CONTESTS   |   SEARCH   |   SUBMIT   |   POSTERS   |   STORE   |   LINKS   |   EXTRA

 

 

 

 

 

The Staircase  (2005)

 

Director: Jean-Xavier De Lestrade

Rating: NR

Distributor: Sundance Channel

Premiere Date: 04.04.05

Review Posted: 04.11.05

 

By Dylan Grant

 

A Long Cold Walk Up the Judicial Staircase

 

Despite the best efforts of District Attorney Jim Hardin and his team (and some of the press information about this documentary) to paint Michael Peterson as a rich weirdo living a bizarre lifestyle, what becomes surprisingly apparent is how Peterson is a man not unlike millions of others.  A retired Marine, Peterson married more than once, and he finally found happiness with Kathleen, and the two raised an ever more typical yours mine and ours family: Michael and Kathleen, Kathleen’s daughter, and Michael’s two sons and two adopted daughters.  They were a wealthy family: Michael a successful writer and Kathleen an executive at Nortel.  Michael did have extramarital affairs, but the inference is that Kathleen knew, that there was an unspoken agreement between the two of them, their own “don’t ask don’t tell” policy.  Hardin does not take issue with the fact that Peterson had affairs as much as he had affairs with men.  See, Michael was bisexual, and if there is anything more dangerous than a sex-crazed bisexual running free in society, I don’t know what is.  At least, that seems to be the attitude of Hardin and his crew.

 

Such is the weakness of the prosecution’s case in Academy Award winning filmmaker Jean-Xavier de Lestrade’s dense, novelistic film The Staircase, a detailed look at the other Peterson trial, the Michael Peterson trial, which took place in Durham, North Carolina, in 2003.  Supposedly Durham is a relatively progressive, liberal burg, a blue oasis in an otherwise red state, but one would never know it to look at this film.  District Attorney Hardin and his assistant, Freda Black, come across like two classically stereotypical red staters.  How interesting it is to see Black’s lip curl when she talks about the gay sex pictures that were found on Peterson’s computer.  She is physically uncomfortable, and her bias shows itself most especially in the closing arguments, when she actually calls it “filth.”  One can almost picture her running home to bathe after having to look at some of those pictures.

 

What does porn and bisexuality have to do with Peterson’s guilt or innocence?  Nothing, other than that is the track the prosecution decides to take.  The State’s case is surprisingly weak, their witnesses like clay pigeons which lead defense attorney David Rudolf easily shoots down.  In the face of such a flimsy case, legally outgunned, the D.A. resorts to showing the jury autopsy photos and gay porn.  (Has anyone ever looked good in an autopsy photo?)  They marry themselves to a case designed more to bias the jury than to actually prove guilt.

 

Watching how everyone involved in the case evolves over the course of eight chapters is interesting.  At the center of it all is David Rudolf, and in a sense he is the one most changed by it in the end.  Michael Peterson becomes a supporting player while Rudolf, who has the unenviable task of saving Peterson’s life, becomes the star.  As Peterson himself says, once the trial begins, it really isn’t about Kathleen anymore; it is about who can make the strongest case.  We should all be fortunate enough to have an attorney like Rudolf.  Every preposterous argument the prosecution makes, Rudolf jumps on it like Pete Sampras smashing down an easy lob; he makes being a trial lawyer look easy.  Rudolf has a great team around him, and there is almost nothing they do not see coming.

 

Rudolf is media savvy as well.  When it is learned that an old friend of Michael’s was found dead at the bottom of another staircase years earlier, he looks at the camera and says, “Your film just got a whole lot more interesting.”  From day one he takes the media to task over their portrayal of Michael and the trial.  In a particularly interesting scene, Rudolf and one of his colleagues are watching Nancy Grace’s coverage of the trial on Court TV.  Nancy Grace is, well, Nancy Grace, which is to say that nothing of what she has to say has anything to do with the trial.  When it comes out that there was no blood on the shirt Peterson was wearing the night of the murder, she answers that, “he must have changed shirts.”  Rudolf is quickly on the phone, taking Court TV to task over their biased coverage.  It is one thing coming from Nancy Grace, he says; you expect that, but the correspondent who was actually at the trial is saying things that are patently untrue.  Nothing changes, of course, and as the trial progresses, he and his partner can watch the television coverage only in stunned silence, wondering if they are even looking at the same case. 

 

Having the actual trial right next to the Court TV coverage leads one to a striking conclusion: Nancy Grace should never be allowed to comment on a public hearing again.  Ever.  She and her forget-the-evidence-we-all-know-he’s-guilty style of “journalism” have no place in polite society.  She is a fraud, a phony, a blight on the national media.

 

The most startling, peculiar thing in the film is the behavior of Michael Peterson himself.  He clearly does not mind a camera crew following him around, recording this moment in his life, but he talks about the trial as though it were happening to someone else, like it isn’t his life on the line.  The trial is casual dinner conversation, and some of the gallows humor is a bit uncomfortable at times, like when son Todd says that for Halloween they are all going to put on Michael Peterson masks to scare the neighbors.  Michael is an intelligent, intellectual guy, perhaps too much so for his own good.

 

It is no surprise when someone points out midway through the trial that the defense’s entire case has been built on science and forensics and not one ounce of emotion, something that probably shouldn’t matter, but does.  Michael takes us on an interesting driving tour of Durham, across its racial and economic lines, pointing out along the way some of the corruption that have kept the more impoverished areas from improving.  He points out houses in the predominantly Black section of town that were meant to be a step in the right direction but have now fallen into disrepair.  This tour is especially interesting considering that the jury in this trial is predominantly Black.

 

After the tour, Michael reads from some of his old newspaper columns, where he holds the D.A. up to ridicule for his handling of issues.  The intimation is that there is a political tinge to the charges Peterson is facing.  Whether you believe this or not, the articles cannot have helped.  What is most interesting is that Michael has more to say about Durham’s political climate than he does about his own case.  When he talks about city politics, passion seeps through, like he really cares about what happens, but during one startling conversation about the trial he talks about how there is no sense in getting upset because nothing can be changed now.  “Fuck it,” he says, “no use worrying about it now.”  At times he comes across as someone who expects to go to jail.

 

De Lestrade and his team have put together a compelling documentary.  Their real coup is in how much access they were able to get from the families, the defense attorneys, the prosecution, and others involved in the case.  They capture some interesting moments, and at times it seems as if the subjects truly forgot that the camera was present.  This is not to say that everyone is cast in a favorable light.  Kathleen Peterson’s two sisters are surprisingly unsympathetic, so blinded by their contempt for Michael that they are incapable of entertaining the idea that their sister’s death might have been anything other than murder.  D.A. Hardin and his assistants seem simple and ignorant and legally outclassed for much of the film.  The only people that fare particularly well are the children of Michael Peterson, who, despite what one thinks of his guilt or innocence, as losers here as much as anyone else.  Finishing the film is like finishing a good book.  The characters span a wide range, the story takes us around the world, the ending is stunning, and after it is over, there are endless layers to think and rethink.

 

The Sundance Channel will air two back-to-back episodes every Monday in April at 9:00pm.  See it.

 

Home | Back to Top

 

 

:: Merchandise