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-...

22 hours ago (edited) | [YT] | 82

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-…

4 days ago | [YT] | 713

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 week ago | [YT] | 443

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.

2 weeks ago | [YT] | 202

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] | 292

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

1 month ago | [YT] | 823

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...

2 months ago (edited) | [YT] | 384

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

Getting shit done with the dream team (Mark Larson and Matt Beall) in Seattle: What a year it’s been working with them — and these last few days have been the best kind of chaos!

2 months ago | [YT] | 572

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

We are officially through the peer review process — and our forensic paper on Kurt Cobain’s death is now PUBLISHED in the International Journal of Forensic Sciences.

This is a landmark moment. For the first time, a multidisciplinary team of scientists, forensic experts, and investigators have successfully challenged the official “suicide” ruling in a peer-reviewed forensic journal.

And the reviewers themselves highlighted the strength of our work:

✨ “Overall, it’s a well thoroughly processed case report.”

✨ “The described results deepen the probability of an alternative scenario.”

✨ “The conclusions are reliable… the relevance of this paper is high.”

✨ “This perspective challenges the original findings… indicating that further investigation is warranted.”

We’ve said it for years: the science proves homicide. Now it’s not just us — it’s in the scientific record.

This victory belongs to everyone who stood by the truth, pushed through the ridicule, and refused to let the case be buried. 💜

This is the new official link (below). Please share it everywhere! @everyone

Justice is punk rock. 🖤

⚠️🔞Content warning: contains graphics image if another gunshot victim on page 24⚠️

meixatech.com/COBAIN.pdf?fbclid=IwY2xjawNw0ZJleHRu…

2 months ago | [YT] | 578

Who Killed Kurt OFFICIAL

People always throw it at us: ‘Well, the people who knew Kurt think he killed himself. Who are you to argue?’ But here’s the truth: grief warps memory. Fear silences people. And being close to someone doesn’t make you an expert in forensics. Science doesn’t bend to opinions — not even the opinions of friends.
⸻

Forensic Psychology Note: Why Denial Persists in the Cobain Case

The persistence of the “suicide” narrative in Kurt Cobain’s death, despite significant forensic contradictions, can be explained through psychological and social mechanisms. The loudest defense of the suicide narrative often comes from those closest to Cobain — yet proximity does not equal clarity. In fact, it often creates unique forms of bias and resistance.

⸻

1. Cognitive Dissonance
• Once individuals commit to a belief, contradictory evidence creates discomfort.

• Accepting homicide would require admitting that police failed, that they were misled, and that their own judgment of the situation was flawed.

• This threatens personal identity and emotional stability, so denial becomes a coping strategy.

⸻

2. The Comfort of Finality

• Suicide offers closure: an ending that can be grieved and mythologized.

• Homicide keeps the wound open. It demands confrontation with betrayal, corruption, and injustice.

• For many, the illusion of closure is preferable to the chaos of reopening the past.

⸻

3. Fear of Retribution

• Courtney Love’s reputation for retaliation — lawsuits, smear campaigns, public attacks — taught observers that questioning her was dangerous.

• Friends, journalists, and even colleagues internalized this fear, choosing silence or compliance rather than confrontation.

⸻

4. Cultural Myth-Making

• Kurt’s “suicide” became a symbol of the tortured artist archetype.

• Media, music industry, and fan culture invested heavily in this narrative.

• Undoing it would unravel decades of cultural storytelling and undermine careers built on that myth.

⸻

5. Social Conditioning

• Journalists who parroted the official narrative retained credibility and access.

• Fans who questioned it were ridiculed as “conspiracy theorists.”

• Over time, conformity became the price of belonging. Challenging the myth meant exile.

⸻

6. Projection & Self-Identification

• For many fans, Kurt’s alleged suicide became a mirror for their own struggles with depression or alienation.

• Accepting murder would shatter that symbolic connection.

• Their defense of the myth is less about Kurt, more about preserving their own identity.

⸻

7. The Problem With “People Who Knew Him”

• Proximity breeds bias. Those closest to a victim often cling hardest to the first narrative they were given, because changing their belief means re-living trauma.

• Friends and family members are vulnerable to manipulation, misinformation, and fear of public scrutiny.

• History shows that being close to someone does not guarantee accurate understanding of their death — especially in cases where powerful interests control the story.

• Personal testimony is emotionally compelling but not scientifically reliable. Autopsy, toxicology, and ballistics evidence cannot be overruled by opinion, even from loved ones.

⸻

8. Personal Loss Example. My own father died of COPD but if someone came to me with a peer reviewed paper proving he was murdered, there’s no chance in hell I wouldn’t look at the information they provided.

• If presented with forensic proof that a family member’s “natural” death was homicide, most would investigate — even if confident in the original cause.

• The refusal to do so in Cobain’s case is not rational but protective: avoiding destabilization of identity, memory, and worldview.

⸻

Conclusion

The insistence — by friends, family, and fans — that Cobain “must” have committed suicide is rooted in fear, denial, and identity preservation, not in evidence.

Scientific analysis is not invalidated by the beliefs of those who knew him personally. If anything, their resistance highlights the very human tendency to defend a comforting story rather than face a destabilizing truth.h

2 months ago | [YT] | 373