nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Did Michael Peterson murder his wife?

wonderwall900

I'm sure by now many of us have read about this case, seen the Documentary or both.

I believe he did it. The documentary was biased to the Defense side of things. To the point that the editor of the series was allegedly dating Peterson.

I'd also believe the Owl Theory before I'd believe his wife got those wounds from a fall down a few steps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Peterson_(murder_suspect)#Kathleen.27s_death

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Hector Bellend

big guilty head on him

who is he?

mad m

There was reasonable doubt....blood splatter patterns etc, the fire poker that mysteriously appeared, the prosecution was a joke but hey they won.

TheValeyard

The detectives still seem damn sure he did it.

biko

Had to google him

Yes|
No|
Maybe|
/care|X

mad m

The forensic FBI agent, good lantern jaysus how in the world was he able to give his expert view after all the crap that came out about him.

wonderwall900

PS - before you vote. Please read up on the case and don't just base your thoughts on Peterson based on the documentary which was highly biased to the Defense.

Just like the Making A Murderer documentary wasn't at all what it seemed once you did some reading up on it.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

wonderwall900 wrote: »

PS - before you vote. Please read up on the case and don't just base your thoughts on Peterson based on the documentary which was highly biased to the Defense.

Just like the Making A Murderer documentary wasn't at all what it seemed once you did some reading up on it.

That's a lot of effort when you couldn't care less.

mad m

The whole investigation as well about his ex wife and the accident in Germany and the exhumation of her body. It’s hard to believe.

wonderwall900

Rebecca Harsh Stenography wrote: »

That's a lot of effort when you couldn't care less.

Why even reply then?

wonderwall900

mad m wrote: »

The whole investigation as well about his ex wife and the accident in Germany and the exhumation of her body. It’s hard to believe.

Plus the fact that when you watched him speak to the press outside the court you get this huge sense of fakeness/acting from him.

mad m

It’s highly interesting to watch “The Staircase”. I’d recommend it.

mad m

wonderwall900 wrote: »

Plus the fact that when you watched him speak to the press outside the court you get this huge sense of fakeness/acting from him.

Yes, very complex person.

mad m

I totally forgot the Owl theory....madness but then again....:rolleyes:

pleas advice

biko wrote: »

Had to google him

Yes|
No|
Maybe|

I don't know,
Can you repeat the question..

wonderwall900

mad m wrote: »

I totally forgot the Owl theory....madness but then again....:rolleyes:

It is crazy but certainly more convincing than her getting those insane wounds from a fall down a few steps.

If I was to go with how much I feel he did it I'd go:

He did it - 90%
Owl Theory/intruder/the son did it alone - 5%
He's innocent - 5%

mad m

wonderwall900 wrote: »

It is crazy but certainly more convincing than her getting those insane wounds from a fall down a few steps.

If i was to go with how much I feel he did it I'd go:
He did it - 90%

Owl Theory/intruder/the son did it alone - 5%

He's innocent - 5%

Seriously though the blood splatter patterns, his own polo shirt I think from memory had none? If the same trial was run today he’d be a free man.

FurBabyMomma

What I don't get is why cause of death of his friend in Germany was charged to murder but he wasn't subsequently charged?

I think there's too much reasonable doubt for a sound conviction tbh.

Giraffe Box

wonderwall900 wrote: »

It is crazy but certainly more convincing than her getting those insane wounds from a fall down a few steps.

If I was to go with how much I feel he did it I'd go:
He did it - 90%

Owl Theory/intruder/the son did it alone - 5%

He's innocent - 5%

If I were to go with my feelings, based on the Netflix series, it would be:

a) She fell down the stairs - 0%
b) It was the Owl wot did it - 0%
c) He killed her (and he murdered the woman in Germany too) - 110%

GingerLily

wonderwall900 wrote: »

I believe he did it. The documentary was biased to the Defense side of things. To the point that the editor of the series was allegedly dating Peterson.

I'd also believe the Owl Theory before I'd believe his wife got those wounds from a fall down a few steps.

They WERE going out for several years - so you cannot trust that documentary.

Also apparently microscopic feather traces found on her scalp would be easily explained by using a feather pillow - I don't trust that theory at all.

He was guilty IMO, too many coincidences otherwise!

wonderwall900

Giraffe Box wrote: »

If I were to go with my feelings, based on the Netflix series, it would be:

a) She fell down the stairs - 0%
b) It was the Owl wot did it - 0%
c) He killed her (and he murdered the woman in Germany too) - 110%

That's good to hear because the documentary was highly biased on Michael's side in what it chose to to leave in and out of the finished product.

wonderwall900

mad m wrote: »

Seriously though the blood splatter patterns, his own polo shirt I think from memory had none? If the same trial was run today he’d be a free man.

He wouldn't. The documentary was highly biased towards Michael in it's editing. Google is your friend

Tilikum17

I found it way too long & most of it was it boring.

I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone.

wonderwall900

Tilikum17 wrote: »

I found it way too long & most of it was it boring.

I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone.

You may well be in the minority on that. Most are hailing it as the best crime documentary series ever or at least up there with The Jinx for that title.

Maybe crime documentaries aren't your thing?

Giraffe Box

I thought it was a fantastic documentary series.
The access that the filmmakers were given to Peterson, his family, and his lawyers was astounding, and made for compelling viewing from the get-go.
It was beautifully made, well-paced and dynamic without ever resorting to trashy tabloid TV techniques.

wonderwall900

Giraffe Box wrote: »

I thought it was a fantastic documentary series.
The access that the filmmakers were given to Peterson, his family, and his lawyers was astounding, and made for compelling viewing from the get-go.
It was beautifully made, well-paced and dynamic without ever resorting to trashy tabloid TV techniques.

Plus this great character

url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=imgres&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi9ms_vxJXcAhXEyRQKHQA1CTQQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmurderpedia.org%2Fmale.P%2Fp%2Fpeterson-michael-iver-photos.htm&psig=AOvVaw1TSApr7hLlKC1X5CugqBd9&ust=1531346624752196

url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=imgres&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwi9ms_vxJXcAhXEyRQKHQA1CTQQjRx6BAgBEAU&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmurderpedia.org%2Fmale.P%2Fp%2Fpeterson-michael-iver-photos.htm&psig=AOvVaw1TSApr7hLlKC1X5CugqBd9&ust=1531346624752196

Underground

I think it's important to take this documentary with a pinch of salt. As mentioned, the editor was dating Peterson which was never mentioned in the film. I'm sure they made their best efforts to ensure the documentary was impartial but really it would be impossible to be truly impartial such was their circumstances.

That being said, between this film and Making a Murderer, God help anyone who gets accused of a crime they didn't commit in the US.

Zirconia

I think many people view the documentary and believe he did it based on his apparently detached and uncaring behaviour. I'm not a professional in the fields of mental behaviour, but (based on family experience), I believe he may be sociopathic. If so, this might cast him in a bad light as he's not someone most people can relate to, but I tend to believe on balance he probably didn't murder anyone - he just doesn't appear to show any real emotion about the death of his wife. He also doesn't show a lot of emotion about his own fate!

wonderwall900

Underground wrote: »

That being said, between this film and Making a Murderer, God help anyone who gets accused of a crime they didn't commit in the US.

The makers of Making A Murderer should be shot with their own balls of shíte for how much they twisted the true facts to make Avery look innocent. He is 100% guilty when even the smallest bit of research is done outside of that travesty of a documentary.

Making A Murderer edited and left out so much to twist the real facts of the case that it should be under "Fiction" on Netflix.

MadDog76

Is he guilty? Maybe..... possibly...... maybe not...... probably not.

Should he have been convicted? Definitely not.

Is it just and fair that he is a free man today? Absolutely!

GingerLily

MadDog76 wrote: »

Is he guilty? Maybe..... possibly...... maybe not...... probably not.

Should he have been convicted? Definitely not.

Is it just and fair that he is a free man today? Absolutely!

I wasn't at the trial, I think a lot of the more convincing evidence was not featured in the documentary.

What was really lacking in the documentary was the plausibility of her falling down the stairs - based on previous cases. There must be tonnes of people who fall down the stairs all the time, did they not have similar injuries to his wife?