PDA

View Full Version : Kathleen Peterson Murder Trial



Sprocket
08-13-2003, 07:48 PM
Thought I would put up a thread for discussion of this current trial.

Newswolf
08-14-2003, 03:11 PM
I've been watching this one as I can. Bizarre. I think sometimes 2+2 does not make 4. The previous 20 year old felldownstairs death may just not add up as murder. I don't see how Michael Peterson benefited from her death. As for Kathleen, I want to see how the defense explains the blood spatter 6 feet high. I don't think the "escort" helped the prosecution. BUT it looks like murder to me. That said, there was a famous case in Ky of an architect convicted of murdering his wife. She was found among an amazing blood pattern in the bathroom of their home. If I remember correctly, the convicted husband was later pardoned after the defense provided medical expert testimony that she was so drunk she fell and spattered the blood herself, or something like that. Some thought he was pardoned because he was rich and connected, some thought it was a miscarriage of justice . Oh, just remembered, his name was William Blanton Moore, I will have to look up the particulars. Anyway, things may or may not be as they seem.

Up2theminute
08-14-2003, 10:10 PM
Expert gives jury a tutorial in blood spatter
DURHAM, N.C. When police arrived to find Kathleen Peterson dead at the bottom of a staircase in the expansive home she shared with her husband, novelist Michael Peterson, one of the first things that struck officers was the amount of blood.
http://www.courttv.com/trials/novelist/081303_ctv.html


and


Peterson's lawyer grills blood spatter analyst on credentials

Aug 13, 2003 : 10:18 pm ET

DURHAM -- A defense lawyer spent much of Wednesday morning attacking the credentials of a State Bureau of Investigation blood-spatter analyst, contending the analyst wasn't qualified to testify as an expert witness in Michael Peterson's first-degree murder trial.

http://www.herald-sun.com/durham/4-380368.html

Up2theminute
08-16-2003, 02:30 PM
Analyst testifies outside of jury's presence


By CRAIG JARVIS, Staff Writer

DURHAM -- A N.C. State Bureau of Investigation analyst, testifying late Thursday afternoon outside the jury's presence, virtually placed Mike Peterson at the center of a bloody beating of his wife in a stairwell.

More Here (http://www.newsobserver.com/peterson/story/2775477p-2572783c.html)

AussieSim
08-16-2003, 11:09 PM
Isn't it amazing what blood splatter patterns can tell you?!?

I hope the forensics nail this case.

Aussie

Up2theminute
08-18-2003, 11:42 PM
This is the newspaper for the Raleigh area and the section that has all the Peterson info (kind of like what the Mod. Bee has for Laci).

The Peterson Trial: What Really Happened?
http://www.newsobserver.com/peterson/

Newswolf
08-20-2003, 01:32 PM
Does not seem that the blood spatter evidence is going Peterson's way. From what I have seen of the pros. expert.

Interesting how his brother appears on Court Tv defending.

They look SO much alike.

tthoman
08-21-2003, 11:11 AM
NEWSWOLF:

I watch when I can also but I get the daily online News/Observer paper...(very well written)...and if you log onto News/Observer after googling.....they have a wonderful, wonderful timeline,etc. group of articles which you can peruse to your heart's content........At the time of Ratliff's demise, 18 years ago, she was much better off financially than the Petersons..(first wife). And he stood to gain $40,000 plus the military monthly stipends the daughters received from their father's estate.........(half of their father's salary as a captain)........

I believe him to be the culprit......

tthoman
08-21-2003, 11:57 AM
POST SCRIPT:

Forgot to mention that a few years before Ratliff's death, she had named the Petersons to be legal guardians of her two little daughters in case something happened to her..........there's the money trail.......

Newswolf
08-22-2003, 03:49 AM
tthoman, I didn't realize all that about the $$. Very interesting. I'm wading through the newspaper site, thanks

tthoman
08-22-2003, 04:07 AM
NEWSWOLF: YOU'RE WELCOME........!

Jeana (DP)
08-27-2003, 12:25 AM
The judge is allowing the statement from a German woman who says she saw Petersen leaving the scene of Ratliff's murder in a big fat hurry. Unfortunately, she can't be cross-examined because of some sort of medical problem. This is all the defense is going to need to win an appeal. I think Petersen is and will be found guilty, but he'll be freed pending this appeal, which will be won, in my opinion. I see another trial in his future.

DocWatson
09-05-2003, 09:36 AM
The autopsies of Kathleen Peterson and Elizabeth Ratliff are nearly identical in terms of blows to head etc. What are the odds of a man finding 2 women mysteriously dead from head injuries following fall down the stairs? You can dismiss one as bad luck, but two is ridiculous. Even if motive is murky, it's pretty clear Peterson did this.

FYI, one of the Ratliff daughters looks striking like Mike Peterson! Which relates to another very odd fact about this case: Peterson was married to wife number 1 when they adopted Ratliff kids, but when they got divorced, these adopted daughters stayed with Dad not Mom. It was only later that he married wife 2. So I'm not a good enough fiction writer to piece this all together, but certainly can imagine a love triangle gone bad that induces enough guilt to deal with consequences (by all accounts, he has been very good Dad to these girls, who, unlike Kathleen Peterson's blood daughter, do not believe their adoptive father is guilty). Strange case.

Rosebud
09-05-2003, 02:36 PM
I noticed that, too (how much the Ratliff kids look like M.P.). Also, I think the resemblance between Liz and Kathleen also is remarkable. What is with his obsession with Liz?

I've only been watching the trial for the last few weeks, but I know Peterson is a piece of work: control freak, embellisher (Purple Heart), willing to sit around making appointments with male "escorts" while his wife worrires about termites, bats, his free-loading kids, her job at Nortel.

I have no doubt that her did it. But I'm worried about the outcome. The prosecution hasn't been all that swift, and the defense hasn't even presented their side yet.

boody
09-08-2003, 12:04 PM
I am addicted to the trial on court tv. Does anyone have a link to pics of the Ratliff kids so I can see this for myself. If anyone could help, its greatly appreciated.

I just realized watching Nancy Grace last week that Kathleen Peterson had defense wounds all over her arms!! How in hell is the defense gonna explain that? Now I think I'm sure!

tthoman
09-08-2003, 01:12 PM
BOODY:

If you log onto the Durham newspaper, the News Observer, there are wonderful pictures........They are running a fantastic special day by day report on this case. You may have to register...It is a great newspaper.

Up2theminute
09-08-2003, 03:39 PM
The Staircase & The Novelist's Wife
Court TV full coverage
http://www.courttv.com/trials/novelist/index.html

tthoman
09-10-2003, 03:02 AM
UP2 & ALL:

I like the judge and the prosecutorial team......

Today it was announced that Michael Peterson's sister believes he did in fact kill both Ratliff and Kathleen.

Norma
09-11-2003, 02:58 AM
I come running home from work every afternoon just to try and catch some type of update as to what's happened during the day - but this has been dragging on so long now!

Do you think the Peterson will take the stand in his defense?

(might need the afternoon off if that's the case... lol)

Jeana (DP)
09-11-2003, 07:21 AM
Pook, if Petersen testifies, I'm going to need oral surgery because my mouth is going to be hanging down to the ground permanently!! He's so guilty its not even funny. As a side note - does he look incredibly creepy to anyone else, or is it just me? I get the creeps just looking at him!!

sariebell
09-11-2003, 12:07 PM
Yeah he looks creepy. He reminds me of Dirk Grineder that other guy who killed his wife and lived an alternate (bisexual) lifestyle.

tthoman
09-12-2003, 07:52 AM
POOK:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! You will definitely HAVE to take the day off and call room-service!!!!!!!!!

He looks just like an elf to me........he is so totally guilty it's unreal. Those Ratliff girls are in denial......feel sorry for them.

I hate the way he deliberately rubs his face with his left hand when he thinks the camera is on him so you can view his wedding ring........UGH!.......he's right handed (watch when he pours water)!!

boody
09-12-2003, 11:24 AM
This trial is v. addictive. I just started college as an older student and I'll tape Nancy Grace & reward myself if I've done my readings, etc for school. Isn't that sick???

You know they are going to smear her before the defense is done. I feel so sorry for her. Her 1st husband cheated on her w/ a woman, her 2nd husband cheated on her w/ men & then killed her, and now her step-son, who I'm sure she financially took care of, is calling her a drunk! (At least that was the snippet I got last week, can anyone confirm or flesh this out?) And now they will crucify her in absentia in the rest of this trial, mark my words.

tthoman
09-12-2003, 03:35 PM
BOODY:

You pretty much have the picture clearly. She was the ONLY breadwinner of the family and was convinced she was going to lose her job the up-coming January........(it was revealed recently that she was on the cut list).......She supported them all and it wasn't peanuts! Mega bucks..........He stood to benefit over a million upon her death from her company........while she was still with the company! He did her in while the doing was good.

Nancy Grace is great!

sariebell
09-14-2003, 12:20 PM
I am intrigued by the college student who claimed they were supposed to meet and have "anal". I missed that whole segment, and my parents keep saying therein lies the motive. Apparently the guy is leading a double life. That's a tough row to hoe. I also think the condoms in the bedroom upstairs have something to do with the crime. SOMEONE was upstairs doing something with condoms that night, even though MP claims they were by the pool drinking. I'm sorry, Kathleen didn't fall up the stairs, ya know?

I am obsessed with this trial. I am a teacher and confess that during my lunch break, I turn on the TV and watch it in my classroom as I choke down a bite to eat. I first learned of the trial when I visited some attorney friends of my boyfriend's in Raleigh and they were giving me the lowdown on the court system and the major players in the area. Super intriguing!

tthoman
09-14-2003, 02:09 PM
SARIEBELL:

That must have been interesting. I am quite impressed with the dignified and cultured demeanor of the Carolinians. I like Mr. Hardin's quiet strength. I think they are pretty sharp and not the "rubes" MP, Rudolf, & company, like to insinuate.

Dear old Dr. Lee is this week, I think.

sariebell
09-14-2003, 09:01 PM
I am familiar with the David Rudolf defense machine, because I watched almost every minute of the Rae Carruth trial. If find Rudolf extremely offensive, though brilliant and effective! As far as the Carolinian prosecution, Hardin is a little emotional, though I find that a plus, myself...nothing wrong with believing in your cause. I worry about the other prosecutor taking the witnesses out to dinner or something like that. Though it was probably done in good faith, one still must apply the general protocols of law to this trial as well, even if people are travelling a great distance. I love to hear about Jim Hardin's mom preparing the lunch every day on court tv. It reminds me of my own relatives in NC...some people are just good as gold!

My friends mostly related to me that the Durham police force is notable for their follies. They said that the legal system in the area was going to be overwhelmed by this case. I guess they were right!

tthoman
09-14-2003, 11:38 PM
SARIEBELL:

I want Mama Hardin's receipes!!!!!!! Did you know that she had two sons and a daughter perish in a fire ?

Yes, to hear that Freda took the out -of- town witnesses to dinner was unusual but I doubt that it amounted to anything. Freda is not dumb and they are very hospitable in North Carolina.

I think MP was counting on the foibles of the police exonerating him but I think they were smarter than he thought.

We shall see.

tthoman
09-15-2003, 06:10 PM
SARIEBELL:

As Nancy Grace said today: "I never thought I'd see the day that Henry Lee would be on the ropes".......! Hardin ruled the day with Lee and was superb.

Lee's performance was appalling. He was defensive, not credible, not focused, and did not seem prepared. He was ego-driven, posturing, and his behaviour was annoying.

You could tell by Rudolf's body language when they all were leaving the court room that he was thinking "You blew it, Lee".

sariebell
09-15-2003, 07:11 PM
I was unable to catch any of Dr. Lee's testimony today, but I am glad to hear that he didn't just breeze through. He is obviously a hired gun and though he would not lie on the stand by any means, he certainly must tailor his findings to meet a certain objective...much like the prosecution does. It has seemed almost unfair to me that the prosecution is always dealt the players that it gets, i.e. the LE et al that work the case. The defense, on the other hand, has the ability to shop around for the most dazzling of witnesses who will testify to the info they want to illuminate. I am happy that even the wonderful Henry Lee can't convince that the fall was au naturel. Too much blood...it's obvious to the eye.

The similarities between the Ratliffe and the Petersen
"incidents" are shocking. I wonder if the jury will simply see pictures of the two women. Their appearances are noticably similar.

I wish I had enough sense to tape the trial during the day to watch at night. I think that is the same reason I don't just get Tivo...letting TV rule my life is not necessarily such a good thing ;)

tthoman
09-15-2003, 07:32 PM
SARIEBELL:

The jury has seen very moving and dramatic testimony concerning the Ratliff murder from the prosecutorial witnesses who came from Germany as well as her sister who came from Rhode Island.

I don't think I would like to be in a relationship with MP and resemble those two women, especially around Christmas.

I wouldn't feel too sorry for Mr. Hardin's experts; after today they reign supreme. Lee made a fool out of himself.

Up2theminute
09-15-2003, 09:56 PM
I agree that there's a resemblance between Elizabeth and Kathleen. I noticed that right away the first time I ever saw their pictures. I hadn't noticed the resemblance in kids but I suppose there is a little bit. Very wierd. Wouldn't that be something if those were his kids through an affair and that's another added reason he stood to benefit so much from Elizabeth's death?!
I live in North Carolina and I must admit I don't hear much about this case at all. The most coverage on this case is Court TV and online newspaper links. I don't usually buy the hardcopy of the News & Observer so maybe they do cover it a lot in the print form, I'm not sure, but mostly I just check what they put online.

Silver Dollar
09-16-2003, 08:29 AM
The words of Henry Lee:
http://boards.go.com/cgi/WTVD/request.dll?MESSAGE&room=PetersonTrial&id=395&move=next

If this were not a murder case, it would be funny--coming from an expert.

sariebell
09-16-2003, 01:02 PM
WOW!
Thanks for the link. Interesting quotes from Mr. Lee. I am presently on my lunch break and watching a bit of the Dr. Lee reruns. So far I have seen very little besides commercials. The court is on lunch break.

When I first heard of this trial, I was really fence sitting. I was pretty convinced that the lady just fell down the stairs, b/c I didn't see any real motive. Now, I hear so much periferal info....condom wrappers (key in my opinion), money problems, homosexual rendezvous, a similar incident years ago, now I think there is more than just mere coincidence here.


It seems like Mr. Lee was pretty theatrical in court, but was a little goofy. I would never have expected such from him. I guess he was just hired to come with his big reputation and expound upon the case. As for research and knowledge of the particular case, he had very little to offer.

It just keeps getting better and better.

So, the Ratliffe case within a case was allowed in, I guess. It's hard to keep up with so much testimony outside the jury's presence. Did the gay college student testimony come in? Was there any mention of the condom and wrappers in the master bedroom? These are key elements in my opinion.

Back to work :o

tthoman
09-16-2003, 01:17 PM
All came into testimony........can't remember whether the unused condom (hadn't about the wrappers) has been mentioned or not yet.

Lee talks to the jury as if they are retarded. Peterson is looking agitated and worried. I have heard he has a SHORT fuse.....DUH! hahahahahaa.......They're on their lunch break right now.

I think Hardin is impeaching Lee with Lee's own book.

SILVERDOLLAR: FABULOUS LINK!

tthoman
09-16-2003, 02:54 PM
SARIEBELL:

Ratliff case not ever brought into Lee's testimony....just Kathleen. Overall, Hardin made some excellent in-roads with Lee. Lee's testimony finished. Deaver appears on equal footing with Lee.

I don't think Rudolf or MP too pleased with Lee, now.

On a personal level, I think Lee likes Hardin better than Rudolf.

boody
09-16-2003, 07:55 PM
I was taking a nap & my boyfriend woke me up before work to tell me that the prosecution sprang it on Henry Lee that there was no blood found in Kathleen Peterson's mouth! After two days of Henry Lee and his medium velocity ketchup-coughs, I thought that this would be a BOMBSHELL! But this was not even remarked upon by the trial commentators. What's up with that? Am I not understanding something? To me, the state has just proven its case.

tthoman
09-16-2003, 09:58 PM
BOODY:

You're right. Don't worry about the Court TV commentators. THINK for yourself.

There was so much about Lee's testimonium of both days which my mind could weigh and sift through, that caused me to realize, point-blank, that he really WAS there to promote an agenda.....and an agenda only! And he realized that Hardin had exposed this, I believe.

He was so un-prepared.....I think he realized that he had really sold the prosecutorial team short.......... And thus the rub between he and Rudolf!

sariebell
09-17-2003, 06:11 PM
I caught a little bit of the video the defense witness made to explain the wounds made by the "fall". It looked pretty ridiculous to me, but I wonder if all these experts won't plant reasonable doubt in at least one juror's mind. I'm beginning foresee a hung jury or an aquittal.

Thanks for the updates from yesterday!

tthoman
09-17-2003, 07:15 PM
SARIEBELL:

Wasn't able to see very much but what I saw was pretty boring and silly. It's that one seed of doubt which worries me but maybe we are worrying for nothing. MP should not be able to walk away from this.

boody
09-19-2003, 12:51 AM
Hey! I missed the stuff I'm hearing from you guys about the condom wrapper! Somebody pleeeeaase fill me in! (I'm in withdrawal since the jury got their hurric-vacation!)

Condom? Condom wrapper? Huh?

Silver Dollar
09-19-2003, 09:29 AM
This is the best site I have found on any information you may want about this case:

http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/trial_m_peterson.html

Silver Dollar
09-19-2003, 09:37 AM
Oops! That site was the 4th page. This site takes you to the main menu:

http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/index.html

{Sorry bout that! I am still learning.}

tthoman
09-19-2003, 01:10 PM
SILVER DOLLAR:

THAT IS FANTASTIC! THANKS!

Silver Dollar
09-21-2003, 10:47 AM
Just knowing MP was in Viet Nam as a high ranking officer, I found this site interesting about the hyoid fracture. VEERRY INFORMATIVE!

http://bjj.org/articles/971008-revive/

Your thoughts?

sariebell
09-21-2003, 01:37 PM
Thanks for the info!

tthoman
09-21-2003, 02:17 PM
SILVER DOLLAR:

My thyroid cartilage is now hurting!!!!! Thanks for the info.
You know he claimed to have been awarded a Purple Heart but it was un-covered that he had lied.

sariebell
09-23-2003, 12:50 PM
Bombshell defense day, to use the court tv anchor's words. The alleged murder weapon, a "blowpoke", which has been missing, suddenly appeared mysteriously in court today. I was worried about the prosecution's adherence to that as the murder weapon, because they have kept too tight to something they couldn't find, but now I'm really worried. The item was supposedly found in the Peterson home in the "garage/basement" area and was introduced without foundation by the defense. The prosecution must have been shell-shocked, because they did not object. I am very skeptical about the item's admittance into evidence, as well as who found it, since Peterson and his family/friends reside in the home. I am really getting worried that the defendant is going to walk. It looks like my attorney friends from Raleigh might have been right... LE and DA's offices in the area are notorious for being bumbling idiots. I wouldn't go that far, but it looks like they might have at least fumbled. I like the prosecution team, and it looks like the crime scene preservation is certainly better than some, but to overlook the supposed murder weapon in the home and to count on it as the "smoking gun" is not very savvy in my opinion.

This case just gets more and more suspense filled for me. I do await the prosecution rebuttal and the closing arguments. Maybe the prosecution will ignite some of its passion and drive their main points home. Sometimes cases get so lost in the periferal stuff and lose the main objective.

Jeana (DP)
09-23-2003, 03:53 PM
If the police are so incompetent that they couldn't find this article in the defendant's garage and the jury doesn't buy their case, then its too bad for the prosecution. Just because some of all of us might think this guy's guilty, if the state cannot prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, then he deserves to walk.

boody
09-23-2003, 05:32 PM
The police couldn't find it in the defendant's garage because it wasn't there when they looked, in my opinion.

And I don't care if a prosecution is made up of circus clowns & potato-headed freaks; a two-time murdering, lying sack of garbage never deserves to walk.

Jeana (DP)
09-23-2003, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by boody
The police couldn't find it in the defendant's garage because it wasn't there when they looked, in my opinion.

And I don't care if a prosecution is made up of circus clowns & potato-headed freaks; a two-time murdering, lying sack of garbage never deserves to walk.


If that's true, then the police need to do a better job. If the guy is guilty, I hope the jury (whose there to hear all of the evidence) finds him guilty. I just think the state needs to PROVE it, that's all. Hopefully, they'll prove the crap out of it and he won't tie the state up in appeals until hell freezes over and then get a new trial!

Wudge
09-23-2003, 10:37 PM
Originally posted by Jeana (DP)
If that's true, then the police need to do a better job. If the guy is guilty, I hope the jury (whose there to hear all of the evidence) finds him guilty. I just think the state needs to PROVE it, that's all. Hopefully, they'll prove the crap out of it and he won't tie the state up in appeals until hell freezes over and then get a new trial!

Jeana... The prosecution's whole case was pure fantasyland. They never had a murder weapon in either of the two alleged murders, nor could they establish a clear, much less a compelling, motive in either of these supposed murders. Even before today's blowpoke surprise, David Rudolf had moved so far into the reasonable doubt zone that the D.A. couldn't find him if he used the Hubble telescope.

The fact that the prosecution brought the blowpoke into the trial as the murder wearpon without having LE first certify that it was not in the house or on the grounds proves their massive incompetence, which is exactly what Michael Peterson wrote about in his press articles. The irony is that the trial proves he was 100% correct, and he will end up writing a best seller as a result, which centers on the stunning incompetency by LE and the prosecution in his own murder trial.

I watched the whole trial, and in my estimation, the D.A, Hardin, and Freda Black's incompetency in this trial surpassed even the incompetency record established by Marsha Clark and Chris Darden in the OJ trial.

Simply put, this case should never have been brought to trial. It was a massive abuse of power by the prosecutor's office to have done so. Fittingly, the prosecutors will leave the courtroom with their heads down, their tails between their legs and impaled on the hard sword of justice.

tthoman
09-24-2003, 12:24 AM
Hey Wudge!

You write so well but I disagree!!! I am completely on the prosecution's side in this case.

And also believe old crafty MP had hidden it very carefully somewhere.....perhaps up in the chimney (there are a lot of chimneys).......

sariebell
09-24-2003, 10:30 AM
I agree Tthoman! Wudge writes so articulately, but I disagree in some respects as well. I do believe that the LE and prosecution have dropped the ball. I do not believe that Michael Peterson is innocent. When I first started watching and talking about this trial, I really thought it was a stretch that a case was brought to court at all. After settling in and hearing the evidence, I drastically changed my mind. I do believe that he is guilty. There are too many cooincidences, and there aren't that many in the natural world. I am afraid that Rudolf has one upped the prosecution team one too many times. They were no match for Rudolf's excellence (I hate him so much I love him). Wudge is probably right, much to my dismay, that Peterson will get ultimate poetic justice when he writes a bestseller about getting away with murder. There is new news about Candace (Kathleen's sister) carrying a long skinny box into the court. I wish that the trial had stuck to the facts and not veered into crazy land with all this blow poke business. Oh well, here we go!

tthoman
09-24-2003, 11:24 AM
SARIEBELL:

Maybe the fp poker was the logical conclusion as to his weapon after Mr. Hardin had met with Candace originally. It makes sense.

I haven't watched it this week...relying on the News/Observer.

Remember when the Irish nanny said in a private interview that he had told her long ago she would be reading about herself in one of his books? He and Rudolf are so full of themselves that in the end, he will outsmart himself.

sariebell
09-24-2003, 12:40 PM
I hope you are right. I have had a chance to watch and keep up with websleuths today, because it is my laid back day of teaching and I have all my extra work done! I am more and more interested in this case. It really could go either way, but "reasonable doubt" is easier to get than a conviction for murder!

Candace seems like her heart is definitely in the right place, but she is overpowering. She is a bit too much! I guess she may have overly influenced the prosecution to think of the blow poke as the murder weapon. Much like the Courttv anchors, I had never heard of such an instrument until this case came onto the scene.

I'll update if I hear anything terribly interesting. I was interested in the testimony of the evidence custodian who reiterated the list of items which came in. The "used" condom and the wrapper were mentioned. I think the prosecution should have really made more of those items, especially given the hustler guy that went on the stand. If Kathleen caught MP in bed with a homosexual-college-student-hustler, she would probably have flown off the handle! Especially since her money was being spent to pay for it!!!LOL!
I'd like to see him explain that scene away with "just doing research for my new book..."

Wudge
09-24-2003, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by sariebell
I agree Tthoman! Wudge writes so articulately, but I disagree in some respects as well. I do believe that the LE and prosecution have dropped the ball. I do not believe that Michael Peterson is innocent. When I first started watching and talking about this trial, I really thought it was a stretch that a case was brought to court at all. After settling in and hearing the evidence, I drastically changed my mind. I do believe that he is guilty. There are too many cooincidences, and there aren't that many in the natural world. I am afraid that Rudolf has one upped the prosecution team one too many times. They were no match for Rudolf's excellence (I hate him so much I love him). Wudge is probably right, much to my dismay, that Peterson will get ultimate poetic justice when he writes a bestseller about getting away with murder. There is new news about Candace (Kathleen's sister) carrying a long skinny box into the court. I wish that the trial had stuck to the facts and not veered into crazy land with all this blow poke business. Oh well, here we go!

Michael Peterson may not be innocent, and I don't know whether Michael Peterson killed his wife or not, nor does anyone else. Jurors are not asked to find the truth, nor are they asked to render a verdict based on what they feel, think or believe; they are asked to guage the existence of reasonable doubt based on the evidence made available to them.

I approach all cases and trials from the perspective of reasonable doubt. And I do it based on the evidence available at any point in time. This keeps me in perfect tune to what the end deliverable will be, a Guilty/Not Guilty verdict based on the weight of the evidence measured against the reasonable doubt hurdle.

I will leave the determination of the truth to a power far greater than I. I simply wait for the weight of the evidence to take me up and over the reasonable doubt hurdle, and it never came close in this trial. My position throughout the course of this trial was Not Guilty -- Not Guilty does not mean innocent -- and with most every passing day, a Not Guilty verdict was becoming more assurred as I watched he the needle on my evidentiary weighing scales continually drift deeper into the Not Guilty zone.

In this trial, we heard of two alleged murders. One death, Ms. Ratlif's, did not take place in Michael Peterson's home, nor was the woman his wife, nor did she die of bleed out, but she had often complained of the very worst of headache's in the weeks before she was found dead, which the original medical examiner determined occurred from a cerebral hemorrhage.

The other dead woman, Kathleen Peterson, was his wife and she died of bleed out -- as we all are well aware -- and she had also complained of severe headaches, and it is also very significant that she suffered a half hour of blindness in the days just before her death. Additionally, she had taken valium and been heavily drinking the night that she died -- alcohol is a well known blood thinner/lubricant, it acts like aspirin, and will it also facilitate bleed out .

In neither case was any alleged murder weapon found, and in neither case was a clear, much less a compelling, motive established.

I won't go into what reasonable doubt entails here, but it is not comprised of rank speculation and conjecture, which is what the prosecution's case represented..

The evidence simply was not there, and, for the most part, each prosecution witness did far more for the defense than they did for the prosecution. The prosecution never came close to establishing a clear and convincing preponderance of the evidence basket that would enable a jury to breach the reasonable doubt hurdle.

To me, this case represented a major abuse of prosecutorial power, such things do happen, sadly. It simply should never have been brought to the inside of a courtroom, a provable case was not there, period.

I never have an axe to grind with anyone who is charged with a crime, I just guage the evidence that we are aware of. In the Kobe case, things look very bad for him, indeed. Yet, before the alleged rape incident occurred, I liked him a lot and thought he well represented himself to be one of the best models the NBA had to offer to the public. I will wait for the evidence to be tested during a ttrial, but as things stand now Kobe will be fortunate if he walks away with a Not Guilty verdict. In the Laci Peterson case, I think Scott is a louse, cad, liar, and adulterer, but there is no citable hard evidence against him, so my reasonable doubt needle reads Not Guilty at this time.

These cases represent how I have always operated; I am evidence oriented, and I weigh each evidentiary item differently as well. If I classified and weighed all the evidence the same, I would have voted Not Guilty for David Westerfield. However, I had him Guilty, because the DNA of the blood evidence -- it ranked much higher on the evidentiary totem pole -- trumped the scientific testimony of the four entomologists -- including the prosecution's own "expert" entomologist -- who were in David Westerfield's camp.

That's the way I operate; it's just the way things are with me.

Wudge
09-24-2003, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by tthoman
Hey Wudge!

You write so well but I disagree!!! I am completely on the prosecution's side in this case.

And also believe old crafty MP had hidden it very carefully somewhere.....perhaps up in the chimney (there are a lot of chimneys).......

tthoman.... Thank you for the compliment, it most certainly beats the mortar shells that I continually duck in most forums. lol

If you follow this case closely, you may enjoy the site below, which has some nice links and commentary to the case under the heading of: "Stranger Than Fiction", the Michael Peterson murder trial.

Thank you once again and my best regards.

http://www.vanceholmes.com/court/index.html

Jeana (DP)
09-24-2003, 03:44 PM
Wudge, thank you for your interpretation of the trial. Unfortunately, I haven't seen any of it, but the snippets I've read on Court TV and the like make me think you may be onto something. I cannot fathom how they're going to get out of the murder weapon theory now.

tthoman
09-24-2003, 07:34 PM
HEY ALL:

Saw a tiny bit today....the expert witness for the prosecution was EXCELLENT.........

For Rudolf to have just discovered the blow poke introduced yesterday (over the weeknend supposedly in Peterson's garage) is tommyrot....he is grandstanding. Also, the police went over the house, garage, and grounds with a fine tooth comb. Rudolf is trying to pretend he's having a 'Perry Mason' moment, I think.

WUDGE: Thanks for the link!!!!! Appreciate it!

Wudge
09-26-2003, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by Jeana (DP)
Wudge, thank you for your interpretation of the trial. Unfortunately, I haven't seen any of it, but the snippets I've read on Court TV and the like make me think you may be onto something. I cannot fathom how they're going to get out of the murder weapon theory now.

Jeana, I watched the whole trial, and, as I said in my posts, the prosecutorial incompetence displayed throughout this trial was simply stunning, and to have even brought this trial to the inside of a courtroom represented a major abuse of prosecutorial power. This trial is what you are supposed to find in Disneyland, not in a courtroom.

I am happy the prosecutors are going down with their absurd fantasyland case in a flaming death spiral on national TV. If any justice is to be found in this sad excuse for a trial, their coming crash and burn is it.. You can color me very happy.

boody
09-26-2003, 07:22 PM
Today's cross was amazing. How about when Rudolf kept "accidentally" mispronouncing the guy's name. The whole thing was a bloodbath.

I'm worried this guy Saami is gonna kill himself. Seriously. Did anyone see the look on his face when he was sitting at the bench, after the lunch break? It was painful to see.

Wudge
09-27-2003, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by boody
Today's cross was amazing. How about when Rudolf kept "accidentally" mispronouncing the guy's name. The whole thing was a bloodbath.

I'm worried this guy Saami is gonna kill himself. Seriously. Did anyone see the look on his face when he was sitting at the bench, after the lunch break? It was painful to see.

I saw the whole thing; I watched the whole trial. This guy came off as a boldfaced liar, and he was caught doing it in open court on national TV. I think it was fitting justice, but that doesn't bother me one iota that he look sorry for his false testimony. What I am concerned about is other trials where this guy might have sold a jury a bill of goods via his junk science methods supported by false credentials.

I think it was lost in the shuffle, but he also claimed to have authored 60 articles that had received critical per review, which, like his Temple affiliation, was a blatant lie as well. I have no sympatthy for him whatsover. He violated the oath he swore to uphold, and he did it far more than once. I hope he goes to prison.

boody
09-27-2003, 11:38 AM
That's pretty harsh. You never lied on your resume? I know I have. I agree the guy shouldn't have done it, & he came off like a total chucklehead during the toiletbowl incident, but he looked so despondent my heart went out to him. His whole personal & professional life is down the (toilet) drain; it seemed to me his testimony is commonon-sensical so it's a shame the jury must disregard it.
What doesn't make sense is that somebody would accidentally "fall" and land in that position, or that somebody would cough out blood at the rate needed to produced the stains on the wall, and yet not have an iota of blood in their mouth!

tthoman
09-27-2003, 01:31 PM
MONDAY WILL PROVE INTERESTING....

sariebell
10-01-2003, 06:50 PM
Hey, gang!
I found it an interesting last few days. Jurors dismissed, the jury's requests for published exhibits... Lots of interesting commentary. Many predict a hung jury. What do you think?

tthoman
10-01-2003, 07:50 PM
SARIEBELL:

Am so glad you wrote!!!! Am crushed!!!! If that guilty MP doesn't get off scot-free it will be a miracle!!!!!!! You KNOW he did it!

I will say this: IT HAS BEEN INTERESTING! Isn't that hilarious about the drunk juror????? hahahahaha

The judge should not have ruined the Brit's reputation as he did....it was splitting hairs.

boody
10-01-2003, 11:05 PM
I'm sorry too because I think MP is guilty of two murders and he'll walk free.
I don't think it's hilarious about the drunk juror. He was a recovering alcoholic & because of the schedule & the disruption to his regular life he probably wasn't able to get to AA meetings and he fell off the wagon because of that and the stress. Sorry if I'm not hahaha-ing, because I think MP, through the evil he has done and its consequences, has just claimed another (albeit) living victim who is probably going through the depths of hell and despair and humiliation tonight as he realizes how he let everyone down. My heart goes out to him.

tthoman
10-02-2003, 12:29 AM
BOODY: YOU HAVE A TENDER HEART..........But I am looking at the total irony of the situation.

Please excuse.

Doyle
10-02-2003, 09:24 AM
A second juror in Michael Peterson's murder trial is on the cusp of being dismissed after an alleged booze-fueled, profanity-laced escapade Tuesday evening landed him in jail overnight.
http://www.courttv.com/trials/novelist/100103_ctv.html

sariebell
10-02-2003, 01:21 PM
Yeah, I agree that the poor British physicist's reputation is ruined and the judge let that happen. You know, I was thinking about how that could happen. My dad is a brilliant chemical engineer who technically works for UT Battell (sp?) the contractor who oversees operations for Oak Ridge National Laboratory. His research is fairly independent, however, in that grant money usually funds it. He also works very closely with UT, our University, teaching post doc chem engineering courses. I do not know if this is the case now, but I am aware that he has taught many of these courses for free. He needs the students to help with his research, and the course credit helps them further their education. If he were not being paid by UT when he was asked to testify, would his resume or c.v. still include his work at the university? I would think so. I guess I am trying to illustrate that people can be affiliated with universities, without being on the payroll. At huge universities, the human resources depts are unaware of most of the goings on in terms of professors who might consult or work for free. This guy may have continued some research that he started at Temple, but Temple was no longer paying him. We just don't know, because he was not able to defend himself.

I am afraid that David Rudolf is going to get the verdict that he desires. He is so gifted, though I can't stand him or his way!

The jury's perusal/requests for exhibits were so interesting! That list made me have hope for the prosecution. They wanted to see pics of the victim, her sweatpants with his shoe print on them, pics of the neighbor's house from Germany. The fact that they are at least thinking about the Ratliffe murder, makes me think some of them may "believe" it. It ain't over til the fat lady sings!

tthoman
10-02-2003, 04:41 PM
SARIEBELL:

I dare not give myself hope at this point, even though I agree with you about the jury's perusal list. I have not watched Rudolf today very much as I find him so repugnant and his points so lame.

That is so true about the Brit's situation.....And 'tis a shame he cannot sue Rudolf for slander.

Norma
10-02-2003, 04:43 PM
The interview with Kathleen's sister today was great - too bad they couldn't get Peterson's history of beating on Kathleen into the testimony.

Would someone please explain to me just what the hell is a blow poke?? Does it have a special function, other than a fireplace poker? I've never heard this term before, yet now I can see a vast array of them held up in this trial!

tthoman
10-02-2003, 09:34 PM
POOK:

I think it is a poker -Plus......not really sure...but I think you are able to blow through it to kindle the flames as they are dying out...as well as poking the fire.......(Remember, it was stated it was NOT solid brass...but a hollow brass cylinder?)

I wish I had seen what you describe about Kathleen's sister's interview.........Do you meant to tell me that he used to hit her ?????????

sariebell
10-03-2003, 12:17 PM
I saw part of the interview with Kathleen's sister, yesterday, and she seemed very believable and humble. I think Candace was a good witness, but she is so adamant to get her point across, that she gets in the way of the facts. This other sister might have been a better witness, because she merely described her sister's concerns and could not talk about her sister very articulately, because she got upset by it. I think this kind of genuine emotion, without seeming to have an agenda, would have been good testimony for the prosecution.

I just now turned on the tv and heard courttv commentators discussing the inadequacy of Freda Black's closing argument statement. I hate to say this, but I think the prosecution has left a lot to be desired in terms of their management of this case. Yes, they are Southern, but they are from a fairly progressive area with many educated people living there. They can't afford to seem disorganized and make bad decisions in this case. I'll bet the jurors are pretty intelligent individuals who won't let this type of thing go. They seemed to have a really strong case...I believe the evidence points to his guilt. I worry, however, that the prosecution has not demonstrated competence in administering this case evidence to the jury. At this point, I think he'll walk.

I am particularly bothered by the fact that the defense team, MP's brother, and his friend/advocate have not once answered the question as to when, how and by whom the blowpoke was found. This is hinky!! I can't believe the prosecution just lets them waltz in and whip them with it without fighting back!

The defense also argues that Kathleen was okay with the fact that MP did it with young guys. I'd bet she definitely was not okay with that. If she was, why would he sneak around to do it? Although this behavior is not altogether uncommon, they had only been married for 5 years. I know people who have married bisexual partners and have open relationships. And guess what...I know about it. Why does no one else know about this aspect of the relationship if it was totally out in the open and accepted?

The prosecution, to my knowledge, never mentioned the condom and wrappers in the master bedroom. I would mention that!! Someone was doing something sexual in there, and not sitting by the pool like it has been said. Remember, Kathleen fell down the stairs, not up. She may have been walking down instead of up the stairs when this occurred. The prosecution just did not mention these things clearly, in my opinion.

In the prosecution closing, it just doesn't seem that either attorney is driving the points home.

I am just sad that someone who more likely than not murdered at least one female is going to get fat on the money from her insurance policy!

Wudge
10-03-2003, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Pook
The interview with Kathleen's sister today was great - too bad they couldn't get Peterson's history of beating on Kathleen into the testimony.

Would someone please explain to me just what the hell is a blow poke?? Does it have a special function, other than a fireplace poker? I've never heard this term before, yet now I can see a vast array of them held up in this trial!

Pook, a blowpoke has a dual function; it serves to move logs and embers around in the traditional sense of a fireplace poker, yet it is also hollow and acts like a giant straw with a hook at the end. The straw arrangement allows for the user of a blowpoke to blow air/oxygen underneath sparkling embers -- like a billows in a blacksmith shop -- thereby providing them the needed catalyst to turn the embers hotter and, in turn, ignite the logs faster.

In the old days, when you came into a cold house, the idea was to get a fire up and flaming as fast as possiible. It is to that end that a blowpoke best serves its dual purpose.

tthoman
10-03-2003, 01:46 PM
SARIEBELL:

Although they had been married for five years, they had lived together a total of around ten.

I thought the closing arguments of Freda and Mr. Hardin were excellent, each in their own way.

Candace becomes scattered when she talks...she gets so nervous.

I hope he is found guilty.

tsitra01
10-05-2003, 03:37 PM
The clearest evidence to me of MP's guilt was the amount of blood and the extent of her injuries.....and his excuse of lounging by the pool when she fell. It was a very chilly night and he was wearing shorts. That was a bit suspect.

The fact that most of the blood was dry, also very suspicious.
While I think David Rudolf did an excellent job of defending his client, I feel the two similar "accidents" and the enormous amount of blood and injuries will bring a guilty verdict.
Hung jury possible.

tthoman
10-05-2003, 08:19 PM
I hope it's not a hung jury..........

There is so much silliness which flys in the face of common sense that Rudolf wishes the jury to believe.............It's very difficult to swallow a bowling ball!

River
10-05-2003, 09:15 PM
Rudolf is an excellent attorney. He managed to get Rae Carruth convicted of second degree murder, when in actuallity, Rae Carruth should have gotten First Degree Murder with Life in Prison.

As for the Peterson case, there are too many coincidences. Kathleen was murdered.

tthoman
10-05-2003, 11:27 PM
POOK: Yes she was........

I wonder if he has molested the eldest Ratliff daughter.

Toth
10-05-2003, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by tthoman
I wonder if he has molested the eldest Ratliff daughter. I thought his interests lay in other directions.

tthoman
10-05-2003, 11:53 PM
He swings both ways.....

Silver Dollar
10-06-2003, 09:54 AM
Will the juror stay on?

http://www.wral.com/news/2533481/detail.html

Rude dolph wants him!

sariebell
10-07-2003, 12:38 PM
VERDICT WATCH!!!!
So, we dismissed 2 more jurors yesterday??? They are dropping like flies. I didn't even get to hear about the female bank worker who mocked MP. It just gets curiouser and curiouser...

tthoman
10-07-2003, 01:15 PM
SARIEBELL:

I didn't get to see it yesterday ........Nothing in my morning news e-mail from the News/Observer either. What did you hear?

Silver Dollar
11-06-2003, 01:07 PM
Judge Hudson rules for Peterson:

http://www.herald-sun.com/durham/4-410032.html

Jeana (DP)
11-06-2003, 01:57 PM
If his appeal is going to rest on an attorney whose only being paid $65 per hour to represent him, either he'd better pray someone wants to do it for free publicity or just pray. He's seriously screwed otherwise. Around here, we charge more than that per hour for legal assistant time.

Silver Dollar
11-06-2003, 03:21 PM
Originally posted by tthoman


There is so much silliness which flys in the face of common sense that Rudolf wishes the jury to believe.............It's very difficult to swallow a bowling ball!



:D

less0305
12-16-2003, 01:01 PM
Papers reporting that Michael Peterson's two best friends want judge to allow exumation of Kathleen's body to prove that she was killed by an.......owl......yep, a barn owl.!!!!!!!! They want to prove the marks on Kathleen's body are from talons. Have you ever heard anything so ludicrous in your life???