The Controversy Surrounding The Ken Fitzhugh Trial

May 5th 2000.It was just a normal day in Palo Alto, California. Elementary school music teacher Kristine Fitzhugh finished her morning classes and stopped at a local coffee shop. Just a few hours later, she was dead at the bottom of her basement steps, leaving the tiny community of Palo Alto with an uncanny mystery. Just a year later, her husband Ken Fitzhugh was indicted on first-degree murder charges. On July 2, 2001 the trial began.The prosecution provided their claims, and so did the defense. After calling their witnesses onto the stand, the jury was left with an important task. Ken Fitzhugh deserves to be put behind bars for first-degree murder. The blood and the motive sealed his fate.First, a piece of evidence that supports my position was the blood evidence. There were bloody shoes and a bloody

There were also the bloodstained paper towels in the car, which appeared to be poorly hidden. All items appeared to be placed in a hurry, possibly to quickly hide any evidence of the crime. Even more curiously, when Ken was asked about the items, he gave a very simple “I don’t know.” The defense claimed that an intruder had gotten into his house. However, the theory just seemed highly incoherent, as even if there was an intruder, what was their motive? The defense also claimed that Ken was in shock, so he put the items in the car. But, why would he make an attempt to hide the items under the seat and not just some trash can or out in the open in the car? It seems likely that Ken was in a rush to clean up the crime scene. Second, another piece of evidence that supports my position is the motive. The prosecution proposed that Kristine wanted to tell their oldest son Justin Fitzhugh about his paternity. If Kenneth decided that he did not want that to happen, he could have easily plotted a murder. This goes far beyond a reasonable doubt, as no one else would have a reason to murder