Tim: I suggest the most likely interpretation – assuming he wasn’t part of the murder – is that he either had a suspicion his father did it or knew he did (because his father confessed to him or he knew about a raging argument between his parents – something like that), and worried that this would come over or come out under interview, given that he wanted to stand by his father. She was in my grammar school spelling class. The strongest basis for acquittal – and one’s expectation of such – is innocence. For this week, I looked into what’s happened to Michael Peterson since the Netflix series ended in 2018 and whether a theory that a rogue owl played a role in Kathleen’s death ever got any traction. An owl?

people seem to be convicted when the guilty evidence slightly outweighs the innocent evidence. Plus with the things he wrote in some of his books, yeah…he’s guilty. Hardin has profited from his abuse of they system.

Flawed justice however. His 2003 trial ended in a first-degree murder conviction and a sentence of life without parole. Owls do not attack, unless provoked. A poor lower class convict would be serving life without parole for 2 murders! Therefore we have to have very good reason to suggest they got it wrong, and there’s no good reason to do so. I don’t think Kathleen would call it a loving relationship when her husband has to find sexual pleasure elsewhere. Then, yet another bombshell came up. The events in Germany are further evidence of precedent and his sexual proclivities are evidence of his marriage not being the idyllic one that he claimed in his defence. Thanks, Rebecca. ), I watched the documentary recently and thought, could she have found out the same night and he pushed her down the stairs. Parts of the film were in bad taste when this was about showing your innocence. 5. Why is he appearing in court when it’s all over? She had been drinking and was wearing floppy shoes, so she probably tripped, Michael told police. hmmm what were you saying about being there and knowing ??? They may think him guilty but that enough damage has been done to the family without public division over this, etc. That’s highly unlikely. It is no surprise to me that most of the kids, who were totally under his control their whole life, couldn’t believe one second he did it. I’d avoid the extreme ‘impossible’, at least until a literature review informs that all cases of serious or fatal head injury per stair fall resulted in other injury. He lost the election. Making Peace with Your Past: Choosing Forgiveness. However Margaret is spitting image of Michael??? For, formally, an Alford recognises that there was sufficient evidence to convict; therefore, taken at face value, he’s more likely than not to’ve been convicted at a second trial (entirely minus the controverted blood evidence). Michael told Dr. Phil McGraw that medical reports confirmed Liz Ratliff died of a stroke. Michael Peterson was a victim as much as Kathleen. It shields them from being sued by people wrongfully imprisoned. I certainly don’t think he is.

Kathleen Hunt grew up in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and was so bright that she took advanced Latin classes at a nearby college while still in McCaskey High School, according to the Lancaster New Era newspaper. Really??

Why the blood was so dry if the event had been so recent according to him. I disagree with the poster’s opinion, not the question, which could well’ve been asked in court (‘You say you discovered your wife at the bottom of the stairs. I think the kids were too over the top expressing how great the marriage was. The police were out to get him because he criticized them in columns he wrote for the Herald-Sun before Kathleen’s death, he told Dateline. However, he would never have had the opportunity to lie absent Hardin putting him on the stand. Why? You presume this was planned, and planned well. Michael moved into a two-bedroom condo, according to reporting from Cosmopolitan on June 11, 2018. He has however managed to hide what actually happened that night (weapon etc…), but it didn’t matter.

Did the jury convict significantly because of that testimony? From the outset: Too much blood at the scene for an accident; and the head lacerations were nothing like a fall down a set of stairs. Outside of a couple of areas, Dr Phil allowed Mike to run the interview and push his talking points (For example, that he was convicted due to the bloody staircase photos, his sexuality, and to the corrupt testimony of Deaver ("Deaver, Deaver, Deaver" was like an incantation to ward off his own guilt)... that the blowpoke was a false, manufactured element of a corrupt prosecution... that the cause of death of Liz Ratliff was nothing more than a stroke, misconstrued by a prosecution/ME out to get him... that his own attorney now believes an owl killed Kathleen, etc).

Had Phil been armed with this kind of counterpoint, it would have been a better interview. The fact that he's relegated to a day time modern day Jerry Springer show is telling to me. Previously, Michael had told people Liz Ratliff died from a brain hemorrhage, never mentioning a fall on the stairs, according an interview with Kathleen Peterson’s sister, Candace Zamperini, on Power, Privilege, and Justice. This isn’t to say that no conceivable harm was done – but you overstate the case that there was demonstrable harm.

In April 2019, an extensive News & Observer story by Andrew Carter reported that Michael had written an e-book titled Behind the Staircase to exonerate himself, with any profits going toward charity. There was so much undisclosed evidence and information that it should have been thrown out. More than 17 million kids in the United States are at risk for hunger each day. Liz l have a suspicion about his son also! This is an advantage in the US legal system notoriously, in spite of which he was found guilty – for the good reason that the evidence pointed firmly to him. I thought for sure he’d be behind bars for good. Then only male relations with Kathleen during their marriage. It ISN’T a mystery: he was found guilty and admitted that there was sufficient evidence to convict even if claiming innocence. Are there people who still take Dr Phil seriously? Studies estimate that in US between 2.3 and 5% of all prisoners are innocent: https://web.archive.org/web/20141110182624/http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/How_many_innocent_people_are_there_in_prison.php. The kind of weapon a sissy would use!