Binge-watched this series earlier this week. Curious to know what others think.
Creating some white space here in the event the big word SPOILERS in the header wasn't noticed.
SPOILERS AHEAD.
So, did he do it? Was it an accident? Or was it the result of an owl attack?
Like "Making a Murderer," it showed an unsettling level of corruption in the legal system. The kind you just would never expect, especially with a spotlight trained on the case/courtroom every day. Goes to show ... arrogance is rampant and somewhat stunning to watch, in that sort of setting.
Like "Making a Murderer," it showed an unsettling level of corruption in the legal system. The kind you just would never expect, especially with a spotlight trained on the case/courtroom every day. Goes to show ... arrogance is rampant and somewhat stunning to watch, in that sort of setting.
You had me at corruption. I will give it a watch.
The trickle-down seemed to be - from my viewing - that the DA and anyone they brought in as an "expert witness," had a little extra juice in the direction of a prosecution. In some cases, whether or not they dealt with facts.
Also there are way too many gashes to the head to be a simple fall down a set of stairs. 7 deep cuts to the head. From a fall? No. No way that could happen that many times on one set of wooden stairs. One? Yes. Two? maybe. Seven? That's a joke. That would never happen on a set of household stairs.
He's guilty. Yes, maybe the police fudged things or screwed up or all their ducks aren't in a perfect row but the bottom line is that he did it, plain and simple.
He was at home at the time of the incident. I feel like saying he was at the pool means he wasn't "home" is really splitting hairs.
If one slips and falls, the first thing they do is to roll over and try to protect the wounded area. That is natural. This was not done. To assume that someone would try and stand up again for a second time, fail, fall and receive another gash to the head IS possible.
To assume that they would do it over and over again (7 times in a row), failing each time and after each failure, they receive another huge amount of pain and then they repeating try the same process over and over again, and fail, and receive another huge dose of pain, is just not correct. Once yes, twice, maybe. Seven times in a row? I don't think so. That is what you would have to believe if you believe the defense.
Be advised that the movie was shown from the defense point of view and only the defense. The State's side of the case was rarely given outside of what was given at trial. We never heard about his anger issues. The defense said he was always a nice, warm, loving person. There were a few spots that people said that he had an VERY bad temper. Two different pictures of the same person. I would have liked to seen that aspect explored in the film but it wasn't since this was a defense point of view film.
Keep in mind that the film is only one side of the story.
I take all these documentaries with a grain of salt but that’s a “fact” that I think is a pretty big deal.
But the pool thing isn't nothing. They even went into some detail about what you could or could not hear from the pool. That was the scene where they played the tape of a woman's voice screaming over and over for help. It appeared the only thing that could be heard from the pool was the water from the fountain. Otherwise it seemed like a normal, peaceful moment at the pool.
I do wonder about the piece we got at the end of the series, where it was mentioned that the prosecution had information about the "blow poke" and how it had been found by authorities, and had been photographed, then placed in the garage, leaning against a wall behind a car, where Peterson's son happened upon it a year later.
It's an interesting documentary, but there are many unanswered questions - hell, they're not even asked in the film - that leave me a bit frustrated.
I think worth mentioning again, the woman allegedly had bird feathers in her hand(s) at the bottom of the stairs, along with strands of her own hair, but Peterson's attorney didn't look into this at all, according to an article I read. The attorney admitted that the neighbor's theory about an owl attack was plausible, but by the time it came to light, it was too late.
Hard to criticize the folks who were all over the house and the case for so many years. Still, it seems a lot of things were either glossed over, dismissed, or not even investigated.
Also there are way too many gashes to the head to be a simple fall down a set of stairs. 7 deep cuts to the head. From a fall? No. No way that could happen that many times on one set of wooden stairs. One? Yes. Two? maybe. Seven? That's a joke. That would never happen on a set of household stairs.
He's guilty. Yes, maybe the police fudged things or screwed up or all their ducks aren't in a perfect row but the bottom line is that he did it, plain and simple.
The wife's extensive injuries were a bit much from a staircase fall. I believe he's guilty.
Quote:
when police, EMTs and everyone came to the scene. It was DRY!!! That means that there was a long time between the attack and the calling of the police. Why the delay? What took so long? He was right there, in the home when the attack took place. Gosh, it shouldn't take a hour or more to dial 911, should it?
Also there are way too many gashes to the head to be a simple fall down a set of stairs. 7 deep cuts to the head. From a fall? No. No way that could happen that many times on one set of wooden stairs. One? Yes. Two? maybe. Seven? That's a joke. That would never happen on a set of household stairs.
He's guilty. Yes, maybe the police fudged things or screwed up or all their ducks aren't in a perfect row but the bottom line is that he did it, plain and simple.
The wife's extensive injuries were a bit much from a staircase fall. I believe he's guilty.
Owl attack.