- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Staircase: Netflix Original - worth a watch?
Posted on 6/26/18 at 10:18 am to Big Scrub TX
Posted on 6/26/18 at 10:18 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Even nominal research into the case shows that this a-hole is 100% guilty. (And I say that as someone who still thinks it's likely that Making a Murderer is innocent.)
Now That is dishonest 
0
Posted on 6/26/18 at 10:33 am to skullhawk
Here are my thoughts from this doc/case:
1. I still do not know if MP killed here or not, but I easily still have 100% reasonable doubt that he killed her, so he is therefore "Not Guilty"
2. David Rudolph is an incredible criminal defense attorney, and got shafted by that judge numerous times
3. The DA and his team, the law enforcement, the prosecutions witnesses were extremely corrupt and many of them should be prosecuted themselves for things they got away with.
4. The jurors are some backwoods ignorant people who do not understand how to interpret evidence vs. bias and don't understand what reasonable doubt means
5. MP is weird dude, and his kids are even weirder
6. That sister in law might be the craziest bitch on planet earth
7. That judge is either a complete moron, or easily influenced by politics, either scenario being extremely dangerous to his court
1. I still do not know if MP killed here or not, but I easily still have 100% reasonable doubt that he killed her, so he is therefore "Not Guilty"
2. David Rudolph is an incredible criminal defense attorney, and got shafted by that judge numerous times
3. The DA and his team, the law enforcement, the prosecutions witnesses were extremely corrupt and many of them should be prosecuted themselves for things they got away with.
4. The jurors are some backwoods ignorant people who do not understand how to interpret evidence vs. bias and don't understand what reasonable doubt means
5. MP is weird dude, and his kids are even weirder
6. That sister in law might be the craziest bitch on planet earth
7. That judge is either a complete moron, or easily influenced by politics, either scenario being extremely dangerous to his court
Posted on 6/26/18 at 10:33 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
Duane Deaver was rightfully fired and we all know how it turned out for Mike Nifong.
Sadly I think I read recently he has a big job in Texas somewhere now. But I’m not 100% sure. Dude should be in prison for what he’s done even outside the MP case
Posted on 6/26/18 at 11:04 am to McLemore
quote:
But anyway, that whole trip (no spoilers) was a small fraction of the episode.
It was like 20 minutes long, or felt like that atleast
Posted on 7/2/18 at 2:47 pm to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
DirtyMike nailed it.
I can not comprehend how humans can lie about things to incriminate a stranger...even though he MIGHT be guilty. And yes, Mike Peterson and his kids are weird birds. I felt sorry for the two adopted girls and all they have had to go through in their lives.
ETA: when they read his porn emails to the jury and they showed the old lady's faces, I told my wife he was toast.
I can not comprehend how humans can lie about things to incriminate a stranger...even though he MIGHT be guilty. And yes, Mike Peterson and his kids are weird birds. I felt sorry for the two adopted girls and all they have had to go through in their lives.
ETA: when they read his porn emails to the jury and they showed the old lady's faces, I told my wife he was toast.
This post was edited on 7/2/18 at 2:50 pm
Posted on 7/2/18 at 9:14 pm to skullhawk
quote:
quote: Margaret is his biological daughter
quote:
This has been proven false with DNA evidence
I'm watching this now and was struck by how much Michael's sons and Margaret resemble one another. I thought a possible theory for Liz' death was she may have been about to tell Patty that Margaret was Michael's daughter. It just struck me as odd that he would have retained custody of the girls after he and Patty split. I could not find any mention of DNA. Was it reported?
This post was edited on 7/2/18 at 9:19 pm
Posted on 8/5/18 at 9:21 pm to shana
Just finished this.
1) of course I agree with most that he was not guilty. Reasonable doubt was obvious.
2) glad I read this thread b/c of the owl theory. There are some good podcasts on that.
3) I lost my shite during the doc when the lady da in her closing arguments said something like ‘this isn’t a relationship...this is just any-which-away!”
1) of course I agree with most that he was not guilty. Reasonable doubt was obvious.
2) glad I read this thread b/c of the owl theory. There are some good podcasts on that.
3) I lost my shite during the doc when the lady da in her closing arguments said something like ‘this isn’t a relationship...this is just any-which-away!”
This post was edited on 8/5/18 at 9:22 pm
Posted on 8/12/18 at 9:04 pm to theunknownknight
We are watching now. Fifth episode.
It's certainly dragging and hard to imagine how they stretch the original trial portion of the show out to 8 or 10 episodes, or whatever the original part of the series was.
Our biggest takeaway, other than the family being a bunch of weirdos, is that Mike looks like a complete fool smoking that pipe. Some dudes can pull it off. He cannot.
Also, if they ever made a movie about this case, here is prime candidate number one to play Peterson...
It's certainly dragging and hard to imagine how they stretch the original trial portion of the show out to 8 or 10 episodes, or whatever the original part of the series was.
Our biggest takeaway, other than the family being a bunch of weirdos, is that Mike looks like a complete fool smoking that pipe. Some dudes can pull it off. He cannot.
Also, if they ever made a movie about this case, here is prime candidate number one to play Peterson...
This post was edited on 8/12/18 at 9:08 pm
Posted on 8/26/18 at 8:28 pm to VinegarStrokes
Just watched the documentary. He definitely did it. I don’t believe that much blood can come from falling down a staircase. The phone call to 911 was planned as well I believe. This guy is a writer, so you would think he is good enough to tell a story. Thoughts?
Posted on 8/27/18 at 10:17 am to Make It Rayne
what a weird family.
they would sit there at dinner time and make jokes about killing, blood, etc. Really odd.
I definitely think that the guy probably killed both women. But going strictly by what they showed in the documentary, he was definitely legally "not guilty" due to reasonable doubt. But yeah, I think he did it.
they would sit there at dinner time and make jokes about killing, blood, etc. Really odd.
I definitely think that the guy probably killed both women. But going strictly by what they showed in the documentary, he was definitely legally "not guilty" due to reasonable doubt. But yeah, I think he did it.
Posted on 8/27/18 at 5:17 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
Greta Black, the assistant DA, works at a dry cleaners now
isn't it freda black? check the link she's not working at the dry cleaners anymore...
LINK
Posted on 2/8/19 at 9:52 am to tigahland
We just got around to watching this marathon of a documentary. The guy looks guilty, but it's difficult to hold on to that after 20 hours of hearing people say he's innocent. Whatever.
My favorite part was Freda Black channeling Lane Smith from My Cousin Vinny and saying "Biiii-secksyull" the way Lane Smith said "Iiiii (slap) dentical".
My favorite part was Freda Black channeling Lane Smith from My Cousin Vinny and saying "Biiii-secksyull" the way Lane Smith said "Iiiii (slap) dentical".
Posted on 2/8/19 at 12:27 pm to Fewer Kilometers
His guilt/innocence is pretty insequencial to the case at the end of the day
Posted on 2/8/19 at 12:38 pm to wildtigercat93
quote:
His guilt/innocence is pretty insequencial to the case at the end of the day
Yeah, if you have the ending spoiled for you, you'd bail out pretty fast.
Posted on 2/8/19 at 12:49 pm to Fewer Kilometers
North Carolina in the early 2000s was a wild time
This case was going on during the duke scandal as well. I believe the DA who was arrested from the duke scandal makes a brief appearance in this doc early on as he was helping with the states case
This case was going on during the duke scandal as well. I believe the DA who was arrested from the duke scandal makes a brief appearance in this doc early on as he was helping with the states case
Posted on 2/8/19 at 12:56 pm to theunknownknight
Is this the Staircase with the creepy dad accusedof killing his wife.And his daughters are convinced of his innocence? It’s worth sticking with, imo. There are a couple of twists.
Posted on 2/8/19 at 1:41 pm to theunknownknight
As soon as I saw him ignore his dog who walked around him I knew he was guilty.
Posted on 2/9/19 at 6:59 pm to wildtigercat93
quote:
They have updated the doc twice since you’ve watched it
Might want to check it out and you’re view may change drastically
It’s very likely that those “unbiased” sources were using information that was very biased when it was introduced by the state
Interesting. I remember doing a little research and concluding that the filmmakers were at least somewhat dishonest when it came to omitting or including facts.
I'll admit, though, That the guy seemed pretty spooky to me, as did the sisters.
Posted on 2/9/19 at 7:07 pm to VOR
Most people felt he was guilty based on similar feelings of what he acted like. But at the end of the day almost every piece of evidence used against him to convict him ended up being manipulated or suppressed by the state in a way that did not give him a fair shot of defending his case, which at the end of the day in this country every person has a right to a fair trial, even obviously guilty persons like a Ted Bundy or his elk.
Personally I didn’t feel like he was so obviously guilty as most felt. And certainly don’t think the state did anywhere close to a good job in presenting a case to convict him. And North Carolina’s record of false convictions during that time certainly doesn’t help me feel confident that ANY piece of evidence in that trial was legit.
Personally I didn’t feel like he was so obviously guilty as most felt. And certainly don’t think the state did anywhere close to a good job in presenting a case to convict him. And North Carolina’s record of false convictions during that time certainly doesn’t help me feel confident that ANY piece of evidence in that trial was legit.
Posted on 2/10/19 at 8:20 am to wildtigercat93
quote:
You have to prove a person is guilty
In reality, you only have to get jurors to believe someone is guilty. Same goes for innocence.
There is any number of ways to appeal to a juror's sense of guilt and innocence and established proof is probably used less than simple emotion.
This post was edited on 2/10/19 at 8:21 am
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News