A Perfect Husband (31 page)

In the 1830s, this disorder was called “moral insanity.” By 1900, it was changed to “psychopath.” More recently, the term used is “sociopath,” also known as “antisocial personality disorder.” A sociopath has an outstanding capacity to charm and seduce followers. Because the sociopath appears to be “normal,” the sociopath is not easily recognizable as being deviant or disturbed. While many sociopaths are mind-manipulating cult leaders, the traits of the sociopath can also apply to one-on-one relationships. Note: the below traits of the sociopath are based on the psychopathy checklists of H. Cleckley and R. Hare:

*
Glibness and Superficial charm.
Language can be used by them, without any effort, to convince their audience. They are captivating storytellers who exude confidence.

*
Manipulative and Conning.
They see their self-serving behavior as permissible and never recognize the rights of others. They appear to be charming, yet are secretly hostile and domineering.

*Grandiose Sense of Self.
They must be the center of attention. They use their own fantasies to create an
us-versus-them
mentality.

*Early Behavior Problems.
They usually have a history of just “getting by” through conning others. They have problems in keeping friends and exhibit aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals.

*Pathological Lying.
They create a complex belief about themselves and their abilities, and it is virtually impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis.

*Shallow Emotions.
They show what seems to be joy and love, but it is more feigned than real. They are outraged by insignificant matters, yet completely unmoved by what would upset a normal human being.

*Poor Behavioral Control and Impulsive Nature.
They alternate small expressions of love with acts of rage and abuse. They believe they are all-knowing, yet have no concern for their impact on others.

*Irresponsibility.
They are not concerned with ruining other people's lives and are indifferent or oblivious to the devastation they cause.

*Promiscuous Sexual Behavior and Infidelity.
They engage in sexual acting out of all sorts, usually kept hidden.

*Parasitic Lifestyle.
They make all-encompassing promises without having a realistic life plan. Their opulent lifestyle is supported by donations and gifts from those who are pressured to give, through fear or guilt.

*Lack of Remorse, Shame, or Guilt.
They have a deep-seated rage at the core. To them, the end justifies the means, and nothing stands in their way.

A favorable omen for the defense came when the jury composition had been changed, last minute. Three jurors were dismissed, replaced for varying reasons, and in an unexpected turn of events, one of the alternate jurors brought on board was a male nurse, leaving the final jury of twelve with three nurses in the deliberation room. The public speculated that the new makeup of the jury might very well cause a problem. The alternates, perhaps, hadn't been paying as much attention. People surmised that the deliberations would be more difficult than anyone had first realized.

As jurors were considering the charge of first-degree murder, they sorted through dozens of exhibits, multiple photos, transcripts of testimony, and, of course, the set of identical blow pokes. On day two of deliberations, court clerks had been asked to bring them a boom box and the cassette tape of Peterson's 9-1-1 calls. Also on day two, jurors requested a transcript of Jim Hardin's opening statement, in which the prosecutor first mentioned the blow poke as the possible murder weapon.

Since opening statements could not be considered evidence, Jim Hardin was able to argue that successfully that the transcript would not be provided. David Rudolf, however, argued, “if the jury wants to look at the prosecutor's opening statement to see what he did or didn't prove, that's appropriate.” Rudolf insisted that Hardin wanted to “run from his opening,” and he asked Judge Hudson to inform jurors about Jim Hardin's objection to their being given a transcript. His request was denied.

The fact that jurors wanted to review Hardin's remarks, the fact that they were examining 9-1-1 tapes, along with the identical blow pokes, did not bode well for the state. Clearly, the jurors wanted to check to see just how specific Jim Hardin had been when he spoke about the murder weapon in his opening remarks, which meant they had a question about the credibility of the state's case. Media reports surmised that the jurors wanted to see what the prosecutor had promised, to see what he did and didn't deliver.

If jurors were counting on the blow poke as
the
weapon, if they were counting on the state to prove it, the jury could vote not guilty based on that alone. The jurors had a lot to think about. Since they were not given the option of convicting Peterson of the lesser offense of second-degree murder, they had to find him guilty of first-degree, premeditated murder, or let him walk as a free man.

On the third day of deliberations, the defense team sat in the courtroom, looking somewhat glib. Michael Peterson sat with his whole team, all of whom seemed to be awaiting a verdict in their favor. Michael, in fact, felt comfortable enough to slouch down in a courtroom seat that was marked for the district attorney, the defendant resting his head on the back of the chair, his designer loafers propped on the courtroom railing. David Rudolf was also kicking back, having slipped on a pair of white headphones, listening to an eclectic mix of music on his iPod player.

While the jurors continued to mull over Peterson's fate, giving no hint that they were reaching a decision, prosecutors were cautiously absent from the courtroom. Jim Hardin, Freda Black, and David Saacks remained in their sixth-floor offices of the Durham County Courthouse, trying not to second-guess themselves. The team had already decided, if there was a hung jury, they would try Michael Peterson again. They had already made initial preparations about which witnesses to call. They decided they would be able to retry the case with a much shorter witness list, and knew that they would focus on the “red neurons” present in Kathleen's brain, scientific proof that she had been dead for two hours
before
Peterson made his 9-1-1 calls.

Behind the guarded wall of the deliberation room, the jury of seven women and five men had come to a standoff. They were split, six to six, and for two days the jurors honestly thought they were never going to be able to come to an agreement. The jurors had studied the lacerations on Kathleen's skull. They had examined the blood spatter on the inside of Peterson's shorts. The jurors could see, from photo exhibits of the crime scene, that there was blood on top of dried blood on the wall of the stairwell. Yet, when they first began deliberating, five of them were undecided, four thought Peterson was guilty, and three thought he was not guilty. It wasn't until the end of the third day that everyone came to believe Mrs. Peterson had died as a result of a beating. But then, the trouble was, the jurors could not agree as to whether or not the beating had been an act of premeditation.

Their arguments went back and forth. The jurors were sometimes crying, sometimes fighting, as they reexamined the autopsy photos. Late in the afternoon, day three of their arguments, the jury was split, ten to two, with two people still believing that Michael Peterson was not guilty.

Those who felt Peterson was guilty had taken the position that a) Michael stood over his wife, watching her as she bled to death, or b) he had gone back into the stairwell to finish her off. Either way, ten of the jurors felt convinced that his actions were premeditated, because there was evidence that Kathleen had managed to stand on her own two feet after his initial attack.

But the other two jurors would have to think about it. They needed to find evidence that met all five aspects of first-degree murder: premeditation, malice, cause, deliberation, and intent. The twelve jurors agreed to go home and sleep on it.

It was on October 10, 2003, in the midmorning of the fourth day, when the jury had reached a unanimous decision. Everyone scrambled into the courtroom, Michael Peterson having his family huddled around him as the manila envelope was handed to the court clerk Angela Kelly, who read the verdict aloud:

“We, the twelve members of the jury, unanimously find the defendant, Michael Iver Peterson, to be guilty of first-degree murder.”

Peterson's brothers, Bill and Jack, looked completely stunned. His sons, Clayton and Todd, just stared off into space. Margaret and Martha Ratliff wrapped their arms around each other and sobbed. Hearing their cries as handcuffs were placed on his wrists by deputies, Michael Peterson turned to the two girls, telling them, “It's okay, it's okay.”

Michael Iver Peterson was immediately sentenced to serve the mandatory
life in prison without parole
, he was led away from the courtroom, and whisked to the Nash Correctional Institution, located about seventy miles from Durham, where he would spend the remainder of his natural life. There he would join another infamous prisoner, former Carolina Panther Rae Carruth, who was still serving his prison term of eighteen years, for having plotted to kill his pregnant girlfriend, Cherica Adams.

Peterson's lawyers said they planned to appeal Peterson's conviction on at least two grounds: the judge's decision to admit evidence about Peterson's alleged homosexual conduct, and the testimony about Elizabeth Ratliff's 1985 death in Germany.

“Frankly, I don't understand the verdict,” a very solemn David Rudolf said, speaking to reporters on the courthouse steps. “I am very, very, very disappointed.”

Throughout the weeks and weeks of testimony, Michael Peterson had taken extensive notes on legal pads. It turned out that the novelist had a
book deal
waiting for him over at the HarperCollins publishing house. However, the deal was contingent upon Michael Peterson's being found innocent, and thus was immediately withdrawn.

Bill Peterson, speaking to reporters on behalf of Michael's family, spoke of the “complete and utter demoralization” of his brother, insisting that Michael Peterson was innocent. Bill Peterson told the media that because prosecutors had focused on “gay porn” during the trial, they had prevented the defense from putting Michael on the witness stand.

Patricia Peterson gave a brief statement to reporters as well, speaking of the solidarity felt by the Peterson family, of their sheer and complete belief in his innocence, regardless of what the jury had determined. To prove her devotion to Michael, Patricia told the media that Michael “did not participate in the act” of Kathleen Peterson's death.

“This is about the death of a mother,” Patricia told a TV news team. “This is about children losing their mother, and possibly losing their father. It is an unconscionable loss for every one of those children.”

When the verdict was made public, screaming headlines read:

GUILTY
:
PETERSON GETS LIFE IN WIFE'S KILLING.
And to everyone's chagrin, there was even more information that family members came forward to tell, which revealed secrets about Peterson's “alter” personality.

Michael Peterson's sister, Ann Christensen, called reporters from her home in California to say that her brother, ten years her elder, had a volatile temper, which was often directed at the women in his life.

“It's not just anger,” Christensen told news reporters, “it cuts you to the bone.”

Kathleen Peterson's sisters, Lori Campell and Candace Zamperini, also came forward after the verdict. They revealed to
Herald-Sun
reporters that Michael was a controlling husband who “flew into rages around the house.”

Candace Zamperini explained that Kathleen had hidden the “trouble” in her marriage from the family, and in an interview with Court TV, Candace referred to a diary that Caitlin had written, three entries of which were so upsetting, she couldn't bring herself to finish reading them.

“I hope that someday other people can read what life was truly like with Michael Peterson in that house,” Candace told reporters. “He did verbally abuse people and control things.”

In an interview with Court TV, Lori Campell revealed that Michael's temperament was erratic. Lori told news reporters that she was aware of an “incident” that occurred when her sister was on a trip with Michael in Paris. According to Lori, Kathleen alleged that Michael had hit her, just after their belongings were stolen on the Metro. Kathleen explained that Michael had gone out and bought her an expensive purse, in an attempt to “make up.”

“He became angry and he took it out on her,” Lori told media. “I admired her and looked up to her. Kathleen was an intelligent woman. But she didn't leave him.”

Kathleen's sister Lori would also state that she never believed for a minute that her sister had fallen down the stairs. Upon learning about Kathleen's death, she recalled, the first words out of her mouth were “He did this to her” and “He didn't love her.”

Elizabeth Ratliff's sister, Margaret Blair, had confided to members of the prosecution that Michael Peterson allegedly beat his English bulldog, that she had seen Michael hurt the family pet, watching the bulldog's eyes become bloody. Blair told Durham prosecutors that she had witnessed the incident, and she had gotten “the biggest white fluffy towel” she could find, so she could comfort the poor dog.

Elizabeth's former nanny, Barbara Malagnino, alleged that back in the early days, she had seen Michael Peterson beat his pet, Bud, a basset hound. Malagnino further alleged that just after Elizabeth's death, Michael Peterson had “scraped the nose” of one of the Ratliff girls, rubbing the girl's face in urine on Mrs. Ratliff's wooden floor.

Kathleen's first husband, Fred Atwater, and daughter Caitlin would confide that on 9/11, the day of the U.S. terrorist attacks, they had been informed that Kathleen was in the emergency room being treated for a head injury. Fred and Caitlin were told that Kathleen had hurt herself by diving into the swimming pool, but they could never get a straight answer from Kathleen about what happened. Upon reflection, they felt the story Michael had told them never really made sense. Kathleen was not a big swimmer. She was the type to wade into the water slowly. . . .

And on the steps outside the courthouse, after a press conference was held by Jim Hardin, Freda Black stated that the passion in her closing argument had stemmed from the significance that the case held for victims of domestic abuse all across the world.

“I was speaking for women,” Black told reporters. “These were two female victims of domestic violence.”