The Staircase Murders Part 2: When the Star Witness Turns Out to Be a Fraud

0:00 Michael Peterson was convicted of murder in 2003 based on blood spatter testimony from a state expert. Eight years later, investigators discovered that expert had been lying in cases for years. Fabricating evidence, hiding exculpatory findings, committing perjury. This is part two where everything falls apart and a man has to choose between freedom and vindication. [Music] After Michael Peterson was convicted in October 2003 and sentenced to life in prison, he filed appeals.

0:53 Those appeals were initially rejected as they moved through the North Carolina court system. For years, it looked like the case was over. Peterson was in prison. Kathleen's family had their conviction. The legal system had spoken. But then something happens that nobody expected. An independent review of the state bureau of investigation revealed a massive problem. And that problem had her name, Dwayne Deever. Remember, Deever was the blood spatter analyst whose testimony was the only direct evidence linking Michael Peterson to Kathleen's death. He was the one who said the blood patterns proved Peterson was present when the blows were struck. He was the one who declared it a homicide within 90 minutes of arriving at the scene.

1:36 The district attorney himself had called Deever indispensable to the case. The independent review found that Deever had a long standing pattern of fabricating evidence to support the prosecution. He concealed excolpatory evidence that could have helped defendants and he committed perjury. This wasn't a one-time mistake for Deever. This was systematic misconduct, spanning multiple cases over years. In 2011, Deever was fired from the SBI. The legal implications were severe. Deever's testimony was the core of the prosecution's case. Without it, there was no evidence placing Michael Peterson at the scene as the person who killed Kathleen.

2:17 Everything else was circumstantial. The 911 call, the bisexuality, the Elizabeth Ratliff case. None of that proved Michael Peterson beat his wife to death. When you build a murder conviction on the testimony of one forensic expert and that expert turns out to be a fraud, you have a due process violation. The defendant didn't get a fair trial. The jury made their decision based on lies. Peterson's defense team filed a motion for a new trial based on this discovery. And in 2011, Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson, the same judge who had presided over the original trial, granted the motion. Judge Hudson stated that Deever had misled him and the jury and confirmed that Peterson was entitled to a new trial.

3:00 On December 16, 2011, after serving eight years in prison, Michael Peterson was released. You would think this would be calls for celebration. The conviction was overturned. The key witness was exposed as a liar. Peterson was free, but freedom doesn't mean vindication. And it doesn't mean the nightmare is over. The state still planned to retry Peterson. A new trial was scheduled for 2017 and this created an impossible situation for the defense. On one hand, they had won. They had proven that the original conviction was based on fraudulent testimony. Deever, the star witness, was discredited. Without him, the prosecution's case was significantly weaker.

3:43 But on the other hand, Peterson would still have to face a jury. And that jury would still hear about Elizabeth Ratliffe. They would still hear about his bisexuality and the emails with the male escort. They would see the crime scene photos. They would still hear that 911 call analyzed by experts who thought it sounded rehearsed. All of that highly prejudicial, emotionally charged evidence would still be admissible. Peterson himself said it plainly. Quote, am I going to put my life and my freedom in the hands of the Durham police and the district attorney? Look at what they did the first time. He didn't trust the system. And honestly, why would he? The system had already put him in prison based on lies.

4:23 The defense team had to weigh the risks. If Peterson went to trial and lost, he would go back to prison for life. He had already spent eight years there. He was older now. Another life sentence would mean he would die in prison. If he went to trial and won, he would be fully exonerated. His name would be cleared. He could definitively say that he did not kill Kathleen, but winning wasn't guaranteed. Juries are unpredictable and the cumulative weight of all that circumstantial evidence, even without Deaver, might still be enough to convict him again. There was a third option, a legal compromise that would allow Peterson to maintain his innocence while avoiding the risk of another trial.

5:03 It's called an offered plea. An offered plea is a guilty plea with a twist. The defendant pleads guilty to the charge, but they maintain their innocence. What they're acknowledging is that the prosecution has enough evidence that if presented to a jury would likely result in a conviction, but they're not admitting they actually did it. It's a pragmatic legal tool. It used when the risk of going to trial is too high, but the defendant refuses to lie and say that he committed the crime. The court accepts the plea as a guilty plea for sin-ancing purposes, but the defendant gets to say on the record that he didn't do it. On February 24, 2017, Michael Peterson entered an offered plea to the reduced charge of voluntary manslaughter.

5:47 Peterson addressed the court after entering his plea. He said that accepting the plea had been the most difficult thing I've ever done. He used the opportunity to reinforce that he was not responsible for her death in any way. But legally, he's now a convicted felon. The charge was voluntary manslaughter instead of first-degree murder, but it's still a conviction. And because he had already served nearly 100 months in prison, following his 2003 conviction, and the maximum sentence for voluntary manslaughter was 86 months, the time served covered his sentence. He walked out of the courtroom a free man. Not everyone accepted the resolution. One of Kathleen's sister's spoken court and rejected the offered plea as meaningless.

6:30 She said, "An innocent man does not plead guilty." Mr. Peterson pled guilty today. From her perspective, the legal distinction doesn't matter. He entered a guilty plea, therefore he was guilty. And I understand that reaction. If someone in my family was killed and the person accused of killing them took an offered plea, I would feel cheated. Because there's no closure. There's no trial. There's no jury verdict. There's no definitive answer. But from Peterson's perspective, what choice did he have? Risk everything on a jury that might convict him again, based on the same prejudicial evidence? Spend the rest of his life in prison for something he says he didn't do? Or take the plea, walk free, and maintain his innocence on the record.

7:12 He chose freedom. So here's where we are. Legally, Michael Peterson is a convicted felon who pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter. But he maintains he's innocent. The conviction that sent him to prison was based on fraudulent forensic testimony. The prosecution's theory relied heavily on bifobia and the prejudicial introduction of another woman's death that German authorities had ruled accidental. The physical evidence was always ambiguous. Seven deep cuts to the scalp, but no skull fracture and no brain injury. Blood everywhere, but no murder weapon. A 911 call that sounded prepared, but also a man who might have been in shock. An alleged motive based on his sexuality, but also testimony that Kathleen knew about and accepted his bisexuality.

7:59 We will never know for certain what happened at the bottom of that staircase on December 9th, 2001. Did Kathleen fall? Was she beaten? Was she attacked by an owl and then fell? Did Michael Peterson kill his wife? Or did he find her dying and panic? The courts didn't answer that question. They couldn't because the evidence was never strong enough to prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt without Duane Devers lies. Michael Peterson is a free man. He lives with the voluntary manslaughter conviction on his record. He has maintained his innocence and interviews and documentaries. The case has been covered extensively, including the documentary series, The Staircase, which followed the trial and appeals over many years.

8:40 Kathleen Peterson's family still believes Michael killed her. They believe the offered plea was an admission of guilt, regardless of the legal technicalities. The case remains unresolved in every way that matters most. We don't have a definitive answer. We have a legal compromise that satisfied no one. And maybe that's the most honest conclusion. Sometimes the evidence doesn't lead to a certainty. Sometimes the justice system can't deliver the truth. Sometimes all we're left with is doubt. Michael Peterson says he didn't kill his wife. The state of North Carolina says he pleaded guilty to killing her. And Kathleen Peterson is still dead at the bottom of a staircase with seven cuts on her head and no clear explanation for how they got there.

9:23 That's where this story ends. Not with answers, but with the uncomfortable reality that some questions don't have them. [Music] Thanks for listening to 10 Minute Murder, Bingeable True Crime Stories. I'm Joe, I'm the host, and listen, this documentary had me in a strangle hold back back when it came out years ago. And then I started getting requests more recently to cover this story. So I thought, yeah, go back and rewatch that thing. Man, I forgot how long it was.

10:04 If you're going to watch this staircase, get comfortable. Call in some meals to be delivered to something because you're not going anywhere for like 13 hours. And if you haven't seen it, spoiler alert, you are not going to like Michael Peterson. He comes across very arrogant. He comes across like textbook narcissist. He talks about himself all the time, tries to sound smart all the time. And he is a smart guy. Don't get me wrong, but he's trying. It feels like he's trying to get you to think he's very smart. And I don't like that. But did he kill his wife? I don't know. I lean more toward, yeah, probably he did, but I don't know that. It's based mostly on what I saw from the documentary, plus the research that I did for the story.

10:47 I feel like he did it, but also that's just a hunch by me. All right. If you are a new listener, this is the first episode you're tuning into, it better not be because there was a part one to this. This is part two of this story. But if you're new to the series here, you can hit subscribe wherever you're listening right now. And that's going to help you more easily find the podcast when you open up your app to listen to more true crime podcasts. 10 minute murders can be right there for you. If you hit subscribe right now, you can go to the website 10minutemerder.com, catch up on everything that there is to know about the podcast. And also send me an email if you want to do that. And that's going to do it. That is your episode for today. Thank you again for listening to 10 minute murder.

11:29 We'll see you next time.