The Staircase was Michael Peterson's idea to make. This fact often gets lost in the weeds. He commissioned a famous Documentary team to do it. He also had an affair with one of the editors while they were filming. He did this to control the narrative, leaving out and including information as they saw fit. For example, when luminol was used, there were footprints from her body to the Washer / dryer and back, that had been cleaned up before the paramedics arrived. Also, there was a third person, in addition to michael and his son, present at the house when the police / EMTs arrived. The BBC did a great, and comprehensive, dive into this case. It can be found in podcast form called "Beyond Reasonable Doubt?" that is incredibly interesting and sheds light on a myriad of inconsistencies between The Staircase and what actually happened. I definitely recommend it to anyone interested in this case.
I canʻt believe some people still think he is innocent. Didnʻt she have a broken hyoid bone and petechial hemorrhages in her eyes--both signs of strangling? And as for microscopic owl feather pieces, there were pine needle pieces too but we know a pine tree didnʻt attack her.
@@tmeservey2723 I'm still on the fence on the subject of guilt. I watched this a long time ago and don't remember what his son's alibi was and if it was airtight. I know that he had legal trouble as well as financial trouble and Kathleen refused to bail him out with another loan. This is where I get stuck with reasonable doubt.
Dr. Grande does an excellent job of dissecting each case he examines. He obtains adequate history, observing behaviors and provides a case analysis without assumptions or diagnostic information. As a psychologist, I look how he observes each case, almost like an investigation on his part. I’ve been practicing for 26 years and I love to gain knowledge from peers. This how we exceed in our field, learning from one another.
I have another theory. She found his online porn and confronted him about it. He went up the stairs to avoid the confrontation she followed behind him. He flew into a rage because of her questioning him and pushed her down several stairs. The gravity plus the force of him pushing her could have caused the wounds without an actual fracture. He then realized what he did, regretted it and tried to give her aid which caused the blood on him. It's possible he had a moment of "road rage" or "stair rage".
That's what I think too - which explains why there are blood splatters on his pants that indicate his presence when she fell. And he did seem to have either tried to help or figure out what to do with her, which explains the delay in calling 911. Anyway he must be involved in some way.
That was my theory. He meets a Man he likes, sees the Owl near his house and puts two and two together.He puts some pheromones in her shampoo. Or maybe in a conditioner she puts on at night ?
The owl was actually the "man" Michael had been talking to online. The owl became enraged when Michael refused to leave his wife to live with him in the forest, hooting by night and feasting off field mice and wild rabbits.
Having watched the Netflix documentary, I got the feeling that as an author, his motive was to be the main character in his next suspense thriller called The Staircase. No sane person could cope with the intrusion of a film crew in the midst of a traumatic event like this. It all seems a deliberate act right from the get go. Very disturbing.
@Nolan Grady Oh, YES he's a psycho, Nolan! A BIG one! His indignation about Deaver! Deaver was the best thing that ever happened to Peterson! He'd still be in the slammer if it wasn't for him!
@Nolan Grady Absolutely!! And what an insult to all the brave wo/men who have been awarded that prestigious medal ... especially those who were awarded it posthumously. DISGUSTING!!!
That sounds incredibly far fetched, youre saying he murder his wife in such an unusual manner which leaves behind little to evidence, went thru the prosecution trial and end up in prison just to be "the star" of his own novel. Thats sound ridiculous.
@@nxvasage2597 all none-sociopaths can do is speculate about the motives of a narcissistic sociopath OBVIOUSLY! Apart from the crime itself, the most ridiculous and inhuman aspect of this whole case was the fact that it was made into a documentary. Zero respect for the victim and her loved ones!
The woman died and her life seemed to be lost within the documentary. I watched it and thought he was guilty, though the prosecution in a case like this or any case where flat out lies are told by the prosecution, should face prison time as well. Peterson loved being filmed and that disgusted me. It was all about him and not Kathleen.
It was a French advocacy piece and not a real documentary. Nobody was advocating for her. He murdered 2 women but he is smart and writes books so leave him alone. Similar to the attitudes about roman Polanski who forced himself on a 13 year old girl.
@@TalentedLMT if you combine that with him being broke and that the house was hers, the insurance policy and that is previous ex died the exact same way - guilty as fuck.
@@laraking804 What I thought was weird, though, was that the woman who died in Germany wasn't his ex. She was his neighbor, and yet Michael Peterson and his wife Patty took in her girls after her death and raised them together until Michael took them with him to a whole other country when he and Patty divorced. I found that whole situation peculiar. What do you make of that? And the circumstances of her death were so similar to Kathleen's. There's no way that was just an unfortunate coincidence, in my opinion.
Michael was not well liked by many who knew him (in Durham). He came across as having a sense of self-importance. He wrote several columns portraying the police in a negative way. When all of the evidence was gathered and analyzed, it did not appear that he was innocent.
What also struck me is that Katheleen’s sister and daughter were convinced he was guilty. It’s almost like they knew something was wrong with him. Also, his own children said something like «I have to believe him » and « I asked him and he said he didn’t do it ». This sounds weird for a normal household. It’s like they had to support him because he’s their dad not because they knew 100% that he couldn’t have done it.
I don't understand how one daughter found him guilty, while the other four children didn't. They seemed loyal to him without question. Maybe, it's because they only saw what they wanted to see...that their father loved their mother, there were no heated arguments between them, they don't see their father as a psychopath & continued to live with him after Kathleen's death, etc. It's fair to say that they felt safe around him. Maybe Michael wasn't an overtly angry person? He may have been triggered by latent emotions from a past trauma. In the HBO series, we find out that he may have carried some resentment towards his mother. Maybe, he projected it onto his wife?
@@morningglory3644 Caitlin Atwater is Kathleen's daughter from her first marriage. The other four are either biological or adopted from Michael's first marriage.
The theory that the owl was outside is interesting. But, the theory that the owl was inside is impossible. I don’t know if anybody else has ever had an owl stuck in their house, but when an owl is freaking out there are feathers everywhere. Big feathers. Not just microscopic ones. Also he was the last man to see two women who were found dead at the bottom of the stairs? Really?!
Not impossible my friend two weeks ago had an owl fly into her house and it too her days to get it to fly back out so yes if a window is open an owl can fly inside...
@@samanthapurdy2053 More like reinforcement. Behaviors that are rewarded generally happen again. How was he rewarded besides getting away with it? No man spends every evening with a woman who just lost her husband as a way to show support. I believe they were having an affair (would love to see the girls DNA report) and he didn't want it known.
There is a video on RU-vid of an eagle trying to pick up a toddler sitting in a park. There is a very solid evolutionary reason humans get unnerved when a shadow passes over them. Large birds can most definitely ruin your day.
I watched the Staircase. There are so many wholes in the stories. On the 911 call he MP says his wife fell down the stairs. Anyone walking into that scene would think she was attacked. They also had major financial problems and he paid for sex. Does anyone think Kathleen , who divorced her first husband for infidelity, think she is ok with him paying for sex. I also think it’s a shame so little attention was paid to Kathleen. It’s all about Michael. He is a good actor.
Kathleen had a good job, she was the one taking the check to their house and paying for the bills. she was going to loose her job at the end of the year. Michael told a close friend about it couple of days before Kathleen’s death, and they were very worried about it, as they were having financial problems. There were some important things were not said in the serie. The filming was financed by Michael, so the serie presented him as a good guy. I think Kathleen’s murder has to do with their financial problem, don’t forget she had a life insurance over USD$1M. Everything points Michael as Kathleen’s killer
They should never have been allowed to film this, I also think that the dried was an issue, if it had just happened, the blood would be fresh, but yes you are right, they never acknowledged what a wonderful person kathleen was, it was all about him, lapping up the attention, at least her daughter saw the light, and figured he was guilty, I'm glad that he at least did eight years, as for his first wife who he lived with at the end, I wonder if he had a hand in that too.
This case truly baffled me and still does. With each episode of the series I kept going back and forth with what I believed based on the facts presented. I’m just grateful I didn’t have to sit on the jury in this one.
If I had been on the jury on the original trial, I probably would have voted to convict him. If there had been a second trial, with all of the forensic evidence explained as BS, and the Germany evidence, and computer search evidence omitted, I would not have voted for a conviction. There’s simply no explanation for how she died other than the “he was the only other person in the house” theory.
You know that after a few months the prosecution side decided not to do anymore filming so alot of testimonies aren't seen.but if you goggle cout tv it shows much more of their side and wow was this man guilty!
Dr. Grande analyzes and explains things in such a nice manner that even people not from a psychology related background , can really enjoy his videos .
I actually watched some random show where they highlighted cases where those types of owls attacked people for absolutely no reason. There were several examples, not staged, actual people filming these crazy owls attacking their husband or wife! It was very strange. It gave credence to a situation like that. It really shocked me because, like most people, I found that hypothesis ridiculous. Well, it really isnt.
He downplayed the fact that Michael's first wife had died from a staircase fall, and that Michael had a number of paid affairs with men that he met on the internet...and that his wife may have found out. None of these things necessarily make Michael guilty but it looks bad for the home team.
How strange that the son was there and refused to give evidence? He reminds me of Woody Allen who also denied allegations made against him. Very mysterious.
Quite literally the least “strange” thing to happen in this case. If you know anything about the US justice system the first thing you do is shut up. You put your hands behind your back and at most say “I understand my rights, I want a lawyer.” If the prosecution already has a biased view of what took place (they obviously did) they will try to weaponize everything you say or do against you. “Oh he was overly distraught on the scene!” Nobody on this prosecution has witnessed somebody they love die. Time moves different. Your actions are certainly odd to the unaffected. Either way they were going to weaponize it. How a jury found this man guilty beyond reasonable doubt is more of an oddity.
I watched this series several times. You might consider analyzing the daughters too, very interesting the impact on them and their personalities too. In my opinion he is guilty and narcissistic.
@thievesarmy Actually I agree the term Narcissiust is overused and misapplied to people with narcisstic tendencies. But this guy is one classic narcissist. Side Show Bob's got nothing on this guy. I also think there's reasonable doubt. It's not illegal the have NPD. I'd have been forced to acquit. I think his neighbor wrote a whole book about owl attacks that was very convincing
Omg, those daughters!! They are beyond addicted to him and the belief he is not guilty, but not in a normal way a person would be desperate to prove a convicted loved one's innocent, more like he is crack, magical, super addictive crack to them. They are pretty scary.
Mixed Molly Whoppery! Huge fan of your work! Interesting to see you're also a fan of Dr. Grande's work considering how much you talk about the mental side of fighting
@@rosadeplata1752 Yes, thank you! I tried hard to look for narcissitic behaviors...I mean, if he is, he is quite talented but he talks about his children feelings more than his own.
I was disappointed that the discussion about Peterson, his personality, prosecution, the biased trial, etc...were all talked about with an intelligent and discerning air, yet the "owl theory" is joked about disrespectfully, dismissively and not treated with the same concern or science. There were raptor experts who have proven evidence that during certain life cycles, such as mating season, that owls can become territorial and have been known to attack humans aggressively. It would certainly explain the two talon shaped injuries to Kathleen's skull, which would not have caused fracture or brain injury, but could certainly have caused profuse bleeding. Scalp wounds are known to bleed excesively. She may have gone outside, who knows why, (I don't understand why this point is so outrageous to some people, I walk outside all hours of the night to call the cat in or check if I locked my car, ESPECIALLY after up late drinking) she was then attacked by the owl, hence hair, feathers and pine needles in her own hands, along with small puncture wounds to her face, then she freaked the f out, because who wouldn't if they'd just been attacked by a large bird. She may then have ran into the house, possibly a bit tipsy, tired, panicked and a bit confused, also bleeding from a head injury so perhaps had blood or hair in her face so, disoriented, she runs to get something to stop the bleeding, slips in her own blood and hits her head against the wall as she falls down the stairs. How in the hell do you explain those very specific injuries to her skull? Someone would have had to hit her specifically and accurately like six times. Would she have just decided to hold still for this beating? It makes no sense. There is physically more evidence to an owl or hawk attack than anything else.
Your honor, I submit that the owl did have a motive. It was to protect her nestlings from a potential attack. This was likely her first offense, so no prior record would be in evidence nor would she have learned how to commit the perfect crime while in the owl slammer.
I think often we get confused about "actual guilt" (whether the defendant actually committed the crime) and "legal guilt" (whether the prosecution can PROVE the defendant committed the crime). Defense attorneys ask not, "Did my client do it?" but rather "Can the prosecution PROVE my client did it?" And there is the rub....We don't have a verdict in America of "guilty" or "innocent." We have "guilty" or "not guilty." There's a big difference..... Think Casey Anthony and O.J. Simpson. They couldn't prove them both guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." A defense attorney doesn't have to PROVE anything. All they have to do is introduce "reasonable doubt" in the minds of the jurors.
Yes. Those are very good points and the subtlety of the difference escapes us sometimes. I hear people use, "beyond a shadow of a doubt," there is a big difference between that and "reasonable" doubt. Sometimes everything adds up in a case but one thing......which isn't that rare. It can sometimes provide reasonable doubt, or just be an anomoly......
exactly and that is why there is so much in arguing & drama in the true crime community. (take the watts case) also if you say something along those lines of doubt then you are jumped on for defending the accused or want them to get off. whatever your personal feelings about what would be justice or whether they are guilty or not, guilt legally is very different.
I read an article written by an Italian medical examiner that expressed her theory and it literally sent chills up my spine as it accounted for every single piece of evidence. After fleeing from Michael or being pushed Kathleen fell on or near the bottom of the steps and door frame. Michael then grabbed her by the front and side hairs of her head and began banging the back and top of her head against the stairs and or door frame. After Michael left the scene, Kathleen mustards the strength or consciousness to rise again and attempted to flee with her back toward Michael. Michael kicks her down, likely drug her to the steps again, and continued the beating. This time he was either standing astride or kneeling astride her which caused all the spatter on and up his pants. Her own hair in her hand was an attempt to get her hair out of Michael's hands which is incredibly common during a domestic dispute / catfight. Microscopic owl hairs and pine needles very well could have come from trees outside or just the wind as they were microscopic in nature. There is not a soul that walked into a crime scene like that and thought their loved one fell down the stairs. If solely for my own safety, I would instantly be hyper aware that this was likely an attack, and be concerned as to where the killer was still there. Also, while I'm unsure which of the daughters but one of them looks JUST LIKE HIM. I'm wondering if he took the adopted DAUGHTERS and left the sons with their mother in an effort to keep the money the mother left behind.
Interesting. My question though is: how would such repeated and savage smashing and banging of her head against hard surfaces cause absolutely no damage to the skull or to the brain, not even edema? That baffles me and I cannot make sense of it.
As a person who has experienced this kind of domestic violence, I can tell you, he’d be covered in her blood spatter. Where were the bloody clothes? There’s just no forensic evidence to back up that scenario. And even if there was 30 minutes of missing time, which is the largest possible margin of error in the time sequence, it would be impossible for him to eradicate all incriminating forensics, the police followed him around and swept the place with incredible attention to detail, they were thorough. And feather fragments… where did they come from? Have you seen injuries from a bird of prey before? They look exactly like Kathleen’s scalp. As much as it’s tempting to point the finger at him because he is a bit different (which most writers are), there’s definitely reasonable doubt. It’s unlikely that he’s guilty.
With the kind of injuries you’re describing, it would’ve caused some form of skull fracture or brain damage, which she didn’t have 🤷♀️ I can’t decide if I believe he did it yet
At least one medium-velocity blood spatter was found on the inside of Peterson's shorts. And if I correctly remember the Forensic Files episode, a bloody footprint of one of Peterson's shoes have been found on his wife's body. That's clearly not coming from a first-aid attempt...
I, for one, would be screaming my head off if an owl attacked me...the whole neighborhood would be hearing about it, and no way would my husband have missed it! Don't you think??...
Yes but she wasn’t attacked outside the attack happened in the staircase/kitchen . The investigators even did a sound test to see if they can hear her scream or plea for help and they couldn’t hear her from the inside of the house
Isn’t he a creep. He comes off as a total phony liar. I don’t see how his two wives could not have seen something big was wrong with him. I’ve laughs all the time which is weird.
@@11buleria it also seems he forces himself to keep crying to appear more empathetic than he really is to make you think he would never kill her... it seems so calculated and off tho
Excellent video. You are a very good at this. Brief, concise, outlining everything, showing the evidence for and against well, and analyzing/concluding a variety of things.
"Hi, I'm Rebecca Raddish...be sure to cook me before you eat me, else I'll burn your tongue. And also, there's no fucking way an owl could have killed that woman. I would know. Because I'm Rebecca Raddish."
Small owl feathers and pine needles? So he used a tree branch...I appreciate very much how you stressed on the fact that no matter how someone reacts, people will always see guilt in it.
😳 a branch the size of a blow poke. Easy to burn that evidence. Omg u could be right! I don’t remb in the documentary mentioning pine needles but if there were that makes sense. Gah 😩 Cant ppl just “thou shalt not kill” ppl?
This case is local to me and regardless of the preposterous owl theory, what is the statistical likelihood that you find two women DEAD at the bottom of a staircase in your life? Yeah, no coincidence.
This is a crazy way to see the world. Unlikely isn't impossible. Do you believe people win the lottery? Do you believe rare genetic diseases exist? You've never seen crazy coincidences? You must live quite a sedentary life. I see crazy stuff all the time and have had it happen to me. I hope you never get as unlucky as some people. By the way, statistically, it's more likely that you would find two women dead at the bottom of a staircase than be born at all (when you factor in the single spermatazoa that made each one of your ancestors beat out the millions of others over generations... there is statistically 0 chance that you personally exist. I mean, you expect me to beleive that YOU made it out of millions of other sperm and the time and date *just happened* to be 9 months before your birth and the *same thing* happened with *ALL* of your ancestors? That's ridiculous.
@@ninanano Genius... he's in jail is he? Yeah, I get the analogy is probably too hard for you... here: Statistically highly unlikely that you exist, so I don't believe you exist. You can't argue against that argument, because it's true. I mean... I'm sure *you* could, but I'm also confident you'd argue that water isn't wet.
This is probably the most confounding and frustrating case I've ever looked into. And like Dr. Grande I usually come down to Peterson probably did it, but there was reasonable doubt, and I walk away very dissatisfied. The states case kinda sinks. I don't why he did it, what he used and certainly don't know HOW he did it. I don't believe she fell down those steps, and the cg mock up video of the digital lady repeatedly falling down the steps the defense had made gave me an audible laugh. I don't think an owl did it either. I've looked up as many owl wounds and attacks I could find and they just aren't consistent with these wounds. Besides this would have to be one hellish and stealthy owl. It seems unlikely an intruder came in and killed her without Michael hearing a struggle, etc. And I don't know how in the world he beat her to death with a blow poke, or smashed her head against the steps, without fracturing her skull. There weren't cast off patterns high on the wall or ceiling either. Its very frustrating that we can't get to the answer. It's confounding.
Joins you on The Walk of Dissatisfaction. (but keeps 6 feet apart) I'm a skeptic and am willing to entertain Crazytown destinations with certain cases because life is stranger than fiction. But this case...and the lack of anything that makes forensic sense... we're stuck with Blowpokes, Bard Owls and Bupkis!
I think Deaver was so enamored with his own credibility and significance being someone who’s testimony could swing the vote, he didn’t care about anything else. Truly sick!
They are soooo aggressive. And utterly relentless. Side note: geese are so aggressive that the Dewar’s Scotch Distillery in Scotland actually has a flock of guard geese . Seriously.
Omg my mother has a photo of me at around 3 years old, running from a goose that was bitting me on my back and legs. Great parenting 🤦♀️ put down the camera and save your child lol she still thinks it was funny but I stay the hell away from geese still and I’m 36 now 😂
Honestly when I first watched this I was like ‘he’s innocent’. Then I went back and rewatched it and thought that he was 100% guilty. He comes across as so cold and unbothered by the death of ‘the love of his life’. The whole documentary is so biased towards him, and I later found out he entered into a relationship with one of the producers during the production 🤔.
common...u dont need to watch it twice.. his first girl died falling down the steps ... and "*drumroll*" his nd wife died falling down the steps ...the house looked like freaking michael myers was there xD ...case closed :D
@@MrBluesMessiah Yes, they found it in June in the garage that nobody used and photographed it. There was no blood on it or signs of cleaning. They never reported that to the defense and instead pretended that it mysteriously disappeared from its spot next to the fire place. Michael Peterson claims he looked for it in that unused garage and didn't see it, which initially might seem suspect, but as they noted in the documentary, it was missing the decorative hooked tip, making it look like an old curtain rod. It did not look much like a blow poke. When the defense found it mid trial the prosecution tried to claim there's no way to trust that Peterson and his legal team didn't just buy one and plant it in the house, knowing full well THEY THEMSELVES found it exactly where the defense did months earlier. David Rudolph noted all this in court when Michael gave his Alford Plea. It was one of the many reasons David listed as to why Michael Peterson cannot trust the justice system to give him a fair trial. He said that's why Michael is taking the Alford Plea instead of fighting for his innocence again. That Blow Poke was a complete fabrication by the prosecution. It was their perfect weapon to explain how she could have been beaten to death without sustaining skull fractures or any brain hematomas - something never before seen in a beating death in NC. It supposedly was hard enough to cause the lacerations, but hollow and light enough to spare her from fractures or brain bleeding. It was a total FARCE! Michael is beyond innocent. This is the tip of the iceberg in terms of the criminal abortion of justice committed by the prosecution.
@@MrBluesMessiah Who knows what happened. Knowing all the bad faith exhibited on the part of the prosecution, I'm going to assume bad faith here too. They developed their blow poke theory well after finding it Im sure, after the house was no longer under control of the state. They didn't find it and immedietly come up with the blow poke theory I'm sure. THAT would not make sense.
Here in Sweden we had a similar case a few years ago. A female didn't arrive home in a timely manner, police was called and she was found bludgeoned to death along a forest path she used to hike. The hubbie was ofc blamed and arrested but as time passed it became obvious he could not have done it. Finally the police and prosecutors had to accept the fact that she had upset a female moose with moose babies and was attacked, fell and got killed by the mama moose.
I have no trouble believing that. I lived in Anchorage for three years and learned that most of the time moose just ignore humans, even when they are walking around downtown eating flowers out of the flower pots. They completely ignore people, cars and even dogs. However, during rutting season and when moms have babies, you had better stay away from them.
Dr Grande your monologue about integrity and job ethics is one of the best done in this kind of subjects. As always straight to the point. Thanks for your hard work!
The owl feathers and pine needles were just coincidental. If you sit outside under a pine tree for a while, you're likely going to have some pine needles and feathers in your hair. I have hiked many times in wooded areas and brushed things out of my hair numerous times. The owl theory was a shameful defense and a weak one, at that. The blood smudges on the door seem to point to the victim escaping to potentially get help or flee her attacker. She was probably lured back into the home or was blinded by blood in her eyes or was in shock (or all three). This was a gruesome and horrific murder and Peterson is where he belongs and should have been the FIRST time he committed murder.
If Michael is guilty, do you think his fluidity in discussing Kathleen's death (as you've said, the way he didn't ever seem to misspeak or stumble over his words) could be related to higher cognitive ability/quick processing speed? He does present as relatively intelligent *and* possibly narcissistic and manipulative (or certainly accustomed to having others look up to him and appreciate him) - almost like he had convinced himself that perhaps Kathleen's death was an accident, even if it wasn't. Loved this video and I will always be fascinated by this case.
Here's a little more on why Micheal Peterson might be guilty and a little more about his behavioral history *Odd behavior* Michael deleted a large number of files and photos from his computer the day before and after her death. *216 files were deleted the day before Kathleen died and 352 were deleted two days afterward, according to Markley.* Michael's over-the-top attempts to sound romantic and like he loved Kathleen: "Kathleen was my life. I whispered her name in my heart a thousand times. She is there. But I can't stop crying." Yet, his actual *natural behavior seems so cold and uninterested in Kathleen. He's just obsessed with "winning the game"* of court and not having to deal with the case anymore. I know people grieve in different ways, but his behavior from the beginning seemed off and never really changed unless it was for the public. There are a few scenes where he's smoking a cigar and speaking about Kathleen's death and it's as if he's remembering it fondly. It's just weird. Evidently *he has a bad temper and would often fly into fits of rage.* There were rumors that he killed a family pet after beating it when he was angry. Michael had a collection of war medals but no paperwork. He lied about getting all of these honors when he served time. His father actually earned medals, so he may have taken them and pretended they were his. Showing his life is a web of lies. *Murder scene* Kathleen’s blood had long been dry by the time police showed up, despite Michael saying she was still breathing when he called 911 had “died in his arms.” Kathleen’s brain had *red neurons.* These neurons appear a few hours before death, so the neuropathologist estimated that her death took around 2 hours and was slow and painful. This doesn’t match up with Michael’s story of Kathleen going inside, while he smoked a cigar at the pool, and then came in 45 minutes after (which was actually his second story). Dr. Radisch found that Kathleen had defensive wounds on her arms and marks consistent with manual strangulation on her throat. Michael’s *bloody shoe print* on the back of Kathleen’s leg. Evidence that someone had attempted to clean the crime scene. If you came upon your dead/dying wife, why would you take the time to clean up the blood? And if not, Michael, who would have tried to clean it? Michael's son, Clayton, was the first at the murder scene and he refused to cooperate with police, as did Michael. The *blood on the door going out to the patio.* It was a small speck of blood on the door frame going outside. While first responders were attending to Kathleen, *Michael was at his desk checking emails on his computer.* Even after the death *Micheal chose to live in the same house*
I thought living in the house w/all that blood was beyond strange! I guess they couldn't clean it yet bc of trail but I could NEVER live there or even near it
It was never concluded that those were owl feathers. They could have been down from a pillow or comforter. They were also damn near microscopic. Since the case is 100 percent over and will never be reopened, the feathers will never be tested. "The pictures she saw of the feather samples, though, were inconclusive, and couldn't even point her to a particular taxonomic order of birds, let alone a narrower group or family." - Wired
The 1 microfeather mentioned in the original SBI report could only be seen when magnified 400x's. I have found that most uninformed individuals who give credence to this nonsense think that Kathleen had actual visible owl feathers (plural) in her hand. Of course you are 100% right, only 1 microfeather never identified as coming from an owl let alone a barred owl. Michael Peterson is a monstrous psychopath!
@aaronsdavis Hi, owls don't regularly attack people. It does happen that an owl may swoop down and very rarely make contact but no owl deaths. (1) Maybe you didn't know but the word OWL was never said during the 2003 trial. (2) Also Michael Peterson's lawyers while preparing for a 2nd trial conducted a world wide search looking for a case where an owl killed a human and they could not find even one case. If they had gone to trial they were not going to use "the owl did it defense". (3) In the first trial the defense team never did push "the feather thing". (4) No owl feather was ever found at the murder scene. Michael Peterson is a monstrous premeditating psychopath who tried to make it look like an accidental fall down the stairs to collect 1.4 million in insurance money. GUILTY.
very interesting analysis! i had actually stopped the netflix doc just over half way through. it was getting hard to stay interested for 13 episodes so I appreciate the concise analysis
As much as I enjoyed your raptor humor, I must say the owl theory is not as far-fetched as it seems. I’ve been a ranger naturalist and I keep livestock. Even small animals are capable of inflicting considerable damage when they are panicked or defending their young. The evidence - rooted hair, feathers, pine needles - supports a possible scenario wherein the lady encroached upon the space of a nesting owl or somehow, probably unwittingly, created a situation in which it felt cornered or trapped. I wish the owl theory had been rigorously examined by the appropriate specialists in raptor behavior and forensic pathologists familiar with avian-caused trauma.
I still have a hole in my knee and pain from my rooster who sparred me last week. And even ducks have sharp talons. I don't know why everyone thinks birds aren't at all dangerous.
I totally agree. The lack of brain or skull injury coupled with her own hair being pulled out by the roots in her own hand with microscopic feathers and pine needles is something that gave me great pause when I first learned of those details. The idea isn't that the owl "killed" her per se. It's that she got entangled so much with the talons and coupled with the medications she was on, bled heavily from the head and died of blood-loss, slipping and falling in her own blood at the bottom of the stairs. Why go upstairs? To get a towel, perhaps. Why not get Michael? She may have wanted to get the towel first, not thinking straight already. It's horrific no matter what happened, but you said it very well when you suggest specialists in raptor behavior and forensic pathologists familiar with avian-caused trauma should be the ones to analyze this theory.
Completely agree. I'm Swedish living on the countryside and we don't have your large owls here... but our small owls for sure can cause enough damage to make someone trip, fall and hit their head if circumstances are bad. We had a lady killed by a mama moose a few years ago. City people just doesn't get how intimidating wild animals can be. I could totally see an unexperienced person become hysterical by an aggressive owl mama.
Jeanette Waverly I think somebody wrote a whole book about that I’ll theory you can find it if you Google it I’ll bet it was very well presented and very possible we should send it to Dr. Grande
When I saw "Michael Peterson", I first thought you were referring to the Michael Peterson who changed his name to "Charles Bronson" and has been locked up in a UK prison for 30 or 40 years or so. Perhaps it would be worthwhile doing a study on him, Dr Grande? There was a 2008 biopic made about him ("Bronson") starring Tom Hardy. If you look into his background, you'll see he never killed anyone and yet he's been locked up for so long. I think this would be a very interesting study. Check out the movie, and there's lots on the internet about him too.
fran mellor cunning as a cat. He’d cover himself in butter to stop the guards from being able to grasp him. That’s actually true. I think Bronson is on the spectrum. Most people with autism are non violent, but Bronson had few social skills, and is highly intelligent. His personality made him a criminal, not his autism.
Michael always seemed to be so awkward, so odd, and yes, so guilty. His interactions with his kids, his lawyer, everyone were often cringeworthy. I cannot understand how there could be that much blood from a fall down the stairs. In fact it is easy to imagine no blood at all. It would be amazing to have the real story though I doubt we will ever know what actually occurred.
The photo's look like a crime scene. I can't image falling backwards on 3 steps in such a small confined space would kill someone. Strange man doesn't seem to be in touch with reality. The daughters seem to be the same.
And in so many places on the wall beside the stairs. Not from an accidental fall. Also there was blood on the bottoms of her feet, so she was standing or walking while she was attacked. A fall would not produce blood on the soles of the feet.
I watched that documentary awhile ago, Peterson came across as to smooth for my liking, yet strangely believable, hence puzzling. However, I was inclined to believe him guilty, yet not convinced by the courtroom drama. So, thank you for this clarification, as always on point.
Peterson means trouble, all wive killers, just that this one was not pregnant Peterson means trouble, all wive killers, just that this one was not pregnant, but there are more their is also a Christopher Peterson serial killer
Your comment on how his story never changed/was consistent over all the years is important. The absence of blood splatter higher on the walls and ceiling if, as was alleged blunt force trauma, was used seems to be a serious anomaly. No scull fractures or brain injury? Reasonable doubt.
Yeah, I've had Blue Jays dive bomb the everloving crap out of me trying to get to my car. I wish I could let them know that I don't give a shit where their nest is....
I watched this series with great interest, as is your take on this. I think he was a calculated killer, who had worked on this murder scene long before it happened. Thank you Dr. Grande for your clear views.
'Calculated killer' you say. Looks like he did not get the calculations quite right. Spent years in jail. Got out only because a prosecution witness had lied. Don't you think a clever guy like him would have found a better way?
@@Anione111 I thought from the beginning that plan A was to drown her and he made a last minute switch to tried and true plan B, which is that falling down stairs doesn't cause a lot of police scrutiny.
@@lorraineheffernan3322 May be, but even after seeing all the blood splatter, how could he go for 'fallen down the stairs.' We see cases of thousands of staircase falls, even deaths, there is hardly any blood. So, right from him calling 911 and 'declaring' she had fallen down the stairs, when he was not supposed to have even witnessed it, was very fishy.
Hey Doc you are absolutely hysterical! " How many licks does it take " " two time convicted con drunken owl" " owl attack course in Med school" you had me rolling with laughter!
Also, what got me, was he never seemed sad or devastated. It was like he was discussing his screenplay and watching it all play out and get added to by lawyerly theories. Then, the night before the verdict he's with his brother laughing and saying he does not care one way or the other what happens; that he can survive in a nice home or jail cell tells me it was all a game of chess to him.
That’s generally how people are after living in prison for a while. They lose the ability to show sadness and such. Not to mention that he’s likely a combat veteran. You can’t place the normal human reactions on a guy that represents an incredibly unique demographic in this country. And why would he care? What does he have to return to? He’s elderly, he’s broke and most people, his children can be included, believe that he murdered his wife. What part of that would someone want to go back to at the end of their lives? There’s very little actual evidence aside from peoples personal feelings based on his interviews and such. Unless he beat her with owl feathered gloves or a hefty pillow, I can’t see it. Then again, this is the first I’ve heard of this case. But I just don’t see anything solid.
Did you even listen to Dr. Grande? He explictly says in many of his videos that you can NEVER make conclusions about someone's guilt or innocence based on their reaction (unless you're a trained specialist for that). We can't know how we would react in situations like that ourselves. There is no ''normal'' reaction to such an unusual and very stressful event or long-time imprisonment. We have no way of knowing how trials and imprisonment affect someone's psyche. I'm not saying he did or did not do it, just saying that your ''analysis'' is pretty superficial and goes against Dr Grande's teachings.
@@doubleemcastillano464 I agree with you except one things - I think his kids (at least some of them) do support and stand by him. Otherwise, I agree that trying to assess his reactions is extremely stupid and shallow, as if there is some ''norm'' how to react in situations/experiences like that.
@@doubleemcastillano464 Totally agree. I also saw a broken-hearted man in many occasions. I think he sincerely loved and missed his wife; he might not be the most likeable person under the sky (quite repugnant to me actually) but I don’t think he’s a murderer and in my opinion he has been the victim of a grave injustice.
Just watched this case again Forensic Files (Forensic Files - Season 11, Episode 22: A Novel Idea"), I knew I'd seen this case and wanted to refresh my memory. Forensic evidence came back to bite him on the ass....and to think he killed that lovely lady (with children) in Germany for the insurance money as well. I strongly recommend people watch this to get the details; at the very end they go through a recap of what might have happened and it's just too believable from the evidence. One of his sons, who disliked Kathleen, was there when the ambulance came and refused to give any account of what happened, that was strange.Thanks for the great video analysis. I'd like to see you cover Michael's personality. I'll speculate, sounds like Narcissistic Personality Disorder, just guessing. Keep them coning Dr.
I found it particularly unprofessional how the prosecution tried to appeal to any prejudice held by the jury members against gay men. In particular, they referred to the gay porn owned by Michael as "hardcore porn" in their closing speech, almost implying that a person who looks at such photographs is expected to be a murderer. To be fair, the documentary didn't make it clear exactly what it was, but they definitely took it further than trying to prove his infidelity and attempted to paint him as a sick man using vaguely homophobic reasoning.
He had gone on about Kathleen being his soul mate and that just didn't ring true. I don't buy the idea that Kathleen knew about his bisexuality because I think he was deeply closeted and looked distressed when it was being openly discussed in court. I think he was really struggling to conceal his rage. The homophobic defense is just the defense grasping at straws. They use whatever they can of course, doesn't make it true though. It's also biased to suggest all southerners are so backward.
@@notaclue822 Oh I didn't mean anything about southern Americans, I'm not from America so I'm not too familiar with any US stereotypes. I just thought I saw the defence trying to send veiled homophobic signals
I enjoyed this series on Netflix. As Dr. Grande says it's biased towards the guy.. however it still did a good job leaving the case open, I was totally going back and forth believing in his innocence or guilt. In the end the strongest impression that stayed with me were the crime scene pictures of the stair case...so much blood, it looked like a massacre scene
Its a shame that contamination of evidence occurred.. as well as the first staircase death considered inadmissible... what is the likelihood of 2 close females in a man's, both meeting their demise falling down a staircase... with the man being the last to see each of them alive.. whoooo knows... Owl say, stranger things have happened i guess.... 🙄 Thank you, Dr Grande.
Always love to hear your take on these perplexing ones. I also thought he did it. After all, if he pushed her and she fell subsequently sustaining injuries, he would not have had any blood splatter. Especially if he had been above her in the stairs. 🦉
She didn't die when she fell... he had to administer the coup de grâce at the foot of the stairs to finish the job... which would be when the blood splatter occurred.
Great video. I am an attorney and it is interesting to see perspectives from different professions. One of the things that stuck with me during the documentary was the scene at the dining room table with Michael's defense team where they were discussing "telling his story." Michael was intent on taking the stand and telling his story, as though it was a performance, and an opportunity to make the about him. Also, I know you were being funny about the owl, but nobody said the owl killed her, or even caused her death, rather the owl attacked her, causing the scalp lacerations and bleeding. Then, due to the blood pouring from her scalp, she slipped and fell on the stairs. It is very unlikely, but could certainly happen.
Dr. Grande, you're awesome! "Owl with anger-management issues....his wife had an affair with a falcon...two-time convicted owl...owl prison!" And humor aside, great analysis of a case that has fascinated me for a long time.
"There is no joy in conducting bad science" and 'That's pseudo-scientific nonsense" are now two of my favorite Dr G quotes. I'd buy the t-shirts with those witty quotes.
Apparently it's not unheard of for owls to do attacks like that! But I do love the analysis of the owl at the end. Though, I will also say, sometimes people can be super clumsy. In the last 3 years, I've broken 4 ribs, Broke a bone in my hand, sprained an arm, had two concussions and injured my knee. All in separate falls. I saw a neurologist just to be sure I wasn't developing MS or something horrible. I'm just clumsy. :( And apparently fall more than some my neurologist's parkinson's patients. I could totally see myself falling from the 2nd or 3rd step, slip, fall, slip, fall, especially once you have a head wound. I have a shirt that says "I'd like to think I'd die a heroic death, but it's more likely I'll trip on my cat and choke on a spoonful of frosting."
I honestly think that he killed his wife - I like your comment about the owl - very funny. HIs lawyer makes a lot of money now - prisons are full of 'innocent' people -
The owl involved in this case was a known 'who'-dlum. A real 'who'-ligan. When he turned to murder, that's when I give a hoot. I'm a gumsh-'who'. The boss is Captain Chouan. My partner's name is Calla-'who'-n. My name is T-'who'-sday. I carry a badge. *DRAGNEST THEME PLAYS* This case was proving to be a real 'who'-dunnit. The list of suspects was a real who's who of avian delinquents. We had Archimedes the Assassin; Hedwig the Hunter; Mr. Know-it-Owl; Soren of Ga'Hoole; even Big Momma Owl wasn't above suspicion. We headed to our nearest Hooters, hoping to catch a lead...
TheRealBamboonga Haha haha. I’m owling with laughter. Who the heck are you? It’s getting late. Owl go to bed soon but owl never be convinced that nice Hooters girl was involved even though she was a full owl late for work that night. Who’s fault was that? It was the cow that had the moootive after all. Hangin out behind the barn chewin the cud and bullshittin. We knew she was trouble but who knew she’d go owl the way.
Love your sense of humor with the owl theory! Truly one of the more ridiculous defenses I've heard. Maybe if it had happened outside I could believe it. But inside? Without a ton of feathers around? I don't buy it. Definitely an odd case.
I live in a city. About two weeks ago I would have doubted the owl theory, but recently I got attacked by a crow who had her baby on the ground and the baby couldn't fly yet so the parents protected him from cats, humans and everything that passed by it. I didn't even notice the baby crow until one of the crows was about 5 cm from my head. The bird came from behind, and I was lucky that I got immediately in the building. The crows attacked several people in the period their younger was on the ground. I don't know if he's guilty or not, but I will never dismiss the owl theory and I really believe that you can be unlucky and met with unfortunate circumstances that can lead to an inexplicable death.
When watching the Netflix series, I found Michael Peterson incredibly unlikable. Of course that has nothing to do with guilt or innocence but I do think he is guilty.
There is something that went on in that family that no one is talking about. The behavior is just odd. And Margaret and Michael need a paternity test, that is his child.
Great! So glad u covered this. In my humble and rather ignorant opinion I would say he's guilty. No woman would be ok with her husband having casual sex with other men. Also, narcissists often do great things to appear wonderful, that's how I read his adoption of the 2 daughters. No one will suspect u flung their mother down the stairs and killed her if u adopt her kids. It was also very telling his defence lawyer quit. Peterson is a narcissistic fantasist.
I don’t know whether he is guilty or not. However, I disagree with your statement that ‘no woman would be OK with her husband having casual sex with other men’. I believe many women, who accept their husband is bisexual, would see his sexual encounters with men, particularly casual ones, fulfill a need that cannot be found within the marriage. Personally, I would be OK with this. Indeed I would be far more accepting of it than of casual sex with other women. It’s about distinguishing between love and sex.
@@ChantelCarter-cc7cu Perhaps I expressed myself badly and no offence is intended at all. I am certainly not maintaining that bisexual people are all the same, anymore than pan sexual, homosexual or heterosexual people are all the same. But I still argue that the statement no woman would be OK with her husband having casual sex with other men is incorrect.
thank you so much for covering this case!! ive watched the whole series through 3 times and read extensively about it. I agree that there is reasonable doubt, but the crime scene photos convinced me that it had to have been a murder, and Michael is the most likely suspect. great channel, new subscriber!
If the two criteria you mention are good enough for a conviction, so many innocent victims would be behind bars. I believe, they are called circumstantial evidence, not enough for a conviction.
The owl might have been trained to merely act as an accomplice! Seriously though, their house was 11,500 square feet. ( It's worth watching the Netflix film just to see that gorgeous home.) (1) Financial motive for life insurance if I EVER saw one. They were in debt. (2) The odds against TWO women he knew or were married to dying in exactly the same manner by falling down the stairs are at least a billion to one. (3) When the police arrived the blood was so dry they didn't even have to wear protective equipment. She most likely had been lying there for hours and not fifteen minutes (4) There's a difference between "actual guilt" and "legal guilt." (5) . Occam's Razor theory says "the simplest explanation is generally the correct one." He did it.. (Allegedly. In my opinion. Don't come for me Michael Peterson)."
This case makes me curious about Michael's son. He was home when this happened, and refused to give a statement to police. Is there anyway he could have been involved in his stepmother's death?
Michael mentioned in his book that his son, Todd, was furious at a policeman called Holland because Holland was insinuating that Michael could have something to do with Kathleen's death during the first few hours at the crime scene. Todd called Michael's brother, Bill (who was an attorney), and Bill told them to keep their mouth shut from the police until he arrives. Todd kept reminding his father to be quiet and Officer Holland was furious because the two of them couldn't stop talking to each other, when they were told the were not supposed to. but, yes... there are some expects of Todd that's a little curious.
I don't think its suspicious not to give a statement to police I wouldn't tell police anything period I wouldn't say hi to a cop if I passed them on the street
Michael Petersen thoroughly enjoyed the spotlight during this documentary. He enjoyed the notoriety. Narcissism/Psychopathy on display. I have no doubt that he did this and his former wife's family had every reason to be bitter about the deal he got. Great analysis as always.
I’ve seen an angry raven attack my brother by dive-bombing him in the back of his head, when we were children, such that my parents and I formed a defensive barrier to protect him, so the owl story wouldn’t surprise me.
IMO - Michael Peterson is guilty. He has lied so many times during his life, and has done so very convincingly. Also, during The Staircase documentary he appears to consider himself an expert on all legal matters: like he is part of the defense team. He appears to be narcissistic
