All language subtitles for An.American.Murder.Mystery.The.Staircase.S01E03.Reversal.Of.Fortune.1080p.WEB.h264-SKYFiRE_track3_eng

Peterson: AS YOU GO ’ROUND,
THERE’S THIS BACK STAIRCASE.

AND SHE WAS LYING ON
THE BACK STAIRCASE.

AND THAT’S --

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

A NORTH CAROLINA NOVELIST
IS AT THE CENTER

OF A FAMILY DRAMA THAT
READS LIKE A MURDER MYSTERY.

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

Narrator: IN THE CONCLUSION
OF OUR 3-PART INVESTIGATION,

THE PROSECUTION
HAMMERS HOME ITS CASE.

THIS IS CALLED
HARD-CORE PORN.

AND THAT’S NOT THE WAY THAT
SOUL MATES CONDUCT THEMSELVES.

Narrator: THE DEFENSE UNVEILS
A STUNNING NEW EXHIBIT.

DAVID RUDOLF PULLS OUT
A LONG 4-FOOT OBJECT.

-THAT’S A BLOW POKE, ISN’T IT?
-APPEARS TO BE.

IT WAS THE "PERRY MASON" MOMENT.

Narrator: CONFOUNDING EVIDENCE
OF A GRIPPING NEW THEORY.

AH, THERE IT IS.

BLOODY FEATHER.

MAYBE THIS HAD
BEEN DONE BY OWLS.

Narrator: AND AN INVESTIGATOR’S
DAMNING SECRET.

ONE OF THE STAR WITNESSES
WAS A BIG LIAR.

IT MIGHT SOUND CRAZY
BUT COULD BE TRUE.

I DON’T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.

BUT I KNOW THAT
I DIDN’T KILL KATHLEEN.

I LOVED HER.

THERE’S THIS BACK STAIRCASE.

AND THAT’S --

WELL, THAT’S WHEN 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.

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

CAPTIONS PAID FOR BY
DISCOVERY COMMUNICATIONS

Narrator: PROSECUTORS IN THE
MICHAEL PETERSON MURDER TRIAL

HAVE PRESENTED
COMPELLING EVIDENCE

THAT HE FATALLY ATTACKED
HIS WIFE, KATHLEEN.

MY NAME’S JAMES E. HARDIN JR.

I WAS THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY

DURING THE PROSECUTION
OF MICHAEL PETERSON.

KATHLEEN PETERSON WAS FOUND DEAD
AT THE BOTTOM OF A SET OF STAIRS

WITH LACERATIONS ON
THE BACK OF HER HEAD.

THERE WAS BLOOD EVERYWHERE.

IN MY MIND, THERE IS
JUST NO QUESTION AT ALL.

THIS CAN’T BE AN ACCIDENT.

IT WAS A BLUDGEONING DEATH.

AND THAT MIKE PETERSON WAS
THE PERSON THAT KILLED HER.

Narrator: BUT THE DEFENSE

HAS A FAR DIFFERENT EXPLANATION
FOR KATHLEEN’S DEATH.

MY NAME IS THOMAS MAHER.

I’M ONE OF THE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS

WHO WORKED ON THE TRIAL
FOR MICHAEL PETERSON.

THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE WAS
AT LEAST AS CONSISTENT

WITH AN ACCIDENTAL
FALL AS WITH A MURDER.

IT WAS CLEAR FROM
HER BLOOD ANALYSIS

THAT SHE HAD BEEN DRINKING
AND TAKING VALIUM.

THAT WOULD HAVE MADE WALKING UP

NARROW, STEEP STAIRS
POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS.

IF SHE’D SLIPPED AND FELL,
THAT KIND OF LACERATION

PRODUCES A LOT OF BLEEDING.

Narrator: TO PRESS THEIR CASE,
THE DEFENSE SETS OUT

TO UNDERMINE THE STATE’S
PROPOSED MURDER WEAPON.

Fanning: CANDACE, KATHLEEN’S
SISTER, TOLD THE PROSECUTORS

THAT SHE THINKS
SHE KNOWS THE WEAPON

THAT WAS USED TO
KILL HER SISTER.

IT WAS A BLOW POKE.

WELL, THERE WAS NO BLOW
POKE IN THE HOUSE.

AND THE POLICE NEVER
FOUND A MURDER WEAPON.

AT THE VERY BEGINNING
OF THIS TRIAL,

PROSECUTOR HARDIN
LOOKED AT THE JURY.

HE TOOK OUT THIS LONG
POLE AND HE SAID,

"THIS IS A BLOW POKE,
AND THIS IS WHAT WE THINK

WAS THE MURDER WEAPON
ON KATHLEEN PETERSON.

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."

AND HE STARTED TO
MOVE IT UP AND DOWN

AS IF ADMINISTERING
A VICIOUS BEATING.

AND THAT’S WHAT THEY SAID KILLED

KATHLEEN PETERSON,
A VICIOUS BEATING.

Narrator: RUDOLF CALLS

LEAD DETECTIVE ART HOLLAND
TO THE STAND.

THEY WANT TO ASK HIM A QUESTION
ABOUT THE MURDER WEAPON.

AND THEY SAY, "YOU NEVER FOUND
THE MURDER WEAPON, RIGHT?

YOU BELIEVE IT WAS THE BLOW POKE

OR MAYBE SOMETHING
CONSISTENT WITH IT."

"YEAH, THAT’S RIGHT."

AND HOLLAND SPECULATES
THAT IT MUST HAVE BEEN

CARRIED AWAY FROM THE SCENE
OR DESTROYED.

AND ALL OF A SUDDEN,
DAVID RUDOLF PULLS OUT

A LONG 4-FOOT OBJECT IN PLASTIC,

AND HE HANDS IT TO ART HOLLAND.

-SEE THAT?
-YES, SIR.

THAT’S A BLOW POKE,
ISN’T IT?

IS THAT
WHAT IT APPEARS TO BE?

IT APPEARS TO BE
A BLOW POKE.

Narrator: ACCORDING TO RUDOLF,

IT WAS IN THE PETERSON
HOME ALL ALONG.

IT WAS SITTING
IN A DARK BASEMENT,

COVERED WITH DEAD BUGS
AND COBWEBS.

Maher:
I THINK IT WAS A SATURDAY NIGHT,

1:00 OR 2:00 IN THE MORNING.

I GOT THIS PHONE CALL
FROM THE PETERSONS.

THEY THOUGHT THEY’D
FOUND THE BLOW POKE,

AND I NEEDED TO DRIVE
OUT TO THE HOUSE.

IN THE BASEMENT THAT
WAS FAIRLY DARK,

AND THERE WAS A BLOW POKE
LEANING UP AGAINST THE WALL.

AND I WILL SAY IF I
WAS LOOKING TOO QUICKLY,

I WOULD HAVE SAID, "OH,
THERE’S A SHOWER ROD."

Karas: THE SHAPE AND DIMENSION
OF IT IS CONSISTENT

WITH THE BLOW POKE
THAT CANDACE HAD GIVEN

HER SISTER KATHLEEN IN
THE 1980s,

AND IT MATCHED.

PROSECUTORS WERE SHOCKED.

THEY HAD NO IDEA
THIS WAS COMING.

IT WAS THE "PERRY MASON" MOMENT.

Karas: THE POLICE HAD SEARCHED
THE PETERSON HOME

MULTIPLE TIMES,
AND THEY NEVER FOUND IT.

BUT HERE IT WAS
IN THE COURTROOM,

AND IT CLEARLY HAD
COBWEBS AND BUGS ON IT.

WHEREVER IT WAS, IT HAD
BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE.

A CRIMINALIST TESTED IT,

AND THERE’S NO EVIDENCE
OF ANY BLOOD ON IT.

THERE’S NO BLOOD,
THERE’S NO HAIR,

THERE ARE NO FINGERPRINTS.

THERE’S NOTHING OF FORENSIC
VALUE ON THAT BLOW POKE.

FURTHER EVIDENCE,
SAYS THE DEFENSE,

THAT THIS WAS AN ACCIDENT
AND NOT MURDER.

THE QUESTION IS,
WAS THAT BLOW POKE

ALWAYS IN THE PETERSONS’ GARAGE?

OR WAS IT STAGED?

DID THEY BUY ANOTHER BLOW
POKE AND PLANT IT THERE

AND JUST LEAVE IT
FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS,

SO IT LOOKED REAL OLD
AND GRIMY AND COBWEB-Y?

OR WAS IT REALLY THEIR
BLOW POKE ALL ALONG

AND THE STATE HAD IT WRONG?

Narrator:
THE PROSECUTION, HOWEVER,
POINTS TO A CRITICAL FEATURE

THAT THE DEFENSE’S EXHIBIT
IS MISSING.

THE SHARP, SOLID TIP
OF THE BLOW POKE,

WHICH IS HOW YOU MOVE
THE WOOD AROUND, WAS GONE.

Dimond: THE PROSECUTION SAYS
THAT THE CLAW ON IT

CAUSED THOSE HORRIBLE WOUNDS.

WELL, IF THAT’S THE BLOW
POKE, WHERE’S THE TIP?

AND I SAY, "IT WAS IN
THE BACK OF HER HEAD."

THEY DISPOSED OF THE TIP.

Hardin Jr.: FRANKLY, THE BLOW
POKE THAT WAS BROUGHT

INTO THE COURTROOM, I DON’T
BELIEVE WAS THE BLOW POKE

THAT HAD BEEN AT THAT HOUSE
FOR MANY YEARS.

I BELIEVE THAT THE CREATIVE
THINKER, MICHAEL PETERSON,

AND THOSE AROUND
THE CREATIVE THINKER

WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE

A MARVELOUS WAY TO
SABOTAGE THE STATE’S CASE.

Dimond: IT COULD HAVE BEEN A
MAJOR BLOW TO THE PROSECUTION.

THE QUESTION IS, WHAT DID
THE JURY THINK ABOUT IT?

Narrator: AFTER 54 DAYS OF
TESTIMONY, THE DEFENSE RESTS.

FREDA BLACK THEN RISES

FOR THE PROSECUTION’S
CLOSING STATEMENT,

AND BEGINS BY ATTACKING

THE DEFENSE’S NEWEST
PIECE OF EVIDENCE.

Black: ALL OF A SUDDEN, WE FOUND
THAT MISSING BLOW POKE.

WELL, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN,

FIRST OF ALL, WHAT
HAPPENED TO THIS?

THERE’S BEEN NO
EXPLANATION ABOUT THAT.

WHERE IS THE END OF IT?

SO I PUT IT TO YOU THAT
DEFENSE’S EXHIBIT 280A

IS JUST A PIECE OF
NOTHING, NOTHING.

CO-PROSECUTOR FREDA BLACK WAS
A VISION TO BEHOLD IN COURT.

SHE REMINDED THE JURY ABOUT
THE DEFENSE CONTENTION

THAT KATHLEEN KNEW
ABOUT MICHAEL’S

BISEXUAL LIFESTYLE
AND WAS OKAY WITH IT.

DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE
THAT KATHLEEN KNEW

THAT MR. PETERSON WAS BISEXUAL?

DOES THAT MAKE
COMMON SENSE TO YOU?

IT WAS OKAY FOR
KATHLEEN TO BE SLEEPING

IN THEIR MARITAL BED
WHILE MICHAEL PETERSON

IS AT THE COMPUTER
E-MAILING FILTH, PURE FILTH.

THIS IS CALLED HARD-CORE PORN,

AND THAT’S NOT THE WAY THAT SOUL
MATES CONDUCT THEMSELVES.

MICHAEL PETERSON IS GUILTY
OF FIRST-DEGREE MURDER.

Narrator:
NOW IT’S DAVID RUDOLF’S TURN

TO DEFEND HIS CLIENT
ONE LAST TIME.

IN THE CLOSING ARGUMENT,
DAVID RUDOLF TOLD THE JURY

ABOUT HIS TOP-10 LIST, LIKE
A LETTERMAN TOP-10 LIST,

REASONS OF WHY HIS CLIENT
COULD NOT BE GUILTY.

AT THE VERY TOP WAS, THE BLOW
POKE IS NOT THE MURDER WEAPON.

THE MISSING MURDER
WEAPON ISN’T MISSING,

AND IT WASN’T USED IN A MURDER.

REASONABLE DOUBT NUMBER TWO.

THERE IS NO CREDIBLE MOTIVE,

AND YOU DON’T JUST DECIDE
TO KILL YOUR WIFE FOR NO REASON.

TESTIMONY ABOUT BISEXUALITY
WAS MASQUERADING AS MOTIVE.

BUT WHAT IT REALLY WAS,
WAS AN APPEAL TO BIAS.

THE GUY’S BISEXUAL?

THE GUY HAS PORNOGRAPHY
ON HIS COMPUTER?

YUCK.

THAT EVIDENCE ADDED
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING

TO THE MOTIVE IN THIS CASE.

I’VE SEEN A LOT
OF DEFENSE ATTORNEYS.

DAVID RUDOLF WAS MASTERFUL
IN PLANTING REASONABLE DOUBT.

WOULD IT BE ENOUGH?

Narrator:
ONE OF THE LONGEST TRIALS

IN NORTH CAROLINA HISTORY
IS IN THE HANDS OF THE JURY.

THERE’S NO QUESTION
THAT THE JURORS

HAVE A LOT TO TALK ABOUT.

THIS IS GOING TO BE
A CRAPSHOOT HERE.

IS THE CASE STRONG ENOUGH

TO CONVICT PETERSON
OF FIRST-DEGREE MURDER?

WELL, THAT’S A BIG
QUESTION FOR THIS JURY.

THE PROSECUTION, OF COURSE,
SAYS IT’S MURDER.

THE DEFENSE SAYS IT WAS
JUST A TRAGIC ACCIDENT.

REALLY THIS JURY HAS SUCH A
DIFFICULT DECISION IN THIS CASE.

Narrator: JURY DELIBERATION
IN THE CAPITAL TRIAL

OF MICHAEL PETERSON
IS UNDER WAY.

MY NAME IS KELLI COLGAN,

AND I WAS A JUROR
ON THE MICHAEL PETERSON CASE.

THE TRIAL WAS SO LONG.

YOU KNOW, WE HAD
A LOT TO TALK ABOUT.

WE WERE IN A POSITION
WHERE WE WANTED TO SHARE

AND JUST TALK
AND GET IT ALL OUT.

I AM BETTYE BLACKWELL.

I WAS JUROR NUMBER FOUR ON
THE MICHAEL PETERSON CASE.

THERE WERE SEVERAL JURORS WHO
THOUGHT IT WAS AN ACCIDENT.

SOME OF US WERE
HUNG UP ON ONE THING

THAT DIDN’T SEEM TO
PHASE THE OTHERS.

Narrator:
AFTER FOUR DAYS OF DELIBERATION,

THE JURY ANNOUNCES
THEY’VE REACHED A VERDICT.

THE NATION HAS BEEN
RIVETED WATCHING THIS.

BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY,
THE DURHAM COMMUNITY

HAS BEEN LIVING WITH THIS
CASE SINCE DECEMBER 9, 2001.

THIS IS A MOMENT THAT
EVERYONE’S BEEN WAITING FOR.

THE COURTROOM IS PACKED.

YOU COULD HEAR A PIN DROP.

Dimond: THERE WAS PROBABLY
NO ONE MORE ANXIOUS

THAN MICHAEL PETERSON HIMSELF.

HE’S FACING LIFE IN PRISON
WITH NO POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE.

ALL RIGHT, MISS CLERK,
IF YOU WILL TAKE THE VERDICT.

Clerk: STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
VERSUS MICHAEL IVER PETERSON,

WE THE 12 MEMBERS OF
THE JURY UNANIMOUSLY

FIND THE DEFENDANT TO BE...

GUILTY OF FIRST-DEGREE MURDER.

UNDER NORTH CAROLINA LAW,
IT’S A MANDATORY SENTENCE.

THE JUDGE HAS NO
DISCRETION IN THIS.

AND SO HE IS TOLD
RIGHT THEN AND THERE.

Judge Hudson:
THE DEFENDANT IS IMPRISONED

IN THE NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

FOR THE REMAINDER
OF HIS NATURAL LIFE

WITHOUT THE BENEFIT
OF PAROLE.

IT TOOK US A WHOLE
LOT OF TIME TO DO IT,

IT TOOK A WHOLE LOT
OF MONEY TO DO IT.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS,

THIS IS THE WAY
AMERICAN JUSTICE WORKS.

Dimond:
MICHAEL PETERSON IS STOIC.

YOU DON’T SEE ANY
EMOTION ON HIS FACE.

THE JUDGE ASKED IF HE HAD
ANYTHING TO SAY TO THE COURT.

I DON’T KNOW WHAT TO SAY.

AND HE TURNED HIS BACK ON
THE JUDGE AND HE LOOKED

AT HIS FOUR CHILDREN
SITTING DIRECTLY BEHIND HIM.

MICHAEL PETERSON’S
CHILDREN WERE SOBBING.

HE WAS TELLING THEM
EVERYTHING WOULD BE OKAY.

Dimond:
IT WAS PROBABLY A SHOW

TO BUCK UP HIS CHILDREN,
WHO ARE DEVASTATED.

Fanning: ON THE OTHER SIDE,

CAITLIN COULD HARDLY BELIEVE
IT WAS TRUE.

THEY GOT JUSTICE.

Narrator: NEWS OF THE VERDICT
STIRS A RANGE OF EMOTIONS.

UNBELIEVABLE.

MICHAEL IS ONE OF THE
MOST WONDERFUL PEOPLE

I HAVE EVER MET.

HE WOULD NEVER HURT ANYONE.

I THINK THAT THIS VERDICT
SHOWS THAT WE ARE NOT IDIOTS,

THAT WE KNOW HOW TO DO OUR
JOB, AND THAT WE DO IT WELL.

THERE WAS REASONABLE
DOUBT IN THIS CASE

IN EVERY WAY YOU COULD THINK OF.

AND I’M VERY, VERY DISAPPOINTED

THAT THE JURY DIDN’T SEE THAT.

THIS 2-YEAR SAGA
THAT HAS EMBROILED

THE LOCAL AND NATIONAL MEDIA
HAS FINALLY COME TO A CLOSE.

HE’S TAKEN TO NASH
CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION,

IT’S A MEDIUM-SECURITY
PRISON IN NORTH CAROLINA,

TO SERVE OUT HIS SENTENCE.

ALL FOUR OF HIS CHILDREN
CONTINUE TO SUPPORT HIM.

THEY BELIEVED

WHAT MICHAEL PETERSON
WAS TELLING THEM,

THAT HE IS COMPLETELY INNOCENT.

THERE’S JUST SO MANY UNANSWERED
QUESTIONS IN THIS CASE.

WHAT WAS THE REAL MURDER WEAPON?

IF SHE WAS MURDERED,
WHAT KILLED HER?

Narrator: THEN IN 2009,
PETERSON CONDUCTS AN INTERVIEW

FROM BEHIND BARS
IN ATTEMPTS TO ADDRESS

SOME OF THE LINGERING QUESTIONS,

BEGINNING WITH WHAT HAPPENED
THE NIGHT KATHLEEN DIED.

Man: MARK IT.

Peterson:
WE WENT OUT BY THE POOL.

IT WAS A VERY --
I WAS WEARING SHORTS.

IT WAS A VERY NICE NIGHT.

AND WE TALKED.

IT WAS JUST A BEAUTIFUL,
BEAUTIFUL, BEAUTIFUL NIGHT.

AGAIN, I COULDN’T
TELL YOU THE TIME.

LET’S SAY 30 MINUTES,
40 MINUTES LATER,

SHE WENT IN THE HOUSE.

I STAYED OUT THERE WITH
THE DOGS FOR A WHILE.

AND THEN I WENT IN THE HOUSE.

AND THEN AS YOU GO ’ROUND,
THERE’S THIS BACK STAIRCASE.

AND SHE WAS LYING ON
THE BACK STAIRCASE.

AND THAT’S --

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

SHE WAS THERE,
AND THERE WAS JUST --

THERE WAS --
THERE WAS JUST BLOOD.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT WAS
NOT WHAT I FOCUSED ON.

SHE WAS JUST AT THE BOTTOM
OF THE STAIRCASE.

AND I WENT, YOU KNOW,
"OH, MY GOD."

I PICKED HER UP.

SHE WAS DYING, THERE
WAS JUST NO QUESTION.

AND I CALLED 911.

I DON’T REMEMBER WHAT I
SAID, BUT I’M THINKING,

YOU KNOW, IF YOU FIND YOUR WIFE
AT THE BOTTOM OF THE STAIRS

AND SOMEBODY SAYS
WHAT HAPPENS...

SHE FELL DOWN.

THAT WAS MY ASSUMPTION,
THAT SHE FELL DOWN.

I KNOW I’M NOT GUILTY.

I KNOW I DIDN’T HURT KATHLEEN.

IT’S VERY DIFFICULT FOR
ME TO ACCEPT THE FACT

THAT I AM A PRISONER,
A CONVICTED MURDERER.

IT’S JUST NONSENSE.

BUT IT’S REAL,
I UNDERSTAND THAT.

I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED,
THAT I DIDN’T DO IT.

I DON’T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED,

BUT I KNOW THAT
I DIDN’T KILL KATHLEEN.

I LOVED HER.

AND I KNOW I DIDN’T KILL LIZ.
THAT’S RIDICULOUS.

SO...[ SIGHS ]

AND I GUESS BASICALLY STILL
IN MY HEART AND MIND,

I’D LIKE TO BELIEVE KATHLEEN
FELL DOWN THE STAIRS.

BUT NOBODY BUYS THAT
ONE, EXCEPT MAYBE

I’M THE LAST HOLD-OUT FOR
THAT, AND I DON’T KNOW.

Narrator: WHILE PETERSON
LANGUISHES IN PRISON,

HIS FAMILY AND HIS
LAWYERS ARE HARD AT WORK.

PETERSON’S TEAM IS AGGRESSIVELY
LOOKING FOR NEW EVIDENCE,

EVIDENCE THAT THEY CAN BRING
BEFORE THE COURT

AND ARGUE
HE DESERVES A NEW TRIAL.

THE DEFENSE HAS
FILED SEVERAL APPEALS,

AND THEY’VE LOST AT
EVERY STEP OF THE WAY.

Narrator: THEN IN 2009,

HIS LAWYERS CATCH WIND OF
CONFOUNDING NEW EVIDENCE.

PAGE FOUR, FIRST LAB REPORT,
MICROSCOPIC FEATHERS.

I GOT A HUNCH THAT MAYBE
THIS HAD BEEN DONE BY OWLS.

Narrator: IN 2009,

MICHAEL PETERSON’S
APPELLATE ATTORNEYS

LEARN OF A NEW THEORY
THAT COULD EXPLAIN

HIS WIFE, KATHLEEN’S, DEATH.

IT ORIGINATES FROM
A FELLOW DURHAM LAWYER

WHO KNOWS THE PETERSONS WELL.

MY NAME IS LARRY POLLARD.

I AM THE FORMER NEXT-DOOR
NEIGHBOR OF MICHAEL PETERSON.

DURING THE INVESTIGATION PERIOD

AND DURING THE PREPARATION
FOR TRIAL,

THERE SEEMED TO BE
A LOT OF QUESTIONS

IN EVERYONE’S MIND
AS TO WHAT HAPPENED.

SOMETHING JUST DIDN’T
SIT WELL WITH ME.

SOMETHING DID NOT SEEM RIGHT.

I STARTED OUT IN MY CAREER
AS A CRIMINAL LAWYER.

I FELT PARTICULARLY STRONGLY
THAT I HAD A MORAL, LEGAL,

AND ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY
AND DUTY TO FIND THE TRUTH.

AND THAT’S WHAT I’VE
BEEN LOOKING FOR

EVER SINCE THIS HAPPENED.

I WAS SITTING RIGHT
HERE AT THIS DESK

WHEN IT WAS GOING TO TRIAL.

AND THE SECRETARY SAID,

"LARRY, HAVE YOU SEEN
THE AUTOPSY REPORT?"

I SAID, "NO."

AND SHE SAID, "WELL, YOU
MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT IT."

AND SHE HANDED ME
THE AUTOPSY REPORT.

FIRST THING THAT JUMPED
OFF THE PAGE TO ME

WAS WHAT THE MEDICAL EXAMINER
HAD WRITTEN ON THE DIAGRAM.

IT SHOWED VERY CLEARLY
THAT SOME OF THE WOUNDS

HAVE ALMOST THE SAME
MEASUREMENT,

0.25 INCHES IN DIAMETER.

THAT CAUGHT MY EYE
IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE I THOUGHT

IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO TAKE
A 5-FOOT BLOW POKE

AND HIT SOMEBODY OVER THE HEAD

AND GET DISTINCT LACERATIONS
OF THE SAME MEASUREMENT.

EVEN THE FINEST
SURGEONS IN THE WORLD

COULDN’T MAKE
THOSE KIND OF CUTS.

Narrator: AN INTRIGUED POLLARD
DIGS DEEPER INTO THE CASE FILE.

HE WAS READING
THE EVIDENCE LIST ONLINE,

AND SOMETHING CAUGHT HIS EYE.

IN HER LEFT HAND WERE
STRANDS OF HER OWN HAIR.

PROSECUTORS BELIEVE SHE PROBABLY

WAS CLUTCHING HER HEAD
WHEN SHE WAS BEING ATTACKED.

Narrator:
AS HE CONTINUES TO READ,

POLLARD FINDS
SOMETHING CONFOUNDING.

Pollard: THE SBI ANALYZED
ALL OF THE HAIRS.

THEY PULL ONE HEAD HAIR
OUT, THEY LOOK AT IT,

"AH, THERE IT IS,
BLOODY FEATHER."

IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE,
PAGE FOUR, FIRST LAB REPORT.

Narrator: THROUGH CONTACTS

AT THE STATE BUREAU
OF INVESTIGATION,

POLLARD EXAMINES
THE EVIDENCE IN QUESTION.

WE TOOK THAT SLIDE
AND HAD PICTURES MADE

WITH A MICROSCOPIC
CAMERA, 400 POWER.

AND WE FOUND THE FEATHER
WRAPPED AROUND MRS. PETERSON’S

HAIR SHAFT WITH FRESH DROPLETS
OF BLOOD ON TOP OF IT.

WHEN I SAW THAT, I SAID,
"OH, MY, I’VE GOT A HUNCH

THAT MAYBE THIS HAD
BEEN DONE BY OWLS."

[ SCREECHING ]

THEY ARE SOME OF
THE ONLY SPECIES OF BIRDS

IN THE WORLD THAT HAVE
MICROSCOPIC FEATHERS.

THEY GO ALL THE WAY
DOWN THEIR LEGS,

ACROSS THEIR FEET,
TO THE TALONS.

Narrator: AS HE LEARNS MORE
ABOUT THE SPECIES,

POLLARD’S SUSPICIONS
ARE CONFIRMED.

WHEN IT GRIPS, IT’S
GRIPPING AT ABOUT 280 POUNDS

OF PRESSURE ON THESE
NEEDLEPOINT TALONS.

YOU CANNOT TOUCH THOSE
TALONS WITHOUT THINKING,

"OH, MY GOD,
THESE COULD VERY EASILY

HAVE CAUSED THIS
LACERATIONS ON HER HEAD,

WHICH SHE BLED TO DEATH FROM."

LOOK AT THE LACERATIONS
ON HER HEAD.

IT LOOKS LIKE
A PITCHFORK SORT OF A FORM.

DOESN’T THAT LOOK LIKE
IT COULD BE A TALON?

AND THAT WOULD
EXPLAIN EVERYTHING.

Narrator:
COMBINING ALL OF THE EVIDENCE,

POLLARD FORMULATES HIS
THEORY OF WHAT HAPPENED

TO KATHLEEN THAT
MILD DECEMBER NIGHT.

I THINK THAT
MRS. PETERSON WALKED DOWN

THE FRONT PATIO OF THE HOUSE,
AND ON THE WAY BACK IN,

SHE GETS HIT BY AN OWL
FROM BEHIND.

BAM.

BACK RIGHT CORNER OF THE HEAD,

WHERE 90% OF ALL OWL
STRIKES TO HUMAN BEINGS ARE.

SHE GOT SERIOUS LACERATIONS,
SEVEN TO EIGHT BEING EXACT.

AND SHE RAN INTO THE
SAFETY OF HER OWN HOUSE.

PULLS HER HANDS
DOWN FROM HER HEAD,

SHE’S BLEEDING LIKE A STUCK PIG,

AND ALL OF THE BLOOD
IS GOING INTO HER HAIR.

Dimond: I MEAN, CAN YOU IMAGINE,
IF YOU’RE WALKING UP

A DARK, NARROW STAIRWAY AND
YOU’VE JUST BEEN ATTACKED

BY A OWL, AND YOU’VE
HAD A LOT TO DRINK

AND A VALIUM IN YOUR SYSTEM

AND YOU’RE TRYING TO STUMBLE
UPSTAIRS TO CLEAN YOURSELF UP,

IT DOESN’T TAKE A LOT
OF IMAGINATION TO FIGURE

THAT YOU COULD SLIP AND
FALL IN YOUR OWN BLOOD.

SEVERAL ORNITHOLOGISTS
EXAMINED POLLARD’S FINDINGS

AND AGREED THAT IT’S POSSIBLE
THIS WAS AN OWL ATTACK.

BELIEVE IT OR NOT, IN THE STATE
OF NORTH CAROLINA,

THAT’S NOT THAT UNUSUAL.

THERE ARE ONE OR TWO CASES
IN DIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS

WHERE PEOPLE SAY THAT AN OWL
ATTACKED AND KILLED SOME VICTIM.

IF IT WAS DONE BY A BIRD,

IT DOESN’T MEET
THE DEFINITION OF A HOMICIDE.

SO THEREFORE ON ALL LEGS,
THIS CASE SHOULD BE DISMISSED.

Dimond: POLLARD WROTE A LETTER
TO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY,

SAYING YOU’VE GOT
TO REOPEN THIS CASE.

THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY JUST
POOH -POOHED IT AND SAID

IT WAS COMPLETE FOOLISHNESS,
AND IT WENT ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE.

AND THERE ARE SOME
PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY

THAT STILL THINK IT’S A VIABLE
EXPLANATION TO HER DEATH.

DEATH BY OWL.

IT MIGHT SOUND CRAZY,
BUT COULD BE TRUE.

[ OWL HOOTING ]

Narrator: THEN IN 2010, NEWS
OF AN UNRELATED MURDER CASE

CATCHES THE ATTENTION
OF PETERSON’S LAWYERS.

AS THEY LEARN MORE,
THEY DISCOVER THAT THE FATE

OF MICHAEL PETERSON
COULD BE INTERTWINED

WITH ANOTHER CONVICTED KILLER

WHO ALSO CLAIMS
THAT HE’S INNOCENT.

MY NAME’S JOE NEFF.

I’M AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER
AND I WORK HERE IN DURHAM.

BACK IN SEPTEMBER OF 1991,
A WOMAN WAS FOUND MURDERED

IN A KIND OF REMOTE
CUL-DE-SAC IN RALEIGH.

FARTHER DOWN THE STREET,
A COUPLE OF HUNDRED FEET AWAY,

THERE WAS A TRUCK
STUCK IN THE MUD.

IT WAS GREG TAYLOR’S TRUCK.

NEXT DAY HE COMES
BACK TO GET THE TRUCK.

CRIME-SCENE TAPE
ALL AROUND THE PLACE.

POLICE SAY, "WHAT
ARE YOU DOING HERE?"

HE SAYS, "I’M COMING
TO PICK UP MY TRUCK."

Narrator:
THE 28-YEAR-OLD TAYLOR EXPLAINS

THAT THE PREVIOUS EVENING, HE
AND A FRIEND WERE ON A BENDER.

Darrow: GREGORY TAYLOR
WAS A DRUG ADDICT.

HE WAS WITH A FRIEND.

BOTH OF THEM WERE USING DRUGS.

HE SAID, "YEAH,
MY FRIEND AND I WERE OUT,

WE WERE DRINKING.
WE WERE SMOKING CRACK."

HE STARTED DRIVING OFF ROAD,

AND IT GOT STUCK IN THE MUD.

HE ABANDONED HIS TRUCK
THAT NIGHT.

SO YOU HAVE GREG TAYLOR’S TRUCK

STUCK NEAR A WOMAN
WHO WAS MURDERED.

POLICE SAY, ’WELL, LET’S START
QUESTIONING YOU AS A SUSPECT."

Karas: AND THEY BRING HIM DOWN
THE STATION,

AND THEY TALK TO HIM.

AND HE’S LIKE,
"I DIDN’T DO THIS."

BUT THEY’RE CONVINCED
THAT HE WAS LYING.

AND SO THEY ARREST HIM.

GREGORY TAYLOR’S CHARGED
WITH FIRST-DEGREE MURDER.

Narrator:
IN 1993, TAYLOR’S TRIAL BEGINS

AND THE PROSECUTION LAYS
OUT THEIR CASE AGAINST HIM.

AT GREG TAYLOR’S TRIAL,
THERE IS ONE PIECE

OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE
CONNECTING HIM TO THE CRIME.

Karas:
NOW, AMONG THE EVIDENCE

IS SOME SUSPICIOUS SUBSTANCE
FOUND ON TAYLOR’S TRUCK.

AN SBI AGENT WROTE UP
A BLOOD-SPATTER REPORT

AND A CRIME SCENE ANALYSIS.

AND THE REPORT SAID
THE PRELIMINARY TEST

SHOWED THAT THERE WERE
CHEMICAL INDICATIONS OF BLOOD.

THE POLICE DETECTIVE WHO
TESTIFIED TOOK THAT REPORT

AND SAID, "THIS WAS BLOOD."

THERE WASN’T ANY OTHER
EVIDENCE AGAINST GREG TAYLOR.

Narrator: AFTER ONLY SIX DAYS
OF WITNESS TESTIMONY

AND A BRIEF DELIBERATION,
THE JURY HANDS DOWN A VERDICT.

HE’S CONVICTED AND
HE’S SENTENCED TO LIFE.

AND HE IS SHATTERED.

THIS MAN SAYS, "I’M INNOCENT.
WHAT ARE YOU DOING?"

GREGORY TAYLOR
ALWAYS DENIED HIS GUILT.

HE HAD AN IMPECCABLE
RECORD IN PRISON.

HE NEVER HAD AN INFRACTION.

AND HE WENT TO CLASSES
AND HE STUDIED.

HE CONTINUES TO WORK DILIGENTLY

TO UNCOVER NEW EVIDENCE
SO HE CAN GET A NEW TRIAL.

Narrator: THEN HIS SPIRITS
ARE LIFTED IN 2008

WHEN HE LEARNS
OF A NEW STATE ORGANIZATION.

Neff:
INNOCENCE INQUIRY COMMISSION

IS ONE OF A KIND
IN THE UNITED STATES.

IT’S A GOVERNMENT AGENCY SET UP
TO EXAMINE CLAIMS OF INNOCENCE.

TAYLOR APPLIED
TO THIS NEW AGENCY.

Narrator: THE COMMISSION AGREES
TO REVIEW TAYLOR’S CASE,

AND THEY ARE
EMPOWERED TO DIG DEEP.

WHEN TAYLOR’S TEAM OF LAWYERS
EXAMINES THE CASE FILE,

THEY’RE ABSOLUTELY
FLOORED BY WHAT THEY FIND.

Narrator: IN TAYLOR’S RECORDS,
THEY UNCOVER

FORENSIC EVIDENCE THAT THEY
BELIEVE PROVES HIS INNOCENCE.

THE BLOOD EXPERT FOR
THE STATE CONCLUDES

THAT BLOOD WAS FOUND ON
AND UNDER HIS TRUCK.

IT TURNED OUT
IT WASN’T BLOOD AT ALL,

AND THE BLOOD EXPERT
WAS DUANE DEAVER.

Karas: THE SAME TECHNICIAN
WHO TESTIFIED

AT MICHAEL PETERSON’S TRIAL.

HE DID EXPERIMENTS
WITH THE LADDER

AND THE BLOODY SPONGE
AND THE MANNEQUIN HEAD.

THIS IS A MAJOR EVENT.

Karas:
ONE OF THE STAR WITNESSES

FOR THE PROSECUTION
WAS A BIG LIAR.

WHAT’S GOING ON?

Narrator: LAWYERS WORKING
ON BEHALF OF GREGORY TAYLOR

HAVE UNCOVERED PROOF
THAT HE WAS CONVICTED

WITH FALSIFIED EVIDENCE PREPARED

BY SBI BLOOD SPECIALIST
DUANE DEAVER,

THE SAME EXPERT THAT
GAVE CRITICAL TESTIMONY

AT THE TRIAL
OF MICHAEL PETERSON.

THERE IS ONE PIECE
OF PHYSICAL EVIDENCE

CONNECTING GREG TAYLOR
TO THE CRIME.

IT WAS A SPOT ON HIS TRUCK

THAT DUANE DEAVER TESTED
AND FILED A REPORT.

THE REPORT SAID,
"I TESTED THIS SPOT

AND IT GIVES CHEMICAL
INDICATIONS OF BLOOD."

AND WHAT CAME OUT DURING THE
INNOCENCE INQUIRY COMMISSION

WAS THAT DEAVER RAN
A MORE SPECIFIC TEST,

IS THIS HUMAN BLOOD?

IT CAME BACK NEGATIVE.

HE DID NOT PUT THAT
IN HIS LAB REPORT,

AND AS A RESULT,
THE AGENT WHO TESTIFIED

RELYING ON HIS REPORT
TESTIFIED THAT IT WAS BLOOD.

Karas:
IT WASN’T HUMAN BLOOD AT ALL,

YET JURORS WERE LED TO BELIEVE
THAT NOT ONLY WAS IT BLOOD,

BUT IT WAS THE VICTIM’S
BLOOD ON THE TRUCK.

WHEN THAT EVIDENCE
CAME TO LIGHT,

GREGORY TAYLOR GOT A HEARING

BEFORE A THREE-JUDGE COMMISSION.

Narrator: TAYLOR’S LAWYERS
WILL PRESENT EVIDENCE

BEFORE THE PANEL,

WHO IN TURN WILL VOTE TO UPHOLD
OR OVERTURN HIS CONVICTION.

DUANE DEAVER IS
CALLED TO THE STAND

DURING THIS EXONERATION HEARING.

Dimond: UNDER QUESTIONING,
DUANE DEAVER

FINALLY WILL PROVIDE
SOME ANSWERS.

Man #2: SO ANYONE READING
YOUR FORMAL REPORT

WOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN
THAT YOU COULD NOT

SCIENTIFICALLY CONFIRM
THAT WAS BLOOD?

THAT’S CORRECT.

I CAN’T SAY WITH
SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY

THAT THAT WAS BLOOD.

WHEN PRESSED, DEAVER EXPLAINS

THAT WITHHOLDING
A NEGATIVE RESULT

IS COMMON PRACTICE AT THE SBI.

DUANE DEAVER SAYS, "YES,
THAT WAS THE POLICY.

WE WOULDN’T PUT
THE FINAL RESULTS IN

IF THEY WERE NEGATIVE."

HOW CAN A SCIENTIST,
A NEUTRAL FINDER OF FACT

NOT REPORT ALL THE RESULTS
OF ALL THEIR TESTS?

THAT REALLY RAISED A RED FLAG.

Narrator:
ON FEBRUARY 17, 2010,

THE THREE-JUDGE PANEL
MAKES ITS RULING.

Man #3: THE DECISION,
JUDGE HOWARD E. MANNING JR.

RULES THAT
GREGORY F. TAYLOR IS INNOCENT

OF THE CHARGE
OF FIRST-DEGREE MURDER.

[ EXCLAIMING ]

THE CHARGE OF
FIRST-DEGREE MURDER

OF JACQUETTA THOMAS ON
SEPTEMBER 26, 1991,

IS DISMISSED.

[ CHEERS AND APPLAUSE ]

UNBELIEVABLE, ALL THESE YEARS,

WHAT THIS DAY WOULD BE LIKE.

6,149 DAYS AND FINALLY
THE TRUTH HAS PREVAILED.

Narrator: NEWS OF
THE COMMISSION’S FINDING

AND THE TESTIMONY OF
SBI AGENT DUANE DEAVER

SENDS SHOCKWAVES
THROUGH NORTH CAROLINA.

ATTORNEY GENERAL ROY COOPER
ORDERS A MASSIVE REVIEW

OF 15,000 SBI CRIME-LAB CASES
INVOLVING BLOOD ANALYSIS

FROM 1987 TO 2003.

THE REPORT FINDS THAT HUNDREDS
OF CASES WERE MISHANDLED,

BUT A FEW IN
PARTICULAR STAND OUT.

THERE ARE FIVE EXAMPLES
THAT THE REPORT CLASSIFIED

AS THE MOST SERIOUS VIOLATIONS.

ALL FIVE WERE CASES THAT
DUANE DEAVER HANDLED.

Karas: WITHOUT
DUANE DEAVER’S TESTIMONY,

THE JURY WOULDN’T HAVE
CONVICTED MICHAEL PETERSON.

Dimond: WHEN THE STATE’S BLOOD
EXPERT IS REPUDIATED,

DAVID RUDOLPH JUMPED ON THAT.

HE GOES BACK TO THE JUDGE
AND DEMANDS A NEW TRIAL,

ON THE GROUNDS THAT
DUANE DEAVER IS A FRAUD.

MY NAME IS MARY JUDE DARROW.

I WAS ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS

REPRESENTING MICHAEL PETERSON
AFTER HIS CONVICTION.

THEY PULLED BACK
ALL THE LAB REPORTS.

THEY PULLED BACK
ALL THE TRANSCRIPTS

OF DUANE DEAVER’S TESTIMONY,

AND JUST STARTED CHALLENGING
EVERYTHING HE SAID.

Karas: THEY DISCOVERED
THAT DUANE DEAVER

EXAGGERATED HIS EXPERIENCE.

HE HAS REPEATEDLY TESTIFIED

THAT HE HAD BEEN
INVOLVED WITH 500 CASES,

BUT THE RECORDS SHOWED
THAT THERE WERE ONLY 54.

HE HAD WAY OVERBLOWN HIS
CREDENTIALS AND HIS EXPERIENCE.

THAT WOULD’VE BEEN GOOD FOR
THE JURY TO KNOW AT THE TIME.

MR. RUDOLPH WAS ABLE
TO CONVINCE THE COURT

THAT MR. DEAVER HAD
COMMITTED PERJURY.

Narrator:
ON DECEMBER 14, 2011,

JUDGE HUDSON RENDERS
HIS DECISION.

Reporter #2: BOTH TEARS AND HUGS
FILLED THE COURTROOM

MOMENTS AFTER
JUDGE ORLANDO HUDSON

GRANTED CONVICTED MURDERER
MICHAEL PETERSON A NEW TRIAL.

THIS IS REALLY SHOCKING NEWS.

MICHAEL PETERSON HAD
A SHOT AT GETTING OFF.

Narrator: EIGHT YEARS
AFTER HIS CONVICTION,

68-YEAR-OLD MICHAEL PETERSON
IS GRANTED A NEW TRIAL

AND IS RELEASED ON BOND.

I HAVE WAITED OVER EIGHT
YEARS FOR AN OPPORTUNITY

TO HAVE A RETRIAL SO THAT
I CAN VINDICATE MYSELF

AND PROVE MY INNOCENCE
IN A FAIR TRIAL THIS TIME.

Hunt Zamperini:
SO, WHEN WE FOUND OUT

THAT THERE WAS GOING
TO BE ANOTHER TRIAL,

IT REALLY SET ME
BACK ON MY HEELS.

LIKE, "OH, WOW, I’M
GOING TO REALLY HAVE TO

RELIVE THIS INTENSELY AGAIN."

IT REALLY WAS CAUSING ME
A LOT OF EMOTIONAL PAIN.

Narrator: A TRIAL DATE IS SET
FOR MAY OF 2017,

AND A NEW PROSECUTION
TEAM TAKES OVER THE CASE.

IT’S SOON DISCOVERED THAT
THEY FACE AN UPHILL BATTLE.

AT THAT NEW TRIAL,
THERE’S NO GUARANTEE

THAT LIZ RATLIFF’S DEATH

IS GONNA BE ALLOWED
IN THIS TIME AROUND,

OR HIS BISEXUAL LIFESTYLE,

AND THE TESTIMONY OF
DUANE DEAVER IS GONE.

Darrow: DEAVER’S TESTIMONY
WAS VERY DAMAGING

AT THE FIRST TRIAL.

WITHOUT HIM, THE STATE
WAS GOING TO HAVE

A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT
TIME IN A SECOND TRIAL.

Narrator: AS THE STATE SORTS
THROUGH THE CASE FILE,

THEY ENCOUNTER
ANOTHER CRUSHING BLOW.

Reporter #3: PICTURES TAKEN LAST
DECEMBER OF EVIDENCE

FROM THE MIKE PETERSON CASE

SHOWS PACKAGES HAD
BEEN RIPPED OPEN.

Dimond: THE EVIDENCE HAS
BEEN MISHANDLED.

SPECIFICALLY THE CLOTHES
HIS WIFE WAS WEARING,

AND THE CLOTHES HE WAS WEARING
THE NIGHT OF THE DEATH.

Darrow:
YOU HAD DNA CONTAMINATION,

THAT’S NOT GOOD BECAUSE
IT BARRED THE DEFENSE

FROM BEING ABLE TO HAVE
THOSE CLOTHES TESTED AGAIN

OUTSIDE OF THE CONTROL
OF DUANE DEAVER.

Dimond: SO THE STATE NOW HAS
A DILEMMA, WHAT DO THEY DO?

CAN THEY GO FORWARD AND
TRY MICHAEL PETERSON AGAIN?

HE PROBABLY HAD
A SHOT AT GETTING OFF.

Narrator:
FACING A WEAKENED CASE

AND A POTENTIALLY
HIGH-PROFILE ACQUITTAL,

PROSECUTORS MAKE
A CONTROVERSIAL DECISION.

THEY OFFER MICHAEL PETERSON
WHAT’S CALLED AN ALFORD PLEA.

Darrow: AN ALFORD PLEA IS WHEN
A PERSON GOES INTO COURT

AND ACCEPTS THAT THEY ARE GIVING
UP THEIR RIGHTS TO A TRIAL

AND ACCEPTS PUNISHMENT
FOR THE CRIME CHARGED.

HOWEVER, WITH THE ALFORD PLEA,

THE DEFENDANT DOES NOT SAY,
"I’M GUILTY."

MICHAEL PETERSON HAD ALREADY
DONE EIGHT YEARS IN PRISON,

AND THAT WAS MORE
THAN ENOUGH TIME

FOR A MANSLAUGHTER CONVICTION.

Gasparoli:
IT WAS A PLEA DEAL, TIME SERVED.

WE’RE GONNA PUT A GUILTY
VERDICT ON YOUR RECORD.

YOU’RE A CONVICTED FELON

IN CONNECTION WITH THE
DEATH OF KATHLEEN PETERSON,

BUT YOU’RE FREE TO GO.

Dimond: SINCE HIS ARREST,

MICHAEL PETERSON
HAS BEEN CONSISTENT.

HE HAS TOLD EVERYONE
THAT HE IS INNOCENT

AND HE MAINTAINS
THAT KATHLEEN’S DEATH

WAS DUE TO A FALL
DOWN THEIR STAIRWAY.

Karas: BUT FROM MICHAEL
PETERSON’S POINT OF VIEW,

IT WAS A PRETTY GOOD DEAL.

HE DIDN’T HAVE TO ADMIT IT,
HE IS A CONVICTED FELON,

BUT THERE’S A GUARANTEE HE’LL
NEVER GO BACK TO PRISON AGAIN,

AND HE’LL NEVER
BE CHARGED AGAIN.

Narrator: ON FEBRUARY 24, 2017,
16 YEARS AFTER KATHLEEN’S DEATH,

PETERSON APPEARS BEFORE
THE ORIGINAL TRIAL JUDGE,

ORLANDO HUDSON, TO
ANNOUNCE HIS DECISION.

Man #4: YOUR HONOR, AT THIS
TIME, WE’RE HERE TO ADDRESS

THE CASE OF THE STATE
VERSUS MICHAEL PETERSON.

HOW DOES
MR. PETERSON PLEAD

TO THE CHARGE OF
VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER?

HE ENTERS A PLEA OF
GUILTY PURSUANT TO OFFER.

Gasparoli:
AFTER HE PLEADED GUILTY,

CANDACE ZAMPERINI GAVE
AN EMOTIONAL STATEMENT.

Karas: SHE WAS UPSET
AT THE ALFORD PLEA

BECAUSE MICHAEL PETERSON

WASN’T GONNA SERVE
ANOTHER DAY IN PRISON,

AND SHE THOUGHT HE HAD
BEATEN HER SISTER TO DEATH.

MICHAEL PETERSON,
THE WORDS ALFORD PLEA,

THEY’RE MEANINGLESS.

ALFORD SHMALFORD,
IT MEANS NOTHING, GUILT.

YOU BRUTALLY TOOK THE LIFE OF
A WOMAN THAT PROVIDED FOR YOU,

REGARDED YOUR CHILDREN,
LOVED YOUR CHILDREN.

SHE LOVED YOU.

SHE MADE A HOME
PEOPLE COMPLIMENTED.

SHE COOKED EXTRAVAGANTLY.

SHE OPENED HER HEART
AND HOME WITH JOY.

KATHLEEN WAS THE BEST PERSON
YOU’VE EVER HAD IN YOUR LIFE.

IT CAME OVER ME LIKE, "WOW."

I FELT I WAS CHANNELING A BIT
OF KATHLEEN IN MY STRENGTH.

YOU ARE PLEADING GUILTY TODAY

TO BEATING MY SISTER
KATHLEEN TO DEATH.

MICHAEL PETERSON,
NOT ONLY CAN YOU WEAR

THE SCARLET LETTER
"A" FOR ADULTERY,

BUT ALSO THE BLACK
LETTER "G" FOR GUILTY.

NOT PERFECT JUSTICE,
BUT JUSTICE.

THAT WAS HUGELY CATHARTIC TO ME,

THAT I GOT TO SHARE WITH HIM

EXACTLY HOW I FELT ABOUT
THE LOSS OF MY SISTER,

AND HOW MUCH IT MEANT TO ME

TO HEAR MICHAEL
SAY HE IS GUILTY.

-THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.
-THANK YOU, SIR.

HE WALKED OUT OF COURT
A FREE MAN.

AT 6:00 HE WAS ON WRAL SAYING,
"I’M INNOCENT."

ALL THE DECISIONS
I MADE IN MY LIFE,

THIS HAS BEEN
THE MOST DIFFICULT.

MY SON CLAYTON, HE PUT
IT ALL IN PERSPECTIVE.

HE SAID, "DAD,
YOU’RE PLAYING A GAME

AT A CROOKED TABLE.

THE ODDS ARE AGAINST YOU,
YOU’LL NEVER WIN."

Fanning:
I COULD NOT BELIEVE IT.

MANY PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN
HIS GUILT WERE OUTRAGED.

THE TIME HE SPENT IN
JAIL WAS NOTHING COMPARED

TO THE REST
OF KATHLEEN PETERSON’S LIFE,

AND I THINK KATHLEEN

AND HER FAMILY WERE
ROBBED OF JUSTICE.

♪

Karas:
TODAY MICHAEL PETERSON LIVES
IN DURHAM, NORTH CAROLINA,

IN A TWO-BEDROOM CONDO.

HE SPENDS TIME WITH HIS
CHILDREN AND HIS GRANDCHILDREN,

AND HE’S WORKING ON A NEW NOVEL.

I HAD AN ENCOUNTER [LAUGHS]
A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.

I HAD GONE TO THE POST
OFFICE, AND I’M LIKE,

"OH, MY GOD,
THERE’S MICHAEL PETERSON."

AND I JUST HAD KIND
OF A WEIRD FEELING,

LIKE, WE CONVICTED THIS
MAN OF KILLING HIS WIFE,

AND HERE HE IS WALKING
THE STREET JUST LIKE WE ARE.

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

TO THIS VERY DAY.

Gasparoli: IT HAD AN
EXTRAORDINARY PROTAGONIST,

HIGH-SOCIAL STANDING,
HIGH INTELLIGENCE,

MANSIONS, MONEY,
SEX, POWER, BETRAYAL.

Hardin Jr.: WHEN PEOPLE THINK
ABOUT THIS CASE,

FRANKLY I HOPE THEY DON’T FOCUS

ON MIKE PETERSON BECAUSE
HE DOESN’T DESERVE IT.

THEY SHOULD FOCUS ON
KATHLEEN, ’CAUSE SHE DOES.

Hunt Zamperini:
KATHLEEN IS REMEMBERED.

MY DAUGHTERS VERY
MUCH REMEMBER HER.

I’M BLESSED WITH
A LOT OF PICTURES,

AND THERE WAS ONE PHILOSOPHY

SHE ALWAYS SHARED WITH ME
THAT I HOLD DEARLY.

YOU KNOW YOU’RE
GONNA HAVE BAD DAYS.

WHEN YOU HAVE THE BAD DAYS,

YOU’VE GOT TO
REACH IN YOUR BRAIN

AND BRING FORWARD
THAT HAPPY DAY.

SO I WILL, AND I DO THINK

OF A LOT OF REALLY
HAPPY TIMES WITH HER.