Did Michael Peterson murder his wife?

TomOnBoard · 13-07-2018 01:05AM

Virgil° wrote: »

Yeah again you're assuming i haven't read all the additional material. I have. Or much of it anyway. There's nothing there that shook my overwhelming sense of "I don't know".

As I said before and like this case also. I don't know. I am certain however that there was foul play on the states side and as a result he shouldn't have been convicted. That's all.

Frankly, I believe Avery killed Teresa Halbach. And he did it along with someone else.

However, the manner in which the cops investigated was appaling. And their treatment of Brendan Dassey was a disgrace. Everybody used BD. Avery did. Cops did. And most of all, his own brother did. The whole investigation and subsequet prosecution case was inept at best and criminal at worst. Those failures totally undermined the legitimacy of the State's case.

nacho libre · 13-07-2018 04:08AM

I believe he did it. He comes across as a sociopath from the outset.

AudreyHepburn · 13-07-2018 07:10AM

wonderwall900 wrote: »

Any in particular you'd recommend?

Apologies for delay WonderWal, I thought I replied to you earlier- there’s one called The Murder Of Kathleen Peterson that’s well worth a watch. It’s in three parts and covers all the possible theories for what occurred and gives both sides of the case.

Maxpfizer · 13-07-2018 11:04AM

TomOnBoard wrote: »

The judge did NOT say that he shouldn't have been convicted. He said that if it had gone to a retrial, he would almost certainly have refused to allow the German death to be presented to the jury and he MIGHT have also disallowed Brett the Gigolo from testifying as they were prejudicial to Peterson which is not permitted. Therefore, if the corrupt SBI blood man, the German death, Brett and the Blow Poke were all removed from the prosecution case, what else did they have? Shag all!

That's why I can't figure out why he went for the Alford.

Probably there is an element of losing his nerve and just going for Alford.

It really felt like the state was leveraging his fear that the would be convicted again to say "Ok, we can offer you this and you can walk free but you can't sue us or you can take your chances in court again, your call".

So, imagine you are actually innocent (I'm not saying he is or isn't, just for the sake of discussing Alford) and you've been found guilty in the past and you've done some prison time. Now you know for a fact you didn't do it and you sat there knowing you didn't do it while they found you guilty and sent you away.

The options are:

Retrial and hope that history doesn't repeat. You can't REALLY prove your innocence beyond doubt and maybe the jury will get it wrong again.

Alford plea and you get to walk out of court as a free (but technically guilty) person.

You'd want to have nerves of steel to say no thanks to the Alford plea and go ahead with another trial.

In a case like this there were so many dirty tricks from the prosecution that you begin to wonder what they will try to pull next.

Even the woman from Germany. They dug up the body and could have done an examination in the local area with a local coroner. Instead they drove the body across the country so that someone close to the prosecution could do the examination and of course they came to the exact conclusion that the prosecution wanted. Wasn't the wording used in the autopsy report extremely unusual and controversial?

It's very likely that he did it to be honest but the way the prosecution "massaged" the details of the case makes them look EXTREMELY dodgy.

I suppose there are 3 factors.

He either actually did or didn't do it.
The prosecution either is or isn't fair.
He is found either guilty or not guilty.

For some people the end justify the means. If these prosecutions are unfair and a few innocent people are collateral damage then that's OK so long as we get more bad people than good in the net.

For other people the thought of even one innocent person going to prison is unacceptable. Better to have criminals roaming free that to have innocents in jail.

The worst case scenario (for Peterson) is:

1 - He didn't do it.
2 - The police willingly made a false case against him.
3 - He is found guilty.

For sure the documentary reveals that points 2 and 3 are correct. The states case was dodgy and he was found guilty.

Point 1 is speculation, really. Who knows?

So it really comes down to what people think is an acceptable way for the state to bring a case against someone.

The best cases are:

1 - He did do it.
2 - He's found guilty.

or

1 - He didn't do it
2 - He's found not guilty

So we are somewhere in the middle because we just don't know for sure if he did it or not.

The other worst case (from our perspective) would be:

1 - He did do it
2 - The prosecution fails
3 - He is found not guilty

Really the only point of discussion then is the way the state went about their business.

Do people honestly think that going with the Blood Guy, the Germany incident, his sexuality and the blow poke was a fair and honest (and legal!) trial?

At least if he did it we can say the states actions were wrong but they got the guy in the end so it's all good. That's pretty fine right up until they get the wrong guy sometime.

You can be certain that there are 100s, maybe even 1000s of Michael Petersons in prisons all across America and a significant percentage of those will have done nothing illegal at all.

MadDog76 · 14-07-2018 09:59AM

The Alford Plea seems to be a way for the State/Prosecution to get away with the fact that they made a mistake without having to accept any liability for said mistake(s).

Must be a hard pill to swallow for any innocent person forced into that situation.

Tilikum17 · 14-07-2018 10:07AM

wonderwall900 wrote: »

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?

Crime documentaries certainly are my thing. I also love reading about murderers/serial killers. What I don’t like watching though, is some twat walking around his house as they take photos of him gazing off into the distance.

Boring at the start, interesting in the middle, then boring again at the end. It was too long.

CeilingFly · 14-07-2018 10:30AM

Five episodes in.

Still think he's innocent.

1. He was a thorn in the side of local politicians and cops, so good reason for them to skew evidence

2. Its a republican state and seems to be homophobic

3. Its a huge military base, so someone making an injury in a car crash out to be a war injury and being into gay military porn would cause issues.

4. I'm surprised the defence did not mention he also had a bottle of wine that evening. Not conducive to creating the perfect murder.

FourFourRED · 14-07-2018 11:18AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

Apologies for delay WonderWal, I thought I replied to you earlier- there’s one called The Murder Of Kathleen Peterson that’s well worth a watch. It’s in three parts and covers all the possible theories for what occurred and gives both sides of the case.

With a title like that it’s hard to believe it’s going to give a balanced view. I’ll check it out though.

Yamanoto · 14-07-2018 01:08PM

Tilikum17 wrote: »

Crime documentaries certainly are my thing. I also love reading about murderers/serial killers. What I don’t like watching though, is some twat walking around his house as they take photos of him gazing off into the distance.

Boring at the start, interesting in the middle, then boring again at the end. It was too long.

I'd love to hear your suggestions for a crime documentary that's better paced & more skillfully edited than The Staircase.

I first saw it as part of the BBC Storyville strand, where they aired all 8 episodes over the course of an evening on BBC Four. i thought Making a Murderer was a shabby & bloated mess by comparison.

Paully D · 14-07-2018 01:10PM

Regardless of whether he did or did not, there is no way he should have been convicted based on the evidence presented.

There was a massive amount of reasonable doubt.

Earleybird · 14-07-2018 01:17PM

Paully D wrote: »

Regardless of whether he did or did not, there is no way he should have been convicted based on the evidence presented.

There was a massive amount of reasonable doubt.

Completely agree. In particular the perjury of a number of critical expert witnesses shows just how bent the prosecution played the game.

seligehgit · 14-07-2018 01:26PM

I thought Making a Murderer was far superior irrespective any bias.

Irish Guitarist · 14-07-2018 02:22PM

I'm in the middle of watching the documentary on Netflix. I'm on episode nine or something. It's very similar to Making A Murderer in that you're supposed to be appalled by all this police corruption but in reality no sane person could believe the defense. The police supposedly are terrible at their jobs because they can't find this blow poke, but Michael Peterson has something that will prove his innocence right in his garage and neither he, his family or lawyers can find it for months. Then it just suddenly turns up out of nowhere.

The way they just brush off how two women in his life died in the exact same way is ridiculous too. They don't even acknowledge the fact that it's extremely coincidental.

Then there's that Chinese 'expert'. What he's saying makes absolutely no sense but the defense calls anyone that doesn't understand what he's on about a racist.

The 'jokes' they're making are kind of fucked up too. And anytime I see him with that pipe I want to punch his stupid face.

wonderwall900 · 14-07-2018 08:23PM

seligehgit wrote: »

I thought Making a Murderer was far superior irrespective any bias.

After Avery's first prison sentence Making a Murderer is a work of Fiction

wonderwall900 · 14-07-2018 09:14PM

CeilingFly wrote: »

Five episodes in.

Still think he's innocent.

1. He was a thorn in the side of local politicians and cops, so good reason for them to skew evidence

2. Its a republican state and seems to be homophobic

3. Its a huge military base, so someone making an injury in a car crash out to be a war injury and being into gay military porn would cause issues.

4. I'm surprised the defence did not mention he also had a bottle of wine that evening. Not conducive to creating the perfect murder.

All according to a Documentary that was edited by a woman Peterson was having an affair with.

CeilingFly · 14-07-2018 11:27PM

wonderwall900 wrote: »

All according to a Documentary that was edited by a woman Peterson was having an affair with.

Nope Since watching it I have read a lot more about it, but also know that the US justice system is flawed.

Too much doubt for a safe guilty verdict.

I'm at episode 10 and still say not guilty. I do think he's not giving a 100% truthful account, but on murder I say not guilty

wonderwall900 · 15-07-2018 07:51PM

CeilingFly wrote: »

I do think he's not giving a 100% truthful account

Neither are the makers of the Documentary https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedMysteries/comments/4f20u8/kathleen_peterson_michael_peterson_the_staircase/

FourFourRED · 15-07-2018 08:04PM

Mike Peterson is a creepy tart but not a murderer.

Leroy42 · 15-07-2018 08:56PM

Just watched ep 5.

Surely after the blood splatter guys testimony this should have been a mistrial?

The DA did not hand over all the reports to the defence.

CeilingFly · 15-07-2018 11:30PM

wonderwall900 wrote: »

All according to a Documentary that was edited by a woman Peterson was having an affair with.

A film editor has very little influence and both director and producer would have seniority.

I've now finished viewing and both myself and herself have read various news reports.

I can't say 100% not guilty, but it is certain that the evidence was tempered with and the sbi guys falsified their evidence.

Possibly there was a heated argument combined with a push and fall, but prosecution went for something that simply did not match evidence.

All in all, with some doubt about, the end result probably is balanced.

CeilingFly · 16-07-2018 10:07AM

Spoiler Alert

Judges comments at the very end of the last episode are very telling.

I think his legal team chickened out with the alford plea. They would probably have been successful in their motion to have the German case and the computer stuff to be non admissible and with the new information on the blow poker and that Deborah Radisch was requested to change her original findings would have meant there was no case to answer and charges would have to been dismissed.

Though on saying that, considering how crooked law enforcement is in many parts of the US there would still be a chance that a trial would have to have taken place.

AudreyHepburn · 16-07-2018 12:55PM

I was actually surprised they went down that road too - surely that disgrace of an FBI agent and his testimony would have been enough for a mistrial?

TomSweeney · 17-07-2018 01:13PM

The defense wanted the jury to believe that a fall down the stairs left all that blood splatter and great big wounds from force on her head ... yeah sure.
Just shows the fact that anyone with money in the US can get a defense team to peddle any oul ****e - didn't work for Peterson but worked for OJ.

Leroy42 · 17-07-2018 01:31PM

TomSweeney wrote: »

The defense wanted the jury to believe that a fall down the stairs left all that blood splatter and great big wounds from force on her head ... yeah sure.
Just shows the fact that anyone with money in the US can get a defense team to peddle any oul ****e - didn't work for Peterson but worked for OJ.

TBF, it is not the job of the defence team to make a jury believe anything, they merely have to show that other circumstances could lead to her death rather than murder by him.

It is the job of the prosecution to provide evidence that not only could it happen a certain way (in this case murder) but it is the only reasonable explanation for what happened.

So far, I haven't seen that they have done that.

TomSweeney · 17-07-2018 09:12PM

Come on , how can anyone believe that the below was caused by a fall ... I mean ffs!!! how can these defence lawyers sleep at night ..
WARNING GRAPHIC NSFW photo

https://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f10/725784d1491011831-death-staircase-kathleen-20peterson.jpg

wonderwall900 · 17-07-2018 09:13PM

TomSweeney wrote: »

The defense wanted the jury to believe that a fall down the stairs left hall that blood splatter and great big wounds from force on her head ... yeah sure.
Just shows the fact that anyone with money in the US can get a defense team to peddle any oul ****e - didn't work for Peterson but worked for OJ.

Didn't the David Rudolph defense team cost him something like $800k and he lost that lovely house to pay for it?

Good enough for the sociopath tbh.

CeilingFly · 17-07-2018 09:26PM

TomSweeney wrote: »

Come on , how can anyone believe that the below was caused by a fall ... I mean ffs!!! how can these defence lawyers sleep at night ..
WARNING GRAPHIC NSFW photo

https://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f10/725784d1491011831-death-staircase-kathleen-20peterson.jpg

Deborah Radisch initial report said it was probably caused by a fall. Only after intervention did she change her report.

I once was witness to a minor car shunt. There was a huge amount of blood - the guy was picking his nose beforehand and finger went up his nose.

So unless you have specific expertise and knowledge of this, I'll go with what Deborah Radisch gave as her initial report before having it interfered with.

wonderwall900 · 17-07-2018 09:29PM

CeilingFly wrote: »

Deborah Radisch initial report said it was probably caused by a fall. Only after intervention did she change her report.

That's pretty major and new info to me.

Source?

CeilingFly · 17-07-2018 10:31PM

wonderwall900 wrote: »

That's pretty major and new info to me.

Source?

Last episode and it came up during the Alford plea courr sitting

Also the fact that the cops found the blow poker at the scene a couple of days after she died but "forgot" to mention it and put it in the garage.

Unbelievable amount of cockups by the state officials, (and also by his own defence which even at $800k would be just middle rank) hence if he preservered with the motions and was able to bring the finding of the blow poker (must get one myself fir winter) and Radisch's original finding, the case would have to be dropped - not even the most crooked prosecution could win.

CeilingFly · 17-07-2018 10:45PM

wonderwall900 wrote: »

That's pretty major and new info to me.

Source?

And not the only case either

Chist, the medical examiners office was riddled with "errors" to suit cases

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article9254090.html

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/special-reports/nc-medical-examiners/article9088676.html

https://kfor.com/2014/12/15/n-c-teens-hanging-death-ruled-a-suicide-mother-says-it-was-a-lynching/

And that's just a two minute Google search.

Did Michael Peterson murder his wife?

Comments