Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

We are pleased to announce that Professor Dr. Michael Tsokos will appear as a special guest in an upcoming episode of Who Killed Kurt, hosted by Michelle Wilkins.

Professor Tsokos is a leading European forensic pathologist and Director of the State Institute of Forensic and Social Medicine in Berlin, Germany. With three decades of experience in complex forensic investigations, he is internationally respected for his expertise in gunshot wound analysis, toxicology, and the rigorous application of forensic methodology in high-profile cases.

Who Killed Kurt is an independent investigative collective examining the forensic, medical, and evidentiary dimensions of the Kurt Cobain case through a forensic-guided lens. The collective recently commissioned a peer-reviewed forensic report in collaboration with forensic scientist and crime scene reconstructionist Bryan Burnett who specialises in crime scene reconstruction and bloodstain pattern analysis.

The forthcoming discussion will focus on forensic science, investigative standards, and how complex manner-of-death determinations are evaluated. The aim is to explore methodology and professional insight, not to advocate for a particular outcome.

The podcast episode will be released soon. Where and when will be announced here shortly.

‪@dr.tsokos‬
www.instagram.com/dr.tsokos

4 days ago (edited) | [YT] | 449

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

In the weeks and months after Kurt’s death, there were multiple documented copycat suicides — teenagers who mimicked what they were told happened to him. This isn’t speculation; it’s part of the public record from the mid-90s. Families came forward, newspapers reported it, and mental-health experts at the time spoke openly about the “Cobain effect.” That’s why accuracy matters so much. When the narrative around a death is wrong, the consequences don’t stop with the victim — they ripple outward and hurt real people who see themselves in the story.

4 days ago | [YT] | 304

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

Hey everyone — we’ve got real momentum right now. Kurt’s death is trending, and major outlets like Newsweek, Daily Mail, and Parade have all picked up the story. This is our chance to push it even further. Please share any of the articles (or all of them), tag your favorite podcasts, message magazines, comment, repost — whatever you can do. If we don’t keep the pressure on, the SPD and the Medical Examiner will keep pretending none of this matters.

Let’s make it impossible to ignore. 💥 #JusticeForKurt

www.newsweek.com/kurt-cobain-death-why-unofficial-…

1 week ago | [YT] | 834

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

Check out Michelle's interview on the Opperman Report, as she continues to spread the message. Check out what they talk about. ~Cam https://youtu.be/T0RXu7gII_c?si=I6We-...

4 weeks ago (edited) | [YT] | 125

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

I know it’s a subscription but even the title of this is amazing!

A Forensic Perspective on the Cobain Case — With Our Own Bryan Burnett! @everyone

So proud of the careful, professional work our team continues to do. 🥹

www.thesun.co.uk/news/37860745/forensic-scientist-…

1 month ago | [YT] | 727

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

Will do a video update in the next few days giving everyone the broad strokes of what’s been done. Please tell Matt how fucking AMAZING he is for doing this 💕

1 month ago | [YT] | 451

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

Criticizing a woman ≠ criticizing actions.

It becomes “you’re attacking women” instead of “you’re questioning behavior.”

That’s not feminism.

That’s benevolent sexism — the idea that women are too delicate to be interrogated, challenged, or held accountable.

Which, ironically, is sexist as hell.


People this myopic really make me want to move into the woods and become a small, polite forest cryptid who only emerges for evidence-based criticism.

This isn’t misogyny. It’s evidence-based criticism.

Misogyny is prejudice because someone is a woman.

This is scrutiny based on documented behavior, contradictions, power dynamics, money, and forensic facts. Those things don’t magically become sexist when the subject is female.

Criticism ≠ hatred.

Questioning a public figure’s actions, statements, or involvement in events is not misogyny. It’s how accountability works in the adult world.

In fact, saying women can’t be questioned is sexist.

It frames women as too fragile to be held to the same standards as men. Equality means equal scrutiny — not immunity.

If the same facts applied to a man, the criticism would be identical.
That’s the misogyny test. This passes it.

Calling everything misogyny is a deflection.
It replaces evidence with a buzzword so no one has to engage with uncomfortable facts. That doesn’t protect women — it shuts down truth.

You don’t have to agree with the conclusions.
But pretending every challenge is sexism is lazy, intellectually dishonest, and frankly insulting to real feminism.

1 month ago | [YT] | 205

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

I want to address something that’s been circulating, because silence doesn’t equal consent.

A public figure who profits from Kurt Cobain’s legacy recently posted an aggressive, profanity-filled rant aimed at “murder conspiracists.” Disagreement is fine. What isn’t fine is the level of hostility and dehumanization on display. That behavior isn’t normal, and it’s worth naming.

For context:
About a year and a half ago, I personally witnessed this same individual respond to someone who said their brother had died by suicide. When that person explained they understood suicide deeply but did not believe Kurt Cobain died by suicide, this individual replied that the brother “should have done it earlier.”

That is not grief.
That is cruelty.

Psychologically, reactions like this are about threat response, not truth.

When someone responds with rage and contempt instead of evidence, it often signals:
• identity investment in a fixed narrative
• cognitive dissonance when that narrative is challenged
• displaced aggression toward messengers rather than facts

People who are confident in their conclusions don’t behave this way.

I also want to be very clear:
We did not email this individual.
No one connected to our work contacted him.
We do not reach out to witnesses, acquaintances, or legacy figures.

We don’t need to.

The forensic analysis is published.
The science is public.
The evidence stands on its own.

For personal context: my father died a few years ago from COPD. His death was devastating, but it was not a mystery. If credible, peer-reviewed evidence existed showing otherwise, I would not stay silent. Accountability is not harassment.

Finally, multiple people — independently — have told me this individual was not a close friend of Kurt Cobain, but an acquaintance at best. Proximity does not equal authority.

Accountability is not cruelty.
Evidence is not harassment.
Rage is not an argument.

— Michelle

P.S. Back to our regularly scheduled dark humor and sarcasm tomorrow. Today’s post was less “snark” and more “let’s calmly note that this is not a normal response - this person is truly unhinged and move on.”

1 month ago | [YT] | 296

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

✨ BIG UPDATE ✨

Our investigation just broke through the media wall — and in the right way.

The Sun ran a full article on the case and, for once, the mainstream didn’t twist or minimize the evidence. They actually highlighted the core issues we’ve been fighting to get acknowledged:

• Staged homicide indicators
• Overdose-before-shot theory
• Body-moved evidence
• Shotgun shell contradictions
• Bloodstain analysis problems

And the wild part?
They didn’t mock it.
They didn’t downplay it.
They didn’t treat it like a conspiracy.

They presented these points as legitimate claims supported by evidence.

Exactly the way they should be.

This is how the media barrier breaks.
One outlet finally tells the truth plainly… and the others will follow.

Including LADbible who have reached out to Courtney for comment.

www.ladbible.com/entertainment/music/kurt-cobain-c…

Skip the Carousel

1 2

2 months ago | [YT] | 825

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

⭐️ Okay… let’s talk about this whole Candace Owens situation. ⭐️

I have edited this post to make it very clear that I believe Courtney is the villain here - not Candace.

However, giving an animal murdering, child abuser with ties to Epstein a large platform without doing any research on her is irresponsible. Period.


Here’s the thing:

Courtney has a 30-year pattern — she shapeshifts depending on who’s giving her attention, validation, or narrative control. Her story changes to match the audience in front of her.

So let’s break it down:

Candace = massive platform.
Courtney = loves spotlight + chaos.
Together = a match made in a very expensive LA rehab center.

Now, the “I was given LSD as a child to make me work for the CIA” thing?

Not new. She’s floated MK-Ultra-style claims for decades whenever she wants to position herself as a victim of mysterious forces.

The “handlers killed Kurt” angle?

Also not new. She pulls that card every time the heat gets a little too close.

It’s the perfect move because it:
• Makes her look innocent
• Validates the idea that Kurt was murdered
• Pushes the blame onto some vague, unprovable boogeyman
• Lets her appear like she’s “confessing” something explosive without risking anything real

But here’s what people need to understand:

Courtney messaging Candace Owens is not evidence.

It’s strategy.

If she had any interest in self-preservation (and trust me, she does), she wouldn’t be handing the actual truth to a high-profile political pundit on a silver platter.

This is PR.
This is narrative control.
This is chaos management.

Not a confession.

Edited to add the YouTube link to Candace speaking about it.

m.youtube.com/shorts/Y47q1zpe...

3 months ago (edited) | [YT] | 388