Sixteen

David Rudolf, unsatisfied with the court’s ruling that Peterson be held without bail, filed a motion asking for Peterson’s bond hearing to be held at an earlier date. He began to compile a file of letters regarding Michael’s character, letters that would be mailed to superior court judge Henry Hight, who would be taking over the bond hearing.

Among the supporters were Mary Clayton, a friend and neighbor of the Petersons for twelve years, who said she had many occasions to witness Michael, Kathleen, and their children in loving circumstances, at birthday parties, at dinner parties, on walks in the neighborhood. Mary Clayton hoped that the judge would allow Mr. Peterson to return home before his trial. She said he was a wonderful father and an ideal husband to Kathleen. She mentioned that just a few weeks before her death, while having lunch with Kathleen, the two of them had a conversation in which they both agreed that their husbands were perfect for each of them.

Another neighbor who wrote in was Bob Cappelletti. He said that he and his wife of twenty-four years had been entertained by the Petersons on many occasions. Mr. Cappelletti and his wife considered Michael and Kathleen to be dear friends. In his view, it was impossible to think that Mr. Peterson would commit the crime for which he was charged. In fact, after having witnessed the way Michael and Kathleen interacted, each being the perfect foil for one another, it would be hard to imagine how Michael could go on living without Kathleen.

This list went on, and many people planned to testify at the bond hearing, preferring to speak for themselves in person. What struck most of these people was how happy Michael and Kathleen were as a couple. One of her employees at Nortel had noticed that Michael and Kathleen would always stand very close to each other in social situations. Another friend would remember the parties the Petersons held for the North Carolina School of the Arts, parties they were happy to host at their spectacular home.

One person who distinctly stood out from the list of supporters was Patricia Peterson. Patricia was aware of Kathleen’s sudden death. She had been contacted in Germany almost immediately, and had grown extremely concerned about the ramifications of Kathleen’s horrible accident. Worried about the emotional state of her sons and her ex-husband, even from such a distance, Patricia had become a fervent supporter. Over the phone, Patricia Peterson had been interviewed by police, and David Rudolf had incorporated her statement into a motion seeking a new bond date for Michael Peterson.

According to Rudolf’s motion, Patricia Peterson told police officers that Mike Peterson had never been violent toward her, that she never knew him to be violent toward anyone. Patricia asserted that Michael was never physically or psychologically abusive, and in her opinion, he was not capable of doing any harm to Kathleen, regardless of his frame of mind. Patricia Peterson characterized Michael and Kathleen Peterson as “intertwined.” According to Patricia, they were a couple who “needed each other.”

In the first week of January 2002, as her ex-husband sat in jail, Patricia Peterson took it upon herself to write an editorial to the Herald-Sun newspaper to remark about the breadth of Michael’s character. In a very brief note, Patricia attested to her strong marriage with Michael, which had lasted thirty years. She commended Michael’s dedication to the welfare of their children. She offered her sympathy for the death of Kathleen, stating that she, along with Michael and the rest of the family, deeply mourned Kathleen’s loss. Above all, Patricia stated her belief in the absolute innocence of Michael Peterson.

 

 

On Friday, January 11, 2002, on a freezing night in downtown Durham, a group of forty people gathered outside the county jail to show support and seek Michael’s release on bond. Members of the group included Todd and Clayton Peterson, their sister Martha Ratliff, a number of friends, and, of course, Bill Peterson, who spoke to the press on behalf of the family. An attorney from Reno, Nevada, Bill was questioning a process in which a DA was able to claim he would seek the death penalty, hold a man in jail for weeks, then suddenly declare that the case against Michael Peterson would not involve capital punishment.

Bill Peterson had been informed that the DA had decided not to seek the death penalty in the case. Without knowing any further details, Bill was among the outraged members of Peterson’s support group, who were equipped with picket signs and candles. One unusual character after another seemed to fill out the crowd. There were local political activists, people who had supported Peterson’s campaigns, and then there were those who were there strictly out of loyalty and love for Michael Peterson.

Mr. Peterson’s former housepainter, Francisco Garcia, was at the vigil to light a candle for the man who had been such an unbelievably fair person. According to Garcia, Peterson had been a gracious employer, a man who offered nothing but kindness. Garcia stood outside in the ice cold of winter, happy to do whatever he could to support Peterson, because he truly believed in Michael as a good and honest man.

Members of the group held a variety of hand-painted signs:

PETERSON WON’T FLEE

A MAN WITH A FAMILY CAN ONLY RUN HOME

FREE OUR FATHER

As Todd Peterson expressed his father’s gratitude, reading a dictated letter Michael had given him the night prior, he wished to thank everyone there who had shown their support. Todd said that his father was “utterly overwhelmed” when he found out about the vigil.

 

 

Earlier that same day, samples of head and pubic hair, along with samples of blood and saliva, were taken from Michael Peterson after a search warrant was executed at the county jail. Peterson’s attorney David Rudolf could not be reached for comment. However, Kerry Sutton, acting as a friend of the family, told reporters that taking such samples was nothing unusual. Police were just doing basic crime-scene processing....