Anyone want to talk about The Staircase? Spoilers from the start.

[HollowTalk]

I've just been watching The Staircase on Netflix and am driving myself mad, wondering what happened that night!

I'm inclined to believe Michael Peterson killed his wife. To have two people die with almost identical injuries and in identical circumstances is just unbelievable.

What was left out of the documentary was the money. They were spending $100,000 more per year than they were bringing in. They were massively in debt. His wife was at serious risk of being made redundant. She had life insurance which would end if she was made redundant. He was asking people for money right left and centre. And then she died in the month that she would've discovered whether she'd be made redundant.

What was also left out was the fact he had a relationship for several years (starting after his wife's death) with the editor of the documentary.

Another thing that was left out was there was apparently bruising on her neck, consistent with strangulation. Now obviously that wasn't enough for the court, but why leave it out of the documentary?

Does anyone have any theories?

The documentary was definitely biased towards Peterson, I think he absolutely killed Katherine that night, I just don't know how.

What absolutely makes me believe it is how horrific the scene looked with Katherine's body lying at the foot of the stairs, an absolute bloodbath...
I don't believe anyone coming across that scene would presume she had fallen down the stairs, she looks like she's been attacked by a knife.

Plus the bone in her neck was fractured which is found in strangling deaths, and the fact the paramedics said Katherine's blood was dry and she'd been dead for a while, his story about finding her a short time later is an obvious lie.

I think he definitely attacked her that night and allowed her to bleed to death over a couple of hours

I agree.

Did you hear about the email that a colleague sent her that night? It was sent to Michael's email address (by agreement.) It showed she'd opened it but not that she'd opened the attachment. On that computer was his email account, which showed the emails to and from the gay men he was seeing. Also the computer history showed the gay sites he was looking at.

He said that she was aware that he saw other men for sex. There didn't seem to be any of her friends or family that were aware of that.

I wonder whether she saw the emails/history that night and that caused a row.

Did you hear about his son Clayton's criminal past? He'd spent four years in prison and had been in trouble a ton of times. He was the first to arrive and coincidentally he was the one to discover the blow poke months and months later, after the police, who were looking for it, didn't find it.

I watched it all and thought he was guilty the whole time. The documentary is clearly biased to defend him but if you watch the way he talks, he is obviously a great manipulator and very intelligent/egotistical man. The fact that he obviously killed both of his wives in the same fashion just SCREAMS ego and believing he is clever enough to get away with it. It’s totally bizarre.

The first woman wasn't his wife. He was living with his own wife, Patty, and this other woman was a widow with two children. He was her biggest support, apparently. When she died they assumed it was from a stroke, but when the autopsy was done on her 17 years on, and they shaved her head, they saw she had identical injuries to Kathleen.

This article is very good.

It's interesting that Kathleen's life insurance was split between her own daughter, Caitlin, and her first husband.

I really recommend listening to the podcast about it. There are two really good ones: one by Radio 5 called 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt', and then Real Crime Profile also dedicated about six or seven episodes to analysing the documentary.

He's so very obviously guilty. But also, my theory is that the eldest 'adopted' daughter is actually his biological daughter, which is why he killed Elizabeth in Germany. I wonder if a DNA test has ever been done? She looks so like him and the other daughter doesn't.

I thought he was guilty from the start, too.

What I found shocking was how much he and his family would sit around laughing. I just couldn't imagine doing that if my mother had been found dead, whether she was murdered or not.

Apparently a DNA test was done between his own son and his adopted daughter from an envelope which concluded they aren't related, the similarity is uncanny though.
Agree about the laughing, very odd.
Was also weird in the documentary how he claims Katherine knew about him seeing men on the side, and then does a U-turn later and says she didn't know, and muses what she would have thought of it.

Yes, all of those four children could easily have been related.

It's interesting that when he and his first wife split up, the children who were adopted stayed with him. That's unusual for the time, isn't it?

I watched this just over a year ago, it really stuck with me. I was leaning toward him being innocent whilst watching it - but like you’ve said the documentary is quite biased and left out some important details. The whole family is a bit strange in my opinion, but I always think it’s a bit unfair to say they were laughing too much or being too chirpy - no one really knows what they would be like in that situation unless they’ve experienced it and I can sympathise with their need to act normal and keep a little humour in their lives amongst all that was going on. I was also very shocked at the attitude of the prosecution and the way the evidence was handled and presented - it certainly didn’t seem like a fair trial. It was just one crazy event or story after another - and I still can’t believe they literally unearthed that other poor woman for evidence!

But that other woman was vital evidence! What are the chances of two women dying in identical situations with identical marks on their scalps?

True. I just remembered feeling really shocked when I watched it - like they were going to crazy lengths to prove this man guilty rather than working with the evidence they already had. It would be interesting to watch it again and being more aware of how bias the documentary is. Something else I also thought was that perhaps he killed the first woman but not his wife, got away with it the first time and was now being punished even though he didn’t actually do anything this time - that would be great karma.

But then how did his wife die? That's what I can't understand. If you fell downstairs and banged your head so hard that you died, there would be fractures and brain damage. She just bled to death. And the blood was dry on the floor when the paramedics got there - yet he said in the first emergency call that she was still breathing. It was almost as though someone had cut her on her scalp, rather than hit her. I just can't see how a fall would result in seven or so lacerations and no fracture or brain damage.

It could just be a freak accident - although very highly unlikely it’s not impossible. I suppose I’m always in doubt because it seems so stupid of him to not cover it up better - I wonder if it was someone else who we’re not even aware of - some people I think have also suggested his son and that he might be covering for him. Have you come across the owl theory?

I only watched about half of the episodes. He is a vile man, and there was not a likeable thing about him. I was surprised at how all of his children sided with him though.

I certainly believe he did it. When the lawyers were discussing the gay stuff his voice went very high, in a way people often do when they are lying.

I found his main lawyer to be awful too. I also couldn't believe he lived in that house with the blood still there for at least a couple of weeks after the event. And didn't seem to be remotely bothered by it. He certainly was not a grieving husband.

But Pixie, the other woman he was involved with died in exactly the same way! Their lacerations were identical.

I heard that the lawyer had already had the case for a month when he was asked if he wanted to participate in filming, yet the way it was shot made it look as though they were there from the start. I can understand that, but then to have the blood still on the walls and still be living there - that is really awful. I don't know how he could do that.

Yeah I found that weird too - it was all boarded up apparently so they couldn’t get in there or see anything, and I guess it’s not easy to move house when you’ve got a big ongoing court case going on too. Still, I wouldn’t want to be staying there.

Have you watched the you tube update and the raptor suggestion.

The whole thing was very strange, and he’s such an un likeable man and the family dynamic is very off too.

I'll just leave this here...🦉

The podcast is great, listening to her sister talk about Kathryn really hits home how dreadful the whole thing is.

Of course he did it.

I read the owl theory and then couldn't watch anymore as I thought oh yeah of course, owl! Could never be on a jury I'd be useless!