defense did a very good job at looking for evidence to be their main focus. The prosecution however was heavily focused on other factors in my opinion. It’s amazing how the life of one man and his family is so dramatically changed by the choice of that jury. If I were to ever be called for jury duty I would work very hard in trying to stay as biased free as possible, but I realize this is impossible to do.
After watching this case in class, I feel that Michael Peterson is guilty. Although it was hard to tell if he actually did it or not, the way he acted just made it seem like he really was the one who killed his wife. He wasn't very worried about going to prison and he and his brother were making jokes about how it might be his last time drinking at home. If he truely was innocent, I would think that he would do anything to find out how his wife was killed. I would think that he would have more emotion about the whole thing and try and tell people that he was absolutely not the person who killed his wife. I was also interested to see how each juror told how they knew that Michael killed his wife. They all took into account the amount of blood on the stairway, the lacerations on her head, and the fact that Michael was the only one who was home at the time.
The only thing that is making me a little uneasy about my decision was that the blow poke was found in the garage with cobwebs and dust on it. There was no evidence that it was the weapon that was used to kill Mrs. Peterson. So if Michael did indeed kill his wife, what was used to kill her and make those distinct lacerations on her head?
This was a really tough case, and I think both the prosecution and the defense did a great job dealing with each aspect of the trial.
After watching the who staircase video i still think Michael Peterson is guilty. I just found the fact that both women were found at the bottom of the stairs too similar. He didn't seems worried at all about going to prison. I'm sure he was trying to keep a brave face for the kids, but he showed no worry what so ever. Besides the trial when he cried, he didn't act all that sad that he wife had just recently died. The amount of blood that was on the staircase just didn't seem like it could happen from falling down. I have fallen down wooden steps before and gotten hurt and had blood, but never that much. Also what that Chinese guy said about striking someone could not cause that much blood, made me question his work and if he even knows what he is doing. There were just too many facts that pointed to him and his behavior didn't help at all. Another thing that got me is Michael never really wanted to find out who killed his wife and how she died. Even though he stated he thought it was an accident i would think he would want to be 100% sure it was. Michael was more interested in covering his own behind.
Both sides made a good case and i do think the defense proved reasonable doubt. They put some holes in the prosecution's evidence, but i still think he did it and i'm glad he got convicted. I just wonder what was used to beat Mrs. Peterson. It obviously wasn't the blow poke but it could have been a number of items that could have made those marks. I do feel really bad for his children. They lost so much in such a short about of time and i'm sure this whole ordeal will effect them greatly.
After hearing the verdict for Michael Peterson, I was very surprised. Although I do believe he is guilty of murdering his wife, I do not think there is enough evidence to be 100% sure he did it. After reading the book Actual Innocence, I realize that a lot of people are imprisoned even when they are innocent. Most of times they are convicted without having enough evidence like this case. I believe that both the defense and prosecution had very strong cases. One thing that I think probably swayed the jury is the fact that Michael's previous wife had also been found dead on the stairs. For me, this would be a big eye opener because I don't think it is just a coincidence. But, he was never convicted of murdering her so it almost has to be thrown out. Another thing that probably hurt the prosecution is when they found the blow poke. Although the prosecution never said it HAD to be the blow poke, they put a lot of time and effort into proving that it was the murder weapon. Overall, I believe that a lot of the evidence was circumstantial. I am interested in knowing how is appeal is going or has gone.
There were several things about this case that kind of bothered me after watching the video in class. First, the whole blow poke thing was kind of weird. I mean, they didn't even have a murder weapon, they just assumed it was the blow poke because it wasn't by the fireplace, the blow poke wasn't searched for, and then the defense finds the blow poke in the garage. Really? It seemed odd.
Another thing was Mike Peterson's behavior throughout the trial. He seemed kind of off. Now, I've never been accused of murder and don't know anybody who has, and I can only imagine the stress he was going through, but he didn't seem all there when they were talking to him. He was joking around about serious stuff like him being locked up and given a lethal injection and not focusing on maintaining his innocence.
All in all, I thought there were too many reasonable doubts for a jury to find him guilty though. I don't feel like I was given enough information to render him guilty of the crime, even though his previous wife seemed to have had the same thing happen to her. There were too many questions not answered- like his motive and what the murder weapon was.
I was shocked when the jury found Micheal guilty. I was expecting him to be free of all charges. I personally don't think that he committed this crime. There was no evidence directly pointing to him. The 'blow poke' which was the prosecutors only defense was found in the garage, clearly not used that night. I understand that Micheal could have used another instrument to kill his wife, however I'm just not convinced that he did it. The jury said that they didn't take into account that he was bisexual nor the death of his first wife. I found that to be completely bull. I mean, how couldn't they? So they're saying they're going completely off of lacerations even when the blood spatter expert said that they way the blood was on the wall couldn't be a result of a fight? If the jury didn't take into account the fact that Micheal was bisexual, then there was no other motive. So, what they're saying is that Micheal killed his wife, for no reason, with a weapon that was already found? Sounds a little stupid to me. I don't think it was a fair conviction, they're putting a man away for life and ruining a family based solely on what they thought, because there were no direct facts to support it.
After watching the rest of the trial I was suprised that they found him guilty but personally I would have anyways. There is just something about his personality that just seems so abrasive and put on, especially when he started the crying bit I was thinking to myself O C'mon Ive seen beeter acting than that from turtles. Even though I felt as though that is what he deserved I didnt believe they established that he did a 100% and the other thing that made me feel bad was that his kids would have no parents now. It did also shock me when they brought up his ex wife "falling" down the stairs. I feel bad for his children's situation especially the one girl who believes he is guilty because you know that her only family left, her brothers and sisters, are going to blame her for taking their father away even if they felt he was guilty.I thought it was funny how he said he was not going to appeal it because he didnt want to drag his family through it yet right after he filed for an appeal. I feel bad for who ever has to be his cell mate cuz he seems like a creeper psychopath o and maybe michael will get his dreams fufilled if he gets a sexy cell mate since the prosecuters made it a huge point to make sure everyone knew he was bi and liked "hardcore" porn which didnt make sense to bring it up in court except for entertainment.
This is complete BS!!! That jury is a bunch of morons! I cant belive they found him guilty of first degree murder when the case was built on him using that damn blow poke and the damage that it created on the victims head, and the blow poke has been collecting dust for years and years in the garage. Then the prosecution tried to tie him with that other murder from 18 years ago and the witness they used who was the victims best friend is the world biggest idiot that believed in flash backs that made her see the crime so much more clearly. Her flash backs are all contaminations of memory that happened as she learned more about the case from the media...again total b.s! And the detectives that worked the case and had the same blow poke but still couldnt find the one in the garage deserve a pat on the back and time off with no pay to reevaluate their skills. What really suprised me is the daughter that was so committed in presecuting her step dad, to me it seemed like to her it was more important to get her face on the news and media then it was to mourn her dead mother. I also see a similarity in this case and the Vang case, mainly in the language barrier between Dr. Lee and Vang both were of asian descent and i saw in the video that the jury did give much credit to Dr. Lee because his statement was brilliant but to them they might not have gonna past the accent part and ignored his testimony. Also the main doctor that the prosecution used was sure one hundred and ten percent that the victim died of blunt force trauma to the head but when cross examined by the defense she had no idea that there is medical literature that says if something such as a blow poke was used to hit the victim on the head there would be internal damages in the brain which there was none. I also noticed that the foreman for the jury was a woman, now i cant say for sure that there is a connection between that and the woman being a victim but it could be looked at in regards as to why they found Peterson gulity when the evidence proved otherwise. To me this is a serious fail of the criminal justice system and the defense couldnt have done a better job its just the jury really got it wrong and after seeing the case on tape i honestly cant see Peterson as guilty.
After watching the rest of the video during class, I'm surprised the jury found him guilty. I'm not sure I wouldn't have done the same thing, but so much of the prosecution's argument was based off the fact that he used the blow-poke to kill his wife. I understand that they said he could have used another object, but then what?? I'm not entirely convinced he is innocent, but I also don't know if there was enough evidence to convict beyond a shadow of a doubt.
The prosecution also made such a big deal out of the fact that Michael was bisexual and had been chatting with a male escort. However, the jury said that they were able to overlook that? I'm not so sure every single member of that twelve member jury was able to completely overlook something like that, especially in a fairly conservative state which North Carolina is.
While the entire video was very interesting to see how a trial actually goes, as opposed to the dramatizations we see on TV, it was also a little disheartening because there really is no clear cut answer. While there was a lot of forensic evidence associated with this case, none of it could prove that Michael either committed the murder or not for sure. Usually on TV, the evidence is so obviously pointing the way to the correct conviction. With such inconclusive evidence, it almost makes me wary that we're leaving the fate of some people up to twelve random people that may not be the best equipped to make judgments.
I can't say I'm surprised that Peterson was found guilty. Ignoring the blow poke for a moment the defense did little to convince the jury that the victim had just fallen down the stairs. Instead they attempted to convince the jury that she fell and received a injury bad enough that there was enough blood for her to slip on when she got up again. We must further keep in mind that this documentary has a fairly obvious bias toward Peterson's innocence we hear and see very little from the prosecution. Indeed all we seem to see of their side is bits and pieces of their argument with all the context removed from it. Further the defenses argument that Peterson had no motive ignores the fact that one: Just because you can sell your stuff to cover debts doesn't mean you want to, and two that you necessarily need a motive to kill someone. Finally coming back to the infamous Blow Poke. The prosecution was careful never to say that the murder weapon had to be the blow poke simply something similar. Indeed from what I could tell the blow poke was nothing more then a glorified curtain rod. The argument that a beating as sever as the one given to the victim would result in brain damage raises the question of why wouldn't hitting your head on the stairs as hard as she most have done the same thing.
I cant believe they found him guilty either. To find someone guilty means beyond a reasonably doubt. There is no way that every person in that jury thought that he killed his wife, beyond a reasonable doubt. And if they did they have issues! It is obvious to me that there is too much speculation on the side of the prosecution to of convicted him. I also thought that the defenses expert witness. Dr Henry Lee I think his name was, had a better explanation about the case then the prosecution did. It just made more sense to me as far as he was saying that that blood on the wall could of came from her breathing blood and her repeatedly falling down after trying to get back up could have caused the injuries on the back of her head. I think that if she was hit on the head to the extent that the prosecution states the defense is right in saying that there would be fractures! Although I think that Mr. Petersons actions seem kind of out of the ordinary during the trial I still dont think that he did it. It would be hard for anyone to be in that position. Being accused of murdering the one you love and then being accused of killing another lady. wow. I couldnt believe at the end when they found him guilt he jus calmly said "Its ok, Its ok" to his kids and walked out! I would be going crazy If i was innocent. I still think that the jury got this one wrong. Just not enough evidence to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt in my opinion
Upon watching the video and hearing the guilty verdict in the Michael Peterson case, I felt several mixed feelings. Regardless of whether or not one thought Michael Peterson was guilty, I did NOT feel that the prosecution proved BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that Michael Peterson was guilty. The prosecution merely stacked circumstantial evidence against Mr. Peterson and did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty. That phrase, “beyond a reasonable doubt” is a very powerful phrase in our legal system and I feel that people do not understand the full weight of its meaning. Beyond a reasonable doubt literally means that there cannot be one ounce of any doubt in your mind about that person’s guilt. You cannot be 75% sure he’s guilty, 85% sure, or even 99.99999% sure he’s guilty in order to convict him. You have to be absolutely 100% sure beyond a reasonable person’s doubt. There is no way that the prosecution proved that Michael Peterson was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Sure the prosecution did a great job of showing how vile Michael Peterson is as a person. They packed everything they could on the jury and us to make us hate Michael Peterson. I don’t think anyone likes someone who cheats on their spouses but is not liking someone really enough to convict them of murder? But there is a huge leap between bisexual adulteress to homicidal maniac. Like the male prostitute said on the witness stand, many of the people who use his services are happily married men. Sure prostitution and adultery are illegal but that doesn’t mean all bisexual married men are going to turn around and kill their spouses? The wounds on the back of her head might (may or may not) indicate some sort of blunt force trauma but is that the ONLY way that those marks could of happened? These are the little things we call doubt, and you cannot reasonably push doubt out of my head on this case. I have read several responses on this blog that say that they thought Michael Peterson showed no remorse throughout the trial and acted in a way one would not expect an innocent person to act. Michael Peterson’s behavior, appearance, demeanor, etc may have been peculiar, odd, and unemotional but once again these are not facts. There is no handbook on how people are supposed to behave after they find their wives at the bottom of a staircase. Likewise, you cannot say someone “looks” guilty, or have guilty thoughts about someone based on their appearance. I realize we all do this every day in every part of our lives but as a juror, those people that convicted him need to set aside things that may make them dislike Michael Peterson and really focus on those four little words, “Beyond a reasonable doubt.”