All language subtitles for An.American.Murder.Mystery.The.Staircase.S01E02.Lightning.Strikes.Twice.1080p.WEB.h264-SKYFiRE_track3_eng

Man: IT BECAME A CIRCUS,
BECAME ENTERTAINMENT.

JUSTICE WAS LOST,
KATHLEEN WAS LOST.

IT ALL BECAME A MATTER
OF WARRING SIDES,

WHO’S GONNA WIN THIS THING.

AND THAT’S WHAT THESE
THINGS TURN INTO,

THEY BECOME ENTERTAINMENT.

Narrator: IT’S ONE
OF THE MOST CHILLING TALES

IN AMERICAN HISTORY.

I WOULD NEVER HAVE DONE
ANYTHING TO HURT HER.

I AM INNOCENT OF THESE CHARGES

AND WE WILL PROVE IT IN COURT.

Fanning: IT WAS A BATTLE
THAT HAD HIGH STAKES,

AND THOSE STAKES WERE
MICHAEL PETERSON’S LIFE.

Narrator: IN THE SECOND HOUR
OF OUR 3-PART INVESTIGATION,

A 16-YEAR-OLD SECRET
IS UNEARTHED.

Gasparoli:
WHO IS VERY CLOSE TO TWO WOMEN

WHO DIED
AT THE BOTTOM OF STAIRS?

I DON’T KNOW, NOBODY,
EXCEPT MICHAEL PETERSON.

Hardin Jr.: THERE IS NO WAY
THIS IS A COINCIDENCE.

YOU’VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME.

Narrator:
THE PROSECUTION BEGINS

TO BUILD THEIR CASE.

Dimond: JURORS COULDN’T BELIEVE
WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT,

AND SOME OF THEM JUST
LOOKED AWAY IN HORROR.

Narrator:
AN UNEXPECTED WITNESS

IS THRUST
INTO THE SPOTLIGHT.

Black: WHAT TYPES OF SERVICES
DID YOU PERFORM?

OH, WELL,
THAT’S PRETTY BROAD.

YOU’RE CHEATING ON
MY SISTER WITH MEN?

Narrator:
THE DEFENSE DISCOVERS

STUNNING INVESTIGATIVE
MISCONDUCT.

WHAT?! THAT’S WHAT THEY CALL
EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE.

Karas: IF THE JUDGE STRIKES
DUANE DEAVER’S TESTIMONY,

THE PROSECUTION’S CASE
IS GONNA FALL APART.

Narrator: AND LATER,
A NEW AND SURPRISING THEORY

IS HATCHED.

BAM, SHE GETS HIT.
BACK RIGHT CORNER OF THE HEAD.

IF IT WAS DONE BY A BIRD,

IT DOESN’T MEET THE DEFINITION
OF A HOMICIDE.

-- Captions by VITAC --
www.vitac.com

CAPTIONS PAID FOR BY
DISCOVERY COMMUNICATIONS

Peterson: THERE’S THIS BACK
STAIRCASE AND THAT’S --

WELL, THAT’S WHERE EVERYTHING
BOTH BEGINS AND ENDS.

Gasparoli: MICHAEL PETERSON --
HE’S A CLEAR THINKER.

HE KNOWS HOW TO
HOLD AN AUDIENCE.

Karas: HE CLAIMS HER DEATH

IS FROM AN ACCIDENTAL
FALL DOWN THE STAIRS.

Dimond:
THERE ARE SEVEN DEEP LACERATIONS

IN THE BACK OF HER SKULL.

Gasparoli: MUCH OF THE PHYSICAL
EVIDENCE RIGHT AWAY

DID NOT MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.

Dimond: THE MEDIA WERE RIVETED
BY THIS CASE.

Fanning: SHE THINKS
SHE KNOWS THE WEAPON

THAT WAS USED
TO KILL HER SISTER.

Dimond: WHAT MAKES YOU THINK
IT’S A CRIME, HUH?

Fanning: LIGHTNING JUST
DOESN’T STRIKE TWICE.

Peterson:
I DON’T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED,

BUT I KNOW THAT
I DIDN’T KILL KATHLEEN.

I LOVED HER.

Narrator:
ON DECEMBER 9, 2001,

TELECOMMUNICATIONS
EXECUTIVE KATHLEEN PETERSON

IS FOUND DEAD
AT THE BOTTOM OF HER STAIRS.

THERE WAS BLOOD EVERYWHERE.

THERE WAS BLOOD ON THE WALLS.

THERE WAS BLOOD ON THE STAIRWAY.

IT WAS A HORRIBLE,
HORRIBLE SCENE.

Narrator: 11 DAYS LATER,
HER NOVELIST HUSBAND,

MICHAEL PETERSON, IS CHARGED
WITH FIRST-DEGREE MURDER.

THE MEDIA WERE
RIVETED BY THIS CASE.

THIS WAS A COUPLE THAT
WAS VERY WELL THOUGHT OF

IN DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA.

THEY WERE THE CREAM OF SOCIETY,

SO TO THINK THAT THEY
WOULD BE INVOLVED IN A MURDER?

IT WAS TOO GOOD TO PASS UP.

Karas: THE STORY GAINS
NATIONAL ATTENTION

AS HE CLAIMS HER DEATH IS
FROM AN ACCIDENTAL FALL

DOWN THE STAIRS.

Dimond: ALL FOUR
OF THE PETERSON CHILDREN

FIRMLY SUPPORTED THEIR
FATHER’S INNOCENCE,

BUT CAITLYN, THE BIOLOGICAL
DAUGHTER OF KATHLEEN,

AND KATHLEEN’S SISTER CANDACE,

WELL, THAT WAS ANOTHER STORY.

Karas:
IF CONVICTED, MICHAEL PETERSON

FACES LIFE IN PRISON
WITHOUT PAROLE.

Narrator: WEEKS LATER, THE CASE
TAKES ANOTHER BIZARRE TURN.

Karas: NOT LONG
AFTER KATHLEEN’S DEATH,

DETECTIVE ART HOLLAND
RECEIVES A TIP

FROM A WOMAN NAMED
MARGARET BLAIR,

WHO’S THE AUNT

OF MICHAEL PETERSON’S
ADOPTED DAUGHTERS.

MARGARET EXPLAINS THAT HER
SISTER ELIZABETH RATLIFF

TRAGICALLY DIED
17 YEARS EARLIER,

AND THERE’S INFORMATION
ABOUT HER DEATH

THAT SHE DESPERATELY
WANTS TO SHARE.

SHE SAID,
"THIS IS VERY UNUSUAL,

AND YOU NEED TO LOOK INTO THIS."

AND SO IT WAS LIKE, "GOLLY."

Narrator: DETECTIVE HOLLAND
TAKES IN THE STORY

THAT FUNDAMENTALLY
ALTERS PETERSON’S CASE.

IT BEGINS NEARLY
20 YEARS AGO IN GERMANY.

Dimond: IN THE 1980’s,
ELIZABETH RATLIFF, AN AMERICAN,

IS LIVING IN
GRAFENHAUSEN, GERMANY,

WITH HER HUSBAND AND
TWO YOUNG DAUGHTERS,

MARTHA AND MARGARET.

THERE SHE MEETS ANOTHER
AMERICAN FAMILY, THE PETERSONS.

MICHAEL
AND HIS FIRST WIFE, PATTY,

AND THEIR TWO YOUNG SONS.

Fanning:
MICHAEL WAS WORKING ON BOOKS,

AND PATTY HAD A JOB
WORKING AT A MILITARY BASE

IN GERMANY AS A TEACHER.

LIZ RATLIFF WAS A TEACHER
IN THE SAME SCHOOL AS PATTY.

THEY GOT TO KNOW EACH OTHER.

THEY BECOME FRIENDS,
VERY GOOD FRIENDS,

AND LIZ GETS TO KNOW MIKE,

AND THEY BECOME VERY
CLOSE FRIENDS, TOO.

Narrator:
THEN IN 1983, TRAGEDY STRIKES

WHEN LIZ’S HUSBAND, GEORGE,
DIES IN A MILITARY EXERCISE.

THE LOSS LEAVES
THE YOUNG MOTHER REELING.

WHEN HER HUSBAND DIED,
SHE WAS LEFT

WITH SOLE CARE
FOR THESE CHILDREN,

LITTLE MARGARET AND MARTHA.

IT WAS A LOT OF RESPONSIBILITY

FOR SOMEONE WHO THOUGHT
SHE’D HAVE A PARTNER

BY HER SIDE FOR LIFE.

LIZ RATLIFF IS ENCOURAGED
BY THE PETERSONS

TO MOVE AND TO BRING
HER TWO YOUNG CHILDREN

AND LIVE IN THE HOUSE
NEXT DOOR TO THEM.

Fanning: MICHAEL WAS
THE CLOSEST THING SHE HAD

TO A MAN IN HER LIFE.

THEY WEREN’T INVOLVED
AT ALL ROMANTICALLY,

BUT SHE SOUGHT HIS
ADVICE AND ASKED

FOR HIS HELP TO MANAGE FINANCES

BECAUSE IT WAS SOMETHING
THAT HER HUSBAND HAD DONE

AND SHE JUST WASN’T
FAMILIAR WITH IT

AND MICHAEL WAS THERE.

Narrator:
BUT IN THE FALL OF 1985,

THE FAMILIES’ LIVES
ARE FOREVER CHANGED.

Dimond: ON THE EVENING
OF NOVEMBER 24th,

LIZ AND HER TWO YOUNG DAUGHTERS

ENJOYED A FAMILY DINNER
AT THE PETERSONS’ HOME.

AND AFTERWARD, MICHAEL PETERSON
WALKED HER HOME.

Fanning:
IT WAS A VERY SHORT WALK

’CAUSE THEY WERE
JUST CATTY-CORNER

ACROSS THE STREET.

Narrator:
THE NEXT MORNING AT 7:15,

LIZ’S NANNY, BARBARA, ARRIVES

AND IMMEDIATELY NOTICES
SOMETHING UNUSUAL.

Dimond: THE LIGHT IS ON
AND THE FRONT DOOR IS UNLOCKED.

WHEN SHE OPENS THE DOOR,
SHE MAKES A SHOCKING DISCOVERY.

THERE IS LIZ,
CRUMPLED AT THE BOTTOM

OF A STAIRCASE
IN A POOL OF HER OWN BLOOD.

IT’S SHEER TERROR NOW.

SHE REACHES DOWN TO TOUCH LIZ,

AND HER BODY STILL FEELS WARM.

SHE IMMEDIATELY GOES
OVER TO THE PETERSONS

AND ASKS FOR THEIR HELP BECAUSE
SHE DOESN’T KNOW WHAT TO DO.

Dimond:
MICHAEL AND PATTY PETERSON
RUSH TO THE SCENE.

MICHAEL TRIES TO GET A PULSE

AND THEN GIVES
THE DEVASTATING NEWS.

LIZ RATLIFF IS DEAD.

Fanning:
WHEN THE POLICE ARRIVED,

MICHAEL WAS ACTING AS
THE OFFICIAL SPOKESMAN.

HE TOLD THEM THAT WHEN
HE LEFT HER AT HOME,

EVERYTHING WAS PERFECTLY FINE,

AND THERE WEREN’T ANY PROBLEMS,

AND HE WALKED BACK HOME.

HE BELIEVED IT WAS ALL A
HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE ACCIDENT.

Narrator: MICHAEL EXPLAINS
THAT LIZ’S MEDICAL HISTORY

MAY HAVE PLAYED A FACTOR.

Fanning:
MICHAEL TOLD THE AUTHORITIES

THAT SHE WAS SUFFERING
FROM A LOT OF HEADACHES,

AND IT WAS VERY POSSIBLE
THAT SHE HAD GOTTEN DIZZY

AND JUST FALLEN WHEN SHE STARTED
GOING DOWN THE STAIRS.

SHE ALSO HAD A BLOOD DISORDER.

IT WAS A DISEASE
RELATED TO HEMOPHILIA

AND THAT’S WHY THERE
WAS SO MUCH BLEEDING.

Narrator:
INVESTIGATORS PROCESS THE SCENE

AND FIND NO EVIDENCE OF
A STRUGGLE OR FORCED ENTRY.

DAYS LATER, A MEDICAL EXAMINER
DETERMINES THE CAUSE OF DEATH.

Dimond: IT’S DISCOVERED THAT
SHE HAS BLOOD ON THE BRAIN,

AND IT’S BELIEVED THAT SHE’S
HAD A CEREBRAL HEMORRHAGE,

PERHAPS A STROKE,
AND THEY DETERMINED

THAT THIS WAS DEATH
BY ACCIDENTAL FALL.

Fanning:
LIZ’S BODY IS TRANSPORTED BACK

TO THE UNITED STATES
TO A PLACE NEAR HOUSTON

AND SHE’S LAID TO REST NEXT
TO THE BODY OF HER HUSBAND.

Narrator: IN THE WAKE
OF LIZ RATLIFF’S DEATH,

IT BECOMES CLEAR THAT
THE PETERSONS’ ROLE

IN HER FAMILY’S LIFE WAS
GIVEN GREAT CONSIDERATION.

Dimond: TURNS OUT LIZ RATLIFF
WROTE A WILL

SHORTLY AFTER
HER HUSBAND’S DEATH.

AND IN THAT, SHE LEFT
HER $35,000 ESTATE

AND CUSTODY OF HER TWO CHILDREN

TO THE PETERSON FAMILY.

Narrator:
WITHIN MONTHS, MICHAEL AND PATTY

RETURN TO THE UNITED STATES

WITH THEIR NEWLY
ADOPTED DAUGHTERS.

EVENTUALLY, THE COUPLE
DIVORCE ON AMICABLE TERMS.

AND IN TIME, THE CHILDREN CHOOSE
TO LIVE WITH MICHAEL.

Dimond: A FEW YEARS LATER,
MICHAEL PETERSON,

BACK IN NORTH CAROLINA,
MEETS KATHLEEN.

AND THEY ARE MARRIED
AND TOGETHER,

THEY ARE RAISING
A BLENDED FAMILY,

INCLUDING THE TWO RATLIFF GIRLS.

Narrator:
DETECTIVE HOLLAND IS STUNNED

BY THE EERIE SIMILARITIES
IN THE TWO DEATHS.

Gasparoli: TWO WOMEN WHO LOOKED
REMARKABLY ALIKE

ARE FOUND DEAD AT
THE BOTTOM OF STAIRS

WITH A LOT OF BLOOD,

AND THEY’RE BOTH LINKED
DIRECTLY TO ONE MAN.

Hardin Jr. IT WOULD BE
AN IMPOSSIBLE COINCIDENCE

FOR MIKE PETERSON TO BE
THE LAST-KNOWN PERSON

TO SEE KATHLEEN OR ELIZABETH
AND NOT BE INVOLVED.

Narrator: MICHAEL PETERSON
HAS BEEN CHARGED

WITH THE MURDER
OF HIS WIFE, KATHLEEN.

INVESTIGATORS ALSO DISCOVER

THAT 16 YEARS EARLIER,
MICHAEL’S GOOD FRIEND,

LIZ RATLIFF,

DIED UNDER STRIKINGLY
SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES.

THEY BOTH WERE AT THE BOTTOM
OF A SET OF STAIRS

WITH SIGNIFICANT BLOOD
ALL OVER THE SCENE

WITH SIGNIFICANT INJURIES.

Gasparoli:
WHO IS VERY CLOSE TO TWO WOMEN

WHO DIED AT THE BOTTOM
OF STAIRS?

I DON’T KNOW, NOBODY,
EXCEPT MICHAEL PETERSON.

Hardin Jr.:
YOU’VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME.

THERE IS NO WAY THIS
IS A COINCIDENCE.

Narrator: DURHAM POLICE
SEEK MORE INFORMATION

ON THE CASE
BUT ENCOUNTER A PROBLEM.

SINCE IT WAS RULED
AN ACCIDENTAL FALL,

THERE WAS NO REAL INVESTIGATION.

THERE ARE NO PHOTOGRAPHS.

THE PATHOLOGIST WHO
FIRST RECEIVED LIZ’S BODY

DID NOT DO A THOROUGH AUTOPSY.

THERE’S NO WAY TO KNOW
EXACTLY HOW SHE DIED,

SO THEIR ONLY ALTERNATIVE
NOW IS TO EXHUME THE BODY

OF ELIZABETH RATLIFF.

WELL, TO DO THAT, THEY
HAVE TO GET PERMISSION

FROM THE FAMILY,
FROM HER TWO DAUGHTERS,

MARTHA AND MARGARET.

MY NAME’S JAMES E. HARDIN JR.

I WAS THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY

DURING THE PROSECUTION
OF MICHAEL PETERSON.

WE AT FIRST DID NOT BELIEVE

THAT MARTHA AND MARGARET
WOULD AGREE TO IT,

AND THEY’D INDICATED TO US
THAT THEY WOULD NOT.

Dimond: THESE TWO SISTERS
ABSOLUTELY DO NOT

WANT THEIR MOTHER EXHUMED.

THEY BELIEVED THEIR
STEPDAD WAS INNOCENT,

AND THEY WERE GOING
TO SUPPORT HIM

THROUGH HELL OR HIGH WATER,

BUT THEY THINK ABOUT
IT FOR A WHILE.

THEY GO BACK
TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT

AND THE PROSECUTORS
AND THEY SAY, "ALRIGHT,

WE GIVE YOU PERMISSION TO EXHUME
THE BODY OF OUR MOTHER,

BUT WE’RE ONLY DOING IT
TO EXONERATE OUR STEPDAD."

Narrator: ON APRIL 14, 2003,

OFFICIALS EXHUME THE BODY
OF LIZ RATLIFF

AT CEDARVILLE CEMETERY
IN BAY CITY, TEXAS.

IT WAS EXTRAORDINARY
TO EXHUME A BODY

THAT HAD BEEN BURIED
MORE THAN 18 YEARS.

Fanning: SHE WAS RAISED FROM
THE GROUND IN TEXAS

AND TRANSPORTED BACK TO
DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA.

Dimond: STATE MEDICAL EXAMINER
DR. DEBORAH RADISCH

IS THE ONE WHO DID THE AUTOPSY
ON KATHLEEN PETERSON,

AND SHE IS THE ONE

WHO IS GOING TO DO THE AUTOPSY
ON LIZ RATLIFF’S BODY.

Narrator: UPON EXAMINATION,
RADISH DISCOVERS

THAT PART OF THE BRAIN
HAS DECOMPOSED.

THE SKULL, HOWEVER,
IS STILL INTACT.

IN A STUNNING DEVELOPMENT,
THE M.E. DISCOVERS

LIZ RATLIFF HAS SEVEN
DEEP GASH LACERATIONS

IN THE BACK OF HER SCALP,

JUST LIKE KATHLEEN PETERSON.

Hardin Jr.: IF YOU LOOK
AT THE PHOTOGRAPHS,

THE INJURIES AND THEIR
LOCATIONS ARE EERILY SIMILAR.

I MEAN, THEY’RE ALMOST THE SAME.

IT’S SHOCKING
HOW CLOSE THEY ARE.

Dimond: RADISH CONCLUDES
THAT ELIZABETH RATLIFF

DIED OF A HOMICIDAL BEATING.

REPEATED BLUNT FORCE
TRAUMA TO HER HEAD.

Narrator:
NEWS OF RATLIFF’S CAUSE OF DEATH

SEIZES THE ATTENTION
OF THE NATIONAL MEDIA.

Reporter:
IT’S THE DEATH OF ANOTHER WOMAN

THAT’S ADDED A BIZARRE
ANGLE TO THIS STORY.

Reporter #2: BOTH WERE LAST SEEN
WITH PETERSON

AND BOTH DIED
AT THE BOTTOM OF STAIRS.

Dimond: PEOPLE WERE RIVETED
BY THIS CASE.

SO IT WAS BIG NEWS,
IT WAS FRIGHTENING NEWS,

IT WAS TERRIBLE NEWS.

Dimond: HAD HE ACTUALLY
COMMITTED MURDER WITH HIS WIFE

AND WITH ANOTHER WOMAN
17 YEARS EARLIER?

YOU COULDN’T LOOK AWAY.

Fanning: THE INFORMATION ABOUT
LIZ RATLIFF’S DEATH

WAS AN ABSOLUTE NIGHTMARE
FOR THE DEFENSE.

IS IT POSSIBLE
THAT TWO AUTOPSIES

COULD HAVE
GOTTEN IT WRONG?

THAT TWO AUTOPSIES COULD
HAVE SAID --

IN KATHLEEN’S CASE
AND IN ELIZABETH’S CASE --

THAT THEY WERE BOTH

BEATEN TO DEATH
AND THEY WEREN’T?

WELL, YOU’VE GOT 2 WOMEN
18 YEARS APART

AND 6,000 MILES APART
WITH NO MOTIVE

IN EITHER CASE.

AND YOU HAVE THE SAME PERSON
DOING THE TWO AUTOPSIES.

THESE ARE NOT
INDEPENDENT AUTOPSIES.

Narrator:
A HEARING IS CONDUCTED

TO DETERMINE IF TESTIMONY
ABOUT LIZ RATLIFF’S DEATH

WILL BE ADMITTED AT THE TRIAL

FOR KATHLEEN PETERSON’S MURDER.

THERE THE PROSECUTION
MAKES A PARTICULAR REQUEST.

Karas: THE STATE DOESN’T WANT
THE JUDGE TO RULE YET.

THEY SAY, "LOOK, THERE WAS
NEVER A PROPER INVESTIGATION

INTO THE DEATH OF LIZ RATLIFF,"

AND THEY NEED
A LITTLE MORE TIME.

AND SO THEY’RE ASKING
THE JUDGE TO HOLD OFF

ON RULING WHETHER OR NOT
HER DEATH IS ADMISSIBLE.

THE JUDGE GRANTS
THE STATE’S REQUEST.

SO THE LEAD DETECTIVE, HOLLAND,

AND ONE OF THE PROSECUTORS,
FREDA BLACK,

GET ON A PLANE
AND GO TO GERMANY.

THEY’RE GOING TO INVESTIGATE
THIS ON THEIR OWN.

Narrator:
IN EARLY MAY, JURY SELECTION

FOR THE BIGGEST TRIAL TO
EVER HIT DURHAM BEGINS.

MY NAME IS KELLI COLGAN,
AND I WAS A JUROR

ON THE MICHAEL PETERSON CASE.

I DIDN’T FOLLOW THE NEWS.

I DIDN’T KNOW ANYTHING
ABOUT HIS WIFE

OR HIS FAMILY, SO KIND OF
MADE ME A CLEAN SLATE.

I AM BETTYE BLACKWELL.
I WAS JUROR NUMBER FOUR.

I RECEIVED A LITTLE SUMMONS
FROM THE DURHAM COURT SYSTEM.

WHEN I GOT THERE, THERE
WAS A MASS OF PEOPLE THERE,

AND I’M LIKE, "UH-OH, SOMETHING
REALLY BIG IS GOING ON."

Narrator: ON JULY 1st,

THE HIGHLY ANTICIPATED
TRIAL BEGINS.

THE COMMUNITY WAS DIVIDED ABOUT

WHETHER MICHAEL PETERSON
KILLED HIS WIFE.

SO AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, PEOPLE
WERE EAGER TO SEE THE EVIDENCE.

Dimond: ONCE THE JUDGE IS
SEATED, HE BRINGS THE JURY

INTO THE COURT ROOM AND
THERE IS MICHAEL PETERSON,

THE MAN ACCUSED OF MURDER.

Narrator: NOW DISTRICT ATTORNEY
JAMES HARDIN

DELIVERS HIS OPENING STATEMENT.

Hardin Jr.:
I WANTED TO BASICALLY LAY OUT

WHAT WE ANTICIPATED THE
EVIDENCE WAS GOING TO SHOW.

WE WANTED TO ALSO
MAKE IT CLEAR TO THEM

THAT THIS CASE
WAS GONNA BE BUILT

ON PIECES OF A PUZZLE,

AND IT WAS GONNA
TAKE A LONG TIME TO DO IT.

Gasparoli:
HARDIN SAYS, "THIS IS A MAN

WHO MURDERED HIS WIFE VICIOUSLY.

THE BLOOD WILL TELL THE STORY.

IT WILL SPEAK FOR KATHLEEN."

Dimond:
OPENING STATEMENTS IN ANY TRIAL

ARE MEANT TO SHOCK
IN SOME INSTANCES.

ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS HE DID

WAS SHOW THE JURY
THE SEVEN LACERATIONS

ON THE SHAVED HEAD
OF KATHLEEN PETERSON,

AND HE SAID, "THIS IS WHAT
WAS DONE TO THIS WOMAN."

JURORS COULDN’T BELIEVE
WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT,

AND SOME OF THEM JUST
LOOKED AWAY IN HORROR.

Narrator: HARDIN THEN ATTEMPTS

TO ILLUSTRATE HOW
HE BELIEVES THE WOUNDS

WERE INFLICTED.

HE REACHES INTO A PLASTIC BAG

AND PULLS OUT A 4-FOOT-LONG
HOLLOW BRASS ROD,

WHICH HE TELLS JURORS
IS A BLOW POKE.

THE PRIMARY MECHANISM
WAS SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

IT’S HOLLOW, IT’S LIGHT,
IT’S EASILY USED.

NOW, THIS MAY NOT
BE THE EXACT ONE

BECAUSE WE CAN’T FIND IT, BUT WE
KNOW SHE HAD ONE JUST LIKE IT

BECAUSE HER SISTER GAVE IT
TO HER

AND THIS ONE IS HER SISTER’S.

I THOUGHT IT WAS A VERY
IMPACTFUL OPENING STATEMENT.

HE SPOKE OF VICIOUSNESS
WHILE SPEAKING GENTLY

AND THAT MAKES PEOPLE IN
THE JURY BOX LEAN FORWARD

AND LISTEN.

Narrator:
NOW THE DEFENSE PREPARES

TO DELIVER THEIR
OPENING STATEMENT.

HE HAD A BIG JOB AHEAD OF HIM

TO CONVINCE JURORS THAT
THIS WAS AN ACCIDENT.

Dimond: DAVID RUDOLPH BEGINS
BY PLAYING THE 911 CALLS

PLACED BY HIS CLIENT,
MICHAEL PETERSON, THAT NIGHT.

WHEN YOU HEAR THOSE CALLS,

YOU HEAR A VERY DISTRAUGHT
MICHAEL PETERSON.

THEY’RE ABSOLUTELY
URGENT-SOUNDING AND CHILLING.

THIS GUY WANTS HELP,
AND HE WANTS IT NOW.

IS THIS HOW A MURDERER SOUNDS

OR A VERY CONCERNED,
LOVING HUSBAND?

DAVID RUDOLPH DESCRIBED
A STORY-BOOK MARRIAGE.

TWO SOUL MATES AND
THAT PERFECT STORY

WAS NOT MARRED BY MURDER.

THIS WAS A TERRIBLE ACCIDENT.

WHY WOULD MICHAEL PETERSON
KILL THE WOMAN HE ADORED?

Dimond: AS IF TO UNDERSCORE
THE GOOD CHARACTER

OF MICHAEL PETERSON,
HE LITERALLY STEPPED OUT

OF THE WAY AND POINTED
TO MARTHA AND MARGARET

AND REMINDED THE JURY

THAT THESE WERE TWO YOUNG GIRLS
THAT MICHAEL PETERSON

SELFLESSLY ADOPTED AND
RAISED AS HIS OWN DAUGHTERS

AND THEY CONTINUE
TO STAND BEHIND HIM.

Narrator: WITH OPENING
STATEMENTS COMPLETED,

IT’S NOW UP TO PROSECUTORS
TO PROVE THEIR CASE.

AND THEY CALL
A CONTROVERSIAL WITNESS

FROM MICHAEL PETERSON’S
RECENT PAST.

Hunt Zamperini:
THE DEFENSE FALSELY

WAS TRYING TO PORTRAY
LIKE KATHLEEN AND MICHAEL

HAD THIS MONOGAMOUS, FAITHFUL
MARRIAGE AND THEY DIDN’T.

Black: WHAT TYPES OF SERVICES
DID YOU PERFORM?

OH, WELL,
THAT’S PRETTY BROAD.

Narrator: PROSECUTORS
IN THE MICHAEL PETERSON CASE

ARE ATTEMPTING TO
ESTABLISH THE DYNAMIC

OF HIS MARRIAGE TO KATHLEEN

AND CALL A KEY WITNESS
FROM HIS RECENT PAST.

IN THEIR ATTEMPT
TO PROVE A MOTIVE,

THE PROSECUTION CALLED
AN ADMITTED MALE ESCORT

TO THE STAND.

MY NAME IS BRENT WOLGAMOTT,

AND I WAS THE MALE ESCORT
WHO WAS CALLED

TO TESTIFY IN THE
MICHAEL PETERSON TRIAL.

I THINK EVERYBODY HAS
A CERTAIN TALENT IN LIFE,

AND I KNEW HOW TO
MARKET MY TALENTS.

I WAS A SOLDIER IN THE UNITED
STATES ARMY, ACTIVE DUTY.

I WOULD NEVER USE MY REAL NAME

TO DO MY ESCORTING BUSINESS.

I WENT BY SOLDIER TOP ONLINE.

IT WAS A WAY TO
DIFFERENTIATE MYSELF

FROM OTHER ESCORTS.

Fanning:
HE HAD A WEBSITE WITH PICTURES

OF HIM SHOWING OFF
HIS MUSCULATURE.

Gasparoli: WOW, THAT
WAS A SIGHT, ALRIGHT.

MOST OF HIS CLIENTS WROTE
PAGES OF TESTIMONIALS

ABOUT THEIR SEXUAL
ENCOUNTERS WITH HIM

AND HOW HE WAS
WORTH EVERY PENNY.

Black: WHAT TYPES OF SERVICES
DID YOU PERFORM?

OH, WELL,
THAT’S PRETTY BROAD.

BASICALLY
IT’S A COMPANIONSHIP

FOR OTHER MALES
OF LEGAL AGE.

Narrator:
FREDA BLACK QUESTIONS BRENT

ABOUT A SERIES OF E-MAILS HE
RECEIVED IN AUGUST OF 2001,

FOUR MONTHS BEFORE
KATHLEEN PETERSON’S DEATH.

Wolgamott: I WAS CONTACTED
BY A MAN WHO I WOULD LATER

COME TO KNOW AS
MICHAEL PETERSON.

I WOULD LATER FIGURE
OUT THAT OUR E-MAILS

WOULD BECOME
A LOT MORE IMPORTANT

TO MY LIFE STORY THAN
I WOULD HAVE REALIZED.

YOU TAKE ONE LOOK
AT THOSE E-MAILS

BETWEEN MICHAEL PETERSON
AND THE MALE PROSTITUTE,

AND YOU SEE
THE CONSTANT COMMUNICATION.

WHEN CAN I SEE YOU?
WHERE CAN I SEE YOU?

HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?

Wolgamott:
WE HAD TRIED TO ARRANGE A TIME

WHERE I WAS GOING
TO BE IN DURHAM

AT THE SAME TIME
THAT HE WAS GOING

TO BE AVAILABLE TO DO A CALL.

AND THAT DATE THAT WE AGREED ON
WAS SEPTEMBER 5, 2001.

Narrator:
IN ONE PARTICULAR EXCHANGE,

PETERSON BOASTS OF
HIS SEXUAL PAST.

Gasparoli: PETERSON LOOKED
VERY COMFORTABLE

IN HIS E-MAILS
WITH HIM.

HE MENTIONED HAVING SEX WITH
AN NC STATE LACROSSE PLAYER

AT SOME POINT,
SO I’M GUESSING

HE’D BEEN DOING THIS
ALL HIS LIFE.

Narrator: DESPITE MICHAEL
AND BRENT’S PLANNING,

THEIR LIAISON NEVER CAME TO BE.

Wolgamott: I BAILED ON HIM.

I BAILED ON MICHAEL
ON THE NIGHT OF SEPTEMBER 5th.

AND HONESTLY,
THE LAST THING I WANTED

TO DO WAS WORK AT THE TIME.

I WAS JUST A LAZY
SON OF A BITCH,

AND I DECIDED, "YOU KNOW WHAT?

I REALLY DON’T WANT TO
DO THIS CALL TONIGHT."

Karas:
WHILE THESE TWO MEN NEVER MEET,

THE PROSECUTION SAYS
THAT THESE SORDID E-MAILS

REVEAL A HIDDEN LIFE
BY MICHAEL PETERSON.

HE’S NOT WHO HE SEEMS TO BE.

Hunt Zamperini: IT WAS
HUMILIATING TO KNOW NOT ONLY

HAD KATHLEEN BEEN
BEATEN TO DEATH,

"OH, YEAH, YOU’RE GETTING
UP AND GOING TO WORK

AND WHAT’S MICHAEL DOING?"

MONEY’S TIGHT,
CHRISTMAS IS COMING,

AND HE’S DIALING UP
MALE PROSTITUTES.

IT BROKE MY HEART.

Narrator:
DAVID RUDOLPH THEN RISES

TO QUESTION BRENT AND
DIRECTS HIS ATTENTION

TO ANOTHER TOPIC IN THE E-MAILS

HE EXCHANGED WITH
MICHAEL PETERSON.

Wolgamott:
HE DID BRING UP KATHLEEN

IN OUR E-MAILS TOGETHER.

HE TOLD ME HOW MUCH HE
HAD A GREAT RELATIONSHIP

WITH HIS WIFE

AND THIS IS JUST A PART
OF HIS LIFE AND SHE GETS IT,

AND IT’S JUST SOMETHING
THAT THEY DON’T TALK ABOUT,

WHICH ACTUALLY I CAN BELIEVE

BECAUSE THERE WERE PLENTY
OF OTHER CLIENTS I HAD

WHO WERE MARRIED
AND THEIR WIVES KNEW

THAT THEY WERE MAYBE
GOING TO SEE ME

ON A PARTICULAR NIGHT.

Karas: THE FACT
THAT THERE’S AN E-MAIL

WRITTEN BY MICHAEL PETERSON

SAYING, "LOOK,
I AM HAPPILY MARRIED,"

IS REALLY GOOD FOR THE DEFENSE.

IT SHOWS THAT HE REALLY
DOESN’T WANT TO DO ANYTHING

TO HARM THE MARRIAGE.

HE JUST WANTS SEX.

WHY IS HE GONNA KILL HER?

WHY WOULD HE KILL
THIS DYNAMITE WOMAN

HE DIDN’T WANT TO DO ANYTHING TO
HARM THE RELATIONSHIP WITH?

Narrator: BUT KATHLEEN’S SISTER
CANDACE DISAGREES.

THERE WAS NO ARRANGEMENT
BETWEEN KATHLEEN AND MICHAEL.

YOU CAN CALL IT BISEXUAL,
YOU CAN CALL IT GAY.

I FIND IT JUST
FLAT-OUT ADULTERY.

SO, NO,
MY SISTER WAS NOT STAYING

IN A MARRIAGE WHERE THERE
WAS INFIDELITY AT ALL.

THE REASON THAT HER
FIRST MARRIAGE BROKE UP

WAS BECAUSE
OF AN EXTRAMARITAL AFFAIR

AND WE BELIEVED
ALL ALONG THAT THIS

WAS THE TRIGGERING MECHANISM
FOR THAT CONFLICT THAT EVENING.

Narrator:
BRENT LEAVES THE STAND

AND THE PROSECUTION TURNS TO
THE MOST CRITICAL EVIDENCE

UNCOVERED AT THE PETERSON HOME.

AT THE CRUX OF THIS
CASE IS THE BLOOD.

THE BLOOD MAKES THE CASE.

George: THE BLOOD THAT WAS
IN THE STAIRWELL,

IT WAS ON THE WALLS, IT
WAS ON A COUPLE OF STEPS,

IT WAS ON THE RISINGS
OF THE STEPS.

THERE WAS A LOT OF BLOOD THERE.

BIG QUESTION IS HOW DID
IT GET WHERE IT GOT?

DID IT GET THERE BECAUSE
SHE HAD AN ACCIDENTAL FALL

OR TWO OR DID IT GET THERE

BECAUSE SHE WAS BEATEN TO DEATH?

Narrator:
TO PROVE THAT THE BLOOD SPATTER

WAS THE RESULT
OF A HOMICIDAL BEATING,

THE PROSECUTION
CALLS A KEY WITNESS.

DUANE DEAVER WAS
AN EXPERT IN BLOOD SPATTER

THAT WE CALLED FROM THE STATE
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION.

Narrator: UNDER QUESTIONING
FROM JIM HARDIN,

DEAVER EXPLAINS THAT HE
WENT TO GREAT LENGTHS

TO UNDERSTAND
THE BLOOD SPATTER FOUND

IN THE PETERSON STAIRWAY.

DUANE DEAVER, MYSELF,
AND MEMBERS OF MY TEAM

WENT TO THE FBI LAB IN RALEIGH

AND WE DID EXPERIMENTS.

WE BUILT A SMALL BOX
THAT WOULD BE COMPARED

TO THE STAIRWELL.

WHAT CAUSES THE BLOOD
SPATTER EVIDENCE?

IT’S A SOURCE OF
BLOOD BEING STRUCK.

THE SOURCE OF BLOOD IS
THE BACK OF HER HEAD,

WHICH HAS ALREADY
BEGUN TO BE BLOODY.

George: AND WE TOOK A MANNEQUIN
HEAD, PUT A WIG ON IT

AND POURED PIG’S BLOOD
ALL OVER THE WIG.

AND WE STRUCK IT
MANY, MANY TIMES

WITH A BLUNT OBJECT JUST TO SEE

IF THE BLOOD SPATTERING
WOULD BE COMPARATIVE

TO WHAT WE FOUND IN
THE STAIRWELL OF THE HOME.

NOW, THE EXTRAPOLATION IS

THAT SHE WAS STANDING AND
SOMEONE WAS STRIKING HER

WITH SOME SORT OF
OBJECT ON HER HEAD.

AND WHEN THEY PULLED
THE OBJECT BACK

TO HIT HER AGAIN,
THE BLOOD CAST OFF

AND LANDED ON THE WALL
IN A DOWNWARD FASHION.

THAT’S WHY IT’S SO HIGH UP
ON THE WALL.

Narrator:
DEAVER THEN EXPLAINS

THAT THE RESULTING BLOOD SPATTER

WAS NOT LIMITED TO
THE STAIRWAY WALLS.

George: CLOTHES THAT MICHAEL
WAS WEARING AT THE TIME,

HE HAD ON A PAIR OF SHORTS

AND WHAT APPEARED TO
BE A JERSEY-TYPE TOP.

THERE WAS BLOOD SMEARS
ALL OVER HIS SHORTS.

THERE WERE ALSO DRIED
BLOOD SPATTERINGS

ON THE INSIDE THE LEGS OF
MICHAEL PETERSON’S CLOTHING.

DEAVER EXPLAINED THAT
HE HAD DONE EXPERIMENTS

AND THOSE EXPERIMENTS
PROVED TO HIM

THAT MICHAEL PETERSON
HAD TO HAVE BEEN

STANDING OVER HIS WIFE,
BEATING HER

AND THE BLOOD SPLATTERED
BACK UP ON HIM.

THAT TO ME
IS THE MOST DAMNING EVIDENCE

BECAUSE THERE’S NO WAY

THAT THAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED
EXCEPT FOR HIM

BEING ABOVE HER CAUSING
THE BLOOD SPATTER.

Narrator:
ACCORDING TO DEAVER,

THERE ARE ADDITIONAL
PIECES OF EVIDENCE

COLLECTED AT THE SCENE

THAT SUPPORT THIS THEORY.

WHEN I FIRST OBSERVED
MICHAEL PETERSON

RUNNING THROUGH THE HOUSE,
HE DIDN’T HAVE SHOES ON.

WHEN I COLLECTED HIS SHOES,

THE BOTTOM OF HIS SHOES
WERE BLOODY

AND ALL THAT
WAS SENT TO THE FBI LAB.

AT THE CRIME SCENE, POLICE HAD
FOUND A PARTIAL SHOE PRINT

ON THE BACK
OF KATHLEEN’S SWEATPANTS.

WHEN INVESTIGATORS LATER
TESTED THAT FOOTPRINT,

IT MATCHED THE SNEAKERS
THAT MICHAEL PETERSON

HAD BEEN WEARING THAT NIGHT.

IT’S CLEAR THAT AT SOME POINT,

HE’S ATTEMPTING TO KEEP HER DOWN

WHILE HE’S ADMINISTERING
SOME ASPECT

OF THIS BEATING TO HER.

Narrator:
NOW IT’S DAVID RUDOLPH’S TURN

TO CROSS-EXAMINE DUANE DEAVER.

HE BEGINS BY ATTACKING THE
BLOOD SPECIALIST’S METHODS.

RUDOLPH GOES THROUGH
A LITANY OF QUESTIONS

CHALLENGING
THE "SCIENTIFIC" EXPERIMENTS

THAT DEAVER DID.

LIKE HOW MUCH BLOOD DID
YOU PUT IN THOSE SPONGES?

YOU TRYING TO REPLICATE
BLOOD IN A HEAD.

HE’S ASKING QUESTIONS

DEAVER REALLY
DIDN’T HAVE AN ANSWER TO.

Maher: THINK THEY DROPPED A
MANNEQUIN’S HEAD FROM A LADDER.

LIKE NOBODY SUGGESTED THAT SHE

WAS DROPPED FROM A LADDER
STRAIGHT ON HER HEAD,

SO WHY WOULD YOU EVEN DO THAT?

Karas: IT’S LIKE HE’S DOING
THINGS OVER AND OVER AGAIN

ALMOST AS THOUGH HE’S WAITING
TO GET THE RIGHT RESULT.

Dimond: IT WAS LAUGHABLE.

JUNK SCIENCE IN THE WORDS
OF THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY.

Narrator:
RUDOLPH THEN QUESTIONS DEAVER

ABOUT AN ARTICLE
OF MICHAEL’S CLOTHING

THAT RECEIVED LITTLE SCRUTINY.

MICHAEL HAD BEEN WEARING
A FAIRLY DARK SHIRT,

AND THERE WAS NO OBVIOUS
BLOOD STAINS ON IT.

AND THE QUESTION WAS IF
HE’D BEEN ATTACKING HER,

ONE WOULD HAVE EXPECTED
CERTAIN BLOOD STAINS.

THEY SAID, "WHY DIDN’T
YOU TEST HIS SHIRT?"

AND DEAVER ANSWERS,
"WELL, IT WAS A DARK COLOR,

NAVY BLUE, AND YOU
CAN’T SEE BLOOD

WITH YOUR NAKED EYE
ON SUCH A DARK COLOR."

AND RUDOLPH FOLLOWED UP,

HE SAID, "WELL, THERE ARE
SEVERAL TESTS YOU CAN DO.

DID YOU DO, FOR EXAMPLE,
A LUMA TEST,

A SPECIFIC LIGHT THEY SHINE?"

AND DEAVER ULTIMATELY ADMITS
HE DID DO SUCH A TEST.

Narrator: RUDOLF IS STUNNED.

WHEN DEAVER MENTIONS DOING
A LIGHT TEST ON THE DARK SHIRT,

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME
RUDOLF HEARS ABOUT IT.

THAT’S NEVER BEEN MENTIONED

IN ANY OF THE REPORTS
THAT HE HAS.

SO IMMEDIATELY HE ASKS,

"WELL, DID YOU DO
A REPORT ABOUT IT?"

-"YES."
-"WELL, WHERE IS IT?"

"I GAVE IT TO THE PROSECUTORS."

PROSECUTORS DON’T
WHERE THE REPORT IS.

THEY’VE NEVER SEEN IT.

DEFENSE ATTORNEY RUDOLF IS
GENUINELY SHOCKED AT THIS NEWS.

HE SAYS, "WELL, WHAT
WAS THE RESULT?"

"WELL," HE SAID, "I DIDN’T
FIND ANY BLOOD SPATTER."

NOW IT STANDS TO REASON
IF MICHAEL PETERSON

WAS STANDING OVER HIS
WIFE AND BEATING HER,

THAT IN ADDITION TO
THE BLOOD ON HIS SHORTS,

THERE WOULD BE BLOOD
ON HIS SHIRT, TOO.

DEAVER DIDN’T HAVE
AN ANSWER FOR IT.

AND NOT HAVING AN ANSWER
ALWAYS MAKES YOU LOOK BAD.

Narrator:
WHILE THE LINE OF QUESTIONING

IS BENEFICIAL TO
RUDOLF’S ARGUMENT,

THE OMISSION OF THE TEST
FROM THE COURT RECORD

OPENS A MASSIVE WINDOW
FOR THE DEFENSE.

RUDOLF IS ENTITLED
TO ANY REPORTS

THAT DEAVER’S DONE
BEFORE HE TESTIFIES.

SO THIS IS WHAT’S CALLED
A DISCOVERY VIOLATION.

THERE’S A RANGE OF SANCTIONS
FOR A DISCOVERY VIOLATION.

THE ULTIMATE SANCTION BEING

STRIKING
THE WITNESS’ TESTIMONY.

IF THE JUDGE STRIKES
DUANE DEAVER’S TESTIMONY,

THE PROSECUTION’S CASE
IS GOING TO FALL APART.

Narrator: OVER A MONTH
INTO THE MICHAEL PETERSON TRIAL,

STATE BLOOD SPATTER
EXPERT DUANE DEAVER

STANDS ACCUSED OF
MISHANDLING KEY EVIDENCE.

DEAVER ADMITTED THAT
HE TESTED THE SHIRT

OF MICHAEL PETERSON AND
FOUND NO BLOOD SPATTER,

BUT THE DEFENSE NEVER
GOT THAT REPORT.

AND THAT PROMPTED THE DEFENSE
TO SUBMIT A MOTION

TO DISMISS ALL OF DEAVER’S
TESTIMONY FROM THE TRIAL.

Dimond: THE JUDGE ULTIMATELY
DECIDES THAT THIS WAS JUST

AN HONEST MISTAKE, AND
DEAVER’S TESTIMONY STANDS.

Narrator: WITH THE BLOOD
ANALYSIS BEHIND THEM,

THE PROSECUTION CALLS
STATE MEDICAL EXAMINER

DR. DEBORAH RADISCH.

SHE TESTIFIES

TO KATHLEEN PETERSON’S
TOXICOLOGY REPORT,

WHICH SHOWS TRACES
OF VALIUM AND ALCOHOL.

HER BLOOD ALCOHOL WAS 0.7.

WITH THAT BLOOD ALCOHOL,
SHE HAS NOT MET THE THRESHOLD

FOR IMPAIRED DRIVING
IN THIS STATE.

SHE WAS NOT INTOXICATED.

SHE WAS NOT STUMBLING DRUNK,

AS MR. PETERSON
ATTEMPTED TO PORTRAY HER.

Narrator:
RADISCH THEN DETAILS

KATHLEEN’S EXTENSIVE INJURIES.

THEY ARE MOST CONSISTENT
WITH THE TYPES OF INJURIES

YOU WOULD SEE IN ATTEMPTING
TO FEND OFF AN ATTACK.

I THINK IT WOULD BE UNLIKELY
TO OCCUR AS A RESULT OF A FALL.

DR. RADISCH ALSO TESTIFIED THAT
IN KATHLEEN’S CLENCHED HANDS,

THERE WERE SEVERAL
STRANDS OF HAIR.

DNA TESTS LATER DETERMINED
THAT THOSE WERE HER OWN HAIRS.

NOW, THAT’S NOT THAT UNUSUAL
WITH VICTIMS OF AN ASSAULT.

PROSECUTORS BELIEVE
THAT IT’S POSSIBLE

WHILE MICHAEL WAS
ATTACKING HIS WIFE,

SHE WAS CLUTCHING HER
HEAD FOR PROTECTION.

Narrator: HARDIN THEN QUESTIONS
RADISCH ABOUT HER CONCLUSIONS.

IN MY OPINION,
THE MANNER OF DEATH

IN THIS CASE IS HOMICIDE.

Karas: NOW IT’S DAVID RUDOLF’S
TURN TO GET UP

AND CROSS-EXAMINE
DEBORAH RADISCH.

HE IMMEDIATELY
BEGINS TO POKE HOLES

IN THE PROSECUTION’S
THEORY ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED.

Maher: IF THERE WAS A FIGHT
AND ANGER INVOLVED

AND MICHAEL STARTED
ATTACKING KATHLEEN

WITH THE INTENT TO KILL HER,
YOU WOULD EXPECT THERE

TO HAVE BEEN MORE DAMAGE,
YOU KNOW,

SKULL FRACTURES,
THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

AND THERE WEREN’T.

Karas: DEFENSE ATTORNEY
DAVID RUDOLF

PULLS OUT A DOZEN BINDERS

FULL OF CASE DESCRIPTIONS,

257 FATAL BEATINGS

IN THE LAST DECADE
IN NORTH CAROLINA.

RUDOLF WANTS TO KNOW
HOW IS IT POSSIBLE

THAT THERE’S NO SKULL
FRACTURE OR BRAIN TRAUMA

IN KATHLEEN PETERSON

WHEN 257 OTHER
BLUNT-FORCE-TRAUMA CASES

HAVE ONE OR THE OTHER OR BOTH.

SHE DOESN’T HAVE
AN ANSWER FOR THAT.

THIS IS THE WAY
HE CHALLENGED HER CONCLUSION

THAT THIS WAS A HOMICIDE
AND NOT AN ACCIDENT.

IT WAS VERY COMPELLING.

Narrator: THEN ON AUGUST 22nd,
JUDGE ORLANDO HUDSON

ANNOUNCES A LONG-AWAITED
AND CRITICAL DECISION.

HE DETERMINES THAT
THE 1985 DEATH OF LIZ RATLIFF

WILL BE ADMISSIBLE IN
THE PROSECUTION’S CASE.

Fanning: IT WAS A BATTLE
THE PROSECUTORS WANT.

THEY OFTEN MADE COMMENTS
TO THE EFFECT

LIGHTNING JUST
DOESN’T STRIKE TWICE.

Narrator: WITH NO ADDITIONAL
FORENSIC EVIDENCE

OF LIZ RATLIFF’S DEATH,

PROSECUTORS TURN
TO EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY

AND CALL AMYBETH BERNER
TO THE STAND.

Dimond: AMYBETH BERNER WAS ONE
OF LIZ’S BEST FRIENDS.

AND SHE AND HER HUSBAND
RUSHED TO THE SCENE THAT DAY.

BERNER TELLS THE JURY THE
MOMENT SHE SAW HER FRIEND

CRUMPLED AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT
STAIRWAY, SHE WAS SUSPICIOUS.

AMYBETH AND HER HUSBAND
DECIDED RIGHT THERE AND THEN

THAT THEIR FRIEND LIZ HAD
SUCCUMBED TO FOUL PLAY.

BUT THE QUESTION IS, WHO
WOULD WANT TO HURT HER?

Narrator: BERNER EXPLAINS THAT
AS THE TRAGEDY SUNK IN,

HER CONCERNS ABOUT
MICHAEL WERE RAISED.

Fanning:
MICHAEL CAME OVER TO THE HOUSE

AND HE WAS TAKING
CHARGE OF THE SCENE,

ALMOST LIKE IT WAS HIS HOME.

AND WHEN MICHAEL PETERSON
TOLD THEM THAT SHE HAD FALLEN

DOWN THE STAIRS, THEY PRETTY
MUCH TOOK HIM AT HIS WORD.

Narrator: THE PROSECUTION
THEN PRESENTS A LETTER

WRITTEN BY A NEIGHBOR
OF LIZ RATLIFF IN GERMANY.

THERE WAS A WITNESS
WHO SAW A MAN

RUNNING FROM THE HOUSE
SOME TIME THE NIGHT BEFORE.

SHE COULD NEVER REALLY
IDENTIFY WHO IT WAS.

BY EVERY ACCOUNT, IT APPEARS
THAT MICHAEL PETERSON

WAS THE LAST PERSON TO
SEE LIZ RATLIFF ALIVE.

Narrator:
WHILE HARDIN DOESN’T EXPLICITLY

ACCUSE PETERSON OF
KILLING ELIZABETH RATLIFF,

HE MAKES HIS POINT
ABUNDANTLY CLEAR.

BOTH WOMEN HAD SEVEN
DEEP GASH LACERATIONS

IN THE BACK OF THEIR SCALP.

BOTH WOMEN HAD DIED BY
FALLING DOWN THE BOTTOM

OF A STAIRCASE AND
BLEEDING TO DEATH.

AND OF COURSE, BOTH WOMEN,

THEIR CONNECTION WAS
MICHAEL PETERSON.

THE TRIAL OF MICHAEL PETERSON,
THE NORTH CAROLINA AUTHOR

ACCUSED OF MURDERING HIS WIFE,
IS NOW IN ITS 12th WEEK.

AND IT CONTINUES
TO BE AS COMPELLING

AS ANYTHING THE DEFENDANT
COULD HAVE WRITTEN.

Narrator: MICHAEL PETERSON’S
DEFENSE ATTORNEYS

ARE CHALLENGING
THE STATE’S EVIDENCE

BY CALLING A WORLD-RENOWNED

BLOOD SPATTER EXPERT
TO THE STAND.

DR. HENRY LEE IS
A ROCK-STAR FORENSIC FELLOW.

HE IS BROUGHT IN TO STRENGTHEN
MICHAEL PETERSON’S CASE

THAT THIS WAS JUST
A TERRIBLE ACCIDENT.

DR. LEE BELIEVES
THAT KATHLEEN FELL

AT LEAST A COUPLE OF TIMES,
AND THAT THERE WERE

MULTIPLE IMPACTS THAT WOULD
ACCOUNT FOR THE LACERATIONS.

Dimond: THE DEFENSE SAYS SHE’S
FALLING, SHE’S THRASHING,

SHE’S CLUTCHING AT THE WALLS

AND SHE’S TRYING
TO RIGHT HERSELF.

AND IN THOSE ACTIONS, SHE IS
SPEWING HER BLOOD EVERYWHERE --

HIGH, LOW, ON THE STAIRS,
ON HERSELF.

Narrator: LEE BELIEVES THERE
MAY BE ANOTHER SOURCE

OF THE SPATTER
FOUND ON THE WALLS.

IF YOU HAD CUT YOUR HEAD AND
GOTTEN BLOOD IN YOUR MOUTH

AND WERE COUGHING, YOU WOULD
BE APPLYING FORCE TO BLOOD,

AND IT WOULD CAUSE
BLOOD SPATTER.

Narrator:
TO ILLUSTRATE THE THEORY,

LEE PREPARES
AN UNUSUAL DEMONSTRATION.

Dimond: DR. LEE PUT
A BIG, WHITE POSTER BOARD

IN FRONT OF THE JURY

TO INDICATE TO THEM HOW
ERRATIC BLOOD SPATTER COULD BE

FROM COUGHING OR SNEEZING.

RUDOLF IS HOLDING A WHITEBOARD.

HENRY LEE TAKES
A SLUG OF KETCHUP

AND THEN SPITS IT OUT
ONTO THE WHITEBOARD.

AND RUDOLF KIND OF GOT
CAUGHT IN THE DEBRIS FIELD.

IT WAS A VERY
DRAMATIC PRESENTATION.

I REMEMBER WATCHING
THAT GOING, "OH, MY GOD."

THE SPATTER DID KIND OF LOOK
LIKE SOME OF THE SPATTER

AT THE SCENE, SO HE MADE HIS
POINT THAT IT’S POSSIBLE.

Narrator: NOW IT’S DISTRICT
ATTORNEY JIM HARDIN’S TURN

TO QUESTION THE DEFENSE EXPERT.

HENRY LEE HAS TESTIFIED
IN HUNDREDS OF CASES.

HE HAS SOME NOTE.

I READ EVERYTHING THAT
I COULD POSSIBLY FIND

THAT HE HAD WRITTEN,
SO I KNEW GENERALLY

HOW HE WAS GOING TO OPERATE.

Karas: D.A. HARDIN
CROSS-EXAMINED HENRY LEE.

AND HE WANTED TO POKE
HOLES IN HIS THEORY

THAT THIS IS AN ACCIDENT.

I MEAN, I GOT HIM TO A POINT
WHERE, YOU KNOW, HE SAID,

"THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE IT IS
AND THIS IS MY OPINION."

"BUT CAN YOU EXCLUDE THAT
THIS IS A BLUDGEONING DEATH?"

AND HE SAID, "NO."

BASICALLY CONCEDING THAT IT’S
POSSIBLE IT WAS A HOMICIDE.

HOWEVER, DR. LEE MAINTAINS
THAT THE SCENE TO HIM

LOOKED MORE LIKE
AN ACCIDENT THAN A HOMICIDE.

Narrator: HARDIN THEN ASKS LEE
WHAT EVIDENCE HE HAS

TO SUPPORT HIS
BLOOD-SPATTER DEMONSTRATION.

Hardin Jr.: WELL, HE SAYS ALL
THE BLOOD SPATTER ON THE WALL

WAS ASPIRATED FROM HER
LUNGS AND HER MOUTH,

AND THAT’S WHAT CAUSED IT.

BUT THE AUTOPSY CLEARLY
SHOWED THAT THERE

WAS NO BLOOD WHATSOEVER
IN HER AIRWAY, NONE, ZERO.

SO THAT JUST COULDN’T
HAVE HAPPENED.

Narrator: RUDOLF THEN CALLS
ANOTHER EXPERT TO THE STAND.

THE DEFENSE NEEDED TO SUPPORT
THEIR ACCIDENTAL FALL THEORY,

PARTICULARLY TRY TO
EXPLAIN THE WOUNDS.

FARIS BANDAK, A BIOMEDICAL
ENGINEER, COMES IN TO TESTIFY.

WE WANTED TO SEE IF -- IF A
SCENARIO OF A FALL IS POSSIBLE,

AND IN FACT IF IT’S REALISTIC,
AND IN FACT IF IT’S LIKELY.

AND SO WE DEVELOPED
THIS SIMULATION.

Karas: HE, YOU KNOW,
HAD A COUPLE OF SCENARIOS

OF HOW KATHLEEN COULD
HAVE FALLEN ON THE STAIRS,

WHERE SHE WOULD HAVE
IMPACTED, HIT HER HEAD.

AND SO HE’S OFFERING
THE JURY A PLAUSIBLE THEORY.

Narrator: LINKING THE TESTIMONY
OF HENRY LEE

AND FARIS BANDAK,
THE DEFENSE ATTEMPTS

TO FULLY EXPLAIN EXACTLY
HOW KATHLEEN DIED.

Dimond: THE DEFENSE THEORY
OF WHAT HAPPENED

IS THAT KATHLEEN PETERSON
OVERCELEBRATED

WITH HER HUSBAND THAT NIGHT,

HAD TOO MUCH TO DRINK, HAD
A VALIUM IN HER SYSTEM.

AND WHEN SHE WENT INSIDE,

SHE HAD ON
A PAIR OF FLIMSY FLIP-FLOPS.

AND WHEN SHE HIT THAT WINDY,
DARK, NARROW BACK STAIRCASE,

SHE JUST SLIPPED AND FELL.

SHE PROBABLY LAY THERE
AND BLED FOR A WHILE.

AND THEN SHE STOOD
BACK UP AND TRIED AGAIN

TO GO UP THE STAIRS, AND
SLIPPED IN HER OWN BLOOD,

AND THEN BLED OUT
AT THE BOTTOM OF THE STAIRS.

Narrator:
NEXT TIME, ON THE CONCLUSION

OF "AN AMERICAN MURDER
MYSTERY: THE STAIRCASE"...

THERE WERE SO MANY REASONS
TO STAY RIVETED TO THIS CASE.

IT HAD MANSIONS, MONEY,
SEX, POWER, BETRAYAL.

Narrator: THE DEFENSE ENTERS
A SURPRISING NEW EXHIBIT.

IT WAS SITTING
IN A DARK BASEMENT,

COVERED WITH DEAD BUGS
AND COBWEBS.

IT WAS THE "PERRY MASON" MOMENT.

Narrator: THE TRIAL BUILDS
TO A MOMENTOUS CONCLUSION.

Judge Hudson: HAS THE JURY
REACHED A UNANIMOUS VERDICT?

YOU COULD HEAR A PIN DROP.

Narrator: LATER, CONFOUNDING
NEW EVIDENCE EMERGES...

PAGE FOUR, FIRST LAB REPORT,
MICROSCOPIC FEATHERS.

IT’S POSSIBLE THIS
WAS AN OWL ATTACK.

Narrator: A DISCREDITED WITNESS

THROWS THE VERDICT
INTO QUESTION.

THE STATE’S BLOOD EXPERT
IS A FRAUD.

IT WENT BACK TO SQUARE ONE.

MICHAEL PETERSON HAD
A SHOT AT GETTING OFF.

Narrator: ...CULMINATING
IN A FINAL FIERY SHOWDOWN.

THERE WAS NO TIP
ON THAT BLOW POKE.

WHERE THE HECK
WAS THE HOOK TIP?

I THINK IN THE BACK
OF MY SISTER’S HEAD.