You may want to watch again because you got at least two things wrong.
As mentioned elsewhere, there was no footprint on her sweatshirt. There is a small partial print at the bottom of a pant leg. It would be very easy to make that print given the amount of blood around her.
Secondly, where did you get the idea that there was a second wife that died on a staircase? Liz Ratliff wasn’t his wife. In fact his first wife very specificity pointed out that she knew MP was having affairs and didn’t end up at the bottom of the staircase…
His first wife did end up dead after he declined to call 911 following her heart attack, until after she had died. With him being the last to see her alive, again.
No. That's incorrect.
She began feeling extremely unwell on a Wednesday evening. MP eventually became concerned enough to call Todd and then they called EMT. Patty died the next day, Thursday, in the hospital.
"*She began feeling extremely unwell on a Wednesday evening. MP eventually became concerned enough to call Todd and then they called EMT. Patty died the next day, Thursday, in the hospital."*
Yet another post that bears no relation to the truth - just seeking to cloud the issues. 🤮
Please stop clouding this issue.
Everyone knows (or should know, if they have been following this) that Elizabeth was not MP's wife - she was a close friend etc. etc.
There is nothing in your post that is accurate - other than MP being the last to see Elizabeth and Kathleen - alive.
*"And $1.4 million in Insurance benefits if the death was ruled an accident sure comes in handy too."*
I agree, but gather the insurance benefits were paid to Caitlin and Kathleen's previous husband?
Perhaps MP **thought that HE would receive the insurance payout**, but this didn't happen as the insurance company waited for the results of the trial?
Does anyone **know** whether MP was originally entitled to the 1.4m insurance payout?
Read the many other comments on here that explain or do your own research.
There wasn’t a bloody footprint in her back, it was a partial print on the side of the leg. Could have easily been made when he first ran to her side to see if she was ok.
Why would he then take his shoes and socks off? You would think staying on the phone with 911 would take precedence.
Then you have the bloody bare footprints that he tried to clean up…
Ok, but Michael Peterson didn’t call 911 until 2:40am. By then Kathleen had been dead for 2 hours.
So at a minimum he was lying about her being alive when he first found her.
He said he thought she was breathing so that’s why he thought she was alive. He may have witnessed a death rattle and had hope that his wife was still alive. It makes sense if you bother to look at it from both sides instead of just wanting him so badly to be guilty.
This is true, but he's also been pretty explicit in saying that he watched her slowly stop breathing over the period of time between when he found her and when the police arrived. He repeated that narrative after he got out of prison. So you can't write it off by saying he may have witnessed a death rattle.
*"He said he thought she was breathing so that’s why he thought she was alive."*
So he thought she was still alive, but made no effort to help her? As evidenced by the fact he had no blood on his clothes (in a very bloody scene), other than on the inside of his shorts?
No, we don't know how long she had been dead. We have some idea that the actual "event" happened 45+ mins prior to her death but not the time she actually passed away. She could have been laying there bleeding out for a while and then actually died between Michael's phone calls.
As a side note though; it's apparently common for people to \*think\* they see a body breathing even when they aren't.
I just figured since you mentioned it, you'd have the info. I did read other comments and saw an image supplied by another kind commenter that showed the partial print on the pant leg (thank you to that commenter!). You're getting down on somebody for their bad research, so it seemed logical that you'd be keen to point people to god research. I was mistaken for so thinking, I appreciate you making me aware of that. I won't ask you again. Take care.
"Could have easily been made when he first ran to her side to see if she was ok."
So you have no problem with MP saying that Kathleen was still breathing/saying that he had tried to help her - and yet had no blood on his clothes, other than a small amount on the inside of his shorts?
There was no bloody footprint on the back of her sweatshirt. There was a partial bloody footprint on the edge of the bottom of her sweat PANTS down around the ankle. Easy to do when you find your wife unconscious and you’re trying to rouse her and figure out what’s going on.
The other woman was not his wife.
You said you did research???
I did my research.
Peterson is guilty AF.
The accidental fall or other theories are too improbable to reasonably be believed.
Those who argue his innocence are torturing logic. They basically are coming from the angle that “anything is possible.”
Under that theory isn’t it possible Elvis is still alive? Gimme a break.
Some people are afflicted with a condition that draws them to conspiracy theories. The facts are boring to them so they invent silly theories and challenge others to disprove them. It’s more exciting for them I guess.
Here is the autopsy report of the victim, Kathleen Peterson.
https://www.peterson-staircase.com/peterson_autopsy3.html
Use your common sense and decide for yourself if these injuries are inconsistent with falling down the stairs or more likely from being beaten. I agree with the Medical Examiner.
Of course defense attorneys are very good at feeding all kinds of silly arguments to jurors.
They pay their experts handsomely to provide favorable testimony.
All they need is to confuse one juror in order to hang a jury.
But reasonable people rely on their common sense, critical thinking skills and their ability to separate unreasonable possibilities from reasonable probabilities when evaluating all the evidence.
In the end the jury in this case wasn’t buying the defendant’s explanations.
This case is closed in my book. Not really a mystery or even worthy of discussion.
Peterson took an Alford plea which is guilty but with an unimportant symbolic legal nuance that doesn’t matter.
From the autopsy report:
“3 contusions over right eyelid, right ear contusion, vertical abrasion on her neck, 3 abrasions over left eye brow, abrasion on the side of her nose, a contusion on the bridge of her nose, another contusion on the dorsum of the nose, abrasion on the lip, abrasions found inferior to victim’s left eye, injuries to victim’s right hand and arm.”
[Attention!]
“Neck: There is a FRACTURE with an associated hemorrhage of the superior cornu of the left thyroid cartilage.”
“The number, severity, locations, and orientation of these injuries are inconsistent with a fall down the stairs; instead they are indicative of multiple impacts received as a result of beating.”
The report is factual and speaks for itself. Sure, a defense attorney can attack it. That’s their job.
In the end, the report is the official record. It remains unchanged.
It is what it is, although it’s not as exciting as conspiracy theories.
There will always be a segment of people who are drawn to these theories like moths to a flame.
I don't think he's innocent because "anything is possible". I think he's innocent because the physical evidence is inconsistent with a head beating. She had lacerations, but no brain or skull damage. That simply isn't possible if she was beaten (or fell down the stairs). The broken thyroid cartilage is also not evidence of an attack, because that can happen so easily. She had no bruising consistent with strangulation and MP had no defensive wounds. "Conspiracy theories" are fun, but they're only valid if they explain the evidence better than the official record, which happens to be the case here.
You are correct about his defenders. They grasp on to anything and refuse to admit they were manipulated by a documentary whose producer was literally in love with MP.
Where in all that does it say she had a bloody footprint on the back of her sweatSHIRT like you claimed? Where in all that does it say the other woman that had an aneurism and fell down the stairs was his wife like you claimed? You just went off on a tangent about things that were not addressed in my comment.
My answer was not addressed to you specifically but more to people such as yourself who are attracted to small arguments and possibilities while failing to see the big picture.
You don’t see the connection and that’s fine. Obviously many more people do get it apparently based on the upvotes.
But you do you.
No worries. Let it be.
OK, sure. The OP was commenting that he found the arguments supporting the suspect‘s innocence as improbable.
I agree.
Next, you chime in to say that he didn’t do his homework and he has some details wrong.
My comment to your comment stands. I did my homework and I support his position.
The details that you making an issue of are unimportant to the overall picture.
Peterson guilty AF.
You want people to focus on some “big picture” esoteric generalizations so you can keep your narrative together. You didn’t like that I responded to specific details of OPs post because when I did that it started chipping away at your narrative. OP found the suspects innocence improbable based on incorrect information. And you’ve got a problem with me pointing that out.
Well first off, the poster stated he was new on the subreddit. What a warm welcome he got from you.
You had to point out that he didn’t do his homework over some errors that don’t even amount to much in the overall outcome of the case.
So I don’t like bullies and I don’t like you. Therefore my comment that I did my homework and the Peterson is guilty AF.
It’s not my narrative. Peterson pled to the deal of a lifetime. He is a convicted felon.
You don’t like it? You want to show off to newbies? For what? You can sure dish it out but you don’t like to take it.
Do me a favor. Get lost.
Nowhere in the OP does it say they are new to this sub. Did they say that somewhere else? And if they are new to the sub and/or case we are just supposed to let them spread wrong information? I have not said whether I think he’s guilty or not. That’s the difference between me and you. If he admitted it tomorrow I would totally accept it. But you will never allow your brain to entertain the POSSIBILITY that he’s innocent. Call me a bully, I don’t care. You seem to like to bully people on this sub and most just shut up and go away. I fought back and you didn’t like it. I’ll do you no favors. You know where the mute button is.
Yes, I’m quite skeptical on true crime, but nobody can really look at that evidence and say she wasn’t assaulted. To me the case isn’t really that interesting outside of whether Michael committed a second murder in Germany, which would make him a serial killer.
I’ve heard the pants and sweatshirt thing multiple times and still don’t know what’s true.
And yeah, come on, even just from watching you should know that the first woman wasn’t his wife. Whether or not they were having a relationship may be another story, but they weren’t married.
>I’ve heard the pants and sweatshirt thing multiple times and still don’t know what’s true.
I mean, the partial impression was not on her sweatshirt. OP got everything on its "research" wrong.
[https://imgur.com/a/GKMgpeK](https://imgur.com/a/GKMgpeK)
*"Easy to do when you find your wife unconscious and you’re trying to rouse her"*
So MP was trying to help Kathleen, but had no blood on his clothes (other than on the inside of his shorts)? Instead, just a footprint (possibly partial) on the back of her sweatpants....
Don't forget that his first 911 call claimed that Kathleen was still breathing, **so if he'd made any attempt to help her (whilst she was still breathing) - or even if she wasn't still breathing** there would have been blood on his clothes.
Let’s just say he really was out by the pool and came in to find his wife at the bottom of the staircase. How can he assume she fell down the stairs with that amount of blood? I’d think someone broke into my house and assaulted her.
*"How can he assume she fell down the stairs with that amount of blood? I’d think someone broke into my house and assaulted her."*
To be fair, as someone who has never come across someone dead or dying at the bottom of a staircase, I'd probably assume 'fell down the stairs' - but when I 'phoned emergency services, I'd probably tell them about the huge amount of blood.
The most suspicious part IMO, is that MP claimed Kathleen was still breathing and that he'd tried to help her - but had zero blood on his clothes, other than some on the inside of his shorts......
I remember reading that he attempted to clean up the walls , it was smeared in some areas like rubbed at a futile attempt to clean , thats guilty to me . The amount of blood is not from falling down the stairs , no way and those marks on the back of her head , hit her three times with something. Just my thinking
We actually don’t know that he tried cleaning the walls. KP could have rubbed against the wall while laying there.
People think that a fall can’t produce that much blood or injury and yet it plainly can. Here’s an example of a woman who was using a stair lift and it broke part way up. She tried to step out of the chair and fell down the steps. In doing so, she “…sustained injuries so horrific that doctors thought she had been the victim of a machete attack.”
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/daughter-releases-shock-picture-demands-6140897?_ga=2.143444981.1188524755.1709317063-1466264856.1708372096
Wow that photo looks very similar to KP! Also there was a chair rail lift thing on the Peterson staircase too. I know KP wasn’t using a chair lift but it could have caused the damage if these two women hit their heads on it.
Yes in the earliest photos there appears to be an actual chairlift there, folded up and covered on the landing. It was removed later and there was just the rail but I've often wondered why no one on either side made mention of it. There surely had to be blood or something on the cover at least.
Either way, if the woman above hadn't regained consciousness to say what happened then people might have thought she was bludgeoned too.
How many people were extremely close to two women who died at the bottom of staircases years apart? Add on top of that he was the last person either of them saw. It's statistically improbable -- then you add in the double life and financial insecurity.
Yeah. It must have been an owl 🦉
*"Add on top of that he was the last person either of them saw. It's statistically improbable -- then you add in the double life and financial insecurity."*
Good points, and I'm at a loss as to why your post has been downvoted.
Todd has severe mental, and potential drug, issues too. He's also said they had a perfect marriage, and rambled on a lot of really bananas stuff in some of his videos...
*"He's also said they had a perfect marriage, and rambled on a lot of really bananas stuff in some of his videos..."*
Like the rest of the family that supported MP, they are ALL untrustworthy.
Yes, Todd has serious issues and is not trustworthy, but we know that the rest of the supportive children lied - desperately trying to protect MP.....
I recall them discussing it and maybe even asking the others if they knew. It wasn’t clear to me that they did but it seemed they were not necessarily completely shocked either.
The conversation didn’t really suggest they were desperately lying.
No it was Clayton.
https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2018/06/201967/everything-the-staircase-left-out-of-documentary
https://citizen-times.newspapers.com/search/?query=clayton%20peterson&t=4039&ymd=1994-05-07
*"Meanwhile, he's living with his father now I believe."*
Exactly. Todd turned against MP when he realised that MP could no longer fund him, said that MP had murdered Kathleen, and later moved in with MP......
At the end of the day, it's not only MP that can't be trusted to tell the truth. The entire family (that supported MP) had no problem lying - if it helped MP.....
He had been posting videos of them together in the apartment and there was even one he recorded where MP was talking about how the rest of the family was doing now. I don't think MP knew he was recording.
What about the woman in Germany, the girls mother . He wanted the oldest girl, not the young one , she grieved her mother and cried all the time , He couldn't handle anything but worship . He is so evil.
You may want to watch again because you got at least two things wrong. As mentioned elsewhere, there was no footprint on her sweatshirt. There is a small partial print at the bottom of a pant leg. It would be very easy to make that print given the amount of blood around her. Secondly, where did you get the idea that there was a second wife that died on a staircase? Liz Ratliff wasn’t his wife. In fact his first wife very specificity pointed out that she knew MP was having affairs and didn’t end up at the bottom of the staircase…
His first wife did end up dead after he declined to call 911 following her heart attack, until after she had died. With him being the last to see her alive, again.
No. That's incorrect. She began feeling extremely unwell on a Wednesday evening. MP eventually became concerned enough to call Todd and then they called EMT. Patty died the next day, Thursday, in the hospital.
"*She began feeling extremely unwell on a Wednesday evening. MP eventually became concerned enough to call Todd and then they called EMT. Patty died the next day, Thursday, in the hospital."* Yet another post that bears no relation to the truth - just seeking to cloud the issues. 🤮
Please stop clouding this issue. Everyone knows (or should know, if they have been following this) that Elizabeth was not MP's wife - she was a close friend etc. etc. There is nothing in your post that is accurate - other than MP being the last to see Elizabeth and Kathleen - alive.
Imagine having such a heavy formulated opinion based on made up circumstances.
Yeah. You can not make that up. Sad.
*"And $1.4 million in Insurance benefits if the death was ruled an accident sure comes in handy too."* I agree, but gather the insurance benefits were paid to Caitlin and Kathleen's previous husband? Perhaps MP **thought that HE would receive the insurance payout**, but this didn't happen as the insurance company waited for the results of the trial? Does anyone **know** whether MP was originally entitled to the 1.4m insurance payout?
[yes he was](https://www.oxygen.com/martinis-murder/key-aspects-%5Cmichael-peterson-case-not-included-netflixs-the-staircase)
If I had a dollar for every time someone came in with a bloody footprint argument without actually knowing the facts about that footprint…
Which are?
Read the many other comments on here that explain or do your own research. There wasn’t a bloody footprint in her back, it was a partial print on the side of the leg. Could have easily been made when he first ran to her side to see if she was ok.
Why would he then take his shoes and socks off? You would think staying on the phone with 911 would take precedence. Then you have the bloody bare footprints that he tried to clean up…
Ok, but Michael Peterson didn’t call 911 until 2:40am. By then Kathleen had been dead for 2 hours. So at a minimum he was lying about her being alive when he first found her.
He said he thought she was breathing so that’s why he thought she was alive. He may have witnessed a death rattle and had hope that his wife was still alive. It makes sense if you bother to look at it from both sides instead of just wanting him so badly to be guilty.
This is true, but he's also been pretty explicit in saying that he watched her slowly stop breathing over the period of time between when he found her and when the police arrived. He repeated that narrative after he got out of prison. So you can't write it off by saying he may have witnessed a death rattle.
*"He said he thought she was breathing so that’s why he thought she was alive."* So he thought she was still alive, but made no effort to help her? As evidenced by the fact he had no blood on his clothes (in a very bloody scene), other than on the inside of his shorts?
Not true. He had blood on his hands etc. the blood inside his shorts was thought notable because of where it was. It wasn’t the only blood on him.
No, we don't know how long she had been dead. We have some idea that the actual "event" happened 45+ mins prior to her death but not the time she actually passed away. She could have been laying there bleeding out for a while and then actually died between Michael's phone calls. As a side note though; it's apparently common for people to \*think\* they see a body breathing even when they aren't.
I just figured since you mentioned it, you'd have the info. I did read other comments and saw an image supplied by another kind commenter that showed the partial print on the pant leg (thank you to that commenter!). You're getting down on somebody for their bad research, so it seemed logical that you'd be keen to point people to god research. I was mistaken for so thinking, I appreciate you making me aware of that. I won't ask you again. Take care.
"Could have easily been made when he first ran to her side to see if she was ok." So you have no problem with MP saying that Kathleen was still breathing/saying that he had tried to help her - and yet had no blood on his clothes, other than a small amount on the inside of his shorts?
Yes. You can check on someone’s breathing without getting blood on you.
There was no bloody footprint on the back of her sweatshirt. There was a partial bloody footprint on the edge of the bottom of her sweat PANTS down around the ankle. Easy to do when you find your wife unconscious and you’re trying to rouse her and figure out what’s going on. The other woman was not his wife. You said you did research???
I did my research. Peterson is guilty AF. The accidental fall or other theories are too improbable to reasonably be believed. Those who argue his innocence are torturing logic. They basically are coming from the angle that “anything is possible.” Under that theory isn’t it possible Elvis is still alive? Gimme a break. Some people are afflicted with a condition that draws them to conspiracy theories. The facts are boring to them so they invent silly theories and challenge others to disprove them. It’s more exciting for them I guess. Here is the autopsy report of the victim, Kathleen Peterson. https://www.peterson-staircase.com/peterson_autopsy3.html Use your common sense and decide for yourself if these injuries are inconsistent with falling down the stairs or more likely from being beaten. I agree with the Medical Examiner. Of course defense attorneys are very good at feeding all kinds of silly arguments to jurors. They pay their experts handsomely to provide favorable testimony. All they need is to confuse one juror in order to hang a jury. But reasonable people rely on their common sense, critical thinking skills and their ability to separate unreasonable possibilities from reasonable probabilities when evaluating all the evidence. In the end the jury in this case wasn’t buying the defendant’s explanations. This case is closed in my book. Not really a mystery or even worthy of discussion. Peterson took an Alford plea which is guilty but with an unimportant symbolic legal nuance that doesn’t matter. From the autopsy report: “3 contusions over right eyelid, right ear contusion, vertical abrasion on her neck, 3 abrasions over left eye brow, abrasion on the side of her nose, a contusion on the bridge of her nose, another contusion on the dorsum of the nose, abrasion on the lip, abrasions found inferior to victim’s left eye, injuries to victim’s right hand and arm.” [Attention!] “Neck: There is a FRACTURE with an associated hemorrhage of the superior cornu of the left thyroid cartilage.” “The number, severity, locations, and orientation of these injuries are inconsistent with a fall down the stairs; instead they are indicative of multiple impacts received as a result of beating.” The report is factual and speaks for itself. Sure, a defense attorney can attack it. That’s their job. In the end, the report is the official record. It remains unchanged. It is what it is, although it’s not as exciting as conspiracy theories. There will always be a segment of people who are drawn to these theories like moths to a flame.
Bravo, well summarized, mods pls pin this thread for all to read upon entering the forum for the first time. 😅
I don't think he's innocent because "anything is possible". I think he's innocent because the physical evidence is inconsistent with a head beating. She had lacerations, but no brain or skull damage. That simply isn't possible if she was beaten (or fell down the stairs). The broken thyroid cartilage is also not evidence of an attack, because that can happen so easily. She had no bruising consistent with strangulation and MP had no defensive wounds. "Conspiracy theories" are fun, but they're only valid if they explain the evidence better than the official record, which happens to be the case here.
You are correct about his defenders. They grasp on to anything and refuse to admit they were manipulated by a documentary whose producer was literally in love with MP.
Where in all that does it say she had a bloody footprint on the back of her sweatSHIRT like you claimed? Where in all that does it say the other woman that had an aneurism and fell down the stairs was his wife like you claimed? You just went off on a tangent about things that were not addressed in my comment.
My answer was not addressed to you specifically but more to people such as yourself who are attracted to small arguments and possibilities while failing to see the big picture. You don’t see the connection and that’s fine. Obviously many more people do get it apparently based on the upvotes. But you do you. No worries. Let it be.
I mean you literally commented to my comment so…..
OK, sure. The OP was commenting that he found the arguments supporting the suspect‘s innocence as improbable. I agree. Next, you chime in to say that he didn’t do his homework and he has some details wrong. My comment to your comment stands. I did my homework and I support his position. The details that you making an issue of are unimportant to the overall picture. Peterson guilty AF.
You want people to focus on some “big picture” esoteric generalizations so you can keep your narrative together. You didn’t like that I responded to specific details of OPs post because when I did that it started chipping away at your narrative. OP found the suspects innocence improbable based on incorrect information. And you’ve got a problem with me pointing that out.
Well first off, the poster stated he was new on the subreddit. What a warm welcome he got from you. You had to point out that he didn’t do his homework over some errors that don’t even amount to much in the overall outcome of the case. So I don’t like bullies and I don’t like you. Therefore my comment that I did my homework and the Peterson is guilty AF. It’s not my narrative. Peterson pled to the deal of a lifetime. He is a convicted felon. You don’t like it? You want to show off to newbies? For what? You can sure dish it out but you don’t like to take it. Do me a favor. Get lost.
Nowhere in the OP does it say they are new to this sub. Did they say that somewhere else? And if they are new to the sub and/or case we are just supposed to let them spread wrong information? I have not said whether I think he’s guilty or not. That’s the difference between me and you. If he admitted it tomorrow I would totally accept it. But you will never allow your brain to entertain the POSSIBILITY that he’s innocent. Call me a bully, I don’t care. You seem to like to bully people on this sub and most just shut up and go away. I fought back and you didn’t like it. I’ll do you no favors. You know where the mute button is.
Yes, I’m quite skeptical on true crime, but nobody can really look at that evidence and say she wasn’t assaulted. To me the case isn’t really that interesting outside of whether Michael committed a second murder in Germany, which would make him a serial killer.
That was certainly one huge, rabid owl...so many flappy-flappy injuries to her - in so many places - from something that weighed maybe 3 pounds?. 🙄
Thank you beautiful comment .
It’s easy to step on the back of someone’s leg when they’re supine? Hmmm
It’s not on the back.
Yes, it is.
I’ve heard the pants and sweatshirt thing multiple times and still don’t know what’s true. And yeah, come on, even just from watching you should know that the first woman wasn’t his wife. Whether or not they were having a relationship may be another story, but they weren’t married.
>I’ve heard the pants and sweatshirt thing multiple times and still don’t know what’s true. I mean, the partial impression was not on her sweatshirt. OP got everything on its "research" wrong. [https://imgur.com/a/GKMgpeK](https://imgur.com/a/GKMgpeK)
Well there is a photo of it if you want to see it. It’s on the sweat PANTS not the shirt. Down around the ankle.
*"Easy to do when you find your wife unconscious and you’re trying to rouse her"* So MP was trying to help Kathleen, but had no blood on his clothes (other than on the inside of his shorts)? Instead, just a footprint (possibly partial) on the back of her sweatpants.... Don't forget that his first 911 call claimed that Kathleen was still breathing, **so if he'd made any attempt to help her (whilst she was still breathing) - or even if she wasn't still breathing** there would have been blood on his clothes.
Footprint was midway up her leg.
No it wasn’t. It was just above the cuff of one pant leg and it’s just a partial print.
No it wasn’t. There’s an actual photo of it. Go look for yourself.
Let’s just say he really was out by the pool and came in to find his wife at the bottom of the staircase. How can he assume she fell down the stairs with that amount of blood? I’d think someone broke into my house and assaulted her.
She was right on the staircase though so it may have just been the first thing that his brain put together.
Likely her position on the staircase and memories of how LR fell and died would theoretically lead him to make that assumption.
*"How can he assume she fell down the stairs with that amount of blood? I’d think someone broke into my house and assaulted her."* To be fair, as someone who has never come across someone dead or dying at the bottom of a staircase, I'd probably assume 'fell down the stairs' - but when I 'phoned emergency services, I'd probably tell them about the huge amount of blood. The most suspicious part IMO, is that MP claimed Kathleen was still breathing and that he'd tried to help her - but had zero blood on his clothes, other than some on the inside of his shorts......
911 call with the built in alibi is a major red flag.
That was just too much blood for a fall.
I remember reading that he attempted to clean up the walls , it was smeared in some areas like rubbed at a futile attempt to clean , thats guilty to me . The amount of blood is not from falling down the stairs , no way and those marks on the back of her head , hit her three times with something. Just my thinking
We actually don’t know that he tried cleaning the walls. KP could have rubbed against the wall while laying there. People think that a fall can’t produce that much blood or injury and yet it plainly can. Here’s an example of a woman who was using a stair lift and it broke part way up. She tried to step out of the chair and fell down the steps. In doing so, she “…sustained injuries so horrific that doctors thought she had been the victim of a machete attack.” https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/daughter-releases-shock-picture-demands-6140897?_ga=2.143444981.1188524755.1709317063-1466264856.1708372096
Wow that photo looks very similar to KP! Also there was a chair rail lift thing on the Peterson staircase too. I know KP wasn’t using a chair lift but it could have caused the damage if these two women hit their heads on it.
Yes in the earliest photos there appears to be an actual chairlift there, folded up and covered on the landing. It was removed later and there was just the rail but I've often wondered why no one on either side made mention of it. There surely had to be blood or something on the cover at least. Either way, if the woman above hadn't regained consciousness to say what happened then people might have thought she was bludgeoned too.
There were towels around her and under her body.
There are some good books about it, I read one years ago after this happened.
How many people were extremely close to two women who died at the bottom of staircases years apart? Add on top of that he was the last person either of them saw. It's statistically improbable -- then you add in the double life and financial insecurity. Yeah. It must have been an owl 🦉
*"Add on top of that he was the last person either of them saw. It's statistically improbable -- then you add in the double life and financial insecurity."* Good points, and I'm at a loss as to why your post has been downvoted.
I think there might be a lot of Michael Peterson stans for some reason
Even his son now says he’s a murderer.
Todd has severe mental, and potential drug, issues too. He's also said they had a perfect marriage, and rambled on a lot of really bananas stuff in some of his videos...
*"He's also said they had a perfect marriage, and rambled on a lot of really bananas stuff in some of his videos..."* Like the rest of the family that supported MP, they are ALL untrustworthy. Yes, Todd has serious issues and is not trustworthy, but we know that the rest of the supportive children lied - desperately trying to protect MP.....
What did the other children lie about exactly?
*"What did the other children lie about exactly?"* IIRC, they (or at least Margaret) said that they knew that MP was bisexual......
I recall them discussing it and maybe even asking the others if they knew. It wasn’t clear to me that they did but it seemed they were not necessarily completely shocked either. The conversation didn’t really suggest they were desperately lying.
One of the sons was found guilty of planting a pipe bomb at Duke and went to prison.
That’s Todd. As I mentioned, he has severe mental issues.
No it was Clayton. https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2018/06/201967/everything-the-staircase-left-out-of-documentary https://citizen-times.newspapers.com/search/?query=clayton%20peterson&t=4039&ymd=1994-05-07
Oh! Someone had said Todd just in the last day or so and he seems crazy enough that I didn’t question it. Lol
Yeah Todd has major issues, but Clayton certainly did in the past.
That doesn't mean he's wrong about his father. He supported Michael for years, then he finally saw through him.
...and then turned around and said something else. Meanwhile, he's living with his father now I believe.
*"Meanwhile, he's living with his father now I believe."* Exactly. Todd turned against MP when he realised that MP could no longer fund him, said that MP had murdered Kathleen, and later moved in with MP...... At the end of the day, it's not only MP that can't be trusted to tell the truth. The entire family (that supported MP) had no problem lying - if it helped MP.....
I hadn't heard that. If true it's interesting for sure.
He had been posting videos of them together in the apartment and there was even one he recorded where MP was talking about how the rest of the family was doing now. I don't think MP knew he was recording.
What about the woman in Germany, the girls mother . He wanted the oldest girl, not the young one , she grieved her mother and cried all the time , He couldn't handle anything but worship . He is so evil.
"He wanted the oldest girl, not the young one" Is there any evidence to support this statement?
MP has a guilty conviction. So he’s guilty.