Netflix - The Staircase...innocent or guilty?

[CoRhona]

YABU - it was an unfortunate fall

YANBU - guilty as sin

(If you've not watched it but plan to, read up more about it afterwards...I was )

Satnighttakeaway... it struck me that the family dogs were always around and obviously a big part of the family. They would have been outside at the pool ; they could have even followed her into the house. Whatever happened they would have either gone ballistic at the smell of blood and their owner being attacked. They are the element he couldn't have controlled - unless he locked them away somewhere. There were no paw prints from the blood. So they were somewhere else. It was a line of investigation I felt could have shed some light.

Guilty as sin. Also owl theory - would he not hear her screaming as she was being attacked by said owl?! Why would she go to those particular stairs, just doesn’t add up.

Guilty. None of it added up including the very first part where we are invited to believe they sat outside in the 14 degree ‘warmth’ all evening and into the night. When she went inside he carried on sitting there in that gorgeous balmy temperature .

The whole thing stank.

I'm not sure. But I find him incredibly annoying and infuriating.

But I do know that Martha Ratcliff (step daughter) is guilty of some terrible crimes against haircuts!!!!

Wish I could find photos.....

There are two things I just can't get my head around - the blood, and Germany.

Those two things make me think he's guilty. And that's without Brad, the money, the strangulation theory, the blow poke mysteriously being found at the right time etc etc

Crime against haircuts! Totally agree! 👍

At the beginning of the programme when he explains "what happened" in his own words, he was obviously lying about what i can't say, but I can tell when someone is lying.
There's also the matter of his incredible resemblance to the children of the first woman who also died falling down the stairs, who he adopted after her death, despite not being related to them bullshit

Guilty.

I didn't want to vote for either option because I think it could be the Owl attack theory which I know sounds bizarre but apparently they found a couple of feathers on her body (oddly never mentioned this in the series) also they found her own hair in her hands which would tie in with a bird attacking her head, her trying to get it off and ending up pulling her own hair out. All through the documentary I thought he was guilty but afterwards when I did a bit of online researching I changed my mind. He wasn't a great guy but I don't think he killed her

@Postmysecret

Guilty as sin. Also owl theory - would he not hear her screaming as she was being attacked by said owl?! Why would she go to those particular stairs, just doesn’t add up.

She may not have been screaming though, she could have had a short scuffle and became unbalanced and fell

The podcast Beyond Reasonable Doubt tells the same story but with different biases. I found the podcast pushed me from being on the fence to believing him guilty.

Linguistic analysis guy is bullshit by the way

@bagelbaby

Satnighttakeaway... it struck me that the family dogs were always around and obviously a big part of the family. They would have been outside at the pool ; they could have even followed her into the house. Whatever happened they would have either gone ballistic at the smell of blood and their owner being attacked. They are the element he couldn't have controlled - unless he locked them away somewhere. There were no paw prints from the blood. So they were somewhere else. It was a line of investigation I felt could have shed some light.

Thanks for reminding me, interesting points

@BobbingPuffins

The podcast Beyond Reasonable Doubt tells the same story but with different biases. I found the podcast pushed me from being on the fence to believing him guilty.

Did you think the Netflix doc was biased? I thought it was the most unbiased Documentary I've seen from them. Especially when you compare it to things like Making a Murderer which was the most biased thing I've ever watched

I do think the owl theory could be true - apparently there was evidence not mentioned in the show, like tiny feathers in her hair. The cut on her head certainly looked like a slash from a talon.

@AryaStarkWolf I agree Making a Murderer was biased but I think this one was too. A lot of the details that make me think he is guilty weren’t really included.

All documentaries are biased, it really isn't possible to present an unbiased opinion. The best thing to counter that is to be aware of the bias and do your own reading around the doc.

Definitely guilty and definitely a biased documentary - as PP mentioned, he was in a relationship with the producer. There was a lot of negative info they missed out about him. They also conveniently leave out the fact that one of his sons was arrested for planting a bomb in an office at his university. The whole family seems very disturbed.

@AryaStarkWolf That’s what I would have said when I watched the Netflix doc. But the podcast included quite a lot of evidence that was left out from the Netflix doc. Unfortunately I can’t remember what now as it’s a couple of years since I listened - maybe someone else can say.

Also the editor of The Staircase was in a relationship with Michael Peterson, so it would be surprising if it didn’t at least tell the story in the most favourable possible light.

[quote ChocBeforeCock]@AryaStarkWolf I agree Making a Murderer was biased but I think this one was too. A lot of the details that make me think he is guilty weren’t really included.[/quote]
By the same token though there were things that made me think he was innocent that they didn't include either like that owl theory, the feathers found etc. I actually came away after watching the show thinking he was guilty but changed my mind having read up more about it online.

I read that this was Netflix's first Documentary of that kind and their objective in making it was solely to follow the case and observe how the judicial system works so maybe a different agenda to what they make nowadays

[quote BobbingPuffins]@AryaStarkWolf That’s what I would have said when I watched the Netflix doc. But the podcast included quite a lot of evidence that was left out from the Netflix doc. Unfortunately I can’t remember what now as it’s a couple of years since I listened - maybe someone else can say.

Also the editor of The Staircase was in a relationship with Michael Peterson, so it would be surprising if it didn’t at least tell the story in the most favourable possible light.[/quote]
Is that Podcast still available to listen to, I'd be really interested in it.

@AryaStarkWolf It wasn't made for Netflix (other than the final episodes). It was made for French TV in 2004 and I think it had been shown on the BBC too. The team then shot a few more episodes to bring it up to date when Netflix bought it.

I first watched this series when it was on Storyville many years ago and have watched it three times now, including the new Netflix content.

I have absolutely no idea whether he did it (I don’t think so) but I am pretty sure he shouldn’t have been convicted on what they had. It has been a couple of years, maybe I should watch again!

[quote mynameiscalypso]@AryaStarkWolf It wasn't made for Netflix (other than the final episodes). It was made for French TV in 2004 and I think it had been shown on the BBC too. The team then shot a few more episodes to bring it up to date when Netflix bought it. [/quote]
My mistake, but the points I made about what they've said their objective was still stand

I have been very interested in this case and also went to a talk his defence lawyer had. I do think that a conviction wouldn't be safe due to the forensic evidence but I am leaning more to the owl theory anyway. I don't think he's a nice guy but not a murderer but hey that's only my opinion. Also I thought he didn't admit guilt just that the evidence was there to convict him