Wrong Man season 2, episode 4 recap: Under the Microscope

Episode 204 of Starz’ Wrong Man winds up its coverage of the Rorrer/Katrinak case, but it leaves us with far more questions than answers.

Previously on Wrong Man, we learned about the murder of Joann Katrinak and her baby. Were they murdered because Joann angrily hung the phone up on Patty Rorrer, the ex of Andy Katrinak? There are a number of confounding points in the case. Conventional wisdom says Patty has darker hair, not light blonde ones like those found Joann’s car. However, as noted in the previous recap, hair colors can, in fact, change naturally, based on a wide variety of factors.

Wrong Man‘s Detective Ira Todd heads to interview Patty Rorrer in prison, adding that it’s the anniversary of the day he killed someone in the line of duty. To Todd, Patty doesn’t come across as a villain, and she conveys that she wasn’t on bad terms with Andy Katrinak. She says she even called Andy about her recently winning a prize at a horse show. Patty adds that she didn’t know Joann enough to be angry at her. Ira thinks she’s being truthful. Even apart from that, the prosecution never did much to prove the alleged motive of Patty traveling over 500 miles to kill Joann over a phone call!

Catasauqua

Sandy Mizgerd, Patty’s “spiritual adviser,” maintains that Patty faced a biased trial. In fact, Wrong Man does show old footage of hostile crowds demanding Patty’s execution, indicating heightened tensions surrounding the 1998 case. While the circumstantial evidence may have been considered compelling, it was still circumstantial. Legal expert Sue-Ann Robinson notes the emotional appeals by the prosecution.

More from Starz

• BMF: Interview with Production Designer Kathrin Eder
• 9 of the best Valentine’s Day gifts and cards to give pop culture fans
• Hightown Season 2 newcomer Jona Xiao spills on her character Daisy
• Hightown Season 2: Riley Voelkel spills on Renee’s new journey this season
• Hightown executive producer Gary Lennon teases what’s to come in Season 2

Also, was there proof of an obsessive rage on Patty’s part? Wrong Man gives the impression that nothing was firmly established at the trial, either by prosecutor Michael McIntyre or anyone else. Also, as the series has shown, it’s inconclusive whether Patty had signed into a dance class on the apparent night of the original kidnapping.

Tammy Mal, author of Convenient Suspect, notes that too much time passed before the FBI investigated Patty’s alibi.

If that isn’t enough, none of the bullets Patty used for her target practicing hobby matched the ones found at the crime scene. Certain words were twisted around, too. An officer alleges that Patty stated she wouldn’t have had her child, had she knew she’d be imprisoned. While this could be regarded as callous, it may be the wrong context. It might be about Patty regretting that she can’t be there as a mother. There’s some other speculation, too. For example, the website “Find a Grave” says, “Joann was shot once, then the gun jammed.” Is there proof that the gun jammed, though?  No source is cited.

The hairs

Wrong Man then visits Forensic Scientist Thomas Jensen, who notes that hair analysis is often wrong. It’s stated that, in this particular case, no chemical testing was done on the hair. It was just decided that the blonde hair found was bleached! The hairs found are said to match Patty, but a match is not exclusive to her.  Apparently, 1 in 37,000 people would match the hairs found.

For his part, McIntyre notes that the car in question had been cleaned recently, which could be described as suspicious. However, has anyone proved that Patty (or anyone else) was the one cleaning it? While there’s no solid proof of Patricia Rorrer’s alibi, is there any definitive proof that she made the 550-mile trip from North Carolina to Pennsylvania?

Were the bodies left out for 4 months?

The team also consults Denise Gemmellaro, a Forensic Entomologist. Based on her expertise, she tells Wrong Man‘s Joe Kennedy that she doesn’t think bodies were left there for four months, from December to April.

The bodies were too much intact. Ira and Joe then meet Katherine Maloney, a Medical Examiner who thinks baby Alex was older than 15 and a half weeks at the time of death. In other words, there’s strong forensic evidence already that they were not killed right away.

Other possibilities?

Like other cases on this series, it seems possible that the authorities found a suspect they liked and stuck with it. Still, a witness claims that Joann was hiding money and planning to leave Andy Katrinak. How thoroughly was that investigated? Another witness claims he saw a bearded man, a woman, and baby with a light blue jumper on (matching one Alex wore) not far from some railroad tracks. He says the bearded man was guiding the woman along and that she appeared nervous.

It’s also apparent that police found a diaper bag and a bloody rag but neither were tested!There’s more.  Witness Barbara Seyfried says she saw Joann in the convenience store during her shift there. She adds that they bought a few hundred dollars’ worth of items, which is highly unusual for the store. The witness says she had no reason to make her story up, as she wouldn’t have wanted to be in a courtroom. While her account was overlooked in the trial, her story led to a police sketch being issued.

Were hairs switched?

An FBI report notes that the car hairs had no roots, which leads some to speculate that hairs may have been switched for the trial.  Tammy Mal notes how McIntyre sees everything pointing to Patty’s innocence as a mistake, whereas anything demonstrating possible guilt is correct. In so many words, he gets defensive about it, as opposed to simply letting evidence tell the story.

As the episode winds down, it’s noted that the hairs Joann had clutched in her hand was never tested. If true, it’s hard to see that as anything but mystifying. Why just the hairs found in her car (which, theoretically, could come from many different people and places) and not test those actually found in her hand after a struggle?  It defies common sense.  While none of this absolutely proves Patty Rorrer’s innocence, it definitely complicates the case.

What are your thoughts on Wrong Man and the Joann Katrinak case? Let us know in the comments!