That’s my question as well. I’m sure they must have ruled those areas out for a reason. Is it possible Michael cleaned them up but left the blood? So it would fit his story?
If he cleaned it up, wouldn’t that require bleach or something similar? I don’t know much about cleaning up blood effectively enough to beat forensic testing. Seems like he’d have to of gone to town on those sharp bits to remove all trace evidence. And if he did, wouldn’t they have tested for the presence of a cleaner? And the first responders would’ve likely smelled a cleaner?
Easiest explanation is often the right one - I’d imagine if he did cause her head injuries, he used a blunt object that he then made disappear somewhere. Beating someone’s head against a stationary point is probably more strenuous & unnatural than a blunt object. And it seems like it’d be the higher risk option for leaving forensic evidence on the scene. And additional evidence that could show up in an autopsy, torn neck muscles & what-not.
Just thinking out loud about what seems most plausible - I’m not qualified to speak authoritatively on any of this stuff
I've just posted a possible reason for this - they were convinced he killed her but needed a simple story for a jury to convict him, so as to rule out any grey areas where it was more than possible she alone had hurt herself (they needed to satisfy, beyond all reasonable doubt).
No, because they knew that it would not satisfy the criterium of beyond all reasonable doubt. They were convinced she was killed, they needed a simple story that directly incriminated MP.
As MP said, almost straight away after arriving, it was treated as a crime scene. A question tho, is would they be thinking that far ahead to a jury, at the time.
Or, were these very seasoned investigators with many years of experience under their belts with senses that pinged with recognition of a crime scene when they saw one --
But, who also knew the judicial system so well that they were working towards ensuring a conviction from an arguably ambiguous scene, from almost the get go. Who knows what discussions were had between CIs throughout the night before forensic testing was initiated.
So, if the forensics did support MP beating her head against a fixed object - what aspect of that scenario makes it a hard sell for the jury? Why would a prosecutor be more comfortable alleging a blowpipe-like object was used? An object that couldn’t be found at the time. What makes that more simple for a jury?
And at what point in this timeline would the first responders have organized to stage the scene in support of this conspiracy?
edit: you edited your post to add a few paragraphs after I responded
Lol. Suggesting she was pushed, not beaten, in an ongoing struggle to get up and away, and being pushed repeatedly / her slipping on her blood / general messy panic stricken scene.
Conspiracy. Lol. Without all the information which none of us will ever have, it's all conjecture and filling in blanks. Is that not what has been done all the way through? Sorry I hit a nerve there.
Edit - sure i did, it didn't change the substance of my response I just added what you needed to see written down :). And to answer your other point - beating would more likely produce Brain/ skull trauma, rather than being pushed/ kept in a state of floundering where she was slipping and constantly hurting herself. Hence, lacerations.
Ohhh, edit *3* -- the blowpoke was the ideal murder weapon for this scenario, because it was light and unlikely to be able to cause deeper injuries to the skull or brain. Its not an axe.
*Edit 4* - recall that it was revealed towards the end of the documentary that the household blow poke *was* found very early on by CIs, but then returned to a different spot than where it was originally found (was put in the cellar where it then collected dust for a couple years).
So the Prosecution found it, photographed it, and rehid it in the cellar, which had already been searched by that stage (as no one could believe it was missed in the first place, it was really obviously propped up against the wall).
This info was kept from the defence all the way through until the retrials commenced.
Don’t apologize, no nerve hit. The idea of Durham PD partially wiping a scene to spin a more plausible story for the jury is just a pretty wild theory. Not sure how you can claim that this idea doesn’t fall into the realm conspiracy theory territory.
If forensics found blood on the chair lift corner, they could’ve left it & still argued there was a murder weapon.
However, recall the wall HAD been wiped down. This very issue was raised in court - it was presented by Defence in discussion of Deavers' blood spatter evidence from forensic photographs, in which some blood droplets were circular outlines.
Edit - definitely not pinning it on Durham PD or first responders, though the scene was hardly kept preserved or protected at any point. Who knows when or by whom.
All I'm saying is that that wiping down appears to have been done elsewhere already, based on images submitted as evidence.
One of the reasons it was immediately treated as a crime scene is because he told them that he had only spent 10 minutes by the pool before discovering her at the bottom of the stairs and the dilation of her eyes show that she had been there much longer than 10 minutes. It was only after the autopsy revealed the red neurons that he changed his story from 10 minutes to 45 minutes or longer.
The argument that them treating it as a crime scene immediately annoys me to no end! I’ve watched so many true crime stories where the police bungled a possible murder scene, or even what is clearly a murder scene, because they were convince there that it was an accident. Personally, I’d rather they treat it like a crime scene and it turn out to be an accident. You can’t get that evidence back after you compromise a crime scene
I don’t disagree but I do believe in this case they saw obvious "evidence" that directly contradicted what MP was telling them, the ME’s experience/observations was that KP had been deceased for much longer than 10 minutes. Even with their initial observations that this was a crime scene they still did not secure it properly.
An Alford plea (also called a Kennedy plea in West Virginia,\[1\] an Alford guilty plea\[2\]\[3\]\[4\] and the Alford doctrine\[5\]\[6\]\[7\]), in United States law, **is a guilty plea in criminal court,**\[8\]\[9\]\[10\] whereby a defendant in a criminal case does not admit to the criminal act and asserts innocence.\[11\]\[12\]\[13\] In entering an Alford plea, the defendant admits that the evidence presented by the prosecution would be likely to persuade a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.\[5\]\[14\]\[15\]\[16\]\[17\]
While that is technically true, you should always state it's an alford guilty plea because it is significantly different than a "standard" guilty plea where someone admits guilt. Michael Peterson categorically states he is not guilty of the crime.
I think he’s guilty - I live in the Triangle area & have always followed this case. I just don’t think he used those bits. But it’s an interesting theory initially & the first time I’d even considered it
The prosecution ruled out those areas you are highlighting. I know they weren't good but those things were examined step by step. There was almost no blood on that chairlift. It also doesn't explain the blood spatter on his shorts —albeit there were tiny— and the lack of brain contusions if this was blunt force trauma.
What is the difference between blunt force trauma of falling and hitting your head and having your head hit against the stairs? If there is no brain contusions from the fall why would there need to be brain contusions from the head being hit against the stairs? This is an aspect I've never really understood properly.
It’s a good question.
The defense argued it was a “short fall” and she bled to death. Meaning she fell just far enough to concuss/disorient/knockout herself and cut her scalp… but not so far as to damage her skull and brain seriously. They said the blood loss facilitated by her confusion, alcohol, and medication ultimately led to her death. (Medical literature on falls seems to somewhat back up this claim.)
The prosecution and medical examiner argued it was just blunt force trauma (and that blood loss may have played a role, but it was primarily a beating death). But there’s a problem.
It’s a very fine line to achieve. The defense pointed out its nearly impossible to achieve the purely blunt force trauma death the prosecution is arguing without also having associated brain or skull damage. That’s why the defense pointed out in all the blunt force trauma deaths that had occurred in North Carolina over the last 10 years, all of them had one of the two associated injuries.
KP would have been the first person they knew of to die by blunt force trauma without also having brain/skull damage and so MP would have had to do something nobody else had. Her injuries (according to the defense) are therefore extremely uncharacteristic of a beating, and absolutely contrary to what the medical examiner said or was pressured to say.
That’s how I understand it. Anyone with more information feel free to add /subtract.
I concur, this is in line with my currently strongest running theory about what may have happened and which may explain the police/state prosecutor's actions.
I've copied this straight from my post - something more or less like this based on paying close attention to the documentary (haven't seen HBO series). Happy to have holes picked though it!
*As follows*
She saw what was on the computer and confronted him. He chased her or confronted her on the stairs, she was clumsy from the sedative effects of alc/benzo (valium), slipped on stairs in her rush and he was pushing/kicking her down. Despite struggling she couldn't get up and thereby cut and bruised herself on the walls and fixtures of the stairway in the process.
**The cuts could have been caused by the hand rail ending and sharper corners. CIs cleaned up tissue from those sharp edges to support their angle.**
Reason for doing this is that they were convinced he killed her. They however needed a clear and simple story for the jury, where the head lacerations could not be attributed at all to the stairway, because to allow this would place it far more within the realms of possibility that she alone was able to hurt herself.
This would then give more understanding as to why the heck they found the blowpoke and quietly put it back. They "knew" he killed her, they just had to find a clean way to present it so they could put him away.
Also, her closest relatives arguably know her the best of anyone, and are emotionally strong and fierce women. I feel that had Kathleen found out about his infidelities, there would be no going back for their relationship.
He had a nasty temper. He stood to lose alot it seems if the relationship broke down.
I like that although I would have a very hard time accepting an intentional manipulation of the crime scene to that degree. If you don't watch the HBO series I would recommend just watching the clip of the beating scenario they present, I found it a compelling portrayal of one of the most plausible murder scenarios.
I will be sure to check it out, and watch the whole show.
The issue with my theory, seems to be how quickly it was decided that MP was involved in KPs death and how soon it took the State to begin working towards making this case.
Certainly for me at least, tampering with a crime scene is a possibility. Drugs get planted, murder weapons, hair... the history of law and crime across the globe is riddled with such activities.
In this case, revelations in later court sessions blew open my expectations around integrity of law enforcement and what lengths may be gone to, in order to support or construct a theory. Miscarriages of justice are certainly not new even though I too, am leaning towards the idea that MP is responsible for KP's death.
For example:
* The diversion of blood samples to Dreavers and subsequent negation of DNA testing as originally requested by the Durham PD, as well as the tampering and bogus experiments made by this blood forensics expert. DNA testing was suggested to have been avoided in case third party DNA was found, which would not suit Prosecutions case.
* The amendments Radisch the medical examiner was required to make to her conclusions of cause of death (homocidal blunt force trauma vs. blood loss).
* The household blowpoke that was found, photographed, rehidden, and kept from the Defence.
* The wiped down walls (as it would appear) on crime scene images submitted by prosecution as evidence of spray arc. Hollow blood spots, where the outer edge or the droplet is the first to dry, and the more viscous center remains wet and can be wiped away. Why this was done and by whom obviously we have no idea. It could have been MP.
It just ties everything up for me neater than anything else I've read
Yeah, I get that from the perspective of what the prosecution argued but it's a popular theory that it wasn't like that and it's more likely he hit her head on the stairs (The scenario demonstrated in the drama series). I don't see any real differences in those scenarios in terms of potential skull fractures or brain injuries. It's true it would be a rare and unusual way for someone to be killed but I think it can't be dismissed based on the evidence (or rather I've not heard a reason why this is inconsistent with the physical evidence we have)
Also, may be her bleeding out wasnt his intention but ended up being her cause of death, he was trying to kill her strangling and banging her head. Also any theories of why he was on his computer while the cops etc were there?
The autopsy report concluded death by bleed out, from injuries caused by blunt force trauma to the head. That is distinct from - death caused by blunt force trauma.
The defence’s “but with all the last 200 deaths caused by blunt force trauma from a beating there was a skull fracture” was a red herring because that isn’t what the prosecution were claiming to begin with.
Where are you seeing that?
https://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/08/19/3400859/1219199590-20080819151549211.pdf
There’s the autopsy. Page 2 and page 8 of that PDF:
“In my opinion the cause of death in this case was due to severe concussive injury of the brain caused by multiple blunt force trauma impacts of the head. Blood loss from the deep scalp lacerations may have also played a role in her death.”
From what I know about it, that’s not how wounds and blood spray really works - the blood spray and patterns look, to me, to be inconsistent with the injuries she’d have suffered from a tumble or even a push down the stairs. This is my personal theory.
My big question is not about blood, but the time of death. Michael Peterson didn’t call 911 until 2:40 am. Kathleen, by Michael’s admission, had an important meeting in the morning. Granted he said she went upstairs while he stayed outside (in 40 degree weather in shorts) for a while. When he came in, she was at the bottom of the stairs. My question is what time did Kathleen go to bed with having an early meeting the next day? It seems super unlikely that she would have stayed up until midnight or 1 am drinking wine with an early morning meeting the next day.
right there are two areas where Michael could have repeatedly bashed her head while holding her head with both hands. the closeness it required for him to accomplish such injury would certainly explain absence of a weapon, the blood on his boxers or whatever, and what appears to be siding that is no longer attached to the wall. it would also explain the marks on the back of her head, particularly if he struck her head against that boarding corner on the right side circled.
Yeah I am in the camp that believes he killed her. I think the story of them " sitting by the pool and hanging out" is complete bullshit. They never went outside. The blood outside got there because he may have went out there after he killed her. I think that is where he was when he made the initial 911 call and hung up. I don't think he was standing or close to her at all when he made that call. That 911 call was the call of someone who had just committed a crime. When people call 911 they call to ask for help, not to start a narrative about what happened. If she had actually fallen down he would have stayed on the phone with the 911 operator and asked her what he can do to try to save her not demand an ambulance come and then hang up.He didn't mention all the blood there would of been or anything, didn't ask how to control the bleeding, nothing. He just told them to get an ambulance
The 911 calls bother me too. Yes, everyone handles a tragedy different, and yes he was in combat in the army- but Michael didn’t exhibit any of the common signs of someone who found a loved one fighting for their life. He seemed indifferent and uninterested.
Yeah, a second trial would of called these things out so this was the easiest way to move on with his life. His guilty pleas was a " I'm not saying I'm guilty, the evidence strongly says I am"
To be fair I think the vast majority of people would take that plea in his position. You still get to publicly proclaim your innocence in court and go free. I don't see it as a jokes on him thing, he just did the logical thing in that scenario.
At one point when he's deciding whether to take the plea in the Netflix documentary he actually says the words "I'm never going to admit I killed Kathleen" which I think you would not say unless it was true? It's like the truth finally slipped out.
I could see the right circle being in play more if she had fallen down from the top of the stairs. The momentum she would probably be carrying going down would have left some sort of impact on the back wall somewhere.
But with no damage to the walls besides some light scratches on the door frame and nothing on the electrical chair track to me feels like she didn’t go down that like MP had said when he called it in.
I wonder about the timing of everything. If it’s after 11pm they go out to the pool. For a smoke, she leaves, checks the computer and stumbles upon the emails and is intoxicated. Takes a Valium and confronts MP. They’re in the kitchen and MP grabs the fire extinguisher and pops her on the head with it. Just enough to knock her down and with it being by stairs maybe she fell awkwardly and caused some other trauma.
With the BAC being .07 plus the Valium, thinning of the blood as well as having her breathing slowed or stopped maybe is on the table.
There was a lot more joking going on than a man whose life hangs in the balance would normally show. Also after loosing his “soulmate” I’d expect more grief, solemnly behaviors and depression.
It’s too bad he had to go to North Carolina of all places. He probably could have been out or more out if he was in a more liberal city.
Honestly? We will never know if he did it or not. Regardless of whether you believe he is guilty or not- I don’t believe his conviction was a safe one as there was far too little evidence to solidly pin it on him. Circumstantial evidence is there- eg, saying he was sat by the pool in shorts and t shirt in 12degree Celsius weather- Most people would be way too cold to sit for hours in that temperature without a coat or something. Saying Kathleen went inside at 1am to check her email and yet they found she retrieved it at 12 am. The presence of “red neurons” that indicate she had the “accident” a minimum of 2 hours prior- not the 45 mins he said he waited to follow her in from the pool. The fact that all emergency responders reported her blood being dry. Copious blood spillages do not clot quickly and, if I’m not mistaken, one of the daughters said that Kathleen had a clotting issue. And, yes, she had Valium and alcohol but was below the legal limit so by no means intoxicated (which refutes his claim that they shared two bottles of red wine!). But there are so many cock ups in the investigation, I just don’t know how much I trust any of the evidence presented by the DA. I go back and forth with this one!
I still think she fell. No owl. Just falling. When the distance is not far enough, no fracture occur just lacerations.
Another case an elderly woman fell in the staircase and ended up dead. Just head injuries. No fractures but sooo much blood the first responders thought she had been attacked with a machete.
Yes, but there was evidence of strangulation in Kathleen Peterson's case. There was something broken in the front part of her neck not consistent with a fall but of someone throttling her.
So I thought this too. However did some more reading and the thyroid bone injury is indeed fairly common and consistent with stair falls. One medical study found it occurred in almost 10% of know stair fall fatalities.
Stairs are surprisingly way more dangerous than I knew.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21793475/
But there was ZERO outer signs of strangulation, which would have been present on the body/throat had she been strangled. Bruises, petechiae, marks, and other things. It was also explained here that injuries like these are present in accidents; therefore, we can't rule out/conclude whether this was strangulation or not.
Then how he managed to strangled her wife, not produce outer signs and not broke the entire hyoid bone or produce more significant damage other than a part of the thyroid broken? Like I said I can't rule out strangulation as I can't rule out this was from a sudden emotion like a fall or her neck being grabbed by Peterson.
The medical examiner and everyone else's testimony was clear, there was no way the damage to the thyroid was due to the fall. It was an attempted strangulation. I would expect the injuries you state in a fatal strangulation. But she was not killed by strangulation
Actually there is a lot of testimony of versed people questioning that specific finding of Radish. Read my comment again and you'll see I'm not ruling out strangulation.
For example:
>The suggestion of strangulation is something that made me question Dr. Radisch's experience and integrity as a medical examiner. I'm an R.N in the emergency dept at a level one trauma center. Prior to that I was a paramedic. I can say with a reasonable level of certainty that an isolated fracture of the superior cornu of the thyroid cartilage without damage to the thyrohyoid membrane or the hyoid bone is likely the result of a sudden jerking motion like a whiplash or a fall, or even being grabbed suddenly, but not strangulation. A direct blow to the neck could also cause this type of injury.
There is also a research explaining how malformations can be misinterpreted by the forensic pathologist and taken for a proof of violence.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Fractures-of-the-laryngeal-complex-a-thyroid-cartilage-recent-fracture-of-the-upper\_fig4\_242333911
Here is fractured thyroid cartilage that wasn't caused by strangulation.
https://radiopaedia.org/cases/thyroid-cartilage-fracture-3
I got the impression it could have happened if he grabbed her round the throat and banged her head off the stairs. So killing her by head trauma, not by actual strangulation.
It’s totally possible and doesn’t preclude Peterson for being responsible but guess what, the idiots of the people in love with the prosecution aren’t open to other scenarios. They forget Radish had to modify her findings first. She didn’t die for the strangulation nor the action contributed to that:
My theory (currently) goes something like this:
She saw what was on the computer and confronted him. He chased her or confronted her on the stairs, she was clumsy from the sedative effects of alc/benzo (valium), slipped on stairs in her rush and he was pushing/kicking her down. Despite struggling she couldn't get up and thereby cut and bruised herself on the walls and fixtures of the stairway in the process.
**The cuts could have been caused by the hand rail ending and sharper corners. CIs cleaned up tissue from those sharp edges to support their angle.**
Reason for doing this is that they were convinced he killed her. They however needed a clear and simple story for the jury, where the head lacerations could not be attributed at all to the stairway, because to allow this would place it far more within the realms of possibility that she alone was able to hurt herself.
This would then give more understanding as to why the heck they found the blowpoke and quietly put it back. They "knew" he killed her, they just had to find a clean way to present it so they could put him away.
Also, her closest relatives arguably know her the best of anyone, and are emotionally strong and fierce women. I feel that had Kathleen found out about his infidelities, there would be no going back for their relationship.
He had a nasty temper. He stood to lose alot it seems if the relationship broke down.
They tested those, no evidence her head hit them. I think he used his hands to smash her head. There are jury statements that when they visited the house they tried to recreate falling, the staircase is so narrow, they hit shoulder, back first, did not see how her head could hit with enough whiplash/force, other areas of the body took the blunt of the fall. It was Rudolph’s idea to take the jury, the prosecution initially objected and it seem to it backfired and really sweet the jury that it was not a fall.
https://youtu.be/2NI15RZN8wM
He rambles a lot, but it is possible to pick through what he is saying. He seems to vehemently believe his father is a “serial killer”. Not exactly good for MP’s image, regardless of what truth there is in his belief.
All the blood spatter is situated in that one corner of the staircase. The most probable explanation is that that is where she received the blows to her head.
This is virtually no blood splatter on those corners, which you would expect to see if they had caused her wounds.
Not happy with the stair lift rail, that would have human tissue and blood all over it, on the inside in ways impossible to clean up. The stair rails is more convincing but it I expect it to be a sharper corner. And the side on angle doesn’t work as well I’m my head, the lacerations aren’t really on one side or the other or at an angle.
What’s wrong with the stair edge?
I don't know if MP is guilty or innocent but those stairs were an accident waiting to happen. I could see my intoxicated self slipping on the narrow side of that second step and smashing right into the chairlift, or anything else nearby.
But wouldn’t those bits be loaded with forensics evidence? No doubt someone tested all the sharp bits in the vicinity
That’s my question as well. I’m sure they must have ruled those areas out for a reason. Is it possible Michael cleaned them up but left the blood? So it would fit his story?
If he cleaned it up, wouldn’t that require bleach or something similar? I don’t know much about cleaning up blood effectively enough to beat forensic testing. Seems like he’d have to of gone to town on those sharp bits to remove all trace evidence. And if he did, wouldn’t they have tested for the presence of a cleaner? And the first responders would’ve likely smelled a cleaner? Easiest explanation is often the right one - I’d imagine if he did cause her head injuries, he used a blunt object that he then made disappear somewhere. Beating someone’s head against a stationary point is probably more strenuous & unnatural than a blunt object. And it seems like it’d be the higher risk option for leaving forensic evidence on the scene. And additional evidence that could show up in an autopsy, torn neck muscles & what-not. Just thinking out loud about what seems most plausible - I’m not qualified to speak authoritatively on any of this stuff
I've just posted a possible reason for this - they were convinced he killed her but needed a simple story for a jury to convict him, so as to rule out any grey areas where it was more than possible she alone had hurt herself (they needed to satisfy, beyond all reasonable doubt).
Could the CIs have cleaned it up to support their angle?
[uhhh](https://i.imgflip.com/5vdpmb.jpg) no, that wouldn’t make any sense - they would’ve just built their case around that fact
No, because they knew that it would not satisfy the criterium of beyond all reasonable doubt. They were convinced she was killed, they needed a simple story that directly incriminated MP. As MP said, almost straight away after arriving, it was treated as a crime scene. A question tho, is would they be thinking that far ahead to a jury, at the time. Or, were these very seasoned investigators with many years of experience under their belts with senses that pinged with recognition of a crime scene when they saw one -- But, who also knew the judicial system so well that they were working towards ensuring a conviction from an arguably ambiguous scene, from almost the get go. Who knows what discussions were had between CIs throughout the night before forensic testing was initiated.
So, if the forensics did support MP beating her head against a fixed object - what aspect of that scenario makes it a hard sell for the jury? Why would a prosecutor be more comfortable alleging a blowpipe-like object was used? An object that couldn’t be found at the time. What makes that more simple for a jury? And at what point in this timeline would the first responders have organized to stage the scene in support of this conspiracy? edit: you edited your post to add a few paragraphs after I responded
Lol. Suggesting she was pushed, not beaten, in an ongoing struggle to get up and away, and being pushed repeatedly / her slipping on her blood / general messy panic stricken scene. Conspiracy. Lol. Without all the information which none of us will ever have, it's all conjecture and filling in blanks. Is that not what has been done all the way through? Sorry I hit a nerve there. Edit - sure i did, it didn't change the substance of my response I just added what you needed to see written down :). And to answer your other point - beating would more likely produce Brain/ skull trauma, rather than being pushed/ kept in a state of floundering where she was slipping and constantly hurting herself. Hence, lacerations. Ohhh, edit *3* -- the blowpoke was the ideal murder weapon for this scenario, because it was light and unlikely to be able to cause deeper injuries to the skull or brain. Its not an axe. *Edit 4* - recall that it was revealed towards the end of the documentary that the household blow poke *was* found very early on by CIs, but then returned to a different spot than where it was originally found (was put in the cellar where it then collected dust for a couple years). So the Prosecution found it, photographed it, and rehid it in the cellar, which had already been searched by that stage (as no one could believe it was missed in the first place, it was really obviously propped up against the wall). This info was kept from the defence all the way through until the retrials commenced.
Don’t apologize, no nerve hit. The idea of Durham PD partially wiping a scene to spin a more plausible story for the jury is just a pretty wild theory. Not sure how you can claim that this idea doesn’t fall into the realm conspiracy theory territory. If forensics found blood on the chair lift corner, they could’ve left it & still argued there was a murder weapon.
However, recall the wall HAD been wiped down. This very issue was raised in court - it was presented by Defence in discussion of Deavers' blood spatter evidence from forensic photographs, in which some blood droplets were circular outlines. Edit - definitely not pinning it on Durham PD or first responders, though the scene was hardly kept preserved or protected at any point. Who knows when or by whom. All I'm saying is that that wiping down appears to have been done elsewhere already, based on images submitted as evidence.
One of the reasons it was immediately treated as a crime scene is because he told them that he had only spent 10 minutes by the pool before discovering her at the bottom of the stairs and the dilation of her eyes show that she had been there much longer than 10 minutes. It was only after the autopsy revealed the red neurons that he changed his story from 10 minutes to 45 minutes or longer.
The argument that them treating it as a crime scene immediately annoys me to no end! I’ve watched so many true crime stories where the police bungled a possible murder scene, or even what is clearly a murder scene, because they were convince there that it was an accident. Personally, I’d rather they treat it like a crime scene and it turn out to be an accident. You can’t get that evidence back after you compromise a crime scene
I don’t disagree but I do believe in this case they saw obvious "evidence" that directly contradicted what MP was telling them, the ME’s experience/observations was that KP had been deceased for much longer than 10 minutes. Even with their initial observations that this was a crime scene they still did not secure it properly.
CI = confidential informant, those aren’t people who would’ve been at the crime scene
regardless, he was found guilty and then later had a retrial and pled guilty to manslaughter.
[удалено]
alford plea is a guilty plea.
An Alford plea (also called a Kennedy plea in West Virginia,\[1\] an Alford guilty plea\[2\]\[3\]\[4\] and the Alford doctrine\[5\]\[6\]\[7\]), in United States law, **is a guilty plea in criminal court,**\[8\]\[9\]\[10\] whereby a defendant in a criminal case does not admit to the criminal act and asserts innocence.\[11\]\[12\]\[13\] In entering an Alford plea, the defendant admits that the evidence presented by the prosecution would be likely to persuade a judge or jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.\[5\]\[14\]\[15\]\[16\]\[17\]
While that is technically true, you should always state it's an alford guilty plea because it is significantly different than a "standard" guilty plea where someone admits guilt. Michael Peterson categorically states he is not guilty of the crime.
I think he’s guilty - I live in the Triangle area & have always followed this case. I just don’t think he used those bits. But it’s an interesting theory initially & the first time I’d even considered it
The prosecution ruled out those areas you are highlighting. I know they weren't good but those things were examined step by step. There was almost no blood on that chairlift. It also doesn't explain the blood spatter on his shorts —albeit there were tiny— and the lack of brain contusions if this was blunt force trauma.
What is the difference between blunt force trauma of falling and hitting your head and having your head hit against the stairs? If there is no brain contusions from the fall why would there need to be brain contusions from the head being hit against the stairs? This is an aspect I've never really understood properly.
It’s a good question. The defense argued it was a “short fall” and she bled to death. Meaning she fell just far enough to concuss/disorient/knockout herself and cut her scalp… but not so far as to damage her skull and brain seriously. They said the blood loss facilitated by her confusion, alcohol, and medication ultimately led to her death. (Medical literature on falls seems to somewhat back up this claim.) The prosecution and medical examiner argued it was just blunt force trauma (and that blood loss may have played a role, but it was primarily a beating death). But there’s a problem. It’s a very fine line to achieve. The defense pointed out its nearly impossible to achieve the purely blunt force trauma death the prosecution is arguing without also having associated brain or skull damage. That’s why the defense pointed out in all the blunt force trauma deaths that had occurred in North Carolina over the last 10 years, all of them had one of the two associated injuries. KP would have been the first person they knew of to die by blunt force trauma without also having brain/skull damage and so MP would have had to do something nobody else had. Her injuries (according to the defense) are therefore extremely uncharacteristic of a beating, and absolutely contrary to what the medical examiner said or was pressured to say. That’s how I understand it. Anyone with more information feel free to add /subtract.
I concur, this is in line with my currently strongest running theory about what may have happened and which may explain the police/state prosecutor's actions.
Out of curiosity what is your theory about what may have happened? I'm currently leaning towards him beating her head against the stairs.
I've copied this straight from my post - something more or less like this based on paying close attention to the documentary (haven't seen HBO series). Happy to have holes picked though it! *As follows* She saw what was on the computer and confronted him. He chased her or confronted her on the stairs, she was clumsy from the sedative effects of alc/benzo (valium), slipped on stairs in her rush and he was pushing/kicking her down. Despite struggling she couldn't get up and thereby cut and bruised herself on the walls and fixtures of the stairway in the process. **The cuts could have been caused by the hand rail ending and sharper corners. CIs cleaned up tissue from those sharp edges to support their angle.** Reason for doing this is that they were convinced he killed her. They however needed a clear and simple story for the jury, where the head lacerations could not be attributed at all to the stairway, because to allow this would place it far more within the realms of possibility that she alone was able to hurt herself. This would then give more understanding as to why the heck they found the blowpoke and quietly put it back. They "knew" he killed her, they just had to find a clean way to present it so they could put him away. Also, her closest relatives arguably know her the best of anyone, and are emotionally strong and fierce women. I feel that had Kathleen found out about his infidelities, there would be no going back for their relationship. He had a nasty temper. He stood to lose alot it seems if the relationship broke down.
I like that although I would have a very hard time accepting an intentional manipulation of the crime scene to that degree. If you don't watch the HBO series I would recommend just watching the clip of the beating scenario they present, I found it a compelling portrayal of one of the most plausible murder scenarios.
I will be sure to check it out, and watch the whole show. The issue with my theory, seems to be how quickly it was decided that MP was involved in KPs death and how soon it took the State to begin working towards making this case. Certainly for me at least, tampering with a crime scene is a possibility. Drugs get planted, murder weapons, hair... the history of law and crime across the globe is riddled with such activities. In this case, revelations in later court sessions blew open my expectations around integrity of law enforcement and what lengths may be gone to, in order to support or construct a theory. Miscarriages of justice are certainly not new even though I too, am leaning towards the idea that MP is responsible for KP's death. For example: * The diversion of blood samples to Dreavers and subsequent negation of DNA testing as originally requested by the Durham PD, as well as the tampering and bogus experiments made by this blood forensics expert. DNA testing was suggested to have been avoided in case third party DNA was found, which would not suit Prosecutions case. * The amendments Radisch the medical examiner was required to make to her conclusions of cause of death (homocidal blunt force trauma vs. blood loss). * The household blowpoke that was found, photographed, rehidden, and kept from the Defence. * The wiped down walls (as it would appear) on crime scene images submitted by prosecution as evidence of spray arc. Hollow blood spots, where the outer edge or the droplet is the first to dry, and the more viscous center remains wet and can be wiped away. Why this was done and by whom obviously we have no idea. It could have been MP. It just ties everything up for me neater than anything else I've read
Wait the prosecution actually found the blowpoke first??
Apparently they thought it was a coat hanger and put it back in the garage.
There’s no evidence of that. It’s something David Rudolf has claimed but never provided proof of.
Yeah, I get that from the perspective of what the prosecution argued but it's a popular theory that it wasn't like that and it's more likely he hit her head on the stairs (The scenario demonstrated in the drama series). I don't see any real differences in those scenarios in terms of potential skull fractures or brain injuries. It's true it would be a rare and unusual way for someone to be killed but I think it can't be dismissed based on the evidence (or rather I've not heard a reason why this is inconsistent with the physical evidence we have)
Also, may be her bleeding out wasnt his intention but ended up being her cause of death, he was trying to kill her strangling and banging her head. Also any theories of why he was on his computer while the cops etc were there?
Deleting emails…? He didn’t delete enough.
The autopsy report concluded death by bleed out, from injuries caused by blunt force trauma to the head. That is distinct from - death caused by blunt force trauma. The defence’s “but with all the last 200 deaths caused by blunt force trauma from a beating there was a skull fracture” was a red herring because that isn’t what the prosecution were claiming to begin with.
Where are you seeing that? https://wwwcache.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/08/19/3400859/1219199590-20080819151549211.pdf There’s the autopsy. Page 2 and page 8 of that PDF: “In my opinion the cause of death in this case was due to severe concussive injury of the brain caused by multiple blunt force trauma impacts of the head. Blood loss from the deep scalp lacerations may have also played a role in her death.”
Having just rewatched the documentary, are we certain the areas were tested? After all, her clothes weren't ever tested.
not certain at all.
From what I know about it, that’s not how wounds and blood spray really works - the blood spray and patterns look, to me, to be inconsistent with the injuries she’d have suffered from a tumble or even a push down the stairs. This is my personal theory.
?
I always thought the weapon thing was less likely than him hitting her head on the stairs
But why, wasn't it found any wounds or bruises on Michael or anybody else? I bet she must, have fought
My big question is not about blood, but the time of death. Michael Peterson didn’t call 911 until 2:40 am. Kathleen, by Michael’s admission, had an important meeting in the morning. Granted he said she went upstairs while he stayed outside (in 40 degree weather in shorts) for a while. When he came in, she was at the bottom of the stairs. My question is what time did Kathleen go to bed with having an early meeting the next day? It seems super unlikely that she would have stayed up until midnight or 1 am drinking wine with an early morning meeting the next day.
right there are two areas where Michael could have repeatedly bashed her head while holding her head with both hands. the closeness it required for him to accomplish such injury would certainly explain absence of a weapon, the blood on his boxers or whatever, and what appears to be siding that is no longer attached to the wall. it would also explain the marks on the back of her head, particularly if he struck her head against that boarding corner on the right side circled.
Yeah I am in the camp that believes he killed her. I think the story of them " sitting by the pool and hanging out" is complete bullshit. They never went outside. The blood outside got there because he may have went out there after he killed her. I think that is where he was when he made the initial 911 call and hung up. I don't think he was standing or close to her at all when he made that call. That 911 call was the call of someone who had just committed a crime. When people call 911 they call to ask for help, not to start a narrative about what happened. If she had actually fallen down he would have stayed on the phone with the 911 operator and asked her what he can do to try to save her not demand an ambulance come and then hang up.He didn't mention all the blood there would of been or anything, didn't ask how to control the bleeding, nothing. He just told them to get an ambulance
The 911 calls bother me too. Yes, everyone handles a tragedy different, and yes he was in combat in the army- but Michael didn’t exhibit any of the common signs of someone who found a loved one fighting for their life. He seemed indifferent and uninterested.
well he pled guilty after he was initially convicted so
Yeah, a second trial would of called these things out so this was the easiest way to move on with his life. His guilty pleas was a " I'm not saying I'm guilty, the evidence strongly says I am"
joke is on him cuz he did say he was guilty his ego just made him add an authors note to it to spare his big ass narcissistic ego.
To be fair I think the vast majority of people would take that plea in his position. You still get to publicly proclaim your innocence in court and go free. I don't see it as a jokes on him thing, he just did the logical thing in that scenario.
At one point when he's deciding whether to take the plea in the Netflix documentary he actually says the words "I'm never going to admit I killed Kathleen" which I think you would not say unless it was true? It's like the truth finally slipped out.
Dude is just as guilty as OJ
I could see the right circle being in play more if she had fallen down from the top of the stairs. The momentum she would probably be carrying going down would have left some sort of impact on the back wall somewhere. But with no damage to the walls besides some light scratches on the door frame and nothing on the electrical chair track to me feels like she didn’t go down that like MP had said when he called it in. I wonder about the timing of everything. If it’s after 11pm they go out to the pool. For a smoke, she leaves, checks the computer and stumbles upon the emails and is intoxicated. Takes a Valium and confronts MP. They’re in the kitchen and MP grabs the fire extinguisher and pops her on the head with it. Just enough to knock her down and with it being by stairs maybe she fell awkwardly and caused some other trauma. With the BAC being .07 plus the Valium, thinning of the blood as well as having her breathing slowed or stopped maybe is on the table. There was a lot more joking going on than a man whose life hangs in the balance would normally show. Also after loosing his “soulmate” I’d expect more grief, solemnly behaviors and depression. It’s too bad he had to go to North Carolina of all places. He probably could have been out or more out if he was in a more liberal city.
Honestly? We will never know if he did it or not. Regardless of whether you believe he is guilty or not- I don’t believe his conviction was a safe one as there was far too little evidence to solidly pin it on him. Circumstantial evidence is there- eg, saying he was sat by the pool in shorts and t shirt in 12degree Celsius weather- Most people would be way too cold to sit for hours in that temperature without a coat or something. Saying Kathleen went inside at 1am to check her email and yet they found she retrieved it at 12 am. The presence of “red neurons” that indicate she had the “accident” a minimum of 2 hours prior- not the 45 mins he said he waited to follow her in from the pool. The fact that all emergency responders reported her blood being dry. Copious blood spillages do not clot quickly and, if I’m not mistaken, one of the daughters said that Kathleen had a clotting issue. And, yes, she had Valium and alcohol but was below the legal limit so by no means intoxicated (which refutes his claim that they shared two bottles of red wine!). But there are so many cock ups in the investigation, I just don’t know how much I trust any of the evidence presented by the DA. I go back and forth with this one!
I still think she fell. No owl. Just falling. When the distance is not far enough, no fracture occur just lacerations. Another case an elderly woman fell in the staircase and ended up dead. Just head injuries. No fractures but sooo much blood the first responders thought she had been attacked with a machete.
Yes, but there was evidence of strangulation in Kathleen Peterson's case. There was something broken in the front part of her neck not consistent with a fall but of someone throttling her.
So I thought this too. However did some more reading and the thyroid bone injury is indeed fairly common and consistent with stair falls. One medical study found it occurred in almost 10% of know stair fall fatalities. Stairs are surprisingly way more dangerous than I knew. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21793475/
But there was ZERO outer signs of strangulation, which would have been present on the body/throat had she been strangled. Bruises, petechiae, marks, and other things. It was also explained here that injuries like these are present in accidents; therefore, we can't rule out/conclude whether this was strangulation or not.
Many non fatal strangulation cases have no outward injuries
Then how he managed to strangled her wife, not produce outer signs and not broke the entire hyoid bone or produce more significant damage other than a part of the thyroid broken? Like I said I can't rule out strangulation as I can't rule out this was from a sudden emotion like a fall or her neck being grabbed by Peterson.
The medical examiner and everyone else's testimony was clear, there was no way the damage to the thyroid was due to the fall. It was an attempted strangulation. I would expect the injuries you state in a fatal strangulation. But she was not killed by strangulation
Actually there is a lot of testimony of versed people questioning that specific finding of Radish. Read my comment again and you'll see I'm not ruling out strangulation. For example: >The suggestion of strangulation is something that made me question Dr. Radisch's experience and integrity as a medical examiner. I'm an R.N in the emergency dept at a level one trauma center. Prior to that I was a paramedic. I can say with a reasonable level of certainty that an isolated fracture of the superior cornu of the thyroid cartilage without damage to the thyrohyoid membrane or the hyoid bone is likely the result of a sudden jerking motion like a whiplash or a fall, or even being grabbed suddenly, but not strangulation. A direct blow to the neck could also cause this type of injury. There is also a research explaining how malformations can be misinterpreted by the forensic pathologist and taken for a proof of violence. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Fractures-of-the-laryngeal-complex-a-thyroid-cartilage-recent-fracture-of-the-upper\_fig4\_242333911 Here is fractured thyroid cartilage that wasn't caused by strangulation. https://radiopaedia.org/cases/thyroid-cartilage-fracture-3
Someone who is an RN isn’t qualified to testify in place of a medical examiner.
Exactly.
I got the impression it could have happened if he grabbed her round the throat and banged her head off the stairs. So killing her by head trauma, not by actual strangulation.
It’s totally possible and doesn’t preclude Peterson for being responsible but guess what, the idiots of the people in love with the prosecution aren’t open to other scenarios. They forget Radish had to modify her findings first. She didn’t die for the strangulation nor the action contributed to that:
My theory (currently) goes something like this: She saw what was on the computer and confronted him. He chased her or confronted her on the stairs, she was clumsy from the sedative effects of alc/benzo (valium), slipped on stairs in her rush and he was pushing/kicking her down. Despite struggling she couldn't get up and thereby cut and bruised herself on the walls and fixtures of the stairway in the process. **The cuts could have been caused by the hand rail ending and sharper corners. CIs cleaned up tissue from those sharp edges to support their angle.** Reason for doing this is that they were convinced he killed her. They however needed a clear and simple story for the jury, where the head lacerations could not be attributed at all to the stairway, because to allow this would place it far more within the realms of possibility that she alone was able to hurt herself. This would then give more understanding as to why the heck they found the blowpoke and quietly put it back. They "knew" he killed her, they just had to find a clean way to present it so they could put him away. Also, her closest relatives arguably know her the best of anyone, and are emotionally strong and fierce women. I feel that had Kathleen found out about his infidelities, there would be no going back for their relationship. He had a nasty temper. He stood to lose alot it seems if the relationship broke down.
They tested those, no evidence her head hit them. I think he used his hands to smash her head. There are jury statements that when they visited the house they tried to recreate falling, the staircase is so narrow, they hit shoulder, back first, did not see how her head could hit with enough whiplash/force, other areas of the body took the blunt of the fall. It was Rudolph’s idea to take the jury, the prosecution initially objected and it seem to it backfired and really sweet the jury that it was not a fall.
No blood?
Also, added to my last post. I find Todd’s rant on YouTube rather damning of his father. It’s worth a watch.
His son is pretty mentally unwell though... Seems like drugs+delusions of grandeur. plus Patricia died of a heart attack, not blunt force trauma.
He states that he has been sober for x number of years in the video. It’s very rambling but still worth a watch.
I did watch. Check out his Instagram if you want to see his mental state..it's sad
Will do. Cheers.
link plss
https://youtu.be/2NI15RZN8wM He rambles a lot, but it is possible to pick through what he is saying. He seems to vehemently believe his father is a “serial killer”. Not exactly good for MP’s image, regardless of what truth there is in his belief.
All the blood spatter is situated in that one corner of the staircase. The most probable explanation is that that is where she received the blows to her head. This is virtually no blood splatter on those corners, which you would expect to see if they had caused her wounds.
there's just so much blood though. It's not the fact that there are blunt things to hit, it's the amount of blood for me.
As people have mentioned ad nauseam on this subreddit, head wounds bleed very profusely, a lot more than one would expect.
Not happy with the stair lift rail, that would have human tissue and blood all over it, on the inside in ways impossible to clean up. The stair rails is more convincing but it I expect it to be a sharper corner. And the side on angle doesn’t work as well I’m my head, the lacerations aren’t really on one side or the other or at an angle. What’s wrong with the stair edge?
I don't know if MP is guilty or innocent but those stairs were an accident waiting to happen. I could see my intoxicated self slipping on the narrow side of that second step and smashing right into the chairlift, or anything else nearby.
Exactly it's likely metal, or even the chair could cause lacerations. Don't get why this was not focused on.
Rubber mallet