Scared Monkeys Discussion Forum

Mug Shot

(http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o100/klaasen3/Sub6_022109/PetersonMUG-1.jpg)


http://www.youtube.com/v/oJgXkZC1omM&hl=en&fs=1

Edit to add "guilty" to subject line.  MB

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/Peterson_Bond_20million

Peterson Held on $20
Million Bond
A Will County grand jury filed a murder indictment today against Drew Peterson, the brash, mustachioed former police sergeant who found tabloid fame after his fourth wife's disappearance more than a year and a half ago. Today's indictment covered the drowning death of a former wife found dead in an empty bathtub in 2004.


Peterson was charged with two counts of first-degree murder in the death of Kathleen Savio. He was arrested during an evening traffic stop near his Bolingbrook home and was held on $20 million
bond. Savio's body was found in a dry bathtub. Her death originally was ruled an accidental drowning but authorities later said it was a homicide staged to look like an accident. Savio's family has long voiced suspicions, saying she feared Peterson and told relatives if she died it wouldn't be an accident. Their fears resurfaced after the October 2007 disappearance of Stacy Peterson.

 ::MonkeyDance::      ::MonkeyDance::


(http://i439.photobucket.com/albums/qq117/Wyks_/Smilies/police.gif)  (http://i439.photobucket.com/albums/qq117/Wyks_/Smilies/jail.gif)  (http://i439.photobucket.com/albums/qq117/Wyks_/Smilies/police.gif)

I am so happy to hear this..Justice for Kathleen and her family.

Wipe that smirk off your face Drew..I believe the State will soon follow with a charge of murder in Stacey's death too.
 ::MonkeyDance:: ::MonkeyDance:: ::MonkeyDance::

I hope this wasn't just for show because this cop was laughing   ::MonkeyNoNo::
(http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b104/Blondeonahd/In%20the%20News/laughing.jpg)

Blonde - it was reported that Drew said to the officers when they arrested him (like in that photo), "guess I should have returned those library books", or something like that.  That could be why that officer is smiling.

Could someone explain why there are two counts of murder? Kathleen wasn't pregnant, or at least I never heard that she was, so I was curious about the two counts.

Thanks Klaas I'm so out of the loop   ::MonkeyConfused::

count 1: murder

count 2: assault in a manner that is expected to cause death

 ::MonkeyCool::

I would like to jab pins in all the puffy areas around his eyes and then stab the corneas, repeatedly.

Well over 40,000 pages of evidence in this case against Drew..no way he is going anywhere.

Also since the GJ is still meeting each Thursday I believe..that means to me..we may she more charges about Stacy's death towards the end of next week.

Illinois has passed the law that says statements made by the decease prior to their murder may be used at trial....that means that Kathleen's statements and letters to authorities about Drew can be used against him.  I believe it also means that Stacy's statements to her reverend about Drew admitting to her he killed Kathleen and what she saw that night early morning can also be used in court.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN
This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," May 7, 2009. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

Dissecting Drew Peterson's Arrest in Connection to the Death of His Third Wife
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519439,00.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
AND>>>>

Peterson to attack use of Savio's statements
May 8, 2009 9:46 AM | 16 Comments | UPDATED STORY
Drew Peterson's lead attorney this morning wasted no time attacking a major foundation of the murder case against his client.

Meanwhile, another of Peterson's attorneys said Peterson's arraignment scheduled for today had been postponed because lead attorney Joel Brodsky was in New York on the morning news program circuit, but court officials said it was still on for 1:30 p.m.

In a telephone interview on WGN-Ch. 9,  Brodsky said he will attack the constitutionality of  prosecutors trying to use statements by Peterson's dead ex-wife, Kathleen Savio, as evidence against him.

In a news conference Thursday night following Peterson's indictment and arrest, Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow said prosecutors will seek to admit statements made by Savio, essentially allowing her "to testify from beyond the grave."

"It's going to have to face a constitutional challenge," Brodsky said. "...We have now loosened the requirement for evidence in a homicide case ... We should make it stricter ... We're now involving rumor and innuendo and unreliable evidence in a homicide case."

On NBC's "Today" show--one of Brodsky's stops on a morning-long media blitz--he characterized the case against Peterson as "a weak, circumstantial case at best." He also said that Peterson had passed a polygraph test in connection with Savio's death.

In his appearance on WGN, Brodsky even attacked the contention that Savio was the victim of a homicide, as determined by a second autopsy after she was found drowned in an empty bathtub five years ago as her divorce settlement with Peterson was about to take effect.

He asserted that official Will County coroner's records still list the cause of Savio's death as accidental.

Brodsky also attacked Peterson's $20 million bail as unreasonable and said he would make a motion to reduce it. Peterson would have to post $2 million of that in cash to gain his release from jail.

"Drew clearly isn't a flight risk," Brodsky said as he reasserted his client's innocence. "If he was going to run, he would have run a long time ago."

Brodsky also was scheduled to appear on "ABC's "Good Morning America," and CBS' "The Early Show" in New York, according to Peterson's public relations firm.  He will also do interviews with MSNBC, WLS Radio and WFLD (Fox) Chicago. Another Peterson attorney, Andrew Abboud, was interviewed on WGN-720 AM (listen here).

"There is no evidence that links Drew Peterson to the death of Kathleen Savio or anyone else for that matter," a news release from Peterson's public relations firm quoted Brodsky.

 "Drew did not harm Kathleen, he has said so from day one.  We're obviously disappointed a grand jury indicted him.  But an indictment does not mean guilt."

"Prosecutors will need to prove Drew Peterson is guilty in court, and they can't because he didn't do it."   :roll:
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/05/petersons-attorney-goes-on-new-media-blitz.html

Thanks Wyks  ::MonkeyCool:: Can't wait to see that murderer in shackles today.

Foxnews is going to cover Drew in court today LIVE

http://www.foxnews.com/

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/crime/ArraignmentDrew

Peterson Arraignment
Postponed
Drew Peterson, the former police sergeant who went on a high-profile media blitz after his fourth wife's disappearance more than a year and a half ago, was expected to appear in court on murder charges in the death of his third wife.

Peterson, 55, was scheduled to be arraigned Friday on charges of first-degree murder in the 2004 death of Kathleen Savio, who was found in an empty bathtub at home. However, that arraignment was postponed until May 18th because Peterson's attorney was out of town.Police pulled him over Thursday evening shortly after he drove away from his Bolingbrook home.

(snipped)

(http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o100/klaasen3/Sub6_022109/050809_newdrew.jpg)

Well Isn't THAT conveeeeeeeenient ...  :roll:

You're welcome, NoRose!  It was GREAT to see him in shackles, wasn't it!!!   ::MonkeyDance::


Am so glad that LE waited til Drew left the house yesterday, before arresting him.  Cuz there was some concern that he wouldn't go easy, that he might hold one of his kids hostage, or worse, before ever going along easily in an arrest.  By arresting him down the street, the kids didn't have to see their father being arrested, and it gave LE the opportunity to bring those kids to safety.   So I do believe that LE handled this whole thing with a great deal of finesse.

I could watch that video all day of Drew being led around in shackles!!  MWAHAHAHA! 

 ::MonkeyDance::   ::cartwheel::   ::MonkeyDance::

Drew's attorney's got nothing, IMO.  All they can do is to try and attack the character of the witnesses, stall the proceedings in every way they can, and argue each step of the way.  Again, IMO.


(http://i439.photobucket.com/albums/qq117/Wyks_/Smilies/pacifier.gif)

I agree Drew's attorneys have nothing to use to defend him.  His kids wouldn't have been up at 3 am when he came home, covered in dark, bloody clothing..they weren't in the laundry room where Stacy found him..they were in bed asleep..so if that is his only alabi..they got nothing..and the State has over 40,000 pages of evidence.

And what kind of attorney heads off to talk shows rather then an arraignment...bah..they deserve each other.

The Drew Peterson timeline:

While still married to his third wife, Kathleen Savio, Peterson meets the future Stacy Peterson. Drew Peterson appears at the hotel where Stacy Peterson works. They talk over coffee; he routinely drops in during her shift. He is 47 and she is 17. Months later, they become intimate, Stacy Peterson tells family. While still dating Drew Peterson, Stacy Peterson becomes pregnant. They marry in 2003, exchanging vows in a field in Bolingbrook. Drew Peterson invites a son from his first marriage as his witness. Stacy Peterspon asks her sister Cassandra Cales to be there.

“They didn’t want to tell any of the family,” Cales says. “They just wanted to get it done.”

March 1, 2004. Drew Peterson and Kathleen Savio are sorting out the messy finances of their divorce when he shows up at her Bolingbrook home. (Peterson has said he was dropping off the couple’s two sons at the time). When no one answers the locked door, Drew Peterson asks a neighbor for help and waits for a locksmith, Peterson says. The neighbor goes first, according to Peterson.

“I didn’t want any trouble,” Drew Peterson recalls later. “I stood outside, then I heard screaming and went in.”

Savio’s body is found in the bathtub of her home. There is no water in the tub, and her hair is drenched with blood from a head laceration. Savio’s death is ruled an accidental drowning.

August 2007. Just months before she disappears, Stacy Peterson meets with her pastor, Neil Schori, at a Bolingbrook coffee shop. Stacy Peterson confides to Schori that her husband has told her he killed Kathleen Savio, according to an interview Schori has with Greta Van Susteren of Fox News in December 2007. Stacy Peterson “gave me details that I really can’t share,” Schori tells Fox News. Schori says he believes Stacy Peterson never went to police because she was afraid for her safety. Schori says he doesn’t go to police at the time because he believes Stacy Peterson didn’t want him to.

Drew Peterson says his missing wife had a “big crush” on Schori.

“Every time she went out to see him, she was all dolled up, all sexed up,” Drew Peterson says. “All I know for sure is, Stacy had a big crush on him.”

Early October, 2007. Three weeks before she vanishes, Stacy Peterson calls a man she hasn’t spoken to in years — Scott Rossetto. The call is “out of the blue,” Rossetto recalls. About six years earlier, Rossetto’s twin brother, Keith, had dated Stacy Peterson. After that first surprise phone call, Stacy Peterson and Scott Rossetto talk or e-mail about every other day.

“She kinda mentioned she wanted to end the relationship with her husband,” Rossetto says later, adding she was “sick and tired of being trapped in the house all the time. I think she missed her independence.”

Less than 10 days before Stacy Peterson disappears, Drew Peterson confronts Scott Rossetto and his wife at a suburban Denny’s.

“He asked me how I’d react if my wife was with another man,” Scott Rossetto says in November 2007, after testifying before a Will County grand jury looking into Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.

Although Rossetto has admitted sending Stacy Peterson “flirty” e-mails, he has denied having an affair with her.

Oct. 29, 2007. One day after she is supposed to go to a family friend’s house to paint — Stacy Peterson disappears. When relatives can’t reach the 23-year-old mother of two by phone, they become alarmed and call police. Bolingbrook police classify Stacy Peterson’s disappearance as a missing person case and say Drew Peterson is cooperating with authorities. At the time, Drew Peterson tells authorities he spoke to his wife the evening before she disappeared and had no reason to suspect anything was wrong. Peterson later says he believes his wife left voluntarily, possibly with another man. Stacy Peterson’s relatives say she would never have run away, leaving her two small children behind. A massive manhunt for Stacy Peterson begins. Family and a host of volunteers — including the Texas EquuSearch Mounted Search and Recovery Team — help look for Stacy Peterson.

November, 2007. As the search for Stacy Peterson continues, Drew Peterson becomes a media sensation — and seems to enjoy the attention. He talks with cable TV commentator Greta Van Susteren, and then Geraldo Rivera. He also flies out to New York to chat with NBC’s “Today” show host Matt Lauer — and denies he has anything to do with Stacy Peterson’s disappearance. At one point, he makes an on-camera plea for Stacy Peterson to come home. He also lands on the front cover of People magazine, insisting — once again — in the five-page story he had no role in Stacy Peterson’s disappearance or Savio’s death.

Nov. 9, 2007. Drew Peterson officially becomes a suspect in Stacy Peterson’s disappearance and the case is now a “potential homicide,” no longer a missing person case. That announcement comes on the heels of a decision by a Will County judge to exhume Kathleen Savio’s body so investigators can re-examine her mysterious 2004 bathtub death, which prosecutors say now appears to be murder, not an accident. As the investigation continues, Drew Peterson resigns from the Bolingbrook Police Department and is later granted his full “$6,067.71-a-month police pension.

Late November 2007. a source tells the Sun-Times that on the day Stacy Peterson disappeared, Drew Peterson's stepbrother Tom Morphey helped him move a blue barrel out of Drew and Stacy Peterson’s home and into Drew Peterson’s SUV. Morphey describes the barrel to police as feeling warm and weighing about 120 pounds, sources say. Walter Martineck Jr., a neighbor of Morphey's, appears on the “Today” show saying a distraught Morphey told him Oct. 29 he believed he moved Stacy Peterson's body in the barrel. He says Drew Peterson gave him money for helping with the move. After helping Peterson move the barrel, Morphey overdosed on pills, according to sources.

Feb. 21, 2008. The results of a new Savio autopsy are released, showing the death of the 40-year-old woman was a murder, not an accident, as investigators originally concluded. The results of the forensic exam, conducted in November 2007, are a surprise to her former husband.

“That’s hard to believe. I’m shocked,” Drew Peterson tells the Sun-Times. Meanwhile, relatives of Savio and Stacy Peterson say they hope the findings by pathologist Dr. Larry Blum help solve Savio’s slaying and Stacy Peterson’s disappearance. One of Savio’s relatives says she is angry that authorities didn’t rule Savio’s death a homicide immediately after she was found dead.

“It’s something that should have been done the right way almost four years ago,” says Melissa Doman, Savio’s niece. “It would have been done the right way, if people listened.”

May. 21. Drew Peterson is arrested and charged with felony unlawful use of a weapon for allegedly owning a Colt AR-15 assault rifle that lacked the minimum 16-inch barrel required under state law. His arrest comes months after a Nov. 1, 2007, police search that results in 11 guns — including the assault rifle — being removed from his Bolingbrook home. Joel Brodsky, Drew Peterson’s attorney, rips the arrest as a heavy-handed attempt to rattle the man named a suspect in Stacy Peterson’s disappearance. A trial is set for December.

July 23. Two longtime friends of Drew Peterson — Len Wawczak and his wife, Paula Stark — tell the Sun-Times that they cooperated with Illinois State Police, wearing a wire and recording seven months of intimate conversations with the former Bolingbrook cop. State Police decline to comment to the Sun-Times.

“We got him,” Wawczak, tells the Sun-Times.

Drew Peterson mocked investigators as “idiots,” called his third wife “a bitch” whose body he should have had cremated, and predicted he’d be tried and acquitted long before his fourth wife’s remains were found, Wawczak says in the Sun-Times interview.

Oct. 28. On the one-year anniversary of Stacy Peterson’s disappearance, 70 marchers carrying candles walk from the Bolingbrook home Drew Peterson once shared with Savio to the house where he and Stacy Peterson lived. Stacy Peterson’s sister, Cassandra Cales, and other close relatives don’t attend the vigil, saying they wish to mourn privately. Drew Peterson is in New York to appear on NBC’s “Today” show. “There is not a single day that goes by that I don’t think about Stacy, so to me Tuesday is just another day of her being away,” Drew Peterson says in a statement.

Nov. 11. Drew Peterson meets with high-profile Chicago divorce attorney Jeffery Leving. Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s criminal defense attorney, says Drew Peterson discussed his legal options following Stacy Peterson’s Oct. 28, 2007, disappearance. “All he’s done is consult with him,” Brodsky said at the time. “Nothing has been finalized. No decisions have been made.”

Nov. 19. Legislation goes into effect that is expected to give Will County prosecutors a powerful new took in probing the Savio slaying and Stacy Peterson’s disappearance. The legislation is to allow as evidence hearsay statements from murdered witnesses. The new legislation could come into play in connection with a minister who has said Stacy Peterson told him that Drew Peterson killed Savio. In the Savio case, Savio sent a letter to a prosecutor that said, Peterson “knows how to manipulate the system, and his next step is to take my children away. Or kill me instead.”

December 2008. Will County Prosecutor James Glasgow says he is confident 2009 will bring new information that will help investigators find out what happened to either Savio or Stacy Peterson — or both. “I’m very positive. I’m very encouraged by the work the police have done,” Glasgow said. “We are not at a dead end by any stretch of the imagination.”

January 2009. Drew Peterson moves fiancee Christina Raines, 24, and her two young children into the home he formerly shared with Stacy Peterson. It’s the beginning of a tempestuous romantic saga seemingly without end. Raines’ father, Ernie Raines, tells the media he’s determined to end the relationship, calling Drew Peterson “the devil.” Christina Raines moves out of the Peterson house, but then moves back in again. She walks out again in April. But for good?

March 7. The Sun-Times News Group reports that Thomas Morphey, Drew Peterson’s step-brother, has an immunity deal with prosecutors — if Morphey truthfully tells investigators what he knows about Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.

March 10. After nearly 17 months of silence, Morphey finally talks. In an interview with the Sun-Times News Group, Morphey talks about trying to kill himself after he suspected he’d helped Drew Peterson remove Stacy Peterson’s body.

“It kills me,” Morphey said. “There’s not a day that goes by that I don’t wish I could take back the events of that day.”

May 7. Drew Peterson is indicted on two counts of murder in the slaying of Savio. State Police take him into custody without incident.

“I guess I should have returned those library books,” Peterson jokes.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/1563959,drew-peterson-timeline-050709.article

Does anyone know if Drew will be in general population or if he will get special treatment due to high profile case???  Personally I hope bubba finds him!! ::MonkeyLaugh::

(http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/_3drew640.jpg)
Drew Peterson gives a thumbs-up as he is escorted out of the Will County Courthouse by deputies today. (Zbigniew Bzdak/Chicago Tribune)


http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/05/petersons-attorney-goes-on-new-media-blitz.html

Bond for Peterson remains at $20 million
May 8, 2009 3:34 PM | 70 Comments | UPDATED STORY


Drew Peterson was still grinning Friday even as he was led away by guards after learning he will spend at least the next 10 days in jail before a Will County judge reconsiders a $20 million bail set in the murder case against the former Bolingbrook police sergeant.

Peterson's arraignment on charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004 was postponed by Circuit Judge Richard C. Schoenstedt until May 18 because his attorneys were not in court.

Peterson arrived in the courtroom in a red, jail-issued short-sleeved jumpsuit and appeared to be smirking.

"Look at this bling," Peterson said as he entered the courthouse. "Look at this nice spiffy outfit. Three squares a day."

The courtroom was full, mostly with reporters and court artists. As he was seated in the jury box, someone in the courtroom asked him: "Would you like to come sit by us, Drew." To which he replied: "I'd rather."

Peterson, who was handcuffed, answered a few questions from the judge and the entire hearing lasted five or six minutes.

Glasgow told the judge that he expected Peterson's attorney, Joel Brodsky, to file a motion to reduce the $20 million bond before the next court date, but that hasn't happened yet. Glasgow agreed to the May 18 date.

Peterson is segregated from the general jail population, spending his 90-minute-a-day recreational time alone. His cell has its own shower, sink and toilet, according to officials.

Cassandra Cales, the sister of Peterson's missing fourth wife, Stacy, was in court for the appearance. Her sister, then 23, disappeared 18 months ago.

"It made me feel good to see him chained up like the dog that he is," she said outside the courthouse. "I'm happy that Kathy's family has gotten justice for Kathleen Savio."

Cales said she plans to contact Drew's oldest son Stephen about the children. She also plans to contact an attorney about her visitation rights; she said the last time she saw her nephews was a year ago.

She's hopeful people who have information about her sister's disappearance will step forward now "that they know he's locked up."

When asked if this arrest gives her any sense of closure, she said, "Closure is bringing my sister home and getting her the justice she deserves."

Earlier today, Brodsky wasted no time today attacking a major foundation of the murder case against his client.

In a telephone interview on WGN-Ch. 9,  Brodsky said he will attack the constitutionality of  prosecutors trying to use statements by Savio as evidence against him.

In a news conference Thursday night following Peterson's indictment and arrest, Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow said prosecutors will seek to admit statements made by Savio, essentially allowing her "to testify from beyond the grave."

"It's going to have to face a constitutional challenge," Brodsky said. "...We have now loosened the requirement for evidence in a homicide case ... We should make it stricter ... We're now involving rumor and innuendo and unreliable evidence in a homicide case."

On NBC's "Today" show--one of Brodsky's stops on a morning-long media blitz--he characterized the case against Peterson as "a weak, circumstantial case at best." He also said that Peterson had passed a polygraph test in connection with Savio's death.

In his appearance on WGN, Brodsky even attacked the contention that Savio was the victim of a homicide, as determined by a second autopsy after she was found drowned in an empty bathtub five years ago as her divorce settlement with Peterson was about to take effect.

He asserted that official Will County coroner's records still list the cause of Savio's death as accidental.

Brodsky also attacked Peterson's $20 million bail as unreasonable and said he would make a motion to reduce it. Peterson would have to post $2 million of that in cash to gain his release from jail.

"Drew clearly isn't a flight risk," Brodsky said as he reasserted his client's innocence. "If he was going to run, he would have run a long time ago."

Brodsky also was scheduled to appear on "ABC's "Good Morning America," and CBS' "The Early Show" in New York, according to Peterson's public relations firm.  Another Peterson attorney, Andrew Abboud, was interviewed on WGN-720 AM (listen here).

Stephen Peterson showed up at Drew's house about 11 a.m. Friday with three children, a teenage boy and a younger girl and boy. All four entered the house and Stephen, an Oak Brook police officer, declined comment.

Drew Peterson lives with his four children----two teenage boys from his marriage to Savio and a younger boy and a girl with Stacy. When Drew was arrested Thursday, the children were taken to the Bolingbrook Police Department, then transferred to the custody of the state Department of Children and Family Services.

At Drew's request, authorities contacted Stephen, who lives near North Aurora, so that he could take custody of the children.

When reached earlier Friday at his North Aurora home, Stephen declined comment.

::MonkeyHaHa::   It will serve him right if he does get general population!  heeeee   


Am thinking he probably won't tho.   ::MonkeyNoNo::  Two reasons... one you've mentioned, due to this being a high profile case..... and two, Drew is a former LE officer.  Bubba especially likes that type.

I suppose while in jail, before convicted, his defense attorneys will likely do all they can to protect Drew's placement.  Seems that the accused is sooooo much more protected these days, have soooooo many "rights", blah blah.  I'm all for rights, but my gosh, the victim had all their rights violated.  IMO, all the accused needs are basic food, shelter, and clothing.  Period.  Nothing else but the truth and the person's day in court should matter, IMO. 

Personally, I don't think anyone who is convicted and lands in prison after trial ought to get special consideration of any kind, no matter who they are or what job they held before, etc.  Am thinking that being in prison "ought" to level the playing field for the inmates.  After being convicted, if the perp gets locked up with some bad guys, oh gee darn, maybe they ought not to have done whatever it is they did in the first place.  Let consequences fall where they may, and that includes Bubba.  IMO.   

I realize that what I just posted may sound harsh to some, perhaps as if I'm not considering the perp at all.  And let me hasten to say that I would give the accused (before trial and in jail) and the perp (convicted and in prison), their basic rights and that's it.  I say this even tho two of my three sons managed to screw up their lives and land themselves in prison for 18 months each.  That was about 7 years ago.  I know how hard it was for them, and I don't wish prison time on anyone who doesn't deserve it.  And yet for those who do deserve to be in prison, they ought to do their time equally as the next inmate, no special treatment.  And that's just my opinion.  I hope that Drew never sees the light of day again, that would be too good for him, IMO. 
 

Inside source told me he's be held in the infirmary at Will County jail.

Drew Peterson’s Day in Court, He’s Laughing Now … We Shall See Who Laughs Last … Narcissist

http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/05/09/drew-petersons-day-in-court-hes-laughing-now-we-shall-see-who-laughs-last-narcissist/

All the classic signs of a narcissist …

Wyks...I don't think that you sounded harsh at all...you said what I feel as well...

The infirmary?   ::MonkeyShocked::  Jeeeeeeez.. if that's true, they wasted no time in giving special treatment, did they!! 

Thanks Cookie, that's good to know!  It just seems to me that in making sure an inmate receives fair and just treatment, the line has been crossed, IMO.  If only the victim/s, even their families, could receive one tiny measure of all that consideration.  grrrrrr. 

I don't think it is necessarily special treatment.  I think maybe it is the best place to make sure he is separated from the other prisoners.

I dunno, maybe it's just me then.  Cuz if I were arrested on any charge, let alone murder, am quite sure I'd be thrown into the first available cell, occupied by someone else or not.  Rather doubt they'd make me comfy in the infirmary. 

Kathleen Savio: Mother speaks up about charges in daughter's death
'We're so happy he was arrested, but we know there's a long way to go,' she says

By Joel Hood | Tribune reporter
    May 10, 2009

As the Drew Peterson saga again plays out on a national stage, Kathleen Savio's parents sought comfort the only place they could find it: beside their daughter's grave in Hillside.

Last week, Marcia Savio, Kathleen's stepmother, brought flowers to Kathleen's grave in advance of Mother's Day and kissed the headstone four times -- once for her, once for Kathleen's father, Henry, and once each for the slain woman's two children. Then, before leaving, she said softly, "Let's go get him."

Marcia Savio was talking about Peterson, whom Illinois State Police would arrest just days later on charges alleging that he murdered Kathleen Savio, his third wife, in 2004. On Friday, while Peterson mugged for the cameras and joked with reporters during his first court appearance in Joliet, Marcia Savio again retreated to her daughter's grave to share the news.

"We're so happy he was arrested, but we know there's a long way to go," Marcia Savio told the Tribune on Friday in a rare interview. "Something good needs to come of this. No one should have to live with fear the way Kathleen did."
Henry J. Savio declined to be interviewed. Marcia Savio, who's been married to him for more than 30 years, said the five years since Kathleen's murder have been hard on him.

"He's very hurt by a lot of what he sees and reads," Marcia Savio said of her husband. "What [Peterson] did to [Kathleen] was bad enough. Why does he have to act like that?"

The Savios did not attend Friday's hearing and aren't sure if they'll attend future court proceedings unless they're called to testify. The Stone Park couple are content to remain out of the spotlight while other family members, including Kathleen's brother, sister, niece and nephew, speak freely about the case and their memories of her. That continued Friday night when all four appeared on CNN's "Larry King Live," along with an attorney who is representing the Savio family in a wrongful-death case against Peterson.

Family and friends have said Peterson and Kathleen Savio, whom many called "Kitty," began dating while the former Bolingbrook police sergeant was still married to his second wife. They wed in 1992 and had two boys. The couple was working on a divorce settlement in 2004 when Savio was found dead in a dry bathtub, a death initially ruled an accident.

Marcia Savio said she and her husband didn't care much for Peterson while he and Kathleen were together, and they and other family members have said they suspected abuse.

"Kitty was a proud young lady," Marcia Savio said. "In a lot of cases where women are being abused, they simply don't talk about it. And they don't take action because they believe things will get better."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-kathleen-savio-mom-10may10,0,2839018.story

DANA PRETZER IN ABOUT 5 MINUTES - GOING TO BE A GREAT SHOW!

http://scaredmonkeysradio.com/radio.m3u

(http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o100/klaasen3/Sub6_022109/Pretzer51009.jpg)

that is how I see it to Wyks!
I would be thrown in with Bubbaette! ::MonkeyLaugh::

He won't be in GP because he is EX Police force.

Chicago Sun Times
 
May 10, 2009 Sunday
The case against Drew: Testimony 'From beyond the grave'; Prosecutors plan to use 'hearsay' statements from murdered wife
 
Crucial evidence against Drew Peterson when he stands trial for the murder of third wife Kathleen Savio could come from Savio herself -- and possibly even from Peterson's still-missing fourth wife, Stacy.

Will County prosecutors plan to use statements Savio purportedly made to relatives and others about threats from Peterson to bolster their allegations that the former Bolingbrook police officer drowned her in a bathtub in 2004.

A new state law enacted last year with the support of Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow makes it easier to use "hearsay'' statements from victims who were allegedly killed to prevent them from testifying against their attackers.

"You're letting someone testify from beyond the grave,'' Glasgow said of the law enacted last November, which was referred to informally in Springfield as the "Drew Peterson bill.''

The statements of Savio and Stacy Peterson may be critical -- though some legal experts question the constitutionality of the law -- because authorities apparently have little physical or forensic evidence tying Peterson to Savio's death.

There are no signs of forced entry to the Bolingbrook home where Savio died; her death originally was ruled an accident, not a murder, and defense attorneys have hinted that a teenage son of Savio and Peterson will provide an alibi for him.

Peterson was returning the couple's two sons to Savio on March 1, 2004, when she was discovered dead in an empty tub, her hair streaked with blood from a cut. Investigators initially concluded she had bumped her head and drowned before the water drained from the tub.

After Stacy Peterson vanished in October 2007, investigators reopened Savio's case. Citing a second autopsy done after her body was exhumed, they ultimately concluded she had been murdered.

Among the steps State Policetook during that probe was to yank the bathtub from the house for analysis. It is expected to be shown to jurors who hear the case.

In announcing the murder charges against Drew Peterson, Glasgow acknowledged that prosecutors plan to introduce as evidence statements made by Savio in the months before she was slain.

Savio told relatives she feared Peterson because of threats he allegedly had made against her. The couple had recently divorced, though they had yet to formally divide their financial assets.

"The court can allow those statements in at trial,'' Glasgow contends.

Even statements allegedly made by Stacy Peterson to her church pastor in the weeks before she disappeared could be used against Peterson during the trial of his third wife, authorities said.

A suburban minister has claimed that before she vanished, Stacy Peterson confided to him during counseling sessions that Drew Peterson had admitted to her that he had killed Savio.

A spokesman for Glasgow wouldn't comment on those statements, but another suburban prosecutor who backed the change in state law said he thinks Stacy Peterson's comments to her pastor would be allowed as evidence at Drew Peterson's trial under the new law.

"The pastor's testimony should come in unfettered,'' said DuPage County State's Attorney Joseph Birkett.

The law faces serious constitutional questions, some legal experts said. A similar federal law was struck down last year. The state law could face the same fate because it appears to unfairly limit a defendant's right to cross-examine an accuser, DePaul University law Professor Leonard Cavise said.

"It should fall flat on its face,'' he said.

Drew Peterson's attorneys have publicly cited evidence that is generally inadmissible in court: polygraph tests.

In television interviews Friday, defense attorney Joel Brodsky repeatedly claimed Peterson's innocence by noting that he passed a lie detector test when questioned on the details of Savio's suspicious death.

"He passed that polygraph exam 100 percent,'' Brodsky said on ABC's "Good Morning America.''

Glasgow plans to be part of the legal team prosecuting Peterson and said he is optimistic about its outcome.

"We're very confident in our case,'' Glasgow said. 
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:969923216&start=1

Chicago Sun Times
 
May 10, 2009 Sunday
 
Shaky law shouldn't be used to get Drew
 
The problem with dead people is they're so hard to talk to.
You can't ask them if they really said what people say they said.
You can't ask them where they said it and how they said and why.
You can't challenge their memories. You can't put them under oath.

And yet, short of holding a seance, that is precisely the problem facing Drew Peterson, the clowning ex-cop from Bolingbrook who was charged Thursday with the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

When Peterson goes on trial, the most damning evidence against him could be a slew of remarks supposedly made to others by Savio and his fourth wife, Stacy -- the wife who disappeared.

Obviously, his lawyers won't have much luck cross-examining those two women.

For good reason, "hearsay" evidence -- what one person claims another person said -- is almost never admissible in a criminal trial. Hearsay evidence denies a defendant his 6th Amendment right to confront his accusers in court.

If a judge allows the admission of such evidence in the Peterson trial, under cover of a new state law of debatable legal soundness, legal scholars widely predict a guilty verdict would be thrown out on appeal.

And we're inclined to agree.

If this sounds like a defense of Peterson, it is not. Our concern is for the rule of law, which must prevail even we are most outraged.

Will County prosecutors are optimistic that they will be allowed to present in court the "from-the-grave" words of Savio and Stacy Peterson because a state law enacted in November -- known as the Drew Peterson Law -- creates a new legal exception to the ban on hearsay evidence. The law's sponsor, state Sen. Arthur Wilhelmi (D-Joliet), tells us he crafted the bill as narrowly as possible to apply only in cases of "first-degree murder to prevent a witness from testifying."

But that, in our view, is precisely the problem: The logic of the law is utterly circular. It assumes guilt to prove guilt. It allows the court to presume that Peterson killed Savio so that her hearsay comments that he threatened to kill her can be used to prove he killed her.

The shaky logic grows shakier with respect to Stacy Peterson. Here, prosecutors may ask the court's permission to present even less reliable "double hearsay" evidence -- witnesses who will testify that Stacy told them that Drew told her that he killed Savio.

Got it?

DePaul University Law Professor Andrea Lyon said the introduction of the Stacy Peterson hearsay evidence would create a "double whammy" of unfairness. Not only would Drew Peterson, on trial for murdering Savio, be unable to confront his accuser, but the jury would get an earful of the theory that he also murdered Stacy.

The courts have upheld the introduction of hearsay evidence in cases in which a defendant may have murdered a witness, but only when the motive for the murder clearly was to keep the witness from testifying. An example might be a mobster who guns down a witness who is set to testify against him.

In a major ruling last June, the U.S. Supreme Court made that distinction clear, much to the possible disadvantage of the Peterson prosecutors down the road.

In the case of Giles vs. California, a Los Angeles man was charged with shooting and killing his girlfriend. He claimed self-defense, but a police officer testified at trial that three weeks before the murder, the victim had told her that her boyfriend had threatened to kill her.

A jury found the defendant guilty, but the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the verdict, saying the hearsay evidence given by the police officer should have been ruled inadmissable because there was no proof that the defendant had killed his girlfriend solely to keep her from testifying against him.

Prosecutors and legislators who crafted the Drew Peterson Law tell us that they were well aware of Giles vs. California, of course, and they feel confident the Illinois law meets the U.S. Supreme Court's standard.

Drew Peterson is far from the most popular guy in town, and many people already think he's guilty. But it would be wrong to use a constitutionally questionable law to convict him.

Any one of us could be next. 
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:969923200&start=2

May 11, 12:39 PM EDT

Drew Peterson's adult son says dad's no killer


BOLINGBROOK, Ill. (AP) -- Drew Peterson's adult son says dad's no killer.

Stephen Peterson said Monday that the family is praying for his father's release from jail on last week's murder charge in the 2004 drowning of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Drew Peterson, a former police sergeant in Bolingbrook, Ill., is in custody on $20 million bail in Will County. He has denied any involvement in either Savio's death or the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Stephen Peterson, a son from an earlier marriage, says in a statement that the family is confident of his father's innocence. He says Peterson's two children with Savio and two children with Stacy Peterson are staying with him.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POLICE_OFFICERS_WIFE?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US

Chicago Sun Times 
May 11, 2009 Monday
 
Drew's lawyer says prosecutor 'really doesn't have a case'  :roll:

Prosecutor James Glasgow "really doesn't have a case" against accused wife-killer Drew Peterson, his defense attorney says.

Joel Brodsky -- who was en route to New York when Peterson was arrested last week -- stepped off a plane at O'Hare Airport on Sunday and lambasted Glasgow as an overzealous prosecutor who has hitched a weak case to circumstantial evidence.

The ex-Bolingbrook police officer maintains his "total, complete innocence in Kathy Savio's death," Brodsky said.

He vowed a fight to slash Peterson's $20 million bond. With his roots in the community, it should have been less than $1 million, Brodsky said.

The case is "not just hearsay, but double hearsay," Brodsky said.

He was referring to statements purportedly made by Savio, Peterson's third wife, about his threats, and comments allegedly made by Stacy, his missing fourth wife, to a pastor.

Peterson has been cracking wise since his arrest about jailhouse food and "bling" (handcuffs).

It's a defense mechanism, Brodsky said.

"Drew does not think this situation he's in is funny," he said. "His comments certainly don't help. . . . I've discussed that with Drew."

Given the publicity, Brodsky said he's considering whether Peterson would have a better chance at a fair trial with jurors from outside the area.

The defense will focus on the constitutionality of a new state law that makes it easier to use hearsay, and differing medical opinions on Savio's autopsy, Brodsky said. 
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:969974915&start=1

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519942,00.html

Families of Drew Peterson's Wives May Challenge Custody
Tuesday , May 12, 2009


Drew Peterson, charged in the death of his third wife and suspected in the disappearance of his fourth, soon might face another legal battle: a custody fight.

The ex-cop had two children with Kathleen Savio, whom he's accused of killing, and another two with Stacy Peterson, who has been missing since 2007. Drew Peterson's adult son Stephen announced Monday that he has taken custody of the children, but relatives of Savio and Stacy Peterson are looking into whether they can change that.

"We'd seen a lawyer a ways back and were told we'd have to wait until he was charged," said Pamela Bosco, a friend of Stacy Peterson who has acted as a spokeswoman for her family. "We have to go back to a lawyer and see what's available to us."

Click here for photos.

"It's an issue that's moved to the front burner," said Martin Glink, an attorney representing Savio's father and sister, who filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Peterson shortly before his arrest last week. He added, however, that he hasn't talked about the issue with his clients or anyone else in the Savio family.

Peterson, 55, is being held in lieu of $20 million bond as he awaits a hearing next week on first-degree murder charges in the 2004 death of Savio, who was found drowned in a dry bathtub, a gash to the back of her head.

He has two boys, ages 16 and 14, with Savio and a 5-year-old boy and 4-year-old girl with Stacy Peterson. Peterson has long maintained his innocence in Savio's death and Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

Stephen Peterson, Drew Peterson's son from a previous marriage, issued a statement Monday on behalf of his siblings, noting that they are staying with him.

"All of the children of Drew Peterson fully support their father and know that he is innocent of the charges against him. We know him better than anyone else in the world and we know he is not guilty," Stephen Peterson said.

Drew Peterson wanted his children to stay with his adult son, said Reem Odeh, the law partner of Joel Brodsky, Peterson's attorney, who has worked on Peterson's behalf.

After Peterson's arrest, the state's Department of Children and Family Services turned his children over to "relatives" they would not identify. The child welfare agency also investigated Stephen Peterson's home, Odeh said.

Chicago attorney Matthew Kirsh said the current custody arrangement may be hard to challenge.

"A parent whose rights have not been terminated has the right to designate a guardian in writing," Kirsh said.

After the Savio family filed the wrongful death lawsuit, Peterson appeared beside his teenage sons on CBS's "Early Show," during which the older boy defended his father and characterized his grandfather and aunt as virtual strangers.

"I don't remember meeting him," 16-year-old Thomas Peterson said of Henry Savio. "If he was walking down the street I wouldn't recognize him. And my aunt, I haven't seen in six years."

Jennifer Smetters, a family law attorney in Chicago who is not involved with the case, said if she represented a relative of either mother, she would advise seeking guardianship of all four children.

"The court needs to place the children in the home that would serve their best interests," Smetters said. "I would advise them to prepare their home to take all of the children. It's very important that these children don't go through any more upheaval."

He has brainwashed them all  ::MonkeyNoNo::

Chicago Sun Times
May 12, 2009 Tuesday
 
Drew's 6 kids: 'We know he is not guilty'
The six children of Drew Peterson are standing by their father, saying Monday they believe he is innocent of charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

"We know him better than anyone else in the world, and we know he is not guilty," said Drew Peterson's son Stephen, an Oak Brook police officer, in a statement released by his father's publicist. "We miss our dad and are praying for his release every day."

Stephen and his brother, Eric, are the sons of Drew Peterson and his first wife, Carol.

Drew Peterson has been in Will County Jail since Thursday, when he was charged with killing Savio in 2004.

The two teenage children of Savio and Peterson, Kristopher and Tom, appeared on a morning news program with their father last month to say they didn't believe allegations that he was involved in their mother's death. "I highly do not believe that my dad had murdered my mom," Tom Peterson, 16, said on CBS' "Early Show" on April 24. "Because, first off, he wasn't there, he was with us during that period of time."

Tom and Kristopher, as well as Anthony and Lacy, Drew Peterson's young children with his missing fourth wife, Stacy, are now living with Stephen Peterson. Stacy Peterson was 23 when she went missing in October 2007. Police have said they consider her a victim of a "potential homicide" and have named Drew Peterson as the sole suspect in the case. 
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:970555105&start=2

Well.. I'm not surprised that Stephen would say this.  However, we don't see or hear the rest of "the family" coming forward in droves to say the same thing, do we!  A good reason for that.  Much of the rest of "the family" Stephen speaks of, are counting their lucky stars that Drew is safely behind bars.  For the first time in their lives they are able to walk around without having to watch their back, etc.  This info comes to me from a family member, that's how I've known since the early days in this case.  My heart goes out to all three familes, Stacy's - Kathy's - and the Peterson's.  It is NOT as Stephen wishes to portray to all the world, the Peterson's are just as devastated as the other families are, and do NOT have Drew's back like Stephen and Drew's mother does.   ::MonkeyNoNo:: 

Yes he has, Nut!  So sad. 

Stephen doesn't mention that his brother Eric has estranged himself from his father after Kathy's death, from the whole family except one person.  Eric must be rather lonely, yet needed to make that choice for himself in order to survive feeling the way he does.  IMO, Stephen need NOT be the spokesman for "the family", cuz they are NOT feeling the same way he is!  Just burns my britches!  grrrrr

Not to mention the four younger kids have to act like they are just fine with Drew, they have had to live in the same house with him all these years.  Whatever the teens said to the grand jury, to the media, they knew that they had to go home and face Drew.  Now they get to live with Stephen, yippee.   ::MonkeyRoll::

Many of us do remember what Tom said when Stacy went missing, that she had always been 'vocal' in the arguments between she and his dad Drew.  And that morning, in the room next door to their bedroom, Tom heard them arguing, then he heard nothing.  And never saw Stacy again either.  That has got to weigh heavy on his mind when he thinks of his dad possibly killing Kathy.  Tom was very young at that time, and likely was in his bed sound asleep when Drew supposedly was gone in the middle of the night.  How is he to know anything about that night!  My heart goes out to all the children, even to Stephen, who I'm thinking may have been thrust into this position long ago by Drew, perhaps not even believing himself what he is saying.   

Drew Peterson explains his joking behavior :roll:
May 15, 2009 6:08 AM | No Comments
Drew Peterson is explaining today that he cracked jokes after he was arrested for the murder of his third wife because that's just the way he is. :roll:

Peterson's comments to be aired on NBC's "Today" show this morning were made in a jailhouse phone interview taped Thursday.

"There's no book written on how I'm supposed to act," he told host Matt Lauer. "Would it be better if I hid my head down and tried to hide my face and hunched over and had tears in my eyes? I mean, no, that's just not me."

After his arrest, Peterson had described his orange jailhouse as "spiffy" and referred to his handcuffs as "bling."

Peterson is being held in jail in lieu of $20,000,000 bail. He is scheduled to be arraigned Monday, and his attorney has said that at that time he will move to have that bail reduced to somewhere between $100,000 and $500,000, an amount that would allow his client to go free.

In the NBC interview, Peterson also said he didn't take part in the search for his fourth wife, the missing Stacy Peterson, because he didn't like the way it was being handled.

Peterson has been charged with the murder of Kathleen Savio. He is a suspect in Stacy's disappearance.

The Tribune revealed this morning that six days before Savio's body was found in an empty bathtub in her Bolingbrook home, Drew Peterson's lawyer told his client that he was to be deposed in the couple's divorce battle.

Peterson, indicted last week, stood to lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in the divorce from the sale of the couple's home and his Montgomery bar. Savio also was going after half of Peterson's police pension.
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/05/peterson-explains-his-joking-behavior.html

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/30759276/?GT1=43001

Drew Peterson: I’ll ‘probably be found innocent’
In jailhouse interview, accused killer criticizes grand jury that indicted him

By Mike Celizic
TODAYShow.com contributor
updated 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
In a phone interview from the Will County Jail in Joliet, Ill., recorded Thursday and broadcast Friday, Drew Peterson told TODAY’s Matt Lauer that he’ll “probably be found innocent” of the 2004 murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. The 55-year-old former Bolingbrook, Ill., police sergeant was also harshly critical of the grand jury system that indicted him.

Police have been investigating both Savio’s death and Stacey Peterson’s disappearance for some 18 months. Lauer asked Peterson if he had any thoughts on why he the indictment was handed down when it was.

“I believe that was the last day of the grand jury and I believe they had to do something. The state's attorney, I believe, was under a lot of pressure from both the media and the Savio family to do something,” he replied.

Story continues below ↓
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
advertisement | your ad here

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Flip with quips
“Do you have idea what the state's evidence is against you?” Lauer asked.

“No idea. And the grand jury system seriously needs to be revised,” he replied. “I truly believe that if they wanted to they could have indicted you for this incident. What you have is a bunch of lay people that are in there and they have been sitting there for 18 months, and they are uneducated on the points of law, rules of evidence and things like that.”

Lauer asked Peterson if he has any evidence to prove his innocence.

“There’s all kinds of evidence available. We’ll get discovery and we’ll basically piece-by-piece take apart their case,” Peterson replied, adding that he could not elaborate on what that evidence is.

Peterson was arrested after a traffic stop on May 7 after being indicted at the end of the local grand jury’s 18-month term. He is being held on $20 million bail, a sum that his attorney, Joel Brodsky, has called exorbitant and is trying to get reduced.

 
John Smierciak / Getty Images Contributor
Former police officer Drew Peterson was arrested for the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, near his home in Bolingbrook, Ill.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Peterson told Lauer he expected that he would be arrested when he was.

“I wasn't really that surprised. The news crews were outside which indicated to me that they were getting ready for something,” he said. “So I was trying to get to the bank to make a deposit so my family would have some money in the bank account. And all of a sudden I was swooped down on.”

After his arrest, Peterson quipped to reporters, “I guess I should have returned those library books.” Later, while being transferred in handcuffs and his orange jail clothes, he asked reporters what he thought of his “bling” and his “spiffy” clothes.

 Video

 
  Drew Peterson behind bars
May 8: Drew Peterson is being held in the drowning death of his third wife. Peterson’s attorney discusses the charges.
Today show
 
 
In an appearance on TODAY after Peterson’s arrest, Brodsky had explained Peterson’s flippant remarks as his wisecracking way of dealing with stress. Lauer asked Peterson, “Do you understand how it can tend to make you a very unsympathetic character in the eyes of the public?”

“Well, there is no book written on how I'm supposed to act,” Peterson replied. “Would it be better if I hid my head down and tried to hide my face and hunched over and tears in my eyes? I mean, no, that's just not me.”

True or false?
Savio was found dead in her dry bathtub shortly after she and Peterson divorced. She had a cut on the back of her head, and the death was ruled an accidental drowning after she slipped and hit her head on the tub.

But after Stacey Peterson disappeared, authorities exhumed her body and conducted another autopsy, which concluded that she had been murdered. Peterson took a polygraph examination for a book, “"Drew Peterson Exposed,” by Derek Armstrong, which confirmed his contention that he had nothing to do with Savio’s death. Some of his answers relating to Stacey Peterson were deemed to be untruthful, but on the key questions of whether he harmed either wife, his denials withstood the lie detector. The reliability of polygraph tests is debated and their results are not admissible as evidence in criminal trials.

Lauer asked Peterson about the mixed results of the test.

Speaking hesitantly, Peterson said, “All of the questions about Kathleen I passed with no question.” As for the questions about Stacey Peterson, he said, “Did I remove her from the house, or did I hurt her in any way? I passed those in my answer that I did not.”

Savio had told others that she feared Peterson would kill her. Normally, those people would not be allowed to testify to that hearsay evidence in court, but the Illinois legislature recently passed a law that would allow the evidence to be admitted at the trial. Constitutional scholars have questioned whether the law will stand up to review, and Peterson told Lauer that he has information that the legislature may be having misgivings about the law.

Lauer asked, “Have you given consideration, Drew, to the possibility that you may never be free again; that you may be held until trial and found guilty at trial?”

“Right,” he replied, adding, “I'm also thinking I'm going to be released on bond and I’m probably [going to] be found innocent.

<snip>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Will this guy ever get it?  I hope this piece of chit rots in He77!  JMO

May 15, 2:14 PM EDT

Ex-cop accused in 3rd wife's death defends remarks

 JOLIET, Ill. (AP) -- Former suburban Chicago police sergeant Drew Peterson defended his apparently cavalier attitude about his arrest on charges of killing his third wife, saying that acting in a way people might consider more appropriate is "not me."

"There's no book written on how I'm supposed to act," Peterson told NBC's Matt Lauer during an interview aired on Friday's "Today" show.

Peterson called his handcuffs "bling" and his red jail jumpsuit "spiffy" as he was led into court last week. Lauer asked Peterson if he worries such remarks will make him seem unsympathetic.

"Would it be better if I hid my head down and tried to hide my face and hunched and had tears in my eyes? I mean, no, that's just not me," he said by phone from the jail in Will County, where he's been held since his May 7 arrest in the slaying of Kathleen Savio.
<snipped>
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_POLICE_OFFICERS_WIFE?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US

Chicago Tribune 
May 15, 2009 Friday
 
2 former acquaintances, stepbrother at grand jury
 
Three potentially key witnesses in the cases against Drew Peterson appeared Thursday before the same special grand jury that returned a murder indictment last week against the former Bolingbrook police sergeant in the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. The grand jury is still investigating the disappearance of Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy.

Thomas Morphey, Lenny Wawczak and Paula Stark all entered the Will County Court Annex Building, where the grand jury has been meeting for 18 months. They declined to comment.

But their appearance could signal the end of the investigation into Stacy's disappearance. They were expected to be the last witnesses called to testify, sources said. The grand jury's term expires May 21. If the jury does not return an indictment, State's Atty. James Glasgow could continue the investigation with another panel.

Morphey, Peterson's stepbrother, has alleged he helped Peterson move Stacy's body in a blue container from their Bolingbrook home Oct. 28, 2007, the day she disappeared. He described the container as heavy and warm to the touch.

Wawczak and Stark, former acquaintances of Peterson's, have claimed they secretly recorded Peterson last year for the state police. Peterson has denied wrongdoing.

Peterson's neighbor and friend, Steve Carcerano, also appeared before the grand jury. He was one of the neighbors who discovered Savio's body and has defended Peterson. It is at least the second time he has been called to testify.

Glasgow's office declined to comment. 
 
NEWS FOCUS: The Drew Peterson case / POSSIBLE KEY WITNESSES
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:972627728&start=18

Jailhouse Interview with Drew Peterson … Me, Me, Me … The Narcissist says “I’ll probably be found innocent”

http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/05/16/jailhouse-interview-with-drew-peterson-me-me-me-the-narcissist-says-ill-probably-be-found-innocent%e2%80%9d/

The rantings and stylings of a narcissist ... I am innocent and everyone else just doesn't know any better because they are not me, Drew Peterson.


Haven't we seen this type of personality before ... OJ Simpson

Ex-cop's mouth could compound his legal troubles  ::MonkeyHaHa::
May 17 2009

DON BABWIN
Associated Press Writer
CHICAGO (AP) Drew Peterson might not take the stand if he goes to trial on charges alleging he killed his third wife, but his words could still play a big role as prosecutors try to put him away.

The former police officer, facing arraignment Monday on first-degree murder charges in the 2004 drowning death of ex-wife Kathleen Savio, has never shied from the media that has followed his every move since his fourth wife, Stacy, vanished in 2007 and he became a suspect in Savio's death.

In fact, he's seemed to relish the spotlight, often giving reporters a joke or smart-aleck remark — like smiling and calling his handcuffs "bling" when he was led to his first court appearance earlier this month.

And that, attorneys say, could be one of Peterson's biggest problems.

"If one wife goes missing and (another) wife is dead, those aren't usually the subject of jokes," said Roy Black, a defense attorney whose clients have included Rush Limbaugh and William Kennedy Smith. "People are going to think this is a very bizarre person, who's more likely to have committed murder than someone who is in mourning."

Peterson is accused of drowning Savio, who was found dead in a dry bathtub in 2004 with a gash on the back of her head. Her death was initially ruled an accident, but after Stacy Peterson went missing Savio's body was exhumed and authorities ruled her death a homicide staged to look like an accident.

Marilyn Brenneman, a senior deputy prosecutor in Seattle's King County, once won a murder conviction after showing jurors a video of a news conference given by a man charged in a drowning death.

"We used it to show his attitude was blase," she said. "He was kind of wooden and didn't show any emotion. ... That is not really an appropriate response."

Defense attorney Mark Geragos has seen what a defendant's own words can do to a case. One of his most famous clients, Scott Peterson, was convicted of murdering his pregnant wife, Laci, after a trial in which jurors watched three television interviews he gave before he retained Geragos.

The interviews included Peterson saying he told police about his affair with another woman the first night his wife was reported missing and saying he told his mistress the truth about being married within several days of the disappearance. Neither was true. And by the time those clips played in court, jurors knew from other testimony that they were watching Scott Peterson lie.

"Some of the most compelling evidence the jury can see is prejudicial but unfortunately it's compelling," Geragos said.

In San Diego in 2007, Cynthia Sommer was convicted of first-degree murder in the slaying of her husband after prosecutors based much of their case on the idea that she did not behave like a grieving widow.

The jury heard about how Sommer used insurance money to pay for breast implants, took part in wet T-shirt contests and had casual sex with other men.

"This case was all about a grieving unbecoming of a widow," said Sommer's attorney, Allen Bloom. "That's all it was, it was a lifestyle, it was painting her with a scarlet letter."

However, a year later a judge dismissed the charges that Sommer poisoned her husband with arsenic because new tests revealed there was no arsenic in his system.

Even if the videos of Drew Peterson's public comments don't make it into trial, they can still have an effect.

"Whether it's admissible or not is one thing ..." said Joe Tacopina, a prominent New York defense attorney. "But it's certainly admissible in the court of public opinion, which is your jury pool."

Peterson's attorney said joking around is how his client deals with stress.

"In a tight, uncomfortable situation, you're gonna get humor and wise cracks," said attorney Joel Brodsky, who is expected to ask a judge Monday to reduce Peterson's bail, which is set at $20 million.

Peterson said he wouldn't behave any other way.

"Would it be better if I hid my head down and tried to hide my face and hunched and had tears in my eyes?" he asked NBC's Matt Lauer during a telephone interview aired on "Today" on Friday. "I mean, no, that's just not me."

Almost since the day Stacy Peterson vanished in October 2007, Peterson has done things like joke about his fourth wife's menstrual cycles and agree to take part in a radio "Win a Date With Drew" contest. A radio station rejected the contest idea.

Brodsky said he is confident that if Peterson stands trial the jury will do the right thing.

"My experience is that juries usually work very hard to put away biases and look at the facts," he said.

But Bloom said even though most jurors want to do the right thing, they can still end up being swayed by things that have nothing to do with evidence.

"They say they won't, but they can be impacted by innuendo, suspicion, speculation and moral judgment," he said.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/8512093

http://www.wbbm780.com/Arraignment-Monday-for-Drew-Peterson/4416503

(http://imgsrv.wbbm780.com/image/DbGraphic/200905/1249287.jpg)
Posted: Monday, 18 May 2009 6:24AM

Arraignment Monday for Drew Peterson

Steve Miller Reporting
WBBM Newsradio 780


CHICAGO (WBBM/AP) -- Drew Peterson is due in court this morning in Will County to be arraigned in the murder of his third wife Kathleen Savio.

Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky says he's expecting a very long day today.

Perhaps not a long session in court - but a long day for Brodsky, who'll be in court with two other lawyers for Peterson, and then will answer reporters' questions.

Court call: 9 a.m. for arraignment.

"Presentation of the charges and entry of a plea, which obviously will be a plea of not guilty.  We're going to present our motion for reduction of bond, but I don't think the judge will rule on it immediately.

"Judge Schoenstedt is a deliberative judge and I'm sure he'll want to hear argument and consider his decision for a few days."

Brodsky says he'll ask the judge to lower Peterson's bail from $20 million - to somewhere between $100,000 and $500,000, and Peterson would have to come up with 10 percent of that.

Brodsky says he thinks Peterson "did OK" on his "Today Show" TV interview with Matt Lauer.  Brodsky says Peterson got his point across that he is taking the charges seriously and that wisecracking is his way of dealing with stress.

"Drew has a personality that rubs a lot of people the wrong way, but that's no reason to convict somebody - because their personality rubs you the wrong way.  If that was true, let's just lock up all the unpopular people.  And let all the popular people out."

Brodsky says he thinks the judge will not make an immediate decision whether to lower Peterson's bail.

Peterson has been jailed since May 7.

Savio's death was originally ruled an accident. But after Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy, disappeared in 2007, Savio's body was exhumed. Authorities reclassified the death as a homicide after an autopsy.

Peterson, 55, has denied any involvement in Savio's death or Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

But his numerous media appearances, where he has gained a reputation for making smart-aleck remarks, could play a big role as prosecutors try to lock him up.

Peterson, of suburban Bolingbrook, has never shied from the media, seeming to relish the spotlight and often offering reporters a joke. As he was led to his first court appearance this month, he referred to his prison-issued jumpsuit as a "spiffy outfit."

And that, attorneys say, could be one of Peterson's biggest problems.

"If one wife goes missing and (another) wife is dead, those aren't usually the subject of jokes," said Roy Black, a defense attorney whose clients have included Rush Limbaugh and William Kennedy Smith. "People are going to think this is a very bizarre person, who's more likely to have committed murder than someone who is in mourning."

Peterson is accused of drowning Savio, who was found dead in a dry bathtub in 2004 with a gash on the back of her head. Her death originally was ruled an accident, but after Stacy Peterson went missing, Savio's body was exhumed and authorities ruled it a homicide staged to look like an accident.

Even if the videos of Drew Peterson's arrival in court or of his interviews don't make it into trial, they can still have an effect.

"Whether it's admissible or not is one thing ..." said Joe Tacopina, a prominent defense attorney in New York. "But it's certainly admissible in the court of public opinion, which is your jury pool."

Peterson's attorney said joking around is how Peterson deals with stress.

"In a tight, uncomfortable situation, you're gonna get humor and wisecracks," said Brodsky.

Peterson said he wouldn't behave any other way.

"Would it be better if I hid my head down and tried to hide my face and hunched and had tears in my eyes?" he asked NBC's Matt Lauer during a telephone interview aired on the "Today" show Friday. "I mean, no, that's just not me."

Drew Peterson: Not Guilty, Prosecutors Want New Judge

Monday, May 18, 2009 @10:13am CST

(Joliet, IL) -- Drew Peterson has officially claimed his innocence in the death of his third wife.

The infamous suburban Chicago police officer entered his official not-guilty plea at his morning arraignment.

Peterson is charged with murder for the 2004 death of Kathleen Savio.

His attorney is also pushing for a lower bail.

Peterson is being held on a 20-million-dollar bond, his lawyer wants that cut to a few hundred-thousand dollars.

He says if Peterson was going to flee he would "have done so long ago." The biggest shock from this first court appearance is that prosecutors are asking that a new judge be assigned to the case.

The "Chicago Tribune" says the Will County State's Attorney's office made that request, but has not yet given a reason why.

Peterson faces at least 20 years in prison on the murder charges.

He's also been a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife Stacy, who went missing in October of 2007.

http://mystateline.com/content/fulltext/?cid=67811

(http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o100/klaasen3/Sub6_022109/Globe052509Peterson.jpg)

Chicago Sun Times 
May 20, 2009 Wednesday
 
Drew's stepbrother finishes testimony

The Will County grand jury investigating the fate of Drew Peterson's last two wives wrapped up Tuesday with the testimony of potential star witness Thomas Morphey, a source said.

The grand jury indicted Peterson earlier this month in the slaying of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. It was also hearing evidence in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Morphey, the last witness to testify, received immunity from the state's attorney's office. He claims he helped Peterson carry a large blue barrel from Stacy and Peterson's bedroom to the driveway, and loaded it into Peterson's SUV.

Morphey has said he's certain Stacy's body was inside the barrel. Peterson denies having any role in his fourth wife's disappearance. 
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:975342028&start=2

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/05/prosecutors-to-get-new-judge-in-peterson-case.html

Prosecutors get new judge in Peterson case
May 21, 2009 2:26 PM | No Comments | UPDATED STORY
Will County Chief Judge Gerald Kinney today allowed prosecutors to replace a judge in the Drew Peterson murder case, saying the defense had not established a pattern of abuse by the state of its right to replace judges.

"I do not find that this has been established by the defense's response," Kinney said during a hearing held at the Will County courthouse.

Prosecutors had filed a motion to replace Judge Richard Schoenstedt, arguing he was prejudiced against the state.

Kinney assigned the case to Judge Carla Alessio Policandriotes -- at which point Peterson's attorney, Joel Brodsky, said he wanted to replace that judge. But after a brief recess, Brodsky withdrew his request.

A hearing with the new judge is scheduled for 1:30 p.m. Friday.

Peterson is in jail for the 2004 death of his previous wife, Kathleen Savio. The former Bolingbrook police sergeant has pleaded not guilty.

I'm sorry, but Drew's attorney is full of it. This attitude and wisecracking has been going on since Stacy first disappeared. Drew thought he was getting away with it, and he still thinks it.  I hope they charge him with Stacy's murder, and convict him for Kathleen's murder. I hope he rots in Hell for eternity. What a jerk!
I'm praying that these remains they found are Stacy's, and that her family and Kathleen's family will unite to bring this POS down!! And that this fiance of his will get the heck out of there fast!

Daily Commentary - Friday, May 22nd, 2009 - Body Found by Des Plaines River … Is it Stacy Peterson or Lisa Stebic?

http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/05/22/daily-commentary-friday-may-22nd-2009-body-found-by-des-plaines-river-is-it-stacy-peterson-or-lisa-stebic/

Thanks Red.

Please help raise awareness for this missing teen who’s story has never been told as others have.  Please help give Amber the chance to come home.  I have made it so easy for you to shoot an email over to Greta and Nancy.  Also, links to post and send comments.  Please take a moment to do this for her family who are active Monkeys.
TIA

SEND A COMMENT:

Nancy Grace:
http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form5.html?81

America’s Most Wanted:
http://www.amw.com/contact%5Fus/

Greta:
http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2009/05/22/open-thread-and-a-question/#comments


SEND AN EMAIL: (Simply copy and paste into your “To” section of email)

TO:

nancy.grace@turner.com; viewerservices@foxnews.com

-----------

I am a faithfull long time viewer of your show.  I would like to call to your attention the case of Amber DuBois is a beautiful 13 y/o girl who went missing in Escondido, CA.
I want to hear more about this case.  I want to see her featured as a missing person.  This childs disappearance could happen to any family and it is scary!  Please research and air her story.

Regards,

BREAKING NEWS!

BAIL DENIED AND DREW TRIED TO HIRE HITMAN!

JOLIET, Ill. – Prosecutors say former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson offered someone $25,000 in 2003 to kill a former wife he's now accused of murdering. Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow made the allegation at a hearing Friday on a request to reduce Peterson's $20 million bond. The request was denied.

Peterson is charged with murdering his third wife, Kathleen Savio. He's also a suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Glasgow says Peterson told a police officer in 2003 that he would be better off if Savio was dead because he would be financially ruined by a pending divorce. She was found drowned in her bathtub three weeks later, a gash to the back of her head.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090522/ap_on_re_us/us_drew_peterson

I don't know if you have read this thread but if you haven't, you should.

Drew Peterson 1st on the scene of MANY deaths??

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84340

It's chilling.

Drew Peterson offered someone $25,000 to kill 3rd wife: Prosecutor says

JOLIET, Ill. — Former police officer Drew Peterson offered someone $25,000 to kill his third wife because he thought a pending divorce settlement would financially ruin him, but then killed her himself months later, prosecutors said Friday. Prosecutor James Glasgow made the allegation at a bail reduction hearing for Peterson's $20 million bond.

Judge Carla J. Alessio-Policandriotes refused to reduce the bond for the suburban Chicago police officer, who is charged with first-degree murder in Kathleen Savio's 2004 death.

Peterson also is a suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson. He has maintained his innocence in Savio's death and Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

Glasgow said Peterson told a fellow police officer in late 2003 that he would be financially ruined by a pending divorce, and his life would be easier "if she was just dead." Glasgow did not reveal the source of his allegation.

Savio's body was found with a gash on the back of her head in her bathtub three weeks later, the Will County prosecutor said.

Peterson is a flight risk, he said, because he knows how to disappear and knows he faces 20 to 60 years in jail if he's convicted.

Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky said he wanted the judge to reduce his client's bond to under $1 million. He said Peterson has not fled, despite trips to Mexico, California and Florida, since police named him a suspect in Stacy Peterson's disappearance in late 2007.

Brodsky said that he had heard talk about Peterson trying to hire someone to kill Savio, but said it was "nothing substantive." He added that they would investigate Glasgow's allegations.

Peterson, who is known for making smart-aleck remarks in the media, was much more subdued in court Friday. He hung his head as he left the hearing, and got into a van to go back to jail.

The former Bolingbrook sergeant finally understood the seriousness of his situation, Glasgow said.

Peterson "realizes there is no way out," he said.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/22/drew-peterson-tried-to-hi_n_206910.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hand me the injections...I'll take care of him for free  ::MonkeyHaHa:: *%*%$$$%$%$$ PIG.....I hate him  :smt091

 ::MonkeyDevil:: check out what a few other Cops have to say.....
http://www.policelink.com/news/articles/105013-ex--police-gt-drew-peterson-charged-wmurder
chiefmillan is my hero  ::MonkeyHaHa::

 ::MonkeyDevil:: more comments here......
http://www.policelink.com/news/articles/105068-ex-cop-drew-peterson-arrested-for-death-of-3rd-wife-4th-wife-still-missing

Drew Peterson was a dirty cop from day one on the force. 

He's going down now big time.  Keeping my fingers crossed tha we will be hearing next Thursday that the GJ has indited Drew for Stacy's murder too.

And yes, I believe we are going to see Drew was involved in a few other murders/suicides and disappearing people. 

But the old guy knows his day has come..he wasn't cocky leaving court today, he was actually hanging his head..according to reports.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,521202,00.html?test=latestnews

Judge Won't Lower Peterson's $20M Bond After Prosecutors Say He Hired Hitman to Kill Wife
Friday , May 22, 2009


The $20 million bond keeping Drew Peterson behind bars on murder charges won't be lowered, a judge ruled Friday, after prosecutors argued that the ex-police sergeant hired someone to kill his third wife.

Peterson and his defense team were back in court in Joliet, Ill., to fight for a reduction in the hefty bond so that he could get out of jail while he awaits trial. That request was denied.

Prosecutors contend that the former Bolingbrook, Ill., officer hired someone to kill his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Peterson is charged with murdering Savio and staging the death to look like an accidental drowning.

Click here for photos.

Savio's body was found in a bathtub in 2004. Her death was initially ruled an accident, but a later autopsy on her exhumed body declared she was the victim of a homicide.

Peterson also is a suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Click here to read the charges against Peterson.

He has long maintained his innocence in Savio's death and Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

Prosecutors in the murder case against Peterson got their wish Thursday when a new judge was appointed to preside over his trial.

 
    OMG  wow, if true, can we all say serial killer, big time.   

I posted at WS at that time and some of the research on that thread was done by myself and follow posters   I can you tell there is more..but not all has been verified.

I can also tell you that in investigating the drug deals gone bad a certain mob figure turned up..and he also testified before the GJ....just saying..

I am really hopeful that this body is Stacy.  My thinking is when LE was doing their river search and it was being live streamed on the interent in Dec of 07..Drew spent the day with Brodsky watching the telecast.  If they had not even been close to where she was placed then Drew wouldn't have wasted his time..not Brodsky.

If this isn't her then I hope that they continue their searches in this general area..because Drew's whole demeanor was very different yesterday in court.  Something has shut this man up big time..and it isn't just offereing someone money to off his wife..he has blown off all speculation before..until now.  So someone is very close in this case to solving it..and her remains would take this case from speculation to solid proof..along with Tom M testimony..Drew's goose would be cooked.

Prosecutors Claim that Drew Peterson Tried to Hire a Hitman to Kill Third Wife Kathleen Savio

http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/05/23/prosecutors-claim-that-drew-peterson-tried-to-hire-a-hitman-to-kill-third-wife-kathleen-savio/


Drew Peterson’s attorney Joel Brodsky says talk about his client hiring someone to kill Kathleen Savio was unsubstantiated. You can hear Joel Brodsky LIVE Sunday night at 9 pm ET when he is one of Dana’s guests on Scared Monkey’s radio.

Happy Memorial Day Weekend!  Sorry to barge in again to your conversation, but we are still working on writing the media for Amber DuBois.  Our mission is to get this missing child some media coverage as she has had zilch.  We are going to keep writing every day until our requests are heard.  Please take a moment to visit her thread and write a quick email on her behalf. 

http://scaredmonkeys.net/index.php?topic=4583.msg817947#msg817947

TIA

I heard on HLN that it is not Stacy or Lisa....another murdered woman. ::MonkeyWaa::

Have not heard that..but I have been out of the loop today..prayers to the family and I am happy that they have closure.  I hope that LE keeps looking in this general area for Stacy..Drew and Brodsky have both shown signs of "tells"  when the searches were in this general local.

I am sorry I think this was a mistake. I heard it I thought, now not another word on the news.....I might need a break ::MonkeyConfused:: ::MonkeyConfused::

http://www.prnewschannel.com/absolutenm/templates/?a=1411&z=4
Drew Peterson's Legal Team Issues Statement on Denial of Bond Motion
thepublicityagency.com - May 22, 2009

(PRNewsChannel) / Joliet, Ill. / The following statement is from Drew Peterson's criminal defense team regarding today's denial of the motion to lower bond.

"We’re disappointed that the motion to reduce bond was denied.  We feel the state’s attorney made references during the hearing that were irrelevant to the case, such as statements made in regard to Stacy Peterson.  These statements had nothing to do with the case involving the death of Kathleen Savio.

"We will immediately appeal this decision to the Illinois Appellate Court.  Appeals of motions to deny bond are heard in an expedited fashion.  We are confident the appellate court will reduce the $20-million bond to a reasonable level.  We expect to have the appeal on file by the end of next week."

Double Wow..........

I'm going to believe that the body found is Stacey. I'm going to hope for that, anyway. I do believe that Drew Peterson will finally be proven guilty of murder, if for no other reason than truth has a way of coming out. I'm thinking that this latest information about Drew approaching someone to kill her will pan out and that Drew has already spent his last day of "cocky" freedom.

I believe he will go down.................. way, way down!

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/05/sources-more-remains-evidence-found-in-river.html

Sources: More remains evidence found in river
May 23, 2009 11:03 PM | No Comments | UPDATED STORY
CBS 2 reports: Sources say Illinois State Police have recovered more evidence from along the Des Plaines River which may be related to human remains found on Wednesday.

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/Des_Plaines_River_New_Evidence

New Evidence Found in
Des Plaines River
Worker Says Police Found a Human Bone
LegUpdated: Saturday, 23 May 2009, 10:46 PM CDT
Published : Saturday, 23 May 2009, 9:50 PM CDT

WFLD
Des Plaines, IL. - New evidence found in the Des Plaines River is linked to the human remains found earlier this week. State police confirmed to Fox Chicago News that items were taken out of the river in Channahon...not far from where human remains were found earlier this week. Tera Williams has the exclusive report.

*****************

“They got here about three o'clock”

Chemical plant worker Jeff Triplett says he escorted state police and two workers from the Will County Coroner's office through a brush and back into the woods along the bank of the Des Plaines River...

Tera Williams: What did they find...
Jeff Triplett: They found a human leg bone... they said they found it on the side of the river...
They had their forensics kit and they all had their laptops and they were bagging it up.

Tera Williams: How did they say they were alerted to this area?
Jeff Triplett: They wouldn't say...it's definitely connected to the body earlier this week...

Tera Williams: State police would not confirm that... but did say they took some items into evidence from the Des Plaines River today. We saw search crews wading along the bank and noticed a flagged area where the crew was paying the most attention...

About a mile downriver from there on Wednesday a clean-up crew found skeletal remains. An autopsy done Thursday did not confirm the person's race or gender and it could take weeks for the results of a DNA analysis.

The findings have peaked the interest of the families in two high profile missing persons cases. Stacy Peterson and Lisa Stebic. Searchers have been looking for additional remains since the discovery of the remains Wednesday...

Jeff Triplet says officers who approached him to get onto the property today, were definitely - all business.

“Kinda freaked me out the cops showed up and said we need access and I said why and he said we found a human leg bone.” Triplet said.

Stacy Peterson, Lisa Stebic Missing: More Evidence Found from the Des Plaines River Related to Remains Previously Discovered … More Bones Found?

http://scaredmonkeys.com/2009/05/24/stacy-peterson-lisa-stebic-missing-more-evidence-found-from-the-des-plaines-river-related-to-remains-previously-discovered-more-bones-found/

I noticed that Drew likes the figure 25,000.00

25,000.00 reward he offered for Stacy
25,000,00  he said Stacy took from home when she left...yea right Drew
25,000.00  offered to hit man


I guess using the same amount is easier fora liar to keep up with. ::MonkeyEek:: ::MonkeyNoNo::

WTF!!!!!
Drew Peterson calls talk show, jokes from jail
CHICAGO —  Former police officer Drew Peterson cracked jokes from jail on a Chicago radio show that he called collect. He called WLS Radio's Mancow & Cassidy show on Wednesday and offered snippets of a comedy routine he's working on.

Peterson once proposed a "Win a Date With Drew" contest and offered a jail version called "Win a Conjugal Visit with Drew." He also joked about prison showers, his legal fees and his "bling" handcuffs, saying humor is how he deals with stress.

Peterson is charged with first-degree murder in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. He's also a suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

He denies wrongdoing.
http://www.telegram.com/article/20090527/APA/905271224

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/Remains_River_not_Peterson_Stebic

Remains in River not
Peterson or Stebic
Updated: Wednesday, 27 May 2009, 5:19 PM CDT
Published : Wednesday, 27 May 2009, 5:19 PM CDT

Skeletal remains found last Wednesday along the Des Plaines are that of an unidentified man, Illinois State Police announced Wednesday.

There had been speculation the remains were that of Stacy Peterson or Lisa Stebic.

The remains, discovered on May 20, were sent to the ISP Forensic Crime Lab for DNA analysis and it has been determined they are that of an unidentified male, according to an ISP release.

"An investigation to identify the remains is underway," the release said.

The office of Coroner Patrick O'Neil originally reported, "The partial skeletal remains consisted of a rib cage, spinal column and partial left and right femur bones. The head, arms and below the knee extremities were disarticulated."

O'Neil said the search continues for the missing remains.

Also, a forensic investigation continues as to whether the disarticulation is a result of a postmortem (after death) artifact or antemortem injury.

The coroner's office, he said, was given a conservative time frame in receiving forensic DNA and forensic (snipped)

Thanks for the update Klaasand..prays to the family of the deceased man.

 I guess the news that it's not Stacy gave him a burst of kissmyazzeverybody. He's a pistol alright, wish he'd use it on himself. If that sounded bad, that's how I meant it!  He's a twisted twit. ::MonkeyNoNo::
                                                                                       
                                                                                       

Mymonkey I also heard this on HLN last weekend.  We seem to have been the only two people in the world but they did say it!
I was on a hunt for the transcript when I found your post.  I had to sign up here to let you know you are not crazy  ::MonkeyHaHa::
Actually I really like this site and hope to stick around.

Welcome PinkPopsicle!

http://www.wrex.com/Global/story.asp?S=10456282
New judge assigned to Drew Peterson case

Posted: June 1, 2009 10:44 AM

Updated: June 1, 2009 12:38 PM
JOLIET, Ill. (AP) -- There's another new judge in Drew Peterson's murder case.

Chief Judge Gerald Kinney granted a defense request Monday to replace Judge Carla Alessio-Policandriotes (pahl-ee-KAN'-dree-oh-tihs). The case is now before Judge Stephen White.

Two weeks ago, Alessio-Policandriotes replaced another judge at the prosecutor's request.

White scheduled a court date Wednesday to hear other motions, including a state request to seal discovery.

Peterson was at Monday's hearing.

He's charged with first-degree murder in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. The former Bolingbrook police officer pleaded not guilty. He's jailed on $20 million bond.

Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, has been missing since 2007. Peterson's been named a suspect in her disappearance.
AddThis Social Bookmark Button
*****************************
This is the third judge.

Judge puts limits on Peterson's jail phone calls  ::MonkeyLaugh::

June 3, 2009

A judge on Wednesday sought to control publicity of the Drew Peterson murder case, after prosecutors complained the former Bolingbrook police officer and his lawyers have turned the case into a media circus.

Will County Judge Stephen White ordered Peterson’s lawyers to give him a list of family, friends and attorneys that Peterson calls from the Will County Adult Detention Facility. If Peterson wants to call somebody who is not on the list, he has to get permission, White said.

White also ordered that all attorneys in the case must notify him and the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of any interviews and send copies of press releases.

“If you are going to do an interview, I would like to be informed (beforehand) as to the time and place,” White said.

The judge’s order came a week after Peterson called a radio show from jail and cracked jokes about prison showers, a “Win a Conjugal Visit with Drew” contest and the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Peterson has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder charges in the 2004 death of Savio, whose body was found in a dry bathtub. Peterson also is a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

That the judge would address the issue of pretrial publicity isn’t surprising. The case has generated intense media interest since Stacy Peterson went missing in late October 2007.

Peterson and his attorney Joel Brodsky have made scores of television and radio appearances and a small army of television trucks is often parked outside Peterson’s Bolingbrook home. Also, both Peterson and Savio’s family have hired publicists.

The publicity threatens the ability for a fair trial, said Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow, who said he has limited speaking out on the case.

“This is the place to put a cap on it,” he said of pretrial publicity. “I’m trying to protect the jury pool here.”

Brodsky countered that he needs to be able to talk to the media, saying publicity might prompt potential witnesses to come forward with relevant information.

Glasgow also sought to limit Peterson’s contact visits after reports surfaced that he had played cards with one of his attorneys in jail.

White denied the motion, but he made it clear that he didn’t think playing cards was appropriate and Peterson would have to follow jail rules.

“There won’t be any more card games,” said Will County Sheriff Paul Kaupas after the court hearing.

The judge set an Aug. 24 trial date.

Brodsky, who can ask for a continuance, said it was a realistic date as long as Peterson is in custody.

White also ordered the names of witnesses and potential witnesses be sealed. In some cases witness lists are public information.

There are several hundred witnesses and potential witnesses, Brodsky said after court.

Glasgow said he expects the defense to move for a change of venue because of the publicity.

Brodsky did not address the change of venue, but has said the defense is considering that. He said Wednesday that solitary confinement has been difficult for Peterson, who has been held away from other prisoners after his May 7 arrest.

“It has an effect on his psyche, no question about it,” Brodsky said.

http://www.southtownstar.com/news/1605823,drew-peterson-jail-phone-calls-0603.article

Peterson lawyers want help with discovery
June 25, 2009 5:48 PM | 1 Comment

Attorneys for Drew Peterson, charged with murder in the 2004 drowning death of ex-wife Kathleen Savio, were in court Thursday seeking help as they sift through more than 30,000 pages of investigative reports and hundreds of hours of audio recordings turned over by prosecutors.

Joel Brodsky argued six motions before Judge Stephen White, essentially asking that prosecutors be required to give more details about their theory of how Peterson killed Savio as well as "Cliff's Notes" versions of the 9,470 investigative reports he has received.

"Are they saying my client held her underwater or knocked her unconscious or hit her over the head with a blunt object?" he said, later adding: "How did he do it? The state certainly has to prove that."

John Connor, chief of the Will County State's Attorney's major crimes unit, argued that all that information was detailed in the reports given to Peterson's lawyers.

"I've never seen a request like this in any homicide case I've participated in," he told the judge.

White denied or continued the motions. He did tell prosecutors to give Peterson's attorneys an estimated time that Savio was last seen alive as well as an estimated time her body was discovered in the bathtub of her Bolingbrook home.

Prosecutors also agreed to reveal whether any money or other consideration was given to Lenny Wawczak and his wife Paula Stark, former acquaintances of Peterson who Brodsky said in court Thursday wore wires and also videotaped his client.

Brodsky sought the same information about Thomas Morphey, Peterson's stepbrother, who has said he helped Peterson remove the body of fourth wife Stacy from the couple's home in 2007.

Brodsky said prosecutors have provided a list of 127 pieces of physical evidence in Savio's death, including a Power MacIntosh 7200 computer, and a roughly equal amount of physical evidence in the disappearance of Peterson's second wife.

Peterson has been named the sole suspect in Stacy's disappearance, but has not been charged with any crime.

White agreed to enter an order forbidding the state from listening to recorded phone calls between Peterson and his attorneys, something Connor said prosecutors already abstain from.

"If the state is listening in to an attorney-client phone call, they're in big trouble," said White, who also said he would allow Peterson's attorneys to bring their laptops into the Will County jail, where Peterson has been held since his May 7 arrest.

Also, attorneys for JP Morgan Chase, which has been served two subpoenas for financial records related to the case, asked that the subpoenas be quashed. White is expected to take up the issue July 10.

An attorney forwarded calls to a Chase spokeswoman, who declined comment.

In a separate court filing, Country Mutual Insurance Co., the firm that underwrote Peterson's $500,000 home liability insurance, has asked a judge to find that it is not liable to pay for Peterson's legal fees or any damages that arise from a wrongful death lawsuit filed against him earlier this year by Savio's estate.

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/06/peterson-lawyers-want-help-with-discovery.html

Peterson trial witness list: 805 people
Comments

June 26, 2009
By JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com

JOLIET — Saying Drew Peterson's attorneys were attempting to simplify disclosure evidence into "CliffsNotes," prosecutors thwarted the bid Thursday but will have to pare an 805-witness list down to the 50 most likely to testify.

John Connor, the chief of the major crime unit for the state's attorney, countered an eight-point motion from Peterson's defense team that would help the accused wife-killer's lawyers more easily navigate the thousands of pages of discovery evidence.


"I think what the counsel is asking us to do is give them CliffsNotes on this," Connor said, referring to the study guides that simplify books for students.

One of Peterson's attorneys, Joel Brodsky, argued that the first-degree murder indictment against Peterson was too vague.

He wanted prosecutors to provide detailed descriptions of such matters as how Peterson allegedly drowned his third wife, Kathleen Savio; whether he used any weapons or tools to kill her; exactly where and when the alleged 2004 murder occurred; and how Peterson may have gained entry to her home.

"Was it a key?" Brodsky asked. "Was it, 'Beam me up, Scotty'?"

Connor countered that all of the information Brodsky is entitled to can be found in the discovery evidence already handed over by prosecutors. But Brodsky said it was too much for him and Peterson's other attorneys to sift through.

Judge Stephen White denied all the requests in Brodsky's motion, but did tell Connor to come up with an approximate time Savio was last seen alive and about when her body was found.

755 witnesses too many

Brodsky also took issue with the 805 men and women listed as possible witnesses against Peterson. Connor is supposed to come up with the 50 most likely to testify by July 10, but was not forbidden from calling the remaining 755 at trial, which is scheduled to start Aug. 24.

White also shot down Brodsky's request for Peterson to take possession of the evidence against him while he is in jail. White said Peterson could review the evidence in the presence of his attorneys, who have been granted unlimited jailhouse visits with their client.

Paid testimony?

Brodsky also asked whether three key witnesses against Peterson were compensated by the state police.

Brodsky named Peterson's former friends Len Wawczak and Paula Stark, who clandestinely recorded their conversations with Peterson for seven months at the behest of the state police, and Peterson's stepbrother, Thomas Morphey, who claims to have helped Peterson dispose of the body of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, in October 2007, as the witnesses he suspects may have profited from their statements.

Brodsky asked whether Stark, Wawczak or Morphey were paid money or given consideration in regard to criminal charges that may have faced them.

White said this issue would be resolved July 10.
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/1640073,peterson-witness-list_jo062509.article


Brodsky must be related to Casey's Bozo lawyer. Whining and wanting the prosecutors to do their work for them.

Edit/typos per Pink Angel. MB

I thought we already knew this, but CNN page shows an update of 7 minutes ago ... ??

New autopsy: Drew Peterson's third wife was killed
updated 7 minutes ago

(CNN) -- A new autopsy of the third wife of former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson shows that the woman was killed, a determination that contradicts an earlier autopsy that said she died accidentally.

Peterson was arrested in May and charged with first-degree murder in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

She and Peterson were going through a bitter divorce when Savio was found dead in her bathtub with a gash to the back of her head. The death was declared an accident by a coroner. Then Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, went missing.

Peterson also has been identified as a suspect in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, though her body has not been found.

A new autopsy in the Savio case reveals bruising consistent with a struggle.

There was a 1-inch blunt-force laceration on the back of her head, five scraping abrasions and six blunt-force, black-and-blue bruises on her extremities, abdomen and buttocks, the autopsy said.
The bruising led well-respected forensic pathologist Michael Baden to rule the death a homicide.

Peterson pleaded not guilty to murder in the Savio case in May and has denied wrongdoing in both cases.

At an earlier court hearing, prosecutors said Peterson had tried to pay a hit man $25,000 to kill Savio.


Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky dismissed the allegation, saying it was one of many claims that he would disprove. :roll:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/07/23/illinois.drew.peterson/

Anyone see anything new in that??

Yeah, I'm wondering too--I don't see anything all that new, unless there's more to come???

But I gotta say: keep smirking, Drew. And if you want a demonstration of how poor Kathleen could have died, well, Drew, hop in this bathtub and I'll be more than happy to show you.... ::MonkeyDevil::

http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/1670949,drew-peterson-christina-raines-071709.article
State's attorney: Cops did not hit on Drew Peterson's fiancee

July 17, 2009

BY JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com

The Los Angeles attorney representing Drew Peterson's young love shot down a claim from the accused wife-killer's lawyer that a state cop hit on her client.

"Chrissie has not had dinner with or gone to the movies with any police officer other than Drew Peterson and she has no interest in doing so," the attorney, Gloria Allred, said in a written statement. "She does not feel that she was 'hit on' by any police officer. We do not think there is a basis for filing a complaint against any police officer and we have no plans to file such a complaint."

Following a Tuesday court hearing, one of Peterson's attorneys, Joel Brodsky, announced that a state police detective asked Peterson's 24-year-old girlfriend, Christina Raines, to go out with him on a date.

According to Brodsky, the state police detective proposed that Raines accompany him to dinner and a movie.

The unidentified detective supposedly asked Raines out while investigating the murder of Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio, and disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson. Peterson faces first-degree murder charges in connection with Savio's death.

Brodsky said he planned to file a motion regarding the state police detective's supposed romantic overture.

Charles B. Pelkie, the spokesman for the state's attorney's office, refuted Brodsky's accusation, calling it "preposterous and disingenuous."

Pelkie also said two detectives always interacted with Raines at the same time and never left one or the other alone with her.

Brodsky's claim infuriated Raines' father, Ernie Raines, who called Brodsky a "scumbag." Ernie Raines also called Peterson a "scumbag" and threatened to "kick the [expletive] out of" and "take apart" Brodsky if he happened to run into him.

Brodsky failed to return calls for comment on Allred's statement or to say how frightened he was of Ernie Raines.

Allred's involvement in the Peterson case is not the first time she has stepped into a high-profile murder prosecution.

She represented Amber Frey, the girlfriend of convicted wife-killer Scott Peterson, and was also the attorney for the family of O.J. Simpson's slain wife, Nicole Brown Simpson.

Allred is the mother of television personality Lisa Bloom.

LOL! That made me giggle. How does that go....reporter calls and leaves a voice message for Brodsky..."he said he wants to be kick your ass!" are you scared? huh?

Friday is D-Day for Drew's Road Show
Attorney: Drew Peterson can't get fair trail in Will County
Updated 5:45 PM CDT, Thu, Aug 13, 2009

We'll find out Friday if Drew Peterson will be able to take his show on the road.

The man charged with the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, and suspected of having something to do with the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, filed a motion in Will County last month to move his trial.

The request cites the saturation of coverage in newspapers, on television and online which, according to his attorney, makes it difficult for the former Bolingbrook police sergeant to get a fair trial.

Of course, Peterson hasn't exactly shied away from the attention. Remember, he didn't seem to mind being arrested and charged with murder at all.

"I should have returned those library books,” he told police when he was arrested in May, and while being escorted into jail, he joked about his "bling."

"Three squares a day and this spiffy new outfit, how could I complain?" he cracked.

His comedy routine continued during a seven-minute collect call into WLS Radio's Mancow & Cassidy Show.

He's even taken his story nationally, which sort of makes the request to move the trial seemingly a bit disingenuous.

If unmoved, the trial will be held in Will County Circuit Court in Joliet.

(http://media.nbcchicago.com/images/410*307/Drew-Peterson-court-sketch-May_8_2009_448x336.jpg)

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local-beat/drew-peterson-court-trial-move-081409-53173227.html


Excellent sketch artist. Drew in handcuffs is an awesome sight.

Drew Peterson challenges state's hearsay law
Defense attorneys say 'Drew's law' is unconstitutional

By Steve Schmadeke Tribune reporter

August 11, 2009

    * EmailE-mail
    * printPrint
    *
      Share
    * increase text size decrease text size Text size


Drew Peterson's attorneys filed a motion Monday challenging the constitutionality of a new state law some have called "Drew's law" that gives judges the power to allow hearsay evidence into the courtroom under certain conditions.

Peterson is charged in the 2004 drowning death of third wife Kathleen Savio. If prosecutors can prove at a pretrial hearing that Peterson killed Savio to prevent her from testifying, the new law lets a judge admit Savio's letters and statements to friends and family into evidence at trial.

Peterson's attorneys argue that the law, which took effect in December, violates a defendant's 6th Amendment right to cross-examine witnesses; goes against state and federal constitutional proscriptions against retroactively applied laws; and "erodes the presumption of innocence" by asking a judge before the trial even starts to find that Peterson murdered Savio to silence her.

"There is a profound unfairness in allowing the state's attorney to draft, and the legislature to enact, a law aimed at obtaining the conviction of a single individual," the motion says, referring to Will County State's Atty. James Glasgow, who pushed for the law.

"The new hearsay law ... as written would allow gossip, innuendo, rumor and back-fence scandal to come into a court of law and masquerade as evidence."

The law was specifically drafted to meet constitutional muster, said a spokesman for the state's attorney's office, who added that similar laws have been enacted in more than a dozen states.

"Mr. Glasgow is eager to argue this motion and he believes thoroughly that he will prevail as to the constitutionality issues," said spokesman Charles Pelkie.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-peterson-hearsay_11_aug11,0,1334049.story

I LOVE the Court Artist drawing  ::MonkeyJnBox:: He looks 70 HAHAHAaaaaaaaaa
God, I hate that pig.

Anywho....lol...
JOLIET, Ill., Aug. 14, 2009
Judge In Drew Peterson Case Preparing Jury Pool
Judge In Drew Peterson's Murder Trial Starts Preparing Possible Jurors
AP)  Hundreds of potential jurors in the murder trial of former police officer Drew Peterson were asked to fill out questionnaires Friday, although no trial date has been set and Peterson wants the trial moved.

Will County Judge Stephen White said he was proceeding under the assumption that the trial would remain in the county, and was trying to protect a jury pool. After potential jurors entered the courtroom, Peterson, wearing a gray suit, stood and greeted them.

"Good morning, folks. How are you?" he said.

White instructed the group to avoid media coverage of the case, which has received worldwide attention, and not to look it up on the Internet.

Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, has pleaded not guilty to a first-degree murder charge in the 2004 death of his third wife Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in a dry bathtub.

Savio's death was originally ruled an accident. But after Peterson was named a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, in October 2007, Savio's body was exhumed. Her death was ruled a homicide after a new autopsy was conducted.

A hearing was scheduled for later Friday on Peterson's request to move the trial because of pretrial publicity _ some of it courted by Peterson and his attorney, who went on numerous television and radio shows.

White planned to have 240 people fill out questionnaires Friday. He gave potential jurors a list of 493 people whose names could come up during the trial to see if they knew any them. He said he did not know when the trial would begin, but said they should not change any plans.

Peterson's attorneys said it was very unusual for a judge to begin the jury-selection process months before the start of a trial, adding that it would be difficult for potential jurors to avoid publicity.

"I hope they follow the law," said attorney Andrew Abood.

In June, White ruled that Peterson needed court permission to call anyone from jail after Peterson called a radio show and cracked jokes about prison showers, a "Win a Conjugal Visit with Drew" contest and Savio's death.

At the time, prosecutors claimed the publicity threatened a fair trial, while Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky said publicity might prompt potential witnesses to come forward.

White also set an Oct. 2 hearing on a motion filed by Peterson's attorneys challenging the constitutionality of a hearsay law passed in Illinois in 2008 and widely viewed as a response to the case.

Prosecutors have said the law would allow Savio to "testify from the grave" by admitting into evidence her past statements that she believed Peterson wanted her dead.

But Peterson's attorneys said in their motion that the law "would allow gossip, innuendo, rumor and back fence scandal to come into a court of law and masquerade as evidence."

Peterson has been jailed on $20 million bail since his arrest in May. A judge refused to reduce his bail after prosecutors claimed he tried to pay someone $25,000 to kill Savio before allegedly drowning her himself.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/14/ap/national/main5242531.shtml

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DREW_PETERSON_COURT?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US
Aug 14, 5:43 PM EDT

Judge to rule Oct. 2 on moving Drew Peterson case

By DON BABWIN
Associated Press Writer

(http://hosted.ap.org/photos/A/a6450fbe-c35c-49cf-9706-4d1c85715783-small.jpg)

JOLIET, Ill. (AP) -- Hundreds of potential jurors in the murder trial of former police officer Drew Peterson were asked to fill out questionnaires Friday, although no trial date has been set and Peterson wants the trial moved.

Will County Judge Stephen White said he was proceeding under the assumption that the trial would remain in the county, and was trying to protect a jury pool. White later heard arguments on whether Peterson's trial should be moved, and said he'll rule Oct. 2.

After potential jurors entered the courtroom Friday, Peterson, wearing a gray suit, stood and greeted them.

"Good morning, folks. How are you?" he said.

Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, has pleaded not guilty to a first-degree murder charge in the 2004 death of his third wife Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in a dry bathtub.

Savio's death was originally ruled an accident. But after Peterson was named a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, in October 2007, Savio's body was exhumed. Her death was ruled a homicide after a new autopsy was conducted.

Peterson attorney Reem Odeh said much of the intense publicity surrounding the case has been negative and inflammatory, making it impossible for Peterson to get a fair trial in Will County. She said there also was a chance Peterson arrested or ticketed potential jurors or their family members during his three decades as a police officer.

Prosecutors said there is no reason to move the case, especially since Peterson and his attorneys courted much of the publicity on television and radio shows.
But Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow says he'd agree to a venue change if it became clear during jury selection that a fair trial was impossible.

White planned to have 240 people fill out questionnaires Friday. He gave potential jurors a list of 493 people whose names could come up during the trial to see if they knew any them. the judge also instructed the group to avoid media coverage of the case, which has received worldwide attention, and not to look it up on the Internet.

Peterson's attorneys said it was very unusual for a judge to begin the jury-selection process months before the start of a trial and that it would be difficult for potential jurors to avoid publicity.

White will also hear on Oct. 2 a motion filed by Peterson's attorneys challenging the constitutionality of a hearsay law passed in Illinois in 2008 and widely viewed as a response to the case.

Prosecutors have said the law would allow Savio to "testify from the grave" by admitting into evidence her past statements that she believed Peterson wanted her dead.

But Peterson's attorneys said in their motion that the law "would allow gossip, innuendo, rumor and back fence scandal to come into a court of law and masquerade as evidence."

Peterson has been jailed on $20 million bail since his arrest in May. A judge refused to reduce his bail after prosecutors claimed he tried to pay someone $25,000 to kill Savio before allegedly drowning her himself.

 ::MonkeyGavel::  ::MonkeyJustice:: ::MonkeyViolin::  ::MonkeyBike:: buh bye Drew  ::MonkeyLaugh::

I can't wait to see this mofo  :cool: go down  ::MonkeyLaugh::

Drew Peterson's 'Pucker Factor'
September 10, 2009
Did you hear that? It was Drew Peterson's rear-end clamping shut. Guys call it the "pucker factor." It happens when you get really nervous, and former Bolingbrook, Illinois Police Sergeant Drew Peterson has a lot to be nervous about.

He's in jail with a $20 million bond, awaiting trial for the murder of his third ex-wife, Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in 2004 in the bathtub of the home the couple once shared, and he is suspected by just about everyone of killing his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who disappeared without a trace on Oct. 28, 2007.

The reason for Peterson's sudden puckering has got to be a recent jury decision in faraway Georgia.

On Sept. 3, a jury in LaFayette, Georgia found former local Police Sergeant Sam Parker guilty of murdering his wife, Theresa Parker.

Theresa Parker, a 911 dispatcher, was last seen leaving her sister's house on March 21, 2007. At the time of her disappearance, she was separated from her husband and moving out of their home.

As in the Peterson case, Sam Parker--a 25-year police veteran--initially cooperated with investigators and claimed his wife had run off, probably with another man. Also like Drew Peterson, Sam Parker had a history of domestic abuse.

Although Theresa Parker's body was not found, a grand jury, and later a petite jury, was convinced that Sam Parker murdered his wife.

Parker was sentenced to life in prison.  ::MonkeyHaHa::

So what does that mean for Drew Peterson? Maybe nothing. Maybe an awful lot.

Prosecutors in Illinois potentially get two whacks at him.

A lengthy grand jury investigation into the deaths of both Mrs. Petersons resulted in only one murder indictment, for the death of wife number three, Kathleen Savio.

Savio's death was initially ruled an accident, but after the exhumation of her remains in 2007, two new autopsies--one by renowned forensic pathologist Dr. Michael Baden--reclassified her death as a homicide.

"I don't think there's any possibility this was an accident, and I don't think there's any indication this was suicide," Dr. Baden told Fox News's Greta Van Susteren. "It's my opinion, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that it's a homicide."

Prosecutors could go after Drew Peterson again for the disappearance and presumed death of Stacy Peterson. Depending on what happens at his upcoming trial, Peterson may find himself in the dock facing a second murder charge.

http://incoldblogger.blogspot.com/2009/09/drew-petersons-pucker-factor.html

 ::MonkeySlide::
Chicago Tribune
 
October 3, 2009 Saturday
 
Use of hearsay law OK'd in Peterson case
 
Statements that Drew Peterson's slain third wife and missing fourth wife allegedly made to family, friends, prosecutors and a pastor could be admitted into evidence in the former Bolingbrook police sergeant's first-degree murder trial after a judge Friday upheld the constitutionality of a new state hearsay law.
 ::MonkeyGavel::
Judge Stephen White also denied a motion by defense attorneys to move the trial outside the county, saying he found no reason why Peterson couldn't receive a "fair and impartial trial" in Joliet. White had taken the unusual step of calling in the pool of some 240 potential jurors and ordering them to not view media reports on the highly publicized case.

Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow called the judge's decision to uphold the hearsay statute a vindication of the "much-maligned" law Glasgow himself had pushed for.

Before hearsay comments can be admitted, a sort of "mini-trial" would be held before White, who will rule on whether the preponderance of evidence shows that Peterson killed ex-wife Kathleen Savio in 2004 and whether the hearsay statements are "reliable," prosecutors and defense attorneys said. Prosecutors want to admit statements from fourth wife Stacy Peterson, in whose disappearance Peterson is the sole suspect, defense attorney Andrew Abood said in court.

"I can't say it's not disappointing -- it is," said Joel Brodsky, one of Peterson's attorneys, who in court had argued that allowing hearsay evidence into the murder trial would be a devastating breach of 2,000 years of jurisprudence. "You can't rebut (hearsay statements), you can't refute it. You can't cross-examine for motive or bias."
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:1049894179&start=4

TY NUT..THIS IS FABULOUS NEWS...DREW IS GOING DOWN..NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

O/T

Urgent Request for help for Natalee Holloway

http://scaredmonkeys.net/index.php?topic=5922.msg971214#msg971214

Thank you for your time, Monkeys

Drew's former Step daughter by his second wife I think...was on one of the morning shows this morning...she is now writing a book about him and his verbal abuse to her when she was a child and to her mother...This girl lived with Drew from the age of 8 until I think 18 she said...
guess everyone wants to get on the band wagon... ::MonkeyNoNo::  I had never seen or heard anything about this woman until today..did any of the rest of you monkeys?

http://cbs2chicago.com/local/peterson.family.nephew.2.1296034.html
 Nov 6, 2009 8:20 am US/Central
Is Drew Peterson's Nephew Being Persecuted?
Charlie Doman Says Possible Prison Sentence For Criminal Charges Is 'Political'
(http://llnw.image.cbslocal.com/27/2009/05/08/175x131/WBBM0507saviopeterson.jpg)
nephew of Drew Peterson's slain third wife says prosecutors will call him to the witness stand during the disgraced former cop's trial, and he believes the testimony is going to cost him a year of his life, according to the Herald News.

"This is definitely political," Charlie Doman said of prosecutors supposedly planning to lock him up for the maximum year sentence if he is convicted of misdemeanor battery and obstructing justice in order to keep his testimony above reproach.
<snipped>

Drew Peterson to get police records for trial


WGN News
November 18, 2009


JOLIET, Ill. - Prosecutors in Drew Peterson's murder case will give Peterson's lawyer some important police notes, to help him prepare for trial. Peterson is charged with killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Monday, Peterson's lawyer demanded the handwritten notes of police field investigators. The Will County State's Attorney's office says, he'll get them today; and it says, not turning them over, was just an oversight.

Until now, defense attorneys have been given only finalized typewritten reports. The defense hopes to find something in the field notes that may exonerate Peterson, or at least give the defense a reason to ask for a mistrial.

http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-peterson-to-get-police-records-nov18,0,6409094.story

Hi Cookie!  Yeppers, I've heard about her earlier on, she did at least one interview.  I researched this case indepth from day one, in a private forum, before coming here to SM.   The former step-daughter certainly does have much to say re experiences, as do others. 

I do understand what it 'appears' to be when folks start coming out of the woodwork.  In any case other than this one, I'd be thinking the same thing!  However with this particular case, folks need to realize that so many of those who have been involved with Drew felt and still feel a paralyzing fear of major retaliation if they talk.  And for good reason.  There are many who have known/loved/befriended Drew at one point in their lives, who at another point mysteriously went missing, committed "suicide", or ended up dead somehow.   

* Suspicious suicide of Drew's ex-gf's brother (who didn't like Drew)
* Mysterious murder of the new bf of Drew's 2nd ex-wife
* Suspicious murder of Kathleen Savio, Drew's 3rd ex-wife
* Mysterious disappearance of Stacy Peterson, Drew's 4th wife (not found)
* Mysterious disappearance of the mother of Stacy Peterson in 1998 (not found)
* Suspicious suicide-attempt by Drew's step/brother (the one who unknowingly helped him)

There are two others rumored to have disappeared, one is
* Mysterious disappearance of Drew's step/sister-in-law (but she was later found alive and well, had up and left her husband at some point, Drew's step/brother)

And this one... well this one is just odd
* Strange disappearance ? of the new bf of Drew's 3rd ex-wife (this was an unconfirmed rumor last we heard.  He had been in Kathy's life up to her death and was around afterward for questioning etc, then after a time no one seems to know where he went or what happened to him.)

The 8 unsolved mysteries above (incl other things in Stacy's case) can be read about at:
http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_mysteries.htm (http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_mysteries.htm)

While researching Stacy's case, I had the opportunity of working with an inside source, who for safety reasons needs to remain anonymous to the public.   This person has risked their life in helping the authorities.  There IS a very good reason why those who know things about Drew have been hesitant to say anything.  They don't want to end up missing or dead one day.  Even with Drew behind bars they may not feel safe! 

Life with Drew was, for the most part, his family walking on eggshells around him.  His mother is blind to the truth about Drew, and perhaps one aunt, that's it.  His 4 youngest kids IMO are brainwashed, they had to still live with Drew after Stacy went missing.  Eric, one of his two oldest sons, hasn't spoken to Drew since Kathy's death.   

Just please do not believe that Drew's own family is behind him 100%.  The good majority of them are just as fearful of him as Stacy and Kathy have told others that they were.  The kind of fear that paralyzes a person.  Especially with Drew having been an LE officer in the midst of 'the good ole boys', who did they have to turn to, in their fear?  Who would have listened?  No one.  Just as no one took Kathy seriously, not until long after her death. 

My heart goes out to his family, every bit as much as it does to the families of Kathy and Stacy.

 ::hohohosanta:: Drew ....  ::santawink::
(http://adsoftheworld.com/files/images/Gahnssoaponarope.preview.jpg)

A new lawyer is joining the defense team. He is also Craig Stebic's atty.

Suburban Chicago attorney joins Peterson's defense

JOLIET, Ill. - Another attorney has joined the criminal defense team for Drew Peterson, who is accused of killing his third wife

George Lenard, of the Chicago suburb of Joliet, has practiced law for more than two decades.

Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky says Lenard has been consulting with the defense team for months and brings experience.

Peterson is being held on a $20 million bond in Will County on charges that he killed his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004.

Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, has been missing since October 2007.

Peterson has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-il-drewpeterson,0,7065419.story

Nut..   ::MonkeyDevil:: 

Love the soap on a rope.  Hehe...  Perfect for Drew!   ::snowmanlaugh::

And thanks for the update! 

Latest hearing in Peterson murder trial will be open to the public

Published: January 8, 2010

JOLIET, Ill. — A hearing on evidence that prosecutors claim links former police officer Drew Peterson to the death of his third wife will be open to the public, a judge ruled Friday, dismissing claims by defense attorneys that it could taint potential jurors.

Will County Judge Stephen White said he already warned more than 200 potential jurors to avoid media reports about the case and will send them a letter reminding them of the admonishment.

“We’ve done everything we can to protect the integrity of the proceedings,” White said.

Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police officer, has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the 2004 death of Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in a dry bathtub.

Savio’s death was originally ruled an accident. But after Peterson was named a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, in October 2007, Savio’s body was exhumed. Her death was then ruled a homicide.

http://www2.oanow.com/oan/news/local/article/latest_hearing_in_peterson_murder_trial_will_be_open_to_the_public/121232/

Sorry to be off topic, but how do I request a thread for this woman? I just found out she is missing and I feel so sad that so little has been done to help find her.
http://www.myfoxboston.com/dpp/news/local/family-searches-for-missing-nh-mother-sarah-rogers

I've started a thread for Sarah Rogers in our Missing Persons Forum.  Here is the link to her thread:

http://scaredmonkeys.net/index.php?topic=6895.new#new

Peace, anyone can start a thread.  However, mods are happy to help out with that.  I hope Sarah Rogers is found to be safe.  Muffy

With all the court action in the last couple weeks and the court date on the 19th, maybe we want to brush up on the case?

The pictures (over 800) and a bunch of vids are saved here:
http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/mm166/crankycrankerson/Stacy%20Peterson%20-%20Kathleen%20Savio/

The album is loosely organized, and the pics are labeled, so it is a bit easier.

Drew Peterson pre-trial hearing will examine hearsay evidence
Published: 1/17/2010

In the months before Kathleen Savio's mysterious drowning death, relatives say, the Bolingbrook woman grew "terrified" that her estranged husband would harm her.

Her fears also were captured in writing, such as in a 2002 letter to a prosecutor in which Savio said Drew Peterson "knows how to manipulate the system, and his next step is to take my children away. Or kill me instead."

Such hearsay evidence, which, in effect, allows Savio's words to be heard from beyond the grave are the subject of a landmark court hearing opening Tuesday in Will County.

Peterson, 56, is charged with murdering his third wife, whose body was found in a dry bathtub on March 1, 2004, in the midst of their bitter divorce.

Authorities initially ruled the 40-year-old woman's death accidental but, after Peterson was named a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, last seen in October 2007, Savio's body was exhumed. Her death was ruled a homicide after a second autopsy.

Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, has not been charged in Stacy's disappearance, but he was arrested May 7, 2009, in the Savio investigation.

His trial won't begin until later this year, but media members from across the country are expected to converge on the Joliet courthouse for a hearing that may take three weeks with up to 60 witnesses.

Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow will lay out much of the prosecution's case against Peterson during the hearing, which is required under a recent state law written in part to respond to the ex-cop's high-profile case.

The law requires a judge to hold a pretrial hearing to determine whether so-called hearsay evidence - testimony or documents that quote someone secondhand who is not in court - is admissible in murder trials.

Prosecutors must prove whether a "preponderance of evidence" shows those statements are reliable and that the defendant's wrongdoing made the witness unavailable to testify. If not, the evidence cannot be presented to a jury at trial.

Glasgow has not publicly released the lengthy witness list, but he showed much of his hand during a May court hearing when the defense unsuccessfully challenged the law's constitutionality.

Prosecutors said Peterson killed Savio because he faced financial devastation from their divorce as he tried to begin a new life with his fourth wife, Stacy, 23, - with whom he had an extramarital affair while he still was married to Savio. Peterson even offered a man $25,000 to kill Savio months before her death, prosecutors said.

"My life would be easier if she were just dead," Glasgow quoted Peterson as telling a fellow police officer he saw at the courthouse before Savio's death.

Both state witnesses likely will testify at the hearsay hearing, along with relatives who have said Savio feared Peterson. She repeated those fears in court records.

"She told me that she would never live for the settlement," sister Anna Doman said, "that Drew was going to kill her and that if anything did happen, to please take care of the children. She said, 'You know, Drew's lethal.' She was terrified of him."

Peterson would have had to pay as much as $200,000 in a lump sum to Savio and likely would have lost the couple's Bolingbrook home, Glasgow said. He said her death led Peterson to receive about $25,000 annually in Social Security payments for their two young sons, who as beneficiaries of their mother's life-insurance policy stand to receive $500,000 each.

In addition, evidence in the Stacy Peterson investigation is expected to be presented in the hearing. The Rev. Neil Schori told police Stacy Peterson confided in him before she vanished that her husband admitted killing Savio. He, too, may take the witness stand.

The defense team, led by attorney Joel Brodsky, unsuccessfully fought to have the hearsay hearing in a closed courtroom to control media coverage that it argues will taint the jury pool with "rumor, innuendo and gossip" and "erodes the presumption of innocence" by asking a judge to decide before the trial even starts that Peterson murdered Savio to silence her.

Drew Peterson will not testify.

"You're going to see a lot of the state's case, which we'll attack, but not ours to a great extent," Brodsky said. "We don't want to show them our hand. This is not a mini-trial. This is really the state exposing their case and letting us cross-examine their witnesses."

Will County Circuit Judge Stephen White ruled this month that public access to court proceedings is paramount. The judge took earlier steps to protect the jury pool. In August, White warned some 240 potential panelists to avoid Peterson media coverage. He said a follow-up letter also would be sent before the hearing starts to remind them of his edict.

This is the second time a hearsay reliability hearing is being held under the law. In DuPage County, prosecutors successfully invoked the law in the Oct. 9, 2004, fatal shooting of a 17-year-old Warrenville girl who was killed shortly after accusing an acquaintance of battery. The man, Joshua Matthews, 24, goes on trial later this year in Wheaton.

Peterson is being held on a $20 million bond in the Will County jail. He maintains his innocence.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=351508

Timeline in Drew Peterson investigation

March 1, 2004: The body of Drew Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio, 40, is discovered in a bathtub in her Bolingbrook home. Her death is initially ruled an accidental drowning.

Oct. 29, 2007: His fourth wife, Stacy, 23, is reported missing, a day after she fails to show up at a family member's home.

Nov. 9, 2007: Illinois State Police declare Drew Peterson a suspect in Stacy's disappearance and announce they've launched an investigation into Savio's drowning death. A Will County judge signs an order to exhume Savio's body.

Nov. 12, 2007: Drew Peterson resigns from the Bolingbrook Police Department, where he had been an officer for nearly three decades.

Nov. 13, 2007: Savio's body is exhumed for a second autopsy.

Nov. 16, 2007: Forensic pathologist Dr. Michael Baden says Savio likely was murdered.

Nov. 21, 2007: A special Will County grand jury is convened to hear evidence in both cases involving Savio and Stacy Peterson.

Feb. 21, 2008: Kathleen Savio's death officially ruled a homicide.

May 21, 2008: Drew Peterson surrenders to police on a weapons charge unrelated to the disappearance of his fourth wife.

Nov. 20, 2008: Gun charges dropped against Peterson after Will County prosecutors refuse to hand over internal investigative documents.

May 7, 2009: Drew Peterson indicted on two counts of first-degree murder for Savio's death; peacefully surrenders during a traffic stop. Peterson remains jailed on $20 million bond.

Oct. 2, 2009: Will Circuit Judge Stephen White upholds new state law that allows Savio beyond-the-grave hearsay evidence at trial if later deemed reliable.

Jan. 19, 2010: A landmark hearsay court hearing is scheduled to begin in which prosecutors lay out their evidence against Peterson in Savio's death.

Source: Daily Herald archives

Thanks Nut44 I sure hope they broadcast it.

Testimony ‘from the grave’ in Peterson case
Peterson's 3rd wife drowned in bathtub; witnesses will recount her fears
updated 53 minutes ago
JOLIET, Ill. - Six years after she mysteriously drowned in a bathtub, Kathleen Savio is finally getting her day in court.

Savio essentially will testify from the grave Tuesday, with witnesses expected to tell a judge in Illinois how Savio discussed and wrote about her fears that her husband, former Bolingbrook police Sgt. Drew Peterson, would kill her.

The hearing is expected to provide the first detailed look at evidence prosecutors contend ties Peterson to Savio's death. It stems from a state law that allows a judge to admit hearsay evidence — testimony from witnesses who recount what they heard from others — in first-degree murder cases if prosecutors can prove a defendant killed a witness to prevent him or her from testifying.

The Illinois Legislature passed the law after authorities named Peterson a suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, then exhumed the body of Savio, his third wife, and reopened the investigation into her 2004 death. Though the bill's sponsors were careful never to link the law publicly to Peterson, it has been referred to as "Drew's Law," and his attorneys have long suggested it was passed to put Peterson behind bars.

During the hearing, which is expected to last three weeks, prosecutors will present to Will County Judge Stephen White about 60 witnesses to testify about 15 hearsay statements. White will then decide if the jury can hear any or all of those statements when Peterson stands trial. Peterson has pleaded not guilty to murdering Savio, whose body was found in a dry tub. A trial date hasn't been set.

While neither side has talked much about the evidence in the case, from the day Peterson was arrested, Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow has made it clear that allowing Savio to tell jurors why Peterson wanted her dead is crucial to his case.

"In essence, what you're basically allowing the victim of a violent crime to do is testify from the grave," Glasgow, who pushed for passage of the bill, told reporters in May shortly after Peterson was arrested.

'Afraid for her life'
The list of witnesses remains under seal, but Savio's niece, Melissa Doman, said her mother, Anna Doman, is among those who have been called to testify.

"It would be about things my Aunt Kitty (Savio) told my mom about how she was afraid for her life, she said she was afraid of Drew," Melissa Doman said, adding that she has not been called to testify.

Also expected to testify are other members of Savio's family, including her sister, Susan Savio. It was Susan Savio who told a coroner's jury shortly after her sister's death that Kathleen Savio had told family members that, "if she would die, it may look like an accident, but it wasn't."

The death initially was ruled an accidental drowning — until Stacy Peterson's disappearance led officials to exhume Savio's body, conduct another autopsy and conclude Savio was the victim of a homicide. Drew Peterson has not been charged in Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

Other possible witnesses who could be asked to testify about the stormy relationship between Drew Peterson and Savio are his former colleagues. Eighteen times in two years, police were called to the couple's Bolingbrook home to respond to reports of trouble between the two, with Savio telling officers that her husband had beaten her and threatened to kill her. Peterson was never charged. Savio was charged with domestic battery and later was acquitted.

There also are court documents that prosecutors are expected to present into evidence, including a 2002 order of protection in which Savio alleges that Peterson knocked her down, ripped off her necklace and left marks on her body.

"He wants me dead, and if he has to, he will burn the house down just to shut me up," she wrote.

Clergy may testify
Among the more intriguing possible witnesses are members of the clergy at a Bolingbrook church attended by Stacy Peterson. In the days after her disappearance, there were media reports that she had told a clergyman a couple months earlier that Drew Peterson had confessed to her that he killed Savio and made it look like an accident.

Peterson's attorneys have made it clear that they will attack the credibility of at least some of the witnesses.

"All it is, is rumor, innuendo and gossip," defense attorney Joel Brodsky said after a recent hearing concerning information contained in the 15 statements. "People had ulterior motives for saying what they said or are out-and-out unreliable people."

The defense is not expected to call any witnesses of its own during the hearing.

"People should not think this is going to be the trial," Brodsky said.

He said the hearing will help Peterson.

"We think that even in this questioning, a lot of beliefs that people have about what was said and who said them are going to be burst, dashed," he said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34933523/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

http://www.prnewschannel.com/absolutenm/templates/?z=0&a=2126
Drew Peterson Attorney Not Just a Pretty Face
As a hearing on hearsay testimony gets underway, Reem Odeh prepares for vital role on Peterson's defense team
(PRNewsChannel) / January 19, 2010 / Bolingbrook, Ill. / As a pivotal hearing on hearsay testimony gets underway today, it will again be Drew Peterson's lead defense attorney Joel Brodsky who will get most of the face time. But it's his partner, a model-turned-attorney, who might be the secret weapon to land an acquittal for the former Bolingbrook police sergeant.

Reem Odeh wants the public to know that beyond her stunning good looks is a hard-nosed attorney who is detail-oriented and brings keen analytical skills to Team Peterson.

"You don't need to be front and center to know you're playing a vital role in a huge criminal case," says Odeh. "Drew knows what I'm doing. The legal team knows my contribution. Yet, most of the public following the case probably have no idea who I am."

She hardly ever talks to the media. And, though present, she rarely addresses the court.

Though Odeh has largely taken a behind-the-scenes role, to be fair, she did argue for a change of venue in the case.

Odeh is a single mother of three children who became a "corner office" partner in a Chicago law firm before she turned 30.

Brodsky, who has received the bulk of the press interviews, says he relies on his partner to review the tremendous amount of documents, transcripts, statements and investigative reports and to analyze and develop a legal strategy.

"Reem has developed and implemented an incredibly powerful process that has allowed us to find and organize the evidence which will prove Drew's innocence," says Brodsky. "Her organizational and analytical skills are prodigious."

She gets equal accolades from co-counsel Andrew Abood.

"She is an essential part of the team, and without her we would not be able to expose all the problems with the State's case," said Abood.
During trial, she will conduct the direct examination of one of Peterson's teenage children who will testify in his father's defense.

"The jury needs to hear what his children say about him," says Odeh. "It's very telling and extremely moving and says a lot about him as a man."

Drew Peterson and his legal team are represented by the PR firm The Publicity Agency.  For more information, please visit http://www.thepublicityagency.com.
Source: thepublicityagency.com

This press release was sent by the press release distribution service PRNewsChannel. Follow on Twitter, Friend on Facebook, Connect on Linkedin

http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/1999151,drew-peterson-trial-hearsay-011910.article
Witness: Drew Peterson threatened to kill Savio

January 19, 2010

ASSOCIATED PRESS

A one-time co-worker of Kathleen Savio says Savio told him Drew Peterson threw her to the floor one night and told her he could kill her.

Issam Karam (ih-SAHM' kah-RAHM') testified Tuesday at a hearing in the former Bolingbrook police sergeant's case. Peterson has pleaded not guilty in Savio's murder.
The hearing stems from a state law that allows a judge to admit hearsay evidence in first-degree murder cases if prosecutors can prove a defendant killed a witness to prevent him or her from testifying. After the hearing, a Will County judge will decide if jurors can hear the witness statements when Peterson stands trial.

Karam says Savio said Peterson grabbed her throat and had a knife, and that he told Savio he "could kill her there and then."

Peterson's defense team challenges 'Drew's law'
By Stephanie Chen, CNN
January 19, 2010 -- Updated 2212 GMT

Stacy Peterson had disturbing things to say about her husband, Drew Peterson.

She is still missing, but her statements about former Bolingbrook police Sgt. Drew Peterson, who is accused of murdering his previous wife, may start to come out in court at a crucial pretrial hearing that begins Tuesday.

Her statements, according to court documents, are likely to include her suspicions and fears of Peterson.

At the center of the debate is whether hearsay evidence can be used at Peterson's trial. Hearsay is what one person says to another, outside of a courtroom setting. Because courts prefer to hear from the original source, the person who hears a statement is usually not permitted to tell judges and juries about the statement.

Peterson is accused of murdering his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Her body was found in an empty bathtub in March 2004, and her death initially was ruled an accidental drowning. Her death was reinvestigated after Stacy Peterson's disappearance and then was ruled to be a homicide. Drew Peterson has been charged with first-degree murder. He denies the charges.

Read the indictment

If prosecutors get their way, Stacy Peterson will haunt her husband's murder trial.

In 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in the case Crawford v. Washington that hearsay evidence violates a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him or her.

That case added hurdles for the use of hearsay evidence, according to legal analysts.

But courts have been establishing exceptions to the hearsay laws in cases in which witnesses are silenced. And the list of exceptions has grown over the years, especially if the hearsay can be used to show a witness or victim's state of mind. In those cases, jurors are warned not to automatically consider the statement as truthful.

Illinois passed a law in 2008 -- dubbed "the Drew Peterson law" or "Drew's law" by the media -- that allows hearsay evidence if prosecutors believe the victim was killed to prevent his or her testimony.

The defense maintains in its own motions that the law unfairly targets Drew Peterson because it was passed after the investigation was launched. In a legal response, prosecutor James W. Glasgow called the defense claim "a thinly veiled effort to sway the court into believing that this statute pertains exclusively to this prosecution."

Stacy Peterson was 23 when she vanished in October 2007. According to the prosecution, she had voiced doubts about Savio's demise and told others before she vanished that she feared the same fate.

After Stacy Peterson's disappearance, the state performed a second autopsy on Savio, concluding in November 2007 that her death was a homicide. A third autopsy was performed at the request of the Savio family. The private medical examiner determined the cuts, lacerations and bruises on her body indicated a struggle.

Drew Peterson was charged last year with first-degree murder and held on $20 million bond. He pleaded not guilty. He has not been charged in Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

Stacy Peterson made statements regarding Drew Peterson's whereabouts the night of Savio's death, according to a pastor and other potential witnesses.

Six years after Savio's death, prosecutors also intend to introduce her words through family members who recall their conversations with her, as well as through letters she wrote to police.

The hearings, which could last a month, will determine the merit and relevance of the hearsay statements. As many as 60 witnesses may testify, according to CNN affiliate WLS-TV in Chicago.

James Carey, a law professor at Loyola University law school in Chicago, said prosecutors must prove that Drew Peterson intentionally got rid of Stacy Peterson to keep her from testifying.

Drew Peterson's attorneys are arguing that Illinois' new hearsay law is unconstitutional. The new law was passed only after Peterson's case gained media attention, the defense argues.

"Having newly-minted evidence, but not the evidence to prosecute anyone for it, the Will County State's Attorney decided to draft a new law," wrote Drew Peterson's attorney, Joel A. Brodsky. He was unavailable for comment Monday, an office assistant said.

It is not yet clear what evidence prosecutors are seeking to present. Their motion was filed under seal.

However the court decides on the Peterson evidence, an appeal is likely and the precedents could become legal landmarks.

"This other witness may truthfully be saying what the person said, but how do we know what the person said is true?" said Steven Beckett, director of trial advocacy at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Beckett said hearsay evidence is a serious disadvantage to the defense because they cannot cross-examine the person being quoted.

There are no eyewitnesses or physical evidence to link Drew Peterson to Savio's death, his attorneys argue.

"I think the jury's going to see that, in fact, this always has been an accidental death and still is an accidental death," Brodsky told CNN's Larry King last year.

Savio's family has been hopeful the new law will help prove Drew Peterson's involvement in their daughter's case.

"We hope it's going to come out the right way," her father, Henry Savio, told CNN reporters in 2009, shortly after Drew Peterson was charged.

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/01/19/illinois.drew.peterson.hearsay/

OMG I am so glad I am not near there. I would end up in the Female Jail (lol), ...cause I'd have to kill him  ::MonkeyNoNo::

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/21/AR2010012100890.html
Witnesses to say drowned Ill. woman feared ex-cop
Thursday, January 21, 2010; 7:00 AM
JOLIET, Ill. -- A woman who mysteriously drowned in a bathtub will be given a voice as witnesses tell an Illinois judge how she feared the ex-husband now charged in her death.

Prosecutors are expected to call more witnesses Thursday to detail conversations they had with Kathleen Savio about her former police officer husband, Drew Peterson.

The judge will decide later whether the "hearsay" evidence may be used during Peterson's murder trial. Peterson has pleaded not guilty.

A former co-worker testified Wednesday that Savio told him Peterson once threw her to the floor and threatened to kill her.

Savio's body was found in a dry bathtub in 2004. Her death was ruled a homicide after Peterson's fourth wife disappeared in 2007. Peterson has not been charged in that case.

Witness: Peterson indicated he'd kill his 4th wife
01.21.10, 04:50 PM EST 

JOLIET, Ill. -- The stepbrother of a former Illinois police officer accused of killing his third wife told a hushed courtroom Thursday that he believed he might have helped his relative dispose of the body of his fourth wife, who has not been seen for more than two years.

Thomas Morphey testified at a hearing to decide whether prosecutors can use "hearsay" evidence to try and prove allegations that Drew Peterson killed his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004. Peterson hasn't been charged in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, but authorities say he is the only suspect.

While the Will County hearing is about the death of Savio, Thursday's testimony focused on the day Stacy Peterson disappeared. Prosecutors would not say why Morphey was being asked to testify about Stacy Peterson, but Will County state's attorney's office spokesman Chuck Pelkie said the reasons would become clear in the proceedings.

In a packed but quiet courtroom, Morphey said Peterson suggested when they talked on Oct. 27, 2007, that he intended to kill Stacy because she planned to divorce him, win custody of their children and take Peterson's money.

Morphey said he drank heavily the next day.

"I just heard someone was going to murder somebody else," Morphey explained.

Peterson brought Morphey back to his Bolingbrook home, went into a master bedroom and rolled out a large blue barrel that Morphey estimated weighed up to 150 pounds.

"He had me grab an end, he grabbed the other end and we proceeded down the stairs," Morphey testified. "It felt warm."

Morphey stopped short of saying that Peterson directly admitted murdering Stacy and he said the two men never talked about what was in the barrel. Earlier in the day, Morphey testified he had told Peterson that he always assumed he had killed Savio, but that Peterson denied it.

Savio's body was found in an empty bathtub in her home in 2004. Her death had initially been ruled an accidental drowning - until Stacy Peterson's disappearance led officials to exhume Savio's body, conduct another autopsy and conclude Savio was the victim of a homicide.

The story of the blue barrel has been central in Stacy Peterson's case. Numerous search parties over the years, including divers, have focused on finding it, but it has never turned up.

In court, Morphey said he had not wanted to go with Peterson, in part because he didn't want anything to do with what Peterson did. Morphey did not explain why he agreed to help him.

According to his testimony, the two men took the barrel, put it in Peterson's SUV and Peterson drove Morphey home.

"'He said, 'This never happened,'" Morphey testified. "I said, 'I won't tell a soul.'"

Nevertheless, Morphey said he later told his girlfriend, brother and a neighbor. He said he was stressed out, nervous and drinking more than normal.

Morphey said he didn't contact the authorities because he wasn't sure the incident would be handled fairly due to Peterson's job.

"He was a police officer," Morphey said. "I thought, 'What would be the point of calling 911?'"

Morphey said his fear led him to overdose on the anti-anxiety drug Xanax in an attempt to end his life.

"I felt everything was coming down on me," he said. "I'm still scared to death."

In a cross-examination, Peterson's attorneys raised questions about Morphey's mental state and whether was a credible witness.

Morphey suffers from a bipolar disorder and has admitted to drinking too much as well as problems with drugs. On Thursday prosecutors presented evidence that buttressed what Morphey said happened. That included video footage and witness interviews showing that both men made a trip to Starbucks ( SBUX - news - people ) around the time of the alleged blue barrel incident.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/01/21/general-us-drew-peterson_7293655.html?boxes=Homepagebusinessnews

Wife's disappearance focus of hearing
Peterson hasn't been charged in 2007 disappearance
Updated: Friday, 22 Jan 2010, 5:22 AM MST
Published : Friday, 22 Jan 2010, 5:22 AM MST

The investigation of former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson has always been about both the disappearance of his fourth wife and the death of his third wife.

That was particularly evident when Peterson's stepbrother took the stand at a hearing Thursday regarding the death of the third wife, Kathleen Savio. He spoke for three hours about the day Stacy Peterson vanished.

Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police officer, has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the death of Savio, whose body was found in a dry bathtub in her home in 2004. Peterson hasn't been charged in Stacy's 2007 disappearance, but authorities say he is the only suspect.

Prosecutors did not immediately explain why they asked Peterson's stepbrother, Thomas Morphey, to testify about Stacy Peterson at such length during a pretrial hearing meant to decide what, if any, "hearsay" evidence prosecutors can use to try and prove allegations that Peterson killed Savio. Will County state's attorney's spokesman Chuck Pelkie said it would become clear later.

Friday's testimony was likely to turn to the day Savio's body was found. The lead Illinois State Police investigator who originally looked into Savio's death, retired Sgt. Patrick Collins, was scheduled to resume testifying and was expected to explain why the death was initially ruled an accident.

Officials decided to exhume Savio's body after Stacy Peterson's disappearance. A subsequent autopsy concluded Savio was the victim of a homicide.

At Thursday's hearing, Morphey described in detail how he believed he might have helped his relative dispose of Stacy Peterson's body. She has not been seen for more than two years.

Morphey said Drew Peterson suggested when they talked on Oct. 27, 2007, that he intended to kill his fourth wife because she planned to divorce him, win custody of their children and take Peterson's money.

Morphey said he drank heavily the next day.

"I just heard someone was going to murder somebody else," Morphey explained.

Peterson brought Morphey back to his Bolingbrook home, Morphey said, went into a master bedroom and rolled out a large blue barrel that Morphey estimated weighed up to 150 pounds.

Morphey stopped short of saying Peterson directly admitted murdering Stacy and he said the two men never talked about what was in the barrel. Morphey also testified that he had told Peterson that he always assumed he had killed Savio, but that Peterson denied it.

The story of the blue barrel has been central in Stacy Peterson's case. Numerous search parties over the years, including divers, have focused on finding it, but it has never turned up.

Morphey testified that he had not wanted to help Peterson, in part because he didn't want anything to do with what he thought Peterson did. Morphey did not explain why he agreed to help.

According to his testimony, the two men took the barrel, put it in Peterson's SUV; Peterson then drove Morphey home.

"He said, 'This never happened,'" Morphey testified. "I said, 'I won't tell a soul.'"

Nevertheless, Morphey said he later told his girlfriend, brother and a neighbor. And he said he was stressed and drinking more than normal. The anxiety, Morphey said, even led him to overdose on the anti-anxiety drug Xanax in an attempt to end his life.

"I felt everything was coming down on me," he said. "I'm still scared to death."

Under cross-examination, Peterson's attorneys raised questions about Morphey's mental state and whether was a credible witness.

http://www.krqe.com/dpps/news/us/midwest/3rd-wifes-disappearance-focus-of-peterson-hearing-jgr_3196323

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/23/AR2010012301379.html
Experts: Police botched 1st Peterson investigation
By MICHAEL TARM and DON BABWIN
The Associated Press
Saturday, January 23, 2010; 1:57 PM

JOLIET, Ill. -- From nearly the moment the lead investigator stepped into the suburban Chicago area home where former policeman Drew Peterson's third wife was found dead in a dry bathtub, he treated her death as a tragic accident.
Illinois State Police Sgt. Patrick Collins collected no forensics evidence from the scene - not fingerprints, unfinished drinks or clothes. Most disturbingly, say experts, Collins let Peterson sit in on what may have been a vital interview.

Six years later, as prosecutors and defense attorneys prepare for Peterson's trial on charges of murdering Kathleen Savio, one thing has become clear: Police blew the initial investigation, undermining prosecutors' ability to prove their case.
The incompetency that comes out is somewhat unbelievable," said Richard Brzeczek, a former Chicago police superintendent who now works in private criminal defense. "It seems that, pretty fundamentally, what should have been done was not done."

Among the litany of mistakes: Collins said he never asked anyone whether Savio's body had been touched or moved, he never tried to account for her body being bent forward, and he never interviewed her relatives. And when he left the house, he didn't seal it, meaning someone could walk in and take, move or even clean something.

"They could have had the evidence with a proper investigation," Brzeczek said. "A prosecution's extremely more difficult now."

The now-retired Collins testified Thursday and Friday at a pretrial hearing meant to determine what, if any, "hearsay" evidence prosecutors can use during Peterson's murder trial.

Both prosecutors and defense attorneys hit Collins with tough questions, with prosecutors trying to show he could have gathered evidence pointing to Peterson's involvement in Savio's death. The defense, which has long claimed Savio's death was an accident, argued that even if someone had killed her, the investigation was so shoddy it would be impossible to determine who that was.
Peterson has pleaded not guilty in Savio's 2004 death. Officials exhumed her body and ruled her death a homicide only after Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared in 2007. He hasn't been charged in her disappearance, but authorities say he's the only suspect.

Brzeczek says one of the glaring examples of Collins' poor judgment was permitting Peterson to attend an interview of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, in which she was asked about her husband's whereabouts the day Savio died. Peterson and Savio had divorced and Peterson married Stacy Peterson before Savio died.

Collins testified that Peterson not only sat in on the interview, he answered a question put to his wife about what they ate for breakfast that day.

"Collins should have said, 'I'm sorry there are serious considerations here, we have a death investigation, and at this point there will be no profession courtesies,'" Brzeczek said. "You just cannot do those kind of things."

Continued here.....  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/23/AR2010012301379_2.html

Neighbor: Stacy Peterson said 'I'm already dead'
By DON BABWIN , 01.25.10, 05:51 PM EST 

JOLIET, Ill. -- The fourth wife of former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson was sure her husband would kill her, even telling a neighbor days before her disappearance in 2007 that "I'm already dead," according to testimony at a hearing on Monday.

The neighbor sobbed uncontrollably at times as she spoke during the hearing meant to determine what, if any, "hearsay" evidence prosecutors can use during Peterson's upcoming trial on charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004.
Bychowski told the court that she found Stacy Peterson, then 23, crying outside her suburban Chicago home. She explained how she had packed 10 boxes of Drew Peterson's clothes and asked her husband, 30 years her senior, to leave. But he'd refused.

"She said, 'If I disappear, Sharon, it's not an accident. He killed me,'" a visibly shaken Bychowski testified.

As Stacy Peterson described how she feared for her life, Bychowski advised her to put what she was saying in writing.
"It doesn't matter," Bychowski said Peterson told her. "I'm already dead. He's going to kill me."

At one point, the judge called a brief recess to allow Bychowski to regain her composure.

Peterson has pleaded not guilty in Savio's 2004 death. Officials exhumed her body and ruled her death a homicide only after Stacy Peterson vanished three years later. He hasn't been charged in her disappearance, but authorities say he's the only suspect.

The focus of the pre-trial hearing, now in its second week, is the possible use of "hearsay" evidence in the Savio case.

Hearsay, or statements not based on the direct knowledge of a witness, usually isn't admissible in court. Illinois judges can allow it in murder trials if prosecutors prove a defendant may have killed a witness to prevent them from testifying. There's little available forensic evidence in Savio's case, so prosecutors are expected to rely on statements Savio allegedly made to others saying she feared Peterson could kill her.

But Bychowski is the latest witness to testify at length about Stacy Peterson.

She testified Monday that Stacy Peterson, despite expressing fears for her own life, never said anything about Savio's death or that she may have suspected Drew Peterson of killing Savio. Drew Peterson and Savio had divorced, and he had already married Stacy Peterson before Savio died.

Bychowski also testified that Stacy Peterson talked at length about her intention to divorce Peterson.

"She didn't love him anymore," Bychowski said. She added that, for Stacy Peterson, "having sex with him made her skin crawl."

Drew Peterson tried to dissuade his young wife from leaving by showering her with gifts, including a motorcycle and a ring, as well as by paying for breast enhancement surgery, Stacy Peterson allegedly told Bychowski. But holding up the ring at one point, she said, "'He thinks he's going to keep me. No way,'" Bychowski recalled.

Drew Peterson was so possessive of Stacy, he even installed a satellite GPS tracking system in her cell phone to monitor her movements by computer, Bruce Zidarich - a then-boyfriend of Stacy Peterson's sister, Cassandra Cales - also testified Monday.

In the initial investigation into Savio's 2004 death, retired Illinois State Police Sgt. Patrick Collins also testified last week that he never considered the possibility of murder. He said he never collected any forensics evidence from the home where her body was found in a bathtub.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/01/25/general-us-drew-peterson_7301009.html?boxes=Homepagebusinessnews

(http://www.foxnews.com/images/root_images/peterson_20100125_232919.jpg)

Ohhhhhhh babyyyyyyyy this is going to be good!!!!!  ::MonkeyGavel:: I can't wait for this PIG to be brought down to the level of a slug's slime that drags across the concrete!  ::MonkeyShovel:: ::CowboySmiley:: ::MonkeyShovel:: I HATE HIM!

Judge: Minister can reveal talks with Stacy Peterson at trial

January 26, 2010

A Will County judge says a Bolingbrook minister can reveal conversations he had at a coffee shop with Stacy Peterson, who disappeared in 2007.

Minister Neil Schori provided marriage counseling to Drew Peterson and his fourth wife, Stacy.

Schori is a witness at the "hearsay" hearing to determine what evidence prosecutors can present at Drew Peterson's upcoming trial in the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Peterson has pleaded not guilty.

Will County Judge Stephen White also ruled Tuesday that Schori can't reveal conversations he had with Drew and Stacy Peterson at their home or conversations he had with Drew Peterson.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/2011844,drew-peterson-hearsay-savio-012610.article

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583997,00.html?test=latestnews

Witness Says Peterson Bragged He Could Cover Up Murder

Tuesday , January 26, 2010

JOLIET, Ill. —
An aunt of former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson's missing wife testified Tuesday that he once bragged he could kill someone and "make it look like an accident."

Candace Aikin testified that Drew Peterson made the boast in front of her, Stacy Peterson and others at a family gathering in January 2007, months before Stacy disappeared.

"I just remember him saying something like he could kill and make it look like an accident," Aikin said.

She said Stacy Peterson heard that and replied, "Not with this chick you don't."

Aikin also said Stacy and Drew Peterson often fought, and that her niece told her he would follow her from room to room while she was speaking on the phone.

Drew Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police officer, has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Authorities exhumed her body and ruled her death a homicide only after Stacy Peterson vanished three years later.

Drew Peterson hasn't been charged in Stacy Peterson's disappearance, but authorities say he's the only suspect.

Aikin's friend, Donna Badalamenti, also testified. Badalamenti, who has know Stacy Peterson for years, said they were at a family event in 2003 when Peterson told her that if the marriage to Stacy Peterson didn't work out he would kill himself.

Badalamenti told Drew Peterson not to say that, and she said he responded, "Then I'll kill her."

Earlier Tuesday, Will County Judge Stephen White ruled that Neil Schori, a counseling minister at Westbrook Christian Church in Bolingbrook, could testify about some of what was said during conversations he had at a coffee shop with Stacy Peterson. It was unclear how much of the conversations the judge would allow, but he was expected to rule Wednesday.

White also ruled that Schori couldn't reveal what was said during conversations he had with Drew and Stacy Peterson at their home or during conversations he had with Drew Peterson.

Schori was expected to resume testifying on Wednesday.

Defense attorneys objected to Schori testifying about any conversations with Drew Peterson, arguing that they should be confidential because Schori was acting as a religious minister. But prosecutors argued that the privilege doesn't apply because Westbrook is a nondenominational church and had no specific rules about confidentiality.

The focus of the pretrial hearing, now in its second week, is the possible use of "hearsay" evidence in the Savio case.

Hearsay, or statements not based on the direct knowledge of a witness, usually isn't admissible in court. Illinois judges can allow it in murder trials if prosecutors prove a defendant may have killed a witness to prevent them from testifying. There's little available forensic evidence in Savio's case, so prosecutors are expected to rely on statements Savio allegedly made to others saying she feared Peterson could kill her.

Former prosecutor: Never got Kathleen Savio letter
1/27/2010, 6:59 p.m. ESTThe Associated Press   

(AP) — JOLIET, Ill. - A former Will County prosecutor says she doesn't remember receiving a letter from Drew Peterson's third wife where she allegedly spelled out how she feared Peterson.

Elizabeth Fragale (FRUH'-gaw-lee) testified at a pretrial hearing Wednesday on what "hearsay" evidence could be used when Peterson is tried on charges he killed Kathleen Savio.

Fragale says she does remember meeting Savio in 2002, two years before her lifeless body was found in her bathtub. At the meeting, Savio pleaded with Fragale to dismiss domestic violence charges against her. Savio was later acquitted.

At the same meeting, Fragale says she remembers Savio saying former police officer Drew Peterson was abusive, and that she told Savio to talk to Illinois State Police and get an order of protection.
http://www.syracuse.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/politics-16/126464100760870.xml&storylist=politics

Peterson 'unusual' just after wife vanished, court told

Ex-Bolingbrook cop referred to Stacy Peterson in the past tense, investigator testifies

January 27, 2010

On the day his wife was reported missing, Drew Peterson referred to her in the past tense, would not let state police search their home or cars for evidence and repeatedly bragged about his sex life, an Illinois State Police special agent testified Wednesday in Will County court.

"I thought it was very unusual and awkward," said special agent Patrick Callaghan, who was asked to recount his initial interviews with Peterson in the days after Stacy Peterson's Oct. 28, 2007, disappearance. "I think that it was his attempt to ease the situation."

Callaghan's testimony came during the second week of a pretrial hearing on whether certain hearsay statements can be heard in the murder trial against Drew Peterson, 56. Though he is charged with killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio, much of the testimony so far has involved the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, is the sole suspect in Stacy's disappearance but has not been charged. Judge Stephen White said the Rev. Neil Schori, a pastor whose testimony is expected to connect both cases, will take the stand Friday.

On Wednesday, Callaghan testified that during the first interview with Peterson on Oct. 29, hours after Stacy's sister had reported her missing to police, Peterson said Stacy had called him the night before to say she was leaving with another man and had dropped her car, a Pontiac Grand Prix, at nearby Clow Airport.

Callaghan said he asked Peterson how he got the car back home, a question that "caught him off guard."

Peterson paused for a couple of seconds, Callaghan said, then answered, "Can you believe that?" Peterson said Stacy told him she had left the keys on the floorboard and the doors unlocked.

Peterson wouldn't allow police to search either of his two vehicles, only opening the trunk of the Grand Prix, Callaghan said. He also refused to allow a search of his home, only permitting a crime-scene investigator to walk through — with Peterson at his side — to confirm Stacy wasn't there, Callaghan said.

Phone records show Peterson had conversations with his stepbrother Thomas Morphey in the weeks before Stacy disappeared, Callaghan said. But Peterson told police on Nov. 1 that he hadn't spoken with Morphey in two weeks. Morphey has testified he helped Peterson move a barrel he believes contained Stacy's body on Oct. 28.

Callaghan said Peterson repeatedly referred to his wife in the past tense, such as "she was a good mom," or "she was a hot 23-year-old." He admitted that he was possessive of his much-younger wife, Callaghan said.

Callaghan said Peterson told the officers that he and Stacy were having marital problems, but that their fights coincided with Stacy's menstrual cycle, and that they would always make up and "have great sex" afterward.

He said Peterson brought up, unasked, the couple's sex life three or four times during the interview, something he found "awkward."

In 2002, then-Will County Assistant State's Attorney Elizabeth Fragale received an impassioned letter from Savio asking for help and alleging Peterson had attacked her. Fragale left the state's attorney's office in 2004, the same year Savio was found dead, and was prosecuting two domestic battery charges filed against Savio.

Fragale testified Wednesday that Peterson repeatedly sought to have Savio "prosecuted to the full extent" — once coming to her office in uniform unannounced — and said she got the impression Peterson wanted to use the charges as leverage in his divorce battle.

A woman who testified she had a 9-month affair with Peterson while he was married to Savio said he told her in 1998 that he didn't want to get divorced because his wife would take half his pension.

Susan McCauley, who at the time was a bartender at Peterson's Montgomery pub, said Peterson told her that he and a friend were on a "street death squad," adding, "if you ever needed anyone taken care of."

Peterson, wearing a plaid suit in court, laughed when McCauley testified that the only gift she received during the affair was a "very cheap necklace."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-0128-drew-peterson-hearing-20100127,0,1766037.story

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,584169,00.html?test=latestnews

Witness Testifies Peterson Wanted Him to Kill Third Wife

Thursday , January 28, 2010

JOLIET, Ill. —
Months before Drew Peterson's ex-wife Kathleen Savio was found dead in her bathtub the former police sergeant asked a one-time co-worker if he could find someone to "have his third wife taken care of," the co-worker testified Thursday.

Jeff Pachter said Peterson told him during a ride in Peterson's squad car in the winter of 2003 that he'd pay Pachter $25,000 and he didn't care how Pachter divided the money. Pachter said that while Peterson never used the words kill or murdered, "I thought it was to have her murdered."

Pachter said he didn't take Peterson's offer seriously, saying he simply responded, "OK," but did nothing about it.

The testimony is part of a hearing to determine what "hearsay" evidence prosecutors can present to jurors when Drew Peterson stands trial in Savio's death.

Peterson, 56, a former Bolingbrook police officer, has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in Savio's death. He is also considered the only suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Pachter said Peterson explained to him that he asked Pachter partly because Pachter works in a dangerous section of Joliet. Pachter said he understood that to mean Peterson believed he would be able to find a drug dealer or gang member to carry out the job.

Pachter, who said he met Peterson when the two worked for a cable company, is a convicted sex offender who acknowledged he owed his bookie $1,000 at the time and had marital problems. Prosecutors suggested in their questions that Peterson chose Pachter because he wouldn't be the kind of person who authorities would believe over the word of a police officer.

Pachter said he hadn't heard about Savio's death in March 2004 until he telephoned Peterson the following July to ask about Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy, and the baby she had recently delivered. Pachter said Peterson said during the call, "By the way, the favor that I asked you, I don't need it anymore."

He said Peterson explained that Savio had fallen in her bathtub, hit her head and died.

Peterson has not been charged in Stacy Peterson's disappearance, but much of the testimony has centered on her disappearance as prosecutors attempt to establish a link between the two cases.

Earlier Thursday, Stacy Peterson's sister Cassandra Cales testified that two days before Stacy Peterson disappeared she told Cales she was afraid of Drew Peterson.

"She said she feared for her life and if anything ever happened to her, Drew did something to her," Cales said.

In previous testimony, a neighbor of Stacy and Drew Peterson testified that shortly before she disappeared, Stacy Peterson told her the same thing.

Cales said when Stacy Peterson told her about her plans to divorce Peterson and leave with her children, Cales became frightened. Cales said she mentioned to Stacy Peterson that Savio's death was "kind of weird." But Stacy Peterson didn't respond, Cales said.

Cales also testified that on the night she reported her sister missing, Drew Peterson told her that Stacy had left him for another man and had taken $25,000.

More than 30 witnesses have testified in the hearing, which is in its seventh day and is expected to last at least another week.

http://www.bnd.com/breaking_news/story/1108556.html
Friday, Jan. 29, 2010
| Comments (0) | Recommend (0)
Minister to take stand in Peterson hearing
The Associated Press
Bookmark and Share
email this story to a friend E-Mail print story Print
Text Size:
tool name
close
tool goes here

JOLIET, Ill. -- A minister who counseled former policeman Drew Peterson's fourth wife before she disappeared is set to take the witness stand at a pretrial hearing on "hearsay" evidence.

Neil Schori says he met with Stacy Peterson a number of times after she asked him at the Bolingbrook church where he once worked to provide her marriage counseling.

Drew Peterson is charged with the 2004 slaying of Kathleen Savio, to whom he was married before he married Stacy Peterson. He's been named a suspect in the 2007 disappearance of Stacy Peterson but has not been charged.
The testimony scheduled to take place Friday is considered significant because of widespread media reports that Stacy Peterson told a minister that Drew Peterson confessed to her that he killed Savio

Chicago Sun Times 
January 28, 2010 Thursday
 
Pretrial trial puts Peterson on hot seat; Does hearsay testimony show he's a kidder -- or a killer?
 
Mark Brown, The Chicago Sun-Times 

Drove down to Joliet on Wednesday to see Drew Peterson, a first for me, so first things first.

To borrow a cliche, he's not as big as he looks on television -- or in those photos where he's shown standing alongside his missing wife, Stacy.

I'd put him at 6 feet tall, not nearly as imposing as I'd imagined.

What's big, though, is his head. The guy has a huge head, large enough I'd guess to accommodate a larger-than-normal brain. Seeing that head really makes you think about what goes on inside it -- in light of the accusations that Peterson got away with killing one wife and making another disappear.

If what Will County prosecutors want us to believe about Peterson is true, and I'm not saying it is, some scientist ought to get a look at that brain someday. As it is, they've still got a long way to go to prove their case, no matter how much we might believe he's guilty as we follow along from home.

The oddest testimony Wednesday came from one of Peterson's former fellow officers with the Bolingbrook police, who was asked by defense attorney Joel Brodsky to give examples of why Peterson had a reputation as a practical jokester.

"He put a live goose in the squad car one time," recalled Richard Treece, who spent 15 years working with Peterson.

On another occasion, Treece said, Peterson bought a lottery ticket with the winning numbers from the previous day's drawing, then put it in the office pile with the tickets for the earlier drawing, which had yet to be checked, causing everyone to think they'd won the jackpot.

That Drew. What a card.

Brodsky elicited the testimony to blunt the impact of many of Peterson's alleged statements, such as his supposedly telling an earlier witness his police training would enable him to kill someone and get away with it. The idea is that Drew is always kidding around, and you can never take what he says seriously.

On Wednesday, a former Peterson girlfriend -- a bartender he dated while married to third wife Kathy Savio, the one he's accused of killing -- testified he once left her behind at a friend's house, telling her he was part of a "street death squad" and had some business to take care of.

Later, the police officer, Treece, recounted a 2004 conversation in a courthouse hallway where Peterson, angered by the sight of his divorce lawyer laughing it up with Savio's lawyer, said "he'd be better off if that bitch was dead."

You can see why there would be confusion about when Peterson is to be taken seriously.

They're in the second week of a pretrial hearing to determine what hearsay evidence prosecutors will be allowed to use against Peterson at the real trial -- the hearing was required under a new state law specifically designed to nail him.

I've gotta say I've been dubious about that law from the start.

It's a dangerous business to make a law to go after a single person, and there's no denying that's what happened here with "Drew's Law," even though it will be in place to apply to others going forward.

I had expected, therefore, that the defense bar would be up in arms over allowing this type of hearsay evidence, but that's apparently not the case.

We've always had exceptions to the rule that bars hearsay evidence, I was reminded, and it only makes common sense that such an exception should apply in a case where it can be proved that a defendant killed a witness to keep that person from testifying. Emphasis on proved.

The rules against hearsay are designed to protect the constitutional right of the accused to confront their accusers, which a defendant can't really do if the accuser is dead. But if you're responsible for killing that person, you can see that you shouldn't be able to complain that you can't cross-examine the victim.

The lawyers call this "forfeiture by wrongdoing," and the U.S. Supreme Court has already upheld the concept in a California case.

But the defense community is upset with Drew's Law for another reason -- that it requires this hearing, which is really a full-blown "pretrial trial."

At the end of this hearing, Judge Stephen White will have to rule whether the "preponderance of the evidence" shows Peterson killed somebody to keep that person from testifying. If he agrees that it does, prosecutors could use the hearsay evidence in a trial at which they then would have to prove that Peterson is guilty by meeting the higher threshold of "beyond a reasonable doubt."

The question is how Peterson gets a fair trial after White has made that ruling, and how White impartially presides over that trial. Some believe this will open the door for an appeal.

Peterson's goose isn't cooked just yet.
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:1116854517&start=8

Minister: Stacy Peterson said her husband disappeared the night before ex-wife was found dead

Last update: January 29, 2010 - 3:26 PM
JOLIET, Ill. - A minister says former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson's fourth wife told him her husband had disappeared the night before his third wife was found dead.

The testimony from the Rev. Neil Schori came a pretrial hearing to determine what hearsay evidence a judge will allow jurors to hear when Peterson stands trial in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Schori also said Stacy Peterson had told him that her husband had coached her about what to tell police.

Savio's death was originally ruled an accident. Her body was exhumed after Drew Peterson was named a suspect in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson in October 2007. A new autopsy was conducted and her death was ruled a homicide.

http://www.startribune.com/nation/83060667.html?elr=KArks:DCiUMEaPc:UiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr

Minister testifies in Drew Peterson hearing
By DON BABWIN , 01.29.10, 04:59 PM

JOLIET, Ill. -- Former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson's fourth wife had told a minister that the night before her husband's ex-wife was found dead, he had disappeared, only to turn up later dressed in black and carrying a bag of women's clothes, the minister testified Friday.

The testimony from the Rev. Neil Schori was the most potentially damaging yet during a pretrial hearing to determine what hearsay evidence a judge will allow jurors to hear when Peterson stands trial in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in a dry bathtub in her home. Schori also said Stacy Peterson had told him that her husband had coached her about what to tell police.

The hearing stems from a state law that allows a judge to admit hearsay evidence in first-degree murder cases if prosecutors can prove a defendant killed a witness to prevent him or her from testifying.

In the nearly two weeks the hearing has gone on, witness after witness has limited testimony to either Savio or Stacy Peterson. Schori's testimony provided the clearest connection between the two cases.

Drew Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder. He has not been charged in Stacy Peterson's disappearance, but authorities say he is considered the only suspect.

Stacy Peterson spoke with Schori, a counseling minister at Westbrook Christian Church in Bolingbrook, months before she went missing in 2007.

"She was scared of the control Drew had on her life," Schori said. "She was scared to be with him and scared to be away from him."

Schori said that Stacy Peterson told him that the night before Savio's body was found, she had fallen asleep with Drew Peterson, but woke up in the middle of the night to discover her husband was gone. She searched the house and called his cell phone without an answer, but didn't see her husband until later in the laundry room, Schori said.

Schori said Stacy Peterson told him her husband was dressed entirely in black. The minister said Stacy Peterson told him that her husband dumped the clothes was wearing, along with women's clothing from a bag he was carrying, into the washing machine. Schori said Stacy Peterson said the women's clothes weren't hers.

Schori said he didn't tell police because Stacy Peterson asked him not to. Schori testified that she told him: "It won't do any good. You can't get away from the police when your husband is a police officer."

But Schori said he "immediately" tried to contact police after Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

The judge limited Schori's testimony, preventing him from talking about conversations Stacy Peterson had with her husband, among other things.

Scott Rossetto, a friend of Stacy Peterson, said that days before Stacy Peterson disappeared she told him she had contacted a divorce lawyer and was ready to leave her husband.

Then, he said, she asked if Rossetto could "keep a secret." She then told him that the night Savio died, Drew Peterson came in late at night and said "if anybody ever asks I was home," Rossetto said.

Prosecutors also presented a neurologist to combat defense attorneys' contention that Savio's death was an accident, that she simply fell. Dr. Gene Neri testified that he had diagnosed her with cervical vertigo, but he said "In 30 years of treating (patients) I haven't had a single person fall as a result of cervical vertigo."

In fact, he said that's because people with this particular kind of vertigo are extremely careful.

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/01/29/general-us-drew-peterson_7315862.html?boxes=Homepagebusinessnews

Thank you Nut44x4, Trimmonthelake and Klaasend for posting on Drew. I sure hope they are able to nail his azz.  I am disappointed that we are not hearing this more on the news channels. I guess Tiger is more important.  NOT!

http://www.legalinfo.com/legal-news/%E2%80%9Cdrews-law%E2%80%9D-allows-the-dead-to-testify.html
Drew’s Law” Allows the Dead to Testify
Posted: Friday, January 29th, 2010 at 4:09 pm

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-peterson-brother-20100129,0,3598883.story
 Stacy Peterson's brother agonizes through trial
Yelton Cales angered by prosecution's descriptions of Drew Peterson's third wife
 By Erika Slife, Tribune reporter

January 30, 2010
 It wasn't easy for Yelton Cales to listen to testimony last week suggesting Drew Peterson may have killed his younger sister. It's been hard to sit still as Peterson's attorneys disparage her as an attention-seeking flirt, someone who would leave her two young children and run off with another man.

But what really hurts, said Cales in his first interview since Stacy Peterson vanished Oct. 28, 2007, is testimony that will suddenly stir up good memories of his sister. Like the time she painted and decorated his room, leaving stacks of Diet Pepsi — his favorite drink — in the closet as a surprise gift. Or the descriptions of his sister by witnesses as friendly, outgoing — or "bouncy," as Cales put it.

"It hurts," said Cales, 30, describing the pain as a punch in the gut. "There's no closure."

As the second week ended in the pretrial hearing of whether hearsay statements will be allowed at the trial of Peterson, who is charged with the 2004 drowning of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, much of the testimony has centered on Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, and her alleged fear of Drew Peterson and desire to divorce him. Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, remains a suspect in her disappearance but has not been charged.

With nearly 60 people on the prosecution's witness list, including Stacy Peterson's younger sister, an aunt and an uncle, Cales is one of the few family members allowed to sit in court and watch the case unfold. The privilege is not without cost for Cales, whose sex-offense history has been invoked repeatedly by Drew Peterson's attorneys in an attempt to undermine the state's witnesses.

Peterson's attorneys have suggested that Cales molested Stacy Peterson, who is four years younger than him.

"They're trying to irritate me," said Cales, who was freed from prison in June after serving nearly three years for aggravated criminal sexual assault but vehemently denies being inappropriate with his sister. "Drew won't even look at me."

Cales is a registered sex-offender for crimes against a 16-year-old girl in 2005. Other prison stints were for domestic battery and possession of a motor vehicle.
Cales said he does not care what others think of him; it's the thought of Peterson's attorneys trashing his sister's reputation that puts him on edge.

"Ninety percent of what Drew is saying is lies," he said.
Continued here..... http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-peterson-brother-20100129,0,3598883.story?page=2

Chicago Sun Times
 
January 30, 2010 Saturday
 
Minister: Drew urged wife to lie; Says Stacy was told what to tell police regarding Savio 

Just before Stacy Peterson vanished, she told a friend that her husband, Drew Peterson, had ordered her to lie to police questioning her about the 2004 drowning death of his third wife.

An anxious Stacy confided that Peterson warned her not to tell investigators he had left their Bolingbrook home the night before his former wife, Kathleen Savio, was found dead in her bathtub, Scott Rossetto testified Friday.

"He came home real, real late, all dressed in black, and said, 'If anybody asks, I was home all night,' " Rossetto said Stacy told him on Oct. 26, 2007 -- two days before she disappeared.

Stacy's former minister offered similar testimony, saying she confessed during an August 2007 marriage counseling session that her husband coached her "for hours" not to be honest when questioned by police about Savio's death.

"He told her what to say," Pastor Neil Schori said. "She said what he told her to say was a lie."

The testimony came during a critical pre-trial hearing to determine if indirect hearsay evidence will be allowed when Peterson, 56, stands trial for allegedly drowning Savio in her bathtub. Will County prosecutors are trying to introduce statements purportedly made by Savio and others -- including Stacy Peterson -- to show that Drew Peterson killed Savio and caused Stacy's still-unsolved disappearance.

Sun-Times columnist Michael Sneed first reported that Stacy had confided in a clergyman just before she disappeared.

That clergyman -- Schori -- had said publicly in media interviews that the 23-year-old Stacy told him Drew Peterson had admitted drowning Savio.

But Will County Judge Stephen White barred much of that testimony after defense attorneys argued that most of Stacy's purported statements to Schori -- including comments Peterson allegedly made to her -- couldn't be used without her consent.

Instead, Schori recounted only small portions of what he said Stacy told him occurred shortly before Savio was found drowned in her home on March 1, 2004.

That included Stacy recalling how her husband came home late the night before, wearing black clothing and carrying a duffel bag containing women's clothing that Stacy said didn't belong to her, Schori testified. Peterson dumped all the clothing in the washing machine, Schori said Stacy told him.

Peterson told Stacy to lie to officers questioning her about Savio's death, Schori said, though he offered no details.

At their Aug. 31, 2007, counseling session, Stacy also said she was fearful of her husband, the minister testified.

"She didn't believe she could ever get away from him safely," Schori testified. "She said he made it very clear that she would never get away from him, that she would never be with someone else."

For his part, Rossetto said Stacy mentioned Savio's death as they talked at his home about Stacy's desire to divorce Peterson and her concerns about gaining custody of her two children and two stepchildren.

"She lowered her voice, then she asked me, 'Can you keep a secret?' " Rossetto, a 37-year-old U.S. Army nurse, quoted Stacy as saying.

Stacy then recounted how Drew had ordered her to tell police he had been home all night, Rossetto said.

Pressed by defense attorneys, Rossetto acknowledged that Stacy had grown increasingly flirtatious with him in the weeks leading up to her disappearance, including sending sexually suggestive text messages. But Rossetto -- whose brother dated Stacy before she married Peterson -- denied having any romantic interest in her.

Peterson's attorneys dismissed the testimony from both men as unreliable, contending each had offered differing accounts in earlier testimony they made to a Will County grand jury.

"What's apparent is that even over a short period of time, they can't recall what transpired," defense attorney Andrew Abood said.
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:1118153939&start=6


This POS needs to die  ::MonkeyNoNo:: I despise him  ::MonkeyNoNo:: and that's being nice.... lol.

Sister: Savio asked, 'Take care of my boys'
Updated: 02/02/2010

JOLIET, Ill.—Former police officer Drew Peterson's ex-wife was so afraid of him that she kept changing the locks on her doors, and so certain it wouldn't do any good, that she asked her sister to care for her two sons after her death, the sister testified Tuesday.
Anna Doman said her sister, Kathleen Savio, visited her home six weeks before she was found dead in her bathtub in 2004 and pleaded for help.

"She said, 'You have to promise me, you have to promise me to take care of my boys . . . Drew said he'd kill me,'" Doman testified.

Savio once talked about how Peterson had bound her hands and feet, then told her he could kill her and that nobody would know he did it, Doman said.

The hearing, which was in its third week, was to determine what hearsay evidence will be allowed at Peterson's upcoming murder trial.

Hearsay, or statements not based on the direct knowledge of a witness, usually isn't admissible in court. Illinois judges can allow it in murder trials if prosecutors prove a defendant may have killed a witness to prevent them from testifying. There's little available forensic evidence in Savio's case, so prosecutors are expected to rely on statements Savio allegedly made to others saying she feared Peterson could kill her.

Doman testified that Savio said she had put important documents in her garage and asked Anna Doman to rush to the house to retrieve them should Savio die.

"She said, 'Everything you need is in here,'" Doman recalled. Doman said she did retrieve the documents after her sister died, but she did not discuss their contents during the hearing.

Doman said Savio's family members suspected Peterson immediately. She said her sister, Sue Doman, confronted Peterson with those suspicions. "Suzy looked at Drew and said, 'Why did you kill my sister?'" Anna Doman said.

Sue Doman recounted earlier Tuesday that Peterson claimed he had found Savio's will after she died, taunting her about it.

"He said, 'Ha, ha, ha. Tell Anna I found the will under the floorboards, and you guys aren't going to get anything."

Earlier Tuesday, Savio's boyfriend said he told police just hours after Savio's body was discovered that Peterson might be involved.

Steve Maniaci testified that Illinois State Police investigators assured him they would consider her death a homicide until proven otherwise, but when prosecutors recently allowed him to look at the 2004 police report from that night—it included none of his concerns.

Maniaci said Savio told him repeatedly that she was afraid of Peterson and feared he could kill her and make it look like an accident. Such talk intensified in the days before her death as she and Peterson fought over property they once held in common as husband and wife.

With that conflict in mind, Maniaci immediately confronted Peterson when he arrived at Savio's house the night her body was found.

"I said, 'I sure hope you didn't have anything to do with this,'" Maniaci testified.

When Peterson insisted he didn't, Maniaci responded in reference to the dispute over property, "'It sure worked out good for you.'"

His testimony came after the lead investigator in the case, retired State Police Sgt. Patrick Collins, conceded he believed her death was an accident from almost the minute he stepped into Savio's suburban Chicago home. And he agreed he conducted a less-than-thorough investigation, even failing to collect any forensic evidence from the scene.

Prosecutors know the cause of death will be a key issue at Peterson's trial, and they will likely rely on Maniaci's testimony to help demonstrate there were signs Savio's death was a homicide staged to look like an accident. Peterson's attorneys have argued her death was accidental.

Maniaci testified on Tuesday, for example, that two nights before her body was found, he saw no bruises on her elbow, finger or buttocks like the bruises clearly visible on photographs shot of Savio after her death.

Asked if he had seen scratches on her arms two nights before, Maniaci, barely able to look at the photographs, answered quietly, "No."

Shown a photograph of Savio in the bathtub with her hair down, Maniaci also said she always put her long hair up when she took at bath.

http://**/breaking-news/ci_14318423

Police lieutenant testifies about Savio death scene photos

February 3, 2010 4:43 PM | 1 Comment | UPDATED STORY

Police photos taken when Kathleen Savio was found drowned in a bathtub suggest that a hold often used by police to subdue prisoners may have been used on her, a Bolingbrook police lieutenant testified today.

Lt. Brian Hafner told Will County Judge Stephen White that the position of Savio's arm in scene photos he viewed appear consistent with the use of an "arm bar," which entails twisting an arm behind someone's back.

The positioning of her body did not indicate that she slipped and fell in the bathtub, Hafner said.

Drew Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police officer, is charged with killing Savio in 2004. Hafner testified at a hearing on what hearsay evidence may be allowed at this trial.

Hafner also testified about Peterson's training in police tactics, including 32 hours with nunchucks, and his employment with the department. The department used the martial arts weapons in the 1980s but no longer do, Hafner said.

Records showed that Peterson was appointed to a police evidence technician position in June of 1984, Hafner said.

Also testifying today was Kristin Anderson, whose family lived in Kathleen Savio's basement for two months in 2003.

She testified that Savio told her about her fears that Drew Peterson would kill her and said that Peterson had put a knife to her throat.

Savio also showed Anderson a briefcase with police reports and other documents about Peterson's abuse. Savio was creating a paper trial because "in case she was murdered, she wanted everybody to know who did it," Anderson said.

Anderson, 46, joined a growing list of witnesses who have testified to the same thing.

In Peterson's murder trial, prosecutors want witnesses to be able to testify about the alleged 2002 incident involving the knife when the case goes to trial, saying their participation will give Savio "a voice from the grave." White will decide whether 15 hearsay statements are permissible under a new state statute dubbed Drew's Law.

Savio's death initially was ruled an accidental drowning. She and Peterson were divorced at the time but had not yet settled their contentious property issue.

When Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy, vanished in October 2007, authorities reopened Savio's case and eventually declared her death a homicide.

Anderson said that she and her family rented and lived in Savio's basement for about two months in 2003 while they were having a house built.

Anderson testified that Peterson had told Savio that he could kill her at anytime and make it look like an accident

"She was distraught, and also resigned," Anderson said. "She was so convinced that it was going to happen."

Savio also showed Anderson a briefcase with police reports and other documents about Peterson's abuse. Savio was creating a paper trial because "in case she was murdered, she wanted eveyrbody to know who did it," Anderson said.

"She tried with all of her might to prevent what took place. She went to all the higher authorities," Anderson said.

After Savio died, Anderson called state police twice to tell them about Peterson putting the knife to Savio's throat, but no one ever came out to interview her, she testified.
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/02/more-testimony-that-peterson-threatened-to-kill-savio.html

 ::MonkeyBike::
http://www.theolympian.com/nationworld/story/1127842.html

Pathologist: Peterson's ex-wife didn't die in fall
By DON BABWIN | Associated Press Writer • Published February 05, 2010

JOLIET, Ill. – A pathologist who concluded that the death of Drew Peterson's ex-wife was a homicide and not an accident as first determined testified Friday that her injuries weren't consistent with a fall in a bathtub.

Dr. Larry Blum, in his first public comments since the 2007 autopsy of Kathleen Savio, said he didn't think bruises on her body and a laceration to the back of her head came from a single fall. Savio's body was found slumped forward in a dry bathtub in 2004, and Blum said that her position wasn't consistent with a fall.

"There was no blood, hair or tissue on the tub," said Blum, who looked at photographs from the original autopsy and crime scene to help make his determination. "So the evidence doesn't bear that out."

Blum said Savio did drown but her death was not accidental, as another pathologist initially found.

"It was my opinion that it was a homicide," Blum said.

Blum's findings will be at the center of the courtroom battle between Will County prosecutors and Peterson's attorneys, who argue that Savio's death was accidental.

Blum testified at a hearing to determine what hearsay evidence will be allowed at Peterson's upcoming trial. Hearsay, or statements not based on the direct knowledge of a witness, usually isn't admissible in court. But Illinois judges can allow it in murder trials if prosecutors prove a defendant may have killed a witness to prevent him or her from testifying.

There's little available forensic evidence in Savio's case, so prosecutors are expected to rely on statements Savio allegedly made to others saying she feared Peterson could kill her.

Blum, who said he laid down in Savio's tub as part of his investigation, testified the injury to the back of Savio's head may have been made shortly after her death and not as a result of a fall. He also pointed to a wound in the area of Savio's diaphragm as one that wouldn't have been caused in a fall.

"The bruise was deep, down to the bone," he said.

He said her injuries indicated that there was a struggle.

Blum also testified that Savio had no measurable drugs or alcohol in her system when she died - an effort to head off the argument defense attorneys have raised that perhaps Savio was in a condition that would have made a fall more likely.

Earlier in the day, Mary Parks, who studied nursing with Savio, testified about a day in late 2003 when Savio showed her red marks on her neck and told her Peterson made them.

"She told me her ex-husband had come into the house and had pinned her down," Parks testified.

Parks said Savio told her that during the incident Peterson told Savio, "Why don't you just die?"

She also said that Savio told her Peterson was intent on leaving her with nothing in the couple's divorce - but that even leaving her without any money, a share of the business the two owned, child support or custody of their two sons wouldn't have been enough for him.

"Kathy was very sure that if she gave up every cent ... that her ex-husband still would not leave her alone," Parks said.

Parks said she contacted prosecutors after Savio was found dead but was told there was no investigation into the case.

State cop testifies at pretrial hearing that he was 'disgusted' with investigation into death of Drew Peterson's third wife
February 4, 2010

A state police crime scene investigator said Thursday that he gathered no evidence after Kathleen Savio was found drowned in her bathtub in 2004, and a state trooper there that night testified he was "disgusted" by how the investigation was handled.

Robert Deel said he had been handling crime scene investigations for about one year when he was called to Savio's Bolingbrook house in the overnight hours of March 1, 2004. He said he did not test for the presence of unseen blood in the bathroom, collect a blood sample from the tub, dust for fingerprints and did not take into evidence a glass of orange juice in the kitchen or a bottle of cleaning fluid on a dresser in Savio's bedroom.

"There wasn't really anything to look for," he said of evidence in the bathroom.

Savio's fingernail clippings — sometimes a source of crime scene DNA — were never tested, Deel said.

Deel said he also did not notice that night any of the documented injuries Savio suffered, but said it would not have changed his investigation.

"The bruises on the body are insignificant to me," he said.

He contradicted earlier testimony by head investigator Sgt. Patrick Collins, who said he decided after speaking with Deel within 40 minutes of being on the scene that Savio's death was accidental.

Deel said he believed her death was accidental but didn't reach that conclusion until after reviewing autopsy and toxicology results.

Deel also testified that after Stacy Peterson's disappearance in 2007, he was asked by Will County prosecutors to never again process a crime scene in their county.

Meanwhile, Master Sgt. Bryan Falat testified that Peterson and his new wife Stacy appeared to be lying in interviews with state police after Savio's death. But Falat said his concerns were ignored.

"Quite honestly, I was sort of disgusted with" how the investigation was handled, Falat said.

Despite Falat's objections, Collins interviewed Peterson in the lunchroom of the Bolingbrook Police Department, and Peterson was allowed to sit in on an interview with Stacy to check Peterson's alibi.

"I thought it was ridiculous," Falat said.

Stacy Peterson appeared "scripted" and often looked to Drew Peterson when she was unsure of an answer, Falat testified.

The couple gave a very detailed timeline of their activities that Sunday, the day before Savio's body was found, but they were more vague on what they did in the days just before and on March 1, 2004, Falat said. Peterson showed several signs of lying — volunteering information that wasn't asked for and becoming very still while giving an account of his activities that Sunday, Falat testified.

Falat said he wanted to re-question Peterson and his wife separately and suggested that Peterson's children also be interviewed. They never were, he said, and Falat was taken off the investigation March 10.

Authorities concluded Savio, 40, accidentally slipped in the bathtub and drowned.

But once Stacy Peterson vanished in October 2007, authorities reopened the investigation and reclassified Savio's death as a homicide. Peterson is the sole suspect but has not been charged in Stacy's disappearance.

Psychic Irene Lalagos testified that she read Stacy's cards at least twice and fielded a call from Peterson, who asked for help with the couple's marital problems.

Lalagos said Stacy Peterson told her in June 2007 that Drew Peterson "could kill her and hide her body where nobody would ever find it."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-0205-drew-peterson-hearing-20100204,0,1115270.story

Ex-Peterson co-worker says he was asked to kill Savio

February 9, 2010 11:31 AM | No Comments
A former co-worker of Drew Peterson testified today he had been approached by an intermediary with an offer to kill Kathleen Savio.

William Green said that cable contractor co-worker Jeff Pachter told him in July 2003 that "Drew would like me to ask you if you would kill his wife."

He said Pachter told him that Peterson said he wanted it to look like an accident and that Peterson wanted to be out of town when it happened.

Green said he didn't take the offer seriously.

Peterson moonlighted at the cable firm at the same time he was employed by the Bolingbrook Police Department.

Earlier, Pachter testified that Peterson offered $25,000 to help find a hit man to kill Savio. Pachter said he regarded it as a joke.  He said he never followed through.

Green said today he didn't remember how much he had been offered.  He also suggested he had been approached because of the Heavy Metal T-shirts he wore.

Today marked the 15th day of an evidentiary hearing being held in a Will County courtroom to decide which, if any, of 15 hearsay statements prosecutors may introduce as evidence at Peterson's upcoming murder trial for Savio's slaying.  When Savio's body was found in an empty bathtub in March 2004, her death was originally ruled accidental.  But after Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared in October 2007, authorities reexamined Savio's death and ruled it a homicide.

Green testified that he didn't even know that Savio had died until he read news coverage following Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

At that point, he said, he called Lombard police and told them about the offer to kill Savio.
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/02/ex-peterson-co-worker-says-he-was-asked-to-kill-savio.html

I hope and pray the judge allows every bit of testimony from everyone at his trial. This man has got to go down where he belongs. Also hope they are able to bring charges against him for Stacy too. I am for once glad that he has a big mouth. He has sunk his own ship. ::MonkeyNoNo::

Me too ... I despise him  ::MonkeyMad::

JOLIET, Ill. (AP) - Family members, investigators, clergy and even a psychic have spent weeks testifying in a northern Illinois courtroom - and Drew Peterson's murder trial hasn't even started.

Billed as a preliminary step in the case, an extraordinary hearing to determine what hearsay, or secondhand, evidence jurors will be allowed to hear during the former police officer's trial in his third wife's death has turned into a sort of legal dress rehearsal.

The testimony has exposed serious flaws in the police investigation of Kathleen Savio's death, Peterson's deteriorating relationship with his missing fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, and perhaps most important: a possible motive.

But none of it may matter if the judge doesn't allow at least some of the witnesses to testify during the real thing.

"If they don't get the hearsay stuff in, then they don't have a shot at this case," said Terry Sullivan, a Chicago attorney and former prosecutor.

The hearing is the result of a new Illinois law that allows a judge to admit hearsay evidence - statements not based on a witness' direct knowledge - if prosecutors can prove a defendant may have killed a witness in order to prevent him or her from testifying. The law was so closely linked to the Peterson case that some have dubbed it "Drew's law."

That means for Judge Stephen White to allow hearsay evidence - such as witness testimony that Savio said she feared Peterson would kill her and make it look like an accident - he must believe Peterson not only killed her but did so to keep her from testifying. The same applies to similar comments that witnesses attributed Stacy Peterson before she disappeared.

"(White) is going to have to struggle with the intent here - if he murdered them with the intent to cause their unavailability,' said Herb Tanner of the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan. "It doesn't have to be the sole intent, but it has to be in there."

snipped.....rest of it is stuff we have read a million times
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/10/ap/national/main6195513.shtml

All the prosecution's hearsay witnesses have been heard from, 68 of them.

The defense witness(es) shouldn't take much time to hear from, beginning Wed 2/17.

I have saved all the pics and vids I could find, will separate the "Hearsay Hearing" into a sub-album in a couple weeks since it has all become so huge...
but take a peek:

http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/mm166/crankycrankerson/Stacy%20Peterson%20-%20Kathleen%20Savio/

Thanks Amanda this is really quite interesting! Still can't believe the scant coverage this was given so really glad you have all of this.

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7277914
Report: Peterson may face dropped gun charge
Updated at 08:31 AM today
February 15, 2010 (WLS) -- Drew Peterson may have to face a charge of having an illegal gun after all.

The Tribune reported Monday morning that an appeals court panel has ruled that a judge erred in dismissing the charges against Peterson more than a year ago.

Peterson was originally accused of having an assault rifle with a barrel shorter than 16 inches, which is illegal in Illinois.

But a judge threw out the charge when Peterson's attorneys were not allowed access to certain prosecution documents. The appeals court now says that ruling was wrong.

Peterson is charged with killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio. He's pleaded not guilty. His fourth wife, Stacy, is also missing.

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/02/gun-charges-reinstituted-against-drew-peterson.html

Gun charges reinstituted against Drew Peterson
February 15, 2010 5:18 AM | 2 Comments
An Illinois appeals court has shot down a Will County judge's decision that resulted in illegal gun charges being dropped against Drew Peterson.

Judge Richard Schoenstedt erred in ruling more than a year ago that Peterson's attorneys were to be allowed access to various prosecution documents in pursuit of their contention that the prosecution of Peterson on the gun charge was vindictive and selective, the court ruled.

When the Will County state's attorney's office refused to allow the discovery, arguing that would expose privileged and confidential documents in other aspects of investigations of Peterson, Schoenstedt dismissed the gun charges.
A three-judge panel of the Illinois Appellate Court Third District now has ruled there is no Illinois case law on the issue of where claims of selective or vindictive prosecution can be used to get pretrial discovery. It reversed Schoenstedt's decision and sent the case back to Will County court.

Peterson had been charged with possessing an assault rifle with a barrel shorter than 16 inches as required under state law. That weapon had been seized by state police on a search warrant executed Nov. 1, 2007, just days after Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared.

Since then, Peterson has been charged with murdering his third wife, Kathleen Savio. An evidentiary hearing is now under way in a Will County courtroom to determine which, if any, of 15 hearsay students prosecutors may introduce against Peterson at his upcoming trial.

Prosecutors must show Peterson's wife was killed

Updated: Feb 16, 2010 05:28 PM EST

By DON BABWIN
Associated Press Writer
JOLIET, Ill. (AP) - The crime scene technician didn't think twice about the bottle of cleaning fluid near the bathroom where the body of Drew Peterson's ex-wife lay slumped in her bathtub - or whether it might have been used to wipe away evidence of a crime.

Six years later, as Peterson prepares to stand trial for murder in Kathleen Savio's death, the bottle underscores the huge challenge facing prosecutors: Before they ask jurors to convict Peterson of murder, they first must prove a homicide occurred in the first place.

Police were so sure Savio drowned accidentally that they didn't look twice at the cleaning fluid, and collected no forensic evidence. Even the coroner who conducted the autopsy in 2004 ruled the death an accident.

In most murder trials, the evidence of a slaying is as obvious as a bullet hole or a stab wound, and the only question is "whodunnit?" But in Peterson's case, nothing is obvious.

"This is a true circumstantial evidence case,'" said Vincent Bugliosi, who won a murder conviction of Charles Manson in the 1969 slayings of Sharon Tate and six others even though Manson was not at the scenes when the slayings occurred. "In circumstantial evidence cases you're putting one speck of evidence upon each other... You're putting on evidence showing the unlikelihood that this is an accidental death."

At a pretrial hearing to determine what hearsay - or secondhand - evidence a judge will allow a jury to hear at Peterson's trial, prosecutors have been trying to turn a bathroom into a crime scene. Defense attorneys say they'll call witnesses beginning Wednesday.

In a preview of what is sure to be repeated at Peterson's trial, prosecutors called witnesses to testify about Savio's medical history, her personal habits, even details about her house. They also questioned a pathologist who conducted a second autopsy on Savio's body, which was exhumed in 2007 after Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, vanished.

Longtime pathologist Dr. Larry Blum, who ruled Savio's death a homicide, testified there were fresh bruises on her body that would not have come in a fall. And a gash on her head, which led investigators to the original conclusion that Savio slipped and fell, could have been made immediately after she died, he said.

Other witnesses talked about Peterson's training in subduing suspects, knowledge of choke holds and his background in martial arts - likely signaling that prosecutors will suggest the former Bolingbrook police officer overpowered Savio and put her in the tub.

Peterson's attorneys will try to convince a jury that Savio's medical problems could have caused her to fall.

Savio had a heart murmur, periodontal disease and cervical vertigo. Although her neurologist testified that in his 30 years of practice, he'd never seen that kind of vertigo cause anyone to fall, he acknowledged Savio's medical records show she complained of dizziness and numbness.

"That opens the door for a defense attorney to bring in almost anything, drug use, drinking, whether she walked in her sleep or had dizzy spells," said Terry Sullivan, a prominent Chicago attorney and former prosecutor.

Which might explain why prosecutors asked so many questions about Savio's bathroom.

Witnesses said there were no towels, no robe and no other clothes near the tub, and toiletry items lining the tub's edge were undisturbed. Prosecutors likely want jurors to believe if Savio was taking a bath, she'd at least have laid out a towel and if she did fall, she would have knocked something over.

Then there was Savio's hair. It was down when her body was found, but a woman who had lived with Savio said Savio always put her hair up in a clip before taking a bath.

Some of those answers will resonate with jurors, said Marilyn Brenneman, a prosecutor in Seattle's King County, who's handling a similar case in which a man was charged with killing his 3 1/2-year-old stepdaughter after the death was originally ruled an accident.

"Women on the jury will understand putting hair up because they don't want to have to dry it again," she said.

To argue that Savio's death was a homicide, prosecutors have to overcome something else: There is no evidence of a break-in, and no obvious explanation for how anyone could have gotten inside, killed Savio and gotten out without anyone noticing.

Witnesses included a man who now lives in Savio's house who recounted how was able to climb in a window after locking himself out. Peterson's second wife told of seeing Peterson with locksmith tools. And Peterson friend Rick Mims testified he once followed Savio to work at the request of Peterson, who'd told him he was going to sneak into Savio's house to retrieve "papers." When Savio left work, Mims said he alerted Peterson.

But nobody testified to actually seeing or hearing Peterson - or anyone else - sneak inside Savio's house.

That means the original challenge remains: overcoming a lack of physical evidence, like fingerprints or DNA, to prove she didn't just drown.

"You have to pile a lot of suspicious circumstances on top of each other," Bugliosi said. "You have to get to the point where you can say (to a jury) 'Come onfolks.'"

http://www.kcautv.com/Global/story.asp?S=11993525

http://www.wqad.com/news/wqad-peterson-drew-hearing-021710,0,1224531.story
Drew Peterson attorney calling two witnesses in hearing

Associated Press

10:53 AM CST, February 17, 2010
Joliet, Ill. - Drew Peterson's attorney says he plans to call two witnesses at a hearing to determine what hearsay evidence a judge might allow during the former Bolingbrook police sergeant's murder trial.

Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky says a pathologist will testify Wednesday that he believes the 2004 death of Peterson's third wife was an accident as originally determined before it was ruled a homicide. Brodsky also says a neighbor of Peterson's stepbrother will dispute some testimony from stepbrother Thomas Morphey.

Brodsky had originally said he'd call 20 witnesses. But he now says he believes that's no longer necessary. Brodsky says he expects closing arguments Wednesday afternoon.

Quoting the above with this post to show difference of opinion and source there of ....  ::MonkeyNoNo::

Pathologist: Peterson's ex-wife's death accidental

February 17, 2010

A pathologist hired by Drew Peterson's attorneys says the death of Peterson's ex-wife was accidental, as originally determined, and not a homicide as ruled three years later after her body was exhumed.

Dr. Jeffrey Jentzen testified Wednesday at a hearing to determine what hearsay evidence a judge might allow during the former Bolingbrook police sergeant's murder trial. Peterson has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Jentzen is a former chief medical examiner in Milwaukee who now teaches at the University of Michigan. He says evidence clearly points to an accident in Savio's death.

Savio's body was found in a dry bathtub in 2004. Jentzen says he believes the death was an accidental drowning.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/2054488,drew-peterson-trial-murder-021710.article

I want to know how much he was paid to say that  ::MonkeyNoNo::
(in bold above)

Closing arguments in Peterson hearing Friday

Associated Press - February 17, 2010 3:44 PM ET

JOLIET, Ill. (AP) - Closing arguments are expected Friday in a pretrial hearing for Drew Peterson, a former suburban Chicago police officer accused of killing his third wife.

Prosecutors say they'll call a third pathologist on Friday and closing arguments will follow.

The hearing to determine what hearsay evidence a judge might allow during Peterson's murder trial has gone on for weeks.

Peterson has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the death of Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in a bathtub in 2004. Her death was initially deemed accidental. After Peterson's fourth wife went missing in 2007, Savio's body was exhumed and her death reclassified as a homicide.

Peterson is a suspect in Stacy Peterson's disappearance but hasn't been charged.

http://www.wrex.com/Global/story.asp?S=12000084

Nut, you know how Dr Baden was paid a huge amount to say KS was murdered? Well, I wondered how the defense with so little money could get such a heavy-hitter forensic pathologist. Dr Jentzen handled the Dahmer case, he was Chief ME in Milwaukee for a long time before going to head up the forensics/autopsy dept at U of M.

Through an obit, I found the connection.

A poster at another forum (harmony) gave me the how-it-fits.

Camille Abood was Andrew Abood's uncle, who was in practice with Andrew's father at his law firm. So, Andrew's cousin Dr. Chris Abood was married to Ruth Otto Abood, and her sister is married to Jeff Jentzen.

http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/mm166/crankycrankerson/Stacy%20Peterson%20-%20Kathleen%20Savio/?action=view&current=aboodJentzen.jpg


Here's a good article about Dr Jentzen:
http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2008/03/um_pathologist_handled_jeffrey.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-0217-drew-peterson-hearing-resumes20100216,0,4425394.story

By Steve Schmadeke, Tribune reporter
4:09 p.m. CST, February 17, 2010

Drew Peterson hearsay ruling might be kept secret
Judge expected to issue decision under seal to avoid influencing jury pool

More than 80 hours of testimony from 68 witnesses along with at least 155 pieces of evidence have given the
public a fascinating preview of the murder case against Drew Peterson, but the actual results of the hearing
might be kept secret.

Attorneys for both sides say the public likely won't hear which, if any, of the 15 hearsay statements will be
allowed at trial in the 2004 drowning death of Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio.

As part of his ruling on the monthlong hearing, Will County Judge Stephen White must essentially find
Peterson guilty or not of killing his third or fourth wife before deciding to allow any of the submitted
hearsay to be used at trial. Attorneys on both sides expect White will issue his ruling under seal to
avoid influencing the jury pool.

Colin Miller, an associate professor at John Marshall Law School, said it could create a
"significant problem" if White releases his rulings publicly.

"It's weird because you're saying in the defendant's trial for murder the statements can come in because
he's guilty of murder," Miller said.

White has asked both sides to make closing arguments Wednesday, but prosecutors late Tuesday were
still working to determine whether other witnesses needed to be called. Attorneys for Peterson, a former
Bolingbrook police sergeant, still plan to call one of their expert pathologists to testify.

The hearing, a first of its kind in Illinois, was required under a new state law allowing judges to admit
certain hearsay statements.

Prosecutors were required to show by a "preponderance of the evidence" that Peterson killed Savio or his
 fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who disappeared in 2007, to prevent them from testifying against him.

Peterson is the sole suspect in Stacy's disappearance but has not been charged.

Many legal experts believe that any decision under the new law to admit the submitted hearsay statements
 likely will be overturned.
But former federal prosecutor Steven Miller said he thought prosecutors would get much of their submitted
hearsay into evidence.

"It's the sheer volume of evidence, the multiple dead women connected with (Peterson)," he said. "The dozens
 of witnesses is a witch's brew of problems for a defendant."

White already has found that perhaps the most damning statement — from Pastor Neil Schori, who told the
media that Stacy told him Peterson had killed Savio — won't be allowed.

Lacking any physical evidence that ties Peterson to Savio's death, prosecutors have argued Peterson had a
 financial motive to kill Savio.

Defense attorneys will argue Savio's death was an accident — as a coroner's jury found in 2004. State police
have testified that they gathered no evidence from Savio's home when she was found dead in a dry bathtub.

"That's one of the points that will be brought out — there is no evidence," said Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky.

Here is another article I found about Jeffrey Jentzen testimony.

http://www.dailyrecord.com/article/20100218/UPDATES01/100217077/Pathologist++Drew+Peterson+s+3rd+wife+died+accidentally+

DON BABWIN • Associated Press Writer • February 18, 2010

JOLIET, Ill. (AP) — A pathologist hired by a former suburban Chicago police sergeant's attorneys testified Wednesday that the death of Drew Peterson's third wife was accidental and not a homicide as ruled three years later after her body was exhumed.

In the clearest signal yet of the battle attorneys will engage in over the death of Kathleen Savio, Dr. Jeffrey Jentzen said "it is my opinion that it was an accident."

Jentzen, a former chief medical examiner in Milwaukee who teaches at the University of Michigan, said he did not conduct an autopsy on Savio's body but relied on previous autopsies, crime scene photographs, police reports and other information. Savio's death was ruled accidental after her body was found in a dry bathtub in 2004.

Jentzen said the evidence clearly points to an accident — from the absence of any defensive wounds on Savio's body to the condition of the bathroom when her body was found. He said the bathroom appeared normal, saying Savio's glasses were folded and there was no sign of an intruder.

The pathologist said he believes Savio may have simply slipped or fainted in the tub. He also pointed to medical records that show she had a heart murmur, suggesting her heart may have stopped and caused her to slam the back of her head against a hard object and then fall into the tub and drown.

Whatever happened, "she suffered a blunt force injury and that could have rendered her unconscious," Jentzen said.

Other witnesses have testified that Savio would never have bathed wearing jewelry. Jentzen said the fact that she was wearing what he called a "delicate" necklace strongly suggested to him that she didn't struggle with an attacker.

Jentzen, who has conducted thousands of autopsies, said he would have expected such a necklace to have somehow been damaged in an attack.
"I've seen it numerous times," he said.

Jentzen also said he believes many of the other bruises on Savio's body could have happened when she fell.

Defense attorneys had planned to call 20 witnesses in the pretrial hearing to determine what hearsay evidence a judge might allow during Peterson's murder trial. Defense attorney Joel Brodsky said Wednesday that was not necessary because testimony from those witnesses, including police officers, was already in reports accepted by prosecutors.

Prosecutors plan to call a third pathologist Friday, then closing arguments will follow.

Peterson has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in Savio's death. Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy, disappeared in 2007. Peterson has not been charged in the disappearance but police say he is a suspect. It was after Stacy Peterson went missing that investigators exhumed Savio's body and determined her death was a homicide.

Before the hearing began Wednesday, Brodsky said he didn't know exactly when Judge Stephen White would decide if any of the prosecution's 15 hearsay statements would be allowed. Brodsky said the judge plans to seal his decision to protect the jury pool from pretrial publicity.
Hearsay, or statements not based on the direct knowledge of a witness, is usually not admissible in court. Illinois judges can however allow it in murder trials if prosecutors prove a defendant may have killed a witness to prevent him or her from testifying.

There's little available forensic evidence in Savio's case, so prosecutors are expected to rely on statements Savio allegedly made to others saying she feared Peterson could kill her.


Wow they must have lots of money to hire not one but three pathologists.

I think I have stayed up too late.  I read that wrong. It says the "Prosecutors plan to call a third pathologist Friday" not the defense.
 ::MonkeyEek::

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,586961,00.html?test=latestnews

Pathologist Testifies Peterson's Ex-Wife's Death was Homicide

Friday , February 19, 2010

AP
ADVERTISEMENT

JOLIET, Ill. —
A renowned pathologist testified Friday that former police officer Drew Peterson's ex-wife drowned in her bathtub in 2004 after being beaten and intentionally held under water, not after an accidental fall.

Dr. Michael Baden, the former chief medical examiner of New York City, said there were bruises on Kathleen Savio's body consistent with a struggle but no physical signs that she'd slipped and fallen, such as marks or blood on her bathroom wall.

"In my opinion, this is a homicide in which she drowned and was beaten up," Baden said.

Baden was the last of more than 70 witnesses called in a hearing to determine what hearsay evidence a judge will allow at Peterson's upcoming murder trial.

Hearsay, or statements not based on the direct knowledge of a witness, usually isn't admissible in court. But Illinois judges can allow it in murder trials if prosecutors prove a defendant may have killed a witness to prevent them from testifying. There's little available forensic evidence in Savio's case, so prosecutors are expected to rely on statements Savio allegedly made to others saying she feared Peterson could kill her.

Attorneys said they expect a decision on the hearsay issue in the next few weeks.

The former Bolingbrook police officer has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in Savio's death. She was found dead in a dry bathtub with a laceration to the back of her head.

Savio's family asked Baden to conduct an autopsy in 2007 after the disappearance of Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson. Savio's death was originally classified as an accident, but was reclassified a homicide after her body was exhumed. Peterson has not been charged in Stacy Peterson's disappearance and denies wrongdoing.

While Baden and another pathologist called by Will County prosecutors testified that Savio's death was a homicide, a pathologist called by the defense said he believes it was an accident and that Savio drowned after falling.

Baden said it's "extremely rare" for a healthy adult such as Savio to drown accidentally in a bathtub, noting that most people who drown in tubs are babies or the elderly. Savio's toes were pressed against the side of the bathtub, as if she was struggling, not relaxed as if she'd fallen and knocked herself out, Baden said.

He also refuted claims by the defense pathologist that a heart murmur may have caused Savio's heart to stop, saying her heart condition "did not cause or contribute in any way to her death."

Closing arguments in the hearing were also set for Friday.

Feb. 22, 2010
Will Drew Peterson Be Condemned From the Grave?

Judge to Decide if Hearsay Evidence About Peterson's Two Wives Can Be Used in Trial

Drew Peterson is facing words from the grave that could send him to jail for the rest of his life.   ::MonkeyGavel::

Peterson, the 56-year-old ex-cop who loved to talk, has been silent for the last year -- locked up -- charged with killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in a bathtub in 2004.

The prosecution's case against Peterson is being constructed around Savio -- in an unprecedented attempt to use hearsay evidence from the dead.

"It is being built on the words, the alleged words, the unproven words of a dead person being conveyed through her friends, relatives and acquaintances," said Peterson's attorney, Joel Brodsky.

Watch the full story on "Nightline" tonight at 11:35 p.m. ET



oops......got carried away and 4got the link
http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/Law/drew-peterson-murder-trial-hearsay-evidence-determine-guilt/story?id=9908667

 ::MonkeyGavel::

Missing 4th wife may be big part of Peterson trial

Tuesday, February 23, 2010; 4:13 PM

JOLIET, Ill. -- As Drew Peterson heads to trial in the death of his third wife, it's clear that prosecutors hope to make their case by trying to prove he also killed his missing fourth wife, even though he has never been charged in her disappearance.

That unusual strategy depends on whether a judge permits testimony about what Stacy Peterson allegedly told others before she vanished in 2007, including that she considered threatening to tell police her husband killed ex-wife Kathleen Savio three years earlier; that he came home dressed in black and with a bag of women's clothes the night before Savio's body was found; and that the former Bolingbrook police officer had bragged about being able to conceal a homicide.

"You still can win without Stacy, but it's much tougher without it," said David Erickson, senior law lecturer at Chicago-Kent College of Law.

Will County Judge Stephen White still must rule on whether he'll allow such hearsay - or secondhand - evidence at Peterson's upcoming trial on charges of killing Savio, whose body was found in a bathtub in 2004. On Tuesday, White said jury selection will begin June 14.

Prosecutors have not said how much they would tell jurors about Stacy Peterson, but an extraordinary pretrial hearing revealed just how closely the circumstantial evidence against Drew Peterson in Savio's slaying is tied to Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

The hearing was the result of a new Illinois law that allows a judge to admit hearsay evidence - statements not based on a witness' direct knowledge - if prosecutors can prove a defendant may have killed a witness in order to prevent him or her from testifying.

Prosecutors claim Peterson killed Savio to keep her from testifying against him in a property settlement hearing and prevent her from getting the hundreds of thousands of dollars such a settlement might cost him.

Savio's divorce attorney testified at the hearsay hearing that Stacy Peterson asked him to represent her in her own planned divorce of Peterson and asked about extorting money out of Drew Peterson by threatening to tell police that he killed Savio. Stacy Peterson disappeared shortly after that - before she filed for divorce and got any of Peterson's money.

Stacy Peterson's disappearance also figures in another cornerstone of the prosecutors' case: that Drew Peterson had the ability to kill Savio, not leave any evidence, and even make her death look like an accident.

"This is not somebody who just watched CSI," Assistant State's Attorney John Connor told White on the last day of the hearing in which prosecutors detailed Peterson's law enforcement career, including his experience as an evidence technician. "This is somebody who's been CSI."

Peterson knew how to render someone unconscious without leaving any marks that would indicate a struggle, prosecutors said. Also, prosecutors said, he knew how easily crime scenes can be contaminated and made sure neighbors entered Savio's house before he did the day her body was found.

One challenge in Savio's case is convincing jurors there was a homicide at all; a coroner ruled her death an accidental drowning and police didn't collect forensic evidence.

That might be easier if prosecutors could convince jurors he killed Stacy Peterson.

To do that, experts say prosecutors would have to zero in on what happened after Stacy Peterson disappeared: nothing.

That means presenting witnesses to testify that she was never heard from again after Oct. 28, 2007, never again used a credit card or her cell phone, and never wrote a letter to anyone she knew.

"And the biggest one: She never attempted to contact her children," said DuPage County state's attorney Joe Birkett, who has prosecuted a number of high-profile cases and has used the hearsay law.

Even if the judge does not initially allow anyone to testify about Stacy Peterson's disappearance, the cases are so intertwined that there is always a chance a single question by one of Peterson's attorneys could change that.

"When you're doing cross examination you've got to be damn sure you don't do something that trips into the other case," said Erickson. "If there's one phrase trial judges love it's, 'Counsel, you opened the door.'"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/23/AR2010022303596.html

Chicago Sun Times 
February 24, 2010 Wednesday
 
Peterson trial: June 14; jury selection under way   ::MonkeyGavel::
 
Former Bolingbrook cop Drew Peterson will go on trial June 14 for murder in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.   ::MonkeyJustice::

On Tuesday, Will County Circuit Judge Stephen White ordered jury selection to begin that day for the 56-year-old former Bolingbrook police sergeant, who's charged with killing Savio in her bathtub during their bitter divorce.

Peterson remains in jail.

He has denied any involvement in Savio's death -- which initially was ruled accidental. :roll:   ::MonkeyViolin::

He also has denied any involvement in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who remains missing.  :roll:
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:1133073869&start=16

 ::MonkeyGavel:: ::MonkeyJustice::    Thanks Nut.

Thanks Nut   ::MonkeyGavel::  ::CowboySmiley::

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/bolingbrooksun/news/2070145,6_1_NA26_PETERSON_S1-100226.article
Judge sets trial date for Drew
Hearsay hearing ends, murder trial upcoming for Peterson
 February 26, 2010
By JOE HOSEY jhosey@stmedianetwork.com

Drew Peterson is less than four months away from meeting the men and women who will decide whether he heads to prison for what will surely be the rest of his life.

Judge Stephen White Feb. 23 set a June 14 date for the start of jury selection for Peterson's murder trial.

Peterson, a 56-year-old former Bolingbrook police sergeant, is charged with drowning his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in March 2004.

Savio and Peterson were in the midst of a contentious divorce when she was found dead in her dry bathtub. She was due to claim hundreds of thousands of dollars of her husband's assets only weeks after she died.

Despite the financial savings Peterson achieved through Savio dying, and the circumstances of her death, state police investigators quickly determined she accidentally drowned and closed the case.

State police were forced to open it back up after Peterson's next wife, Stacy Peterson, vanished in October 2007.

Peterson claims his fourth wife left him and ran off with an unidentified lover. If Stacy did indeed abscond with a boyfriend, she has managed to keep such a low profile that she not been heard from since.

State police do not buy Peterson's story of abandonment and have publicly identified him as the sole suspect in what they have termed Stacy's "potential homicide." Police have not charged Peterson with harming Stacy.

The state police did arrest Peterson in May for the murder of Savio, and he has remained in jail on a $20 million bond while awaiting his trial, which will commence after a jury is picked.
White said two shifts of 35 potential jurors each will be brought through court when the selection starts.

Attorneys from both sides will have 240 possible jurors to choose from. In August, White had the 240 men and women come to court and fill out questionnaires. He also warned them to avoid information about the Peterson case.

A landmark hearing to determine what hearsay evidence will be allowed at Peterson's trial wrapped up just last week.

Seventy witnesses testified during the hearing, which was held under recently passed state legislation dubbed "Drew's Law" for its supposed connection to the Peterson case.

After the hearing, it was left to White to rule how many of 14 hearsay statements made by Stacy and Savio will be admitted at the trial. White's decision will be kept under wraps until the start of the trial.
A long trial
For a month during the hearsay trial, Peterson listened to family, former friends and ex-in-laws talk about him allegedly stalking and abusing three of his four wives. He heard stories about his supposed plots to kill two of the women he married and then cover up the crimes.

The last day of the hearsay trial Feb. 19 saw State's Attorney James Glasgow hurling such aspersions as "knucklehead Drew" and "greedy Drew" at the defendant.

Glasgow likened him to "some sort of hideous B-movie stalker."

Even with the lack of criminal charges, Prosecutors tried over the course of the month-long hearing to prove Peterson killed Stacy to keep her from testifying against him in the Savio case.

Peterson's attorneys have questioned the constitutionality of the state hearsay law. In the closing arguments they made at the trial, they also attacked the reliability of the witnesses who repeated the hearsay statements and, in Savio's case, went after the original source.

Peterson's lawyer Andrew Abood, who split the closing arguments with defense attorney George Lenard, said Savio lied during a divorce deposition about income from a tenant and was dishonest to an insurance investigator regarding the theft of her wedding ring.

"She describes things the way she wants, to make people feel sorry for her," Abood said.

More than 10 witnesses have testified that Savio told them Peterson broke into her house and threatened her life. Some said Savio claimed he menaced her with a knife. At least six said she accused him of cutting a hole in the wall of her house to get inside, and another six said Savio predicted Peterson would kill her and make her death appear to be an accident.

Witnesses testified that Stacy expressed similar fears. As Assistant State's Attorney John Connor put it, "Mr. Peterson's wives are 2-for-2 in predicting their own murders."
It was a homicide'
Prior to the attorneys presenting their closing arguments Friday, celebrity medical examiner Michael Baden testified for the prosecution and said he believed Savio was attacked, beaten and drowned.

Baden, who performed an autopsy on Savio's exhumed remains that was later broadcast on the Fox News Channel in November 2007, said, "My opinion is that it was homicidal, that it was a homicide, and that she was drowned and beaten up."

As an alternate theory to Savio's death being an accident, Abood suggested her boyfriend, Steve Maniaci, had greater access to her bathroom -- and less of an alibi -- than Peterson, and questioned why he was not the one under suspicion.

And as far as Stacy, Lenard said the evidence points to her running off with another man.

"She doesn't want to have sex with (Peterson) anymore because it makes her skin crawl. I don't think that's a compliment," Lenard said.

"No offense to Drew Peterson, but he's not the young boy-toy anymore," Lenard said. "He's not the guy walking around with the gelled hair. He's an old man she doesn't want to be with anymore."

eerrrrrrrrrr......ummmmmm Mr.  Lenard ......show us the evidence that Stacy ran off with another man! Drew Peterson was hardly a young boy-toy when he met and married Stacy. He was old when she married him (as compared to herself)and he's even older now  ::MonkeyCool:: and I bet he HATES that, lmao.  ::piggy::

If she had left him for another man, she'd have taken her kids.  ::MonkeyKiss::

Drew killed both women and he is goin' down for BOTH murders!!  ::MonkeyGavel::  Need some more soap on a rope Drew??  ::MonkeyLaugh::  omg I loatheeeeeeeeeee him  ::MonkeyNoNo::

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/2074488,police_bungle_peterson_jo022810.article
Did state police bungle the Peterson case?
Testimony shows cops may have mishandled much of murder investigation
February 28, 2010
By Joe Hosey JHOSEY@STMEDIANETWORK.COM

Prosecutors spent a month tarring Drew Peterson with hours of testimony about how he supposedly killed his last two wives. But after all the witnesses and all the arguing, in the end, it was the state police who may have looked the guiltiest of all.

The revelations about how the state police allegedly mishandled the death investigation for Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio, emerged during the hearsay hearing as a prelude to Peterson's murder trial.
» Click to enlarge image
Former Bolingbrook police Officer Drew Peterson (left), his missing fourth wife, Stacy, and his late third wife Kathleen Savio. Peterson is charged with killing Savio.


Savio was found dead in her bathtub exactly six years ago tomorrow. At least one woman and three men, including an attorney and a Bolingbrook police officer, went to the state police soon after her body was discovered and tried to report the suspicions they harbored about her ex-husband, Drew Peterson.

Those suspicions fell on deaf ears.

"I told them Kathy was afraid of Drew," Savio's boyfriend, Steve Maniaci, testified during the hearsay hearing. "I told them Drew broke into her house. I told them the fact that he had cut a hole in the wall to gain entry and it should be looked at. I told them Kathy was very scared of Drew and it should be looked at closely."
Police: No sign of foul play
Based on testimony from witnesses, closely is not a word one would use to describe the way the state police looked at the death of Savio.

But dismissing the concerns of those who reached out to them was only half the problem with the state police's method of gathering witness information in the Savio case. The law's long arm did not reach out very far to find anyone else; a state police "canvass" of the residents around Savio's home stopped short of her ex-husband Drew Peterson's street, less than a quarter mile away.

Possibly worse, the state police did not interview a single member of Savio's family during their investigation, including two sisters who said Savio predicted Peterson would kill her and make her death appear accidental.

One of the two sisters, Susan Doman, testified at a coroner's inquest convened about a month after Savio died. From the stand, Doman said -- in the presence of a state police special agent assigned to the case -- that Savio "was just terrified of (Peterson). He always threatened her."

The inquest ended with a jury ruling that Savio's death was accidental. The jury reached its verdict after the same special agent, Herbert Hardy, testified that the state police found no sign of foul play during the investigation.
Belief unchanged
While the state police did not talk to too many people about the circumstances surrounding Savio's death, others, including Lisa Mordente, who was once Savio's boss at a Romeoville sign company, did not go out of their way to seek out the law either.

"Because it wouldn't have helped," Mordente testified during the hearsay hearing. "Because Kathleen said it wouldn't have helped."

Sgt. Patrick Collins, the top man of a team of state police investigators, made up his mind within an hour of arriving at Savio's home that the dead woman in the tub had died accidentally. And apparently no one could talk him out of it. Not even one of his own.

State police Master Sgt. Bryan Falat worked the Savio death investigation when he was a trooper on loan to the agency's investigation division. He testified on the 12th day of the hearsay hearing that he repeatedly urged Collins, the lead agent on the investigation, to approach the case as if something more sinister than a slip-and-fall accident had occurred in Savio's bathtub.

For example, Falat suggested re-interviewing the friends and neighbors who found Savio's body. He advised that allowing Drew Peterson to be questioned in the lunchroom of the Bolingbrook police station, where Peterson had worked as an officer since 1977, might not be the most prudent course of action. And he spoke against allowing Peterson to be present for the interrogation of his much younger, new wife, Stacy Peterson, which was held in the basement of the couple's house.

Collins did not heed any of Falat's objections or recommendations. He apparently was already under the sway of the third member of the investigative team, state police Crime Scene Investigator Robert Deel who -- despite the first-degree murder charges now facing Peterson in connection with Savio's death -- still believes she was the victim of nothing more than an accident.
'I don't care why ...'
Collins testified at the hearsay hearing that he had never worked a homicide when he was sent to Savio's home and that he deferred to the judgment of Deel, a 24-year veteran of the state police.
 
Deel collected no evidence during his investigation of the Savio death scene. He overlooked a glass of orange juice on her kitchen counter, a mug of water in her microwave and a condom Falat says he told him was in a bathroom wastebasket. Deel denies Falat told him about the condom -- which Savio's boyfriend says he did not put there. Either way, Deel conceded that he did not look in the wastebasket, or any other trash receptacles, during his investigation.

Deel also failed to check for the clothes Savio was wearing before she took her supposed death bath, or to document whether there were any towels in the bathroom. And he neglected to dust for fingerprints or conduct chemical blood testing.

When she was found in the tub, Savio had an inch-long bloody gash on the back of her head, which she apparently sustained during the "accidental" fall before she drowned. But Deel did not find it strange that he could find no blood or hair on any of the surfaces around the tub.

Savio's body also bore the marks of scratches and extensive bruising, but it was not enough to raise Deel's investigative radar. As he put it, "The bruises on the body are insignificant to me."

The fact that Peterson and Savio, who while legally divorced were still in the midst of a contentious property dispute that was due to wrap up in the coming weeks with Savio claiming hundreds of thousands of dollars in the couple's assets, including a portion of her husband's pension, was also lost on Deel. As was Peterson and Savio's acrimonious and violent history, which was lowlighted by 19 calls to the police and allegations of assault, battery, theft and harassment. Motive, after all, does not come into play when Deel probes a potential murder.

"I don't care why it happened," he explained.
No demerit?

 And if anyone else in the state police -- aside from Falat -- cared about the circumstances of Kathleen Savio's life and death, they must not have looked into it deeply; the state police determined she died accidentally, just as Deel and Collins figured from the start.

But less than three and a half years later, Stacy Peterson, the wife Collins allowed to be held and coached by Drew Peterson during her basement interview, mysteriously disappeared. Suddenly, the Kathleen Savio backstory became a much more compelling subject to the state police.

It was about this same time that the Will County state's attorney's office ordered the state police to keep Deel out of its jurisdiction. At least that's the way Deel tells it.

During the hearsay hearing, one of Peterson's attorneys, Andrew Abood, asked Deel whether his superiors reprimanded him for failing to take fingerprints or if he was stuck with a "demerit" for his performance in the Savio investigation. Deel answered no to both questions.

"Nobody from the state's attorney's office has written a letter to the I.S.P. and said, I don't want Bob Deel investigating crimes in Will County anymore?" Abood asked, to which Deel replied, "I don't know about a letter, but I know that's happened."

Charles B. Pelkie, the spokesman for State's Attorney James Glasgow, declined to confirm whether that request came from Glasgow himself.

Following his appearance at the hearsay hearing on Feb. 4, Deel answered, "No comment," when asked if he is allowed to conduct investigations in Will County, but state police Master Sgt. Isaiah Vega confirmed Deel does still work here.
Another murder case
Whether Deel can operate in the county or not, the damage to the Savio investigation has already been done. And questions about his performance may be raised in at least one other high-profile murder case as well.

Joliet attorney Gerald Kielian, who represents Christopher Vaughn in a pending quadruple murder case, confirmed Deel had a hand in processing the crime scene.

"He was the chief investigator," Kielian said.

Vaughn, who could face the death penalty if convicted, allegedly shot his wife and three young children to death as they sat in the family's sport utility vehicle on the Interstate 55 frontage road outside Channahon in June 2007.

While Kielian declined to comment further, or to disclose whether Deel's handling of the crime scene will be an issue during the trial, his co-counsel, attorney John Rogers argued a motion to dismiss the case in September based on the alleged mishandling of a piece of evidence.

A towel found on the lap of the dead body of Vaughn's wife, Kimberly Vaughn, was seized and taken to the Will County morgue, where for some reason it was put in the wash, destroying its evidentiary value. Vaughn's attorneys maintained that the evidence lost in the wash might have played a part in clearing their client.

The judge in the case shot down the argument but it remains unclear who washed the towel and why he did so.

Pelkie declined to discuss the towel, as did Vega, pointing out that the state police do not comment on ongoing criminal investigations or prosecutions. Which was why he could not comment on the Savio case or the Stacy Peterson investigation, which possibly could have been avoided if Collins had listened to Savio's attorney, Harry Smith, her boyfriend Steve Maniaci, her friend Kristin Anderson, or Bolingbrook police Officer Richard Treece.

"I attempted to do what she told me to do (if she died)," Smith said. "I had to go to the authorities and tell them Drew did it.

"I called," Smith said. "I told him who I was and I told him essentially the complaint and the thing Kathleen had told me. At least I attempted to."

The state agent he spoke to "was not prepared for that kind of a conversation," Smith said, and told him "someone would get back to me."

No one did.
Critical of the cops
Anderson, who briefly lived with her family in Savio's basement, told much the same story as Smith.

"They never followed up with me," she said. "I called. I made a couple of phone calls."

Three-and-a-half years later, when the state police got a second chance to solve the mystery of what happened to one of Drew Peterson's wives, they again proved less than adept at returning telephone calls.

"I immediately made attempts to call the state police," Neil Schori, a pastor who says Stacy Peterson confided in him about her husband killing Savio, said of his reaction to the news Stacy was missing.

"I made multiple phone calls, left multiple voice mails," said Schori, noting not one was returned. He said he also went to the District 5 state police headquarters in Lockport, but no one would meet with him.

As luck would have it, Schori happened to be serving on a grand jury when Sgt. Collins was called as a witness. He stood up and said he needed to speak with the sergeant and was finally able to share his information, which may prove vital to the prosecution in Peterson's murder trial.

During the hearsay hearing, Schori testified how Stacy told him of Peterson missing from their home in the early morning hours just before Savio was found dead. When he showed up again, Peterson was dressed all in black and was dumping clothes from a bag into the washing machine.

Peterson came up with a cover story, Schori said Stacy told him, and he coached her how to answer the cops when they came with questions.

Stacy may have lied to the state police to make her husband's alibi, but she was still critical of the cops who bought her story for the way they conducted their investigation of Savio's death.

"It never went very far," Schori said Stacy told him of the police probe. "The police didn't go very far looking at him."

Im not sure if I have linked it here, but...

Here is the case archive album, everything that has happened (more or less) since the beginning, saved in pictures:

http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/mm166/crankycrankerson/Stacy%20Peterson%20-%20Kathleen%20Savio/

Thanks!   ::MonkeyBike::

 ::MonkeyShocked::

3/13/10
Savio pathologist dies

Dr. Bryan Mitchell, the pathologist who performed autopsies in the death of Kathleen Savio and many other notable cases, has died, Will County authorities have announced.
Mitchell has been the chief pathologist for the Will County coroner's office for the past 12 years, said Coroner Patrick K. O'Neil.

"Dr. Mitchell had performed over 3,000 autopsies for our office and the citizens of Will County during his professional time with us," O'Neil said.

"More compassionately known in Will County as Dr. Bryan, he befriended all those who worked in the forensic community to include hospital staff, law enforcement, prosecutors and funeral directors," O'Neil added.

"Dr. Mitchell was a consummate professional whose skillful work as a forensic pathologist enabled us to successfully prosecute many murder cases in Will County over the past decade," said James Glasgow, Will County state's attorney. "He was a compassionate and insightful colleague, and he will be greatly missed."

Glasgow added: "With regard to pending cases in Will County, Illinois statute clearly provides prosecutors with the ability to enter an autopsy protocol at trial in the event of a pathologist's death."

Among thousands of autopsies, Mitchell handled the 2008 shootings at Northern Illinois University, the 2004 Utica tornado and the 1999 Bourbonnais train crash. He traveled to Croatia to examine victims of torture.

Mitchell correctly identified Kathleen Savio -- the former wife of ex-Bolingbrook police officer Drew Peterson -- as a drowning victim. Both forensic pathologist Dr. Larry Blum and medical examiner Michael Baden determined Savio was the victim of a homicide.

Peterson is charged with drowning Savio, who was his third wife.

Dr. Mitchell was also a distinguished member of the Illinois Coroners and Medical Examiners Association, where he developed new guidelines for coroners and medical examiners, O'Neil said. He was also instrumental in designing the new morgue complex in Kankakee County, O'Neil added.
snipped....
http://www.pioneerlocal.com/burrridge/news/2100862,burr-ridge-pathologist-031310-s1.article

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-04-14/news/ct-met-0415-peterson-attorneys-20100414_1_andrew-abood-joel-brodsky-drew-peterson
2 attorneys for Drew Peterson withdraw
They cite ‘irreconcilable differences’ with co-counsel Joel Brodsky
April 14, 2010|By Alicia Fabbre, Special to the Tribune

Drew Peterson lost two members of his defense team on Wednesday as attorneys Andrew Abood and George Lenard withdrew from the case citing "irreconcilable differences" with co-counsel Joel Brodsky.

Will County Circuit Judge Stephen White approved Abood's and Lenard's requests to withdraw from the case. When asked if he objected to their motions, Peterson hesitated before telling White he had no objections.

"I think (Peterson) understands, and I think he's disappointed that we're no longer on the case," Abood said after the hearing.
Advertisement

Peterson is charged with killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004. State police also suspect that Peterson was involved with the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, but he has not been charged.

In their motions, Abood and Lenard said they differed with Brodsky over strategy and that proceeding with the case would violate their "ethical duty to zealously represent the best interests" of their client.

Brodsky admitted to differences with his co-counsels about defense strategy but declined to elaborate.

Abood and Lenard spent several minutes speaking with Peterson before the motion hearing. After the hearing was over, Abood shook hands with Peterson and wished him "good luck."
It was a pleasure working with Drew Peterson and Andrew Abood," Lenard said after the hearing. "It's unfortunate it got to the point that it did, but there were no alternatives."

http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/2159252,drew-peterson-shark-lopez-041410.article
Noted defense attorney joins Drew Peterson's legal team

April 14, 2010

BY STEVE WARMBIR AND NATASHA KORECKI Staff Reporters

Drew Peterson, going to trial in June for allegedly killing his wife, now has a “Shark” in his corner.

Well known criminal defense attorney Joseph “The Shark” Lopez, who once represented a mob hitman who killed 13 people, is joining Peterson’s legal defense team.

Moments before filing his appearance in the case Wednesday, Lopez said he’s getting involved to see justice done.

Peterson “is being blamed for some kind of accident,” Lopez said. “It’s not justice. Justice never rests, and I want to help.”

Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police officer, is charged with murder in the 2004 death of Kathleen Savio. He’s a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, but hasn’t been charged.

Lopez, practicing law since the early 1980s, has represented clients in dozens of murder trials over the years. Most recently, he represented Outfit killer Frank Calabrese Sr. in the historic Family Secrets mob case in federal court, one of several well known mobsters Lopez has worked with over the years. Lopez, known for his colorful courtroom attire and quick wit, also represented Peterson in a mock trial for a local radio station.

Lopez is coming into the case as two attorneys are leaving.

Attorney Andrew Abood says the motion he and attorney George Lenard filed Wednesday cites “irreconcilable differences.” Neither Abood nor Peterson’s lead attorney, Joel Brodsky, would elaborate.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/04/19/drew.peterson.lawyers/
'Shark' joins Drew Peterson's defense amid shakeup
By Emanuella Grinberg, CNN
April 19, 2010 8:23 a.m. EDT
(CNN) -- Former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson has changed up his defense team two months before the murder trial in his third wife's death is scheduled to begin.

Joining the defense team is Joseph Lopez, a veteran trial attorney nicknamed "The Shark." He is known in legal circles and among mafia buffs for representing some of Chicago's most notorious mobsters.

Peterson lost two other attorneys last week after they filed motions asking to withdraw from the case, citing "irreconcilable differences" with lead attorney Joel Brodsky.

Brodsky said the shakeup would not affect the trial's June start date.

"We absolutely want to go on as planned. Drew wants to go to trial June 14, I want to go to trial on June 14 and Mr. Lopez will be ready on June 14," Brodsky said in a telephone interview Friday.

Charges against Peterson, 56, for the death of Kathleen Savio came amid an investigation into the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy. He has pleaded not guilty to charges he murdered Savio and denies involvement in Stacy's disappearance.
Lopez, a friend of Brodsky's, is no stranger to Peterson's case. He "represented" Peterson in a mock trial staged in 2009 for a local radio station. The mock trial ended in a hung jury.

His law firm doesn't have a Web site. Instead, Lopez said he prefers to rely on his reputation for tenacious cross-examination and off-the-cuff remarks to the press to bring in clients.

"They just come, like moth to a flame," he said in a phone interview. "I've always been ruthless when it comes to this kind of stuff -- anything, you name it."

Lopez speaks proudly of his roots in the heart of Chicago's Little Italy, where he was born and raised, and scoffs at the irony of his high-profile representation of 13 mobsters in the "Family Secrets" federal trial, which is credited with taking down the upper echelons of the Chicago Syndicate.

Lopez said his arguments in the Peterson mock trial mirror his view that Savio's death was an accident that only became a homicide when authorities couldn't pin charges on Peterson for Stacy's disappearance. Stacy still hasn't been found.
It's just a straight-up case of an accident that later turned into an allegation of murder. There's no DNA, no scientific evidence, bunch of expert witnesses that disagree on the cause of death, and that raises reasonable doubt right there."

Brodsky said Lopez's years of experience as a trial attorney and his shared view of the defense strategy in Peterson's case made him an ideal replacement for Andrew Abood and George Lenerd, who asked to withdraw from the case on Wednesday.

Abood said that he and Lenerd were not forced off the case, attributing the decision to leave to personality differences with Brodsky.

"Joel's a different kind of lawyer than I'm used to," he said. "He's a very good lawyer in his office and he's very knowledgeable, but to be a trial lawyer and to present a case requires a certain amount of skill and ability to think on your feet and understand issues and an ability to communicate those issues to jurors."

Brodsky, however, said it was impossible to divorce the concept of clashing personalities from trial strategy when defending a client charged with murder.
Everybody's got their own style, everybody has their own ideas, and maybe when he tries to convince me that his way is the right way and I don't agree with him, maybe he considers that to be a personality conflict," Brodsky said.

"I'm sorry he couldn't see things my way, but there can only be one boss, one bus driver, one captain of the ship, whatever you want to call it. You can try to convince, you can try to argue, try to make people see things your way, but if you can't agree when the captain or coach or lead counsel makes the final decision, and you really can't go along with it, then I guess you have to step aside."

The two attorneys left on good terms with Peterson, Abood said. "We shook hands and wished each other the best."

As for Brodsky?

"I don't think Joel will be inviting me to any Christmas parties," Abood said.

http://www.wlsam.com/Article.asp?id=1780003&spid=
Sun-Times Media
 
Apr 21, 2010

(BOLINGBROOK) A band of volunteers searched a southwest suburban Bolingbrook pond for missing mother Stacy Peterson on Wednesday.

Bolingbrook police Lt. Michael Rompa said the search was strictly a civilian effort with no presence from his department or State Police.

State Police have been the lead agency investigating Peterson's October 2007 disappearance. They consider her to be the victim of a potential homicide and named her husband, former Bolingbrook police Officer Drew Peterson, the sole suspect in their case. <!--[endif]-->

Drew Peterson was arrested in May and charged with murdering the woman he was married to before Stacy Peterson -- third wife Kathleen Savio. His murder trial is set to start June 14.

The search of a pond near the intersection of Boughton and Weber roads was led by Stacy Peterson's sister, Cassandra Cales, Rompa said.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=375396
Two more big names join Peterson defense team
By Christy Gutowski | Daily Herald Staff
Published: 4/22/2010 5:27 PM | Updated: 4/23/2010 12:17 AM
They don't have cool nicknames like "The Shark," but two other high-profile Chicago attorneys known for their aggressive courtroom styles are joining the Drew Peterson defense team.

Attorneys Steven A. Greenberg and Ralph E. Meczyk are expected to file their appearances by Monday to defend the former Bolingbrook police sergeant on charges he killed his third wife as the former couple neared a financial settlement in their divorce.

Both attorneys have handled dozens of murder trials in their lengthy legal careers.

Most notably, Meczyk defended former Chicago police officer Anthony Doyle in the landmark Family Secrets federal mob trial. And, late last year, Greenberg represented triple killer Brian Dugan for the infamous 1983 sex slaying of Jeanine Nicarico of Naperville.

In that case, a DuPage County jury in November initially signed a "life" verdict form after the defense explored functional brain imaging technology to explain Dugan's mental makeup. The panel ultimately sent Dugan to death row, however, after the main holdout juror had a change of heart before the initial verdict was announced.

Greenberg and Meczyk join lead attorney Joel Brodsky, Reem Odeh, and Joseph "The Shark" Lopez, who also was a lead attorney in the Family Secrets trial. Lopez filed an appearance last week after Andrew Abood and George Lenard withdrew, citing "irreconcilable differences" with Brodsky regarding key trial strategy issues.

Drew Peterson, 56, maintains his innocence in Kathleen Savio's 2004 drowning death. His fourth wife Stacy, 23, was reported missing in October 2007, but Peterson hasn't been charged with any wrongdoing in that case.
Jury selection is slated to begin June 14, but the trial may be delayed if prosecutors appeal Will Circuit Judge Stephen White's anticipated ruling regarding the admissibility of about one dozen hearsay statements.

"The passing of a law designed to convict a specific person makes this a witch hunt; that offends my sense of justice," Greenberg said of a recent hearsay law sparked by the Peterson case. "I look forward to the challenge of ensuring Drew gets a fair trial and is found not guilty."

Peterson, arrested May 7, remains in the Will County jail on a $20 million bond.

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/bolingbrooksun/news/2213628,4_1_JO29_THEBOOK_S1-100429.article
Violence expert taps Peterson case for book
Author: 'Time's Up' can help women escape abusive relationships
 April 29, 2010
By JOE HOSEY jhosey@stmedianetwork.com

JOLIET -- Friends and family of missing mother Stacy Peterson told how she feared that the husband she wanted to get away from would kill her before letting her go.

A new book from family violence expert Susan Murphy-Milano would have given Peterson the ways and means to escape her allegedly abusive relationship.
It was born out of Stacy's death, actually," Murphy-Milano said of her new book, "Time's Up," which was released April 12.

While Peterson remains missing, the state police investigating her disappearance believe she may have been slain by her husband, former Bolingbrook cop Drew Peterson, although they have yet to bring criminal charges in the case.
Women's advocate
Murphy-Milano has firsthand experience of an unhinged police officer perpetrating acts of violence on their wives. Her father, a Chicago detective, murdered her mother before committing suicide in 1989. Murphy-Milano found their bodies.

"It was something he always said he would do," Murphy-Milano said of her father.

The startling event propelled Murphy-Milano on her path to becoming an advocate for battered women.

"It chose me, I don't think I chose it," the former investment banker said of her current vocation, which has included penning two other books on the subject of domestic violence prior to "Time's Up."
Peterson case
Murphy-Milano said the idea for "Time's Up" came to her after she got involved in the Stacy Peterson case and spoke with a preacher Stacy confided in about her fears of her husband. Stacy also told the preacher, Neil Schori, that her husband allegedly killed the woman he was married to before her, Drew Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio. Drew Peterson currently faces a murder charge in connection with Savio's March 2004 death.

"It was after I met with Neil Schori, and we talked," Murphy-Milano said of the preacher, who now presides over a church in Naperville.

Murphy-Milano said she spotted the extensive video equipment in Schori's church and told him that she has taped all of her interviews with victims of domestic violence since 2004.

Leaving behind a videotaped statement might be enough to dissuade a murderous spouse from acting on a violent impulse, Murphy-Milano pointed out. And if it isn't, the tape could be used in court to help convict a spouse charged with murder.

"If Lisa Stebic would have done this -- that's another case that's not been solved," Murphy-Milano said of the Plainfield mother of two who vanished in April 2007. Police suspect her husband, Craig Stebic, of doing her in, but he has not been charged with harming her.
Protecting victims
The book "Time's Up" provides a roadmap to safety for victims of domestic violence by showing them the unseen pitfalls of leaving a violent relationship and how to navigate around them.

"Time's Up" also has explicit details and instructions how to fill out an "evidentiary abuse affidavit," one of the unique things that Murphy-Milano has created and used through the years in high danger cases. She believes the evidentiary abuse affidavit, which after it is filled out is notarized, has saved many lives.

Murphy-Milano also envisions her book being distributed by prosecutor's offices and court systems to both promote justice and save money.

"I can't see it not happening," she said.

"It makes the prosecution's case easier," she said. "Look at the millions of dollars they've spent on this whole (Peterson) investigation."

"Time's Up" is available at bookstores and on Internet book sites.

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/bolingbrooksun/news/2262344,4_1_JO12_PETERSON_S1-100512.article
Drew's Peterson's motorcycle on eBay
No takers for $50K Harley-Davidson yet

May 12, 2010
By JOE HOSEY jhosey@stmedianetwork.com

JOLIET -- A piece of the Drew Peterson -- and the Harley-Davidson -- lifestyle can be yours if you score the high bid on an eBay auction for his motorcycle.

Peterson, the serial marrier and accused wife killer now jailed on murder charges for a few days more than a year, has his prized Harley-Davidson on the Internet auction block with a starting price of $50,000.
While Peterson could use some money to cover his legal expenses, that is not the sole reason for selling the motorcycle, said his attorney, Joel Brodsky of Chicago.

"First of all, the bike's been sitting there for over a year now," said Brodsky, who has his own Harley-Davidson up for sale on eBay as well. The minimum bid for Brodsky's bike is $8,500.

"Mine's got nothing to do with money," Brodsky said of unloading his motorcycle. "I'm just getting older."

Peterson allegedly murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in March 2004, but was not arrested until May 2009. The state police had maintained that Savio accidentally drowned in her bathtub but changed their tune when Peterson's next wife, Stacy Peterson, vanished in October 2007.
Peterson and Stacy owned matching Harleys and rode together before she mysteriously disappeared. State police suspect that Peterson had a hand in possibly slaying Stacy but have not charged him with harming her.

The day the state police finally arrested Peterson on murder charges, the former Bolingbrook cop spent a good deal of time tooling around town on his motorcycle. He also cut a dashing figure in the days following Stacy's disappearance by roaring away from his home astride the Harley with an American flag bandana covering his face.
High price
The website Justice Cafe, a blog devoted to the Peterson case, broke the news of the Internet auction. The motorcycle was listed on eBay by Jim McGovern, who said he is an investigator for another of Peterson's lawyers, Ralph Meczyk of Chicago. The listing boasts that "this is the actual bike owned by Drew Peterson," which must count for something, as the original manufacturer's suggested retail price is only $24,995.

Brodsky insists the bike is valuable even without the Peterson connection.

"It's a collector's item, in addition to being Drew Peterson's motorcycle," he said. "If the person who buys it doesn't care where it comes from, that's fine, too."

And just because Peterson is selling this motorcycle -- and facing what would surely amount to a life sentence in prison if convicted on the murder charges -- does not mean he does not plan to ride another day.

"When he gets out he can always buy another one," Brodsky said. "They're not going to stop selling Harleys."


What an a**hat.   ::MonkeyCool::

:roll:
Monday, 17 May 2010 2:06PM

Drew Peterson's Harley-Davidson motorcycle has finally sold

CHICAGO (WBBM)  -- Drew Peterson's lawyer says Peterson's Harley-Davidson motorcycle has finally sold - after being pulled off eBay at least twice.

The new owner of Drew Peterson's motorcycle?

"We went with a private buyer, who gave us a very good price."

Joel Brodsky, Peterson's lawyer, says eBay took Peterson's Harley off the auction site twice - after complaints that it was "murderabilia."

After it was taken down the first time, Brodsky objected - and eBay put the bike back up.

Then, Brodsky says more complaints. And the Harley was taken down again.

Finally, Brodsky says, he and Peterson went with a private buyer - for what Brodsky calls a "good price."

Brodsky wouldn't say how good. Peterson had been asking that bidding start at $50,000 - more than twice the blue book value.

Newsradio 780 has tried to reach eBay for comment.
 
http://www.wbbm780.com/Drew-Peterson-s-Harley-Davidson-motorcycle-has-fin/7067039

The money should be turned over to Stacy's family for her 'search'.

What a *&(**&^ dirtbag he is. I hate him  ::MonkeyNoNo::

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7474331
Peterson trial could be delayed
Updated at 07:46 AM today
June 2, 2010 (WLS) -- A decision is expected Wednesday on a motion to delay the start of Drew Peterson's murder trial.

The trial is set to begin June 14. Peterson's attorneys want to delay the trial until August because prosecutors have proposed to call four new expert witnesses.

Peterson is accused of murdering his third wife, Kathleen Savio, 40, in 2004. He's also suspected in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

Peterson has pleaded not guilty to Savio's murder and denies any involvement in Stacy's disappearance.

www.tmz.com

Cops May Have Found Body of Drew Peterson's Wife

Originally posted 22 minutes ago by TMZ Staff

There may be a huge break in the disappearance of Drew Peterson's third wife.  TMZ has learned authorities believe they may know exactly where the body is buried, and then plan to dig for it tomorrow.

Cops May Have Found Body of Drew Peterson's Wife
Originally posted 30 minutes ago by TMZ Staff
There may be a huge break in the disappearance of Drew Peterson's third wife.  TMZ has learned authorities believe they may know exactly where the body is buried, and then plan to dig for it tomorrow.


http://www.tmz.com/2010/06/04/drew-peterson-murder-wife-body-crime-scene-police-officer-illinois-dig/

Carpe..Would've hated to have met ya in the good ol' western days cause your draw is VERY quick!God Bless.......

Update on info upthread:

Cops May Have Found Body of Drew Peterson's Wife

Originally posted Jun 4th 2010 9:52 PM PDT by TMZ Staff

There may be a huge break in the disappearance of Drew Peterson's third wife.  TMZ has learned authorities believe they may know exactly where the body is buried, and then plan to dig for it tomorrow.

Law enforcement sources tell TMZ ... Peterson, an ex-cop who is currently behind bars awaiting trial for the murder of his third wife, told an inmate yesterday how he killed Stacy Peterson, wife number 4.  Stacy's body has never been recovered.

Our sources say Peterson told the inmate he had an accomplice help him dispose of the body.  The inmate then told authorities about his discussion with Peterson, which led them to the alleged accomplice.  We're told the accomplice informed Will County Sheriff's officials and prosecutors that the body was buried just outside Peoria, Illinois.

Will County Sheriff's deputies and prosecutors took the alleged accomplice to Peoria Friday, and the accomplice led them to private hunting grounds.  The owner allowed authorities to enter his property and the accomplice then led them to the site where Stacy's body was allegedly buried.  The accomplice told authorities the body was stuffed in a metal drum that had been buried underground.

On Friday afternoon, authorities brought police dogs onto the property and we're told the dogs immediately took them to the place where the witness said the body was buried.  Authorities then put prongs in the soil and hit a mass below ground that could be the drum in question.

We're told State Police are now guarding the property and authorities will begin digging tomorrow morning.
(Edit-Add link per Wyks.  MB) http://www.tmz.com/2010/06/04/drew-peterson-murder-wife-body-crime-scene-police-officer-illinois-dig/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Oops.. forgot link, sorry. 

http://www.tmz.com/2010/06/04/drew-peterson-murder-wife-body-crime-scene-police-officer-illinois-dig/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter (http://www.tmz.com/2010/06/04/drew-peterson-murder-wife-body-crime-scene-police-officer-illinois-dig/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

Now that the initial excitement has worn down a bit, am scouring the net to see if any local news stations in chicago are reporting anything. 

And........ nuttin. 

Gosh I hope this isn't some kind of freaky hoax.  That TMZ got the scoop on the local news.  Tribune is supposed to be going bankrupt or something, wouldn't doubt it. 

But if there are guards out there tonight, and all that LE activity out there Fri afternoon... wouldn't some reporter worth his/her salt have nosed that out? 

Hmmmm....

And.... Drew.  Being an ex-dirty-cop, would he actually have confessed all to another inmate?  Enough anyway that sent another inmate running to LE with the name of the accomplice and etc?  I dunno. 

What does sound like Drew is to have said enough to get some attention to his sorry @ss. 

And yet, not so sure that TMZ would lead out with such a detailed report, had LE not contacted them, and their source not slipped the info to them.  How could TMZ back that article if not true? 

I don't want to wake up later today and find out that TMZ pulled their article and denies it was ever posted. 

We want JUSTICE for Stacy!! 

dagnabit.

Oh and yeah, upthread in the TMZ article..... pssssst TMZ!!  Stacy was Drews fourth wife, not third.  <nods> 

Wyks >>>>>>>>>>>> Please post any further developments on this in Stacy's thread >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.

http://scaredmonkeys.net/index.php?topic=2295.msg1147915#new

??????????  I posted what I did because this is the only place it was being discussed. Sorry, will ensure it does not happen again.

Wyks...haven't heard anything on the news about this or on Yahoo news...
thanks for the updates...

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-06-18/news/ct-met-0619-drew-peterson-20100618_1_defense-attorney-joel-brodsky-peterson-and-brodsky-drew-peterson
Drew Peterson's lawyers haggle over what jury will hear
As trial nears in drowning of Peterson's 3rd wife, judge weighs how much jurors will hear about 4th wife's disappearance
June 18, 2010|By Steve Schmadeke, Tribune reporter

Less than three weeks before Drew Peterson is scheduled to go on trial for the 2004 drowning of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, attorneys for both sides are trying to settle what, if any, details jurors will hear about the still-unsolved disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Defense attorney Joel Brodsky was quoted before a lengthy court hearing Friday saying he planned to ask that prosecutors be barred from bringing up Stacy Peterson. Prosecutors have said Peterson is the sole suspect in her disappearance, but he has never been charged.

After the hearing, Brodsky said only that the defense had filed a motion to keep jurors from hearing about Peterson's prior "bad acts." He said he could not comment further because Judge Stephen White had ruled on "those issues" after closing the courtroom.
"Team Peterson had a great day today," said fellow defense lawyer Joseph Lopez.

White declined to throw out a search warrant executed at Peterson's Bolingbrook home days after his fourth wife vanished.

Investigators on Oct. 31, 2007, found 23 firearms, five other weapons including nunchucks, and a red "alibi folder" with receipts from the day before Savio was found drowned, prosecutors said.

Assistant State's Attorney John Connor said the folder would be used to show Peterson "staged" the drowning and planned to use the receipts as his alibi.

White said he would review a video prosecutors made of press appearances by Peterson and Brodsky but didn't plan to allow jurors to see it.

White declined to delay the July 8 start date of the trial after Peterson's lawyers had pleaded for more time.

sschmadeke@tribune.com

Drew Peterson Trial: Jury To Hear Some Hearsay Evidence Under New Law
 Updated: 06-25-10 02:07 PM

Under a new law passed specifically for this case, jurors in the Drew Peterson murder trial will hear certain portions of the so-called "hearsay" testimony that is usually inadmissible in court cases.

According to the Chicago Tribune, a suburban pastor will be able to testify about his discussion with Stacy Peterson, Drew's fourth wife, in which she said she gave police a false alibi for her husband the night his previous wife was killed.

Peterson is charged with the murder of Kathleen Savio, his third spouse. Stacy reportedly told her pastor, Neil Schori, that Peterson was missing for hours on the night of Savio's death. He came home dressed in all black and carrying another woman's clothes, she told Schori, and coached her for hours on what to say to investigators about where he had been.

This type of evidence, in which a witness like Schori testifies about what another has said, is ordinarily not allowed at trial. But under an Illinois law passed in 2008, commonly known as "Drew's Law," some forms of hearsay are admissible if the prosecution argues that the witness was killed to keep from testifying.

Stacy Peterson disappeared in October 2007; Drew Peterson is a suspect in her disappearance, though no charges have been brought as her remains have not yet been found.

Meanwhile, the Tribune reports that the prosecution also suffered a setback in the hearsay rulings:

However, the jury will not hear some details of an alleged 2002 incident in which Peterson allegedly broke into the home of his third wife, Kathleen Savio; held a knife to her throat; and threatened to kill her, according to sources and comments made by defense attorney Joel Brodsky in court Thursday.

Sources told the Tribune that statements from several of the women's [Savio's and Stacy Peterson's] friends have been barred, including some testimony about the July 2002 incident in which Peterson is accused of breaking into Savio's house and holding a knife to her throat.

The alleged home invasion was a major focus of the hearsay hearing held earlier this year, with at least seven witnesses testifying about it. One of Savio's former co-workers told the judge that Savio said Peterson, clad in all black and carrying a knife, snuck into her home, pinned her on the stairs and then balked at killing her because it would be "too bloody."

It's unclear why the judge allowed Schori's testimony and not those of the women's friends, but the Tribune reports that Judge Stephen White has to "weigh the witness's reliability" before allowing them to testify hearsay.

Hearsay testimony is risky, and especially damaging to the defense, said University of Illinois law professor Stephen Beckett, because they have no opportunity to cross-examine the person whose words are being spoken.

"This other witness may truthfully be saying what the person said, but how do we know what the person said is true?" Beckett said, in a 2009 article on the subject.

Still, enough evidence was apparently excluded by Judge White to appease Peterson's attorneys.

Joseph Lopez, one lawyer on the defense team, again from the Tribune: "I'm extremely content. As content as a puppy with a new bone."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/25/drew-peterson-trial-jury_n_625814.html

Chicago Sun Times 
June 25, 2010 Friday
 
Testimony on a Savio autopsy may be barred
 
A celebrity pathologist who autopsied Kathleen Savio may not be allowed to testify when Drew Peterson stands trial next month for the murder of his third wife, a Will County judge said Thursday.

But Judge Stephen White rejected a request from Peterson's attorneys to push back the scheduled July 8 trial date so they have more time to obtain and review evidence.

"Right now, the July 8 date is going to stand," White said bluntly.

Among the evidence defense attorneys still want to obtain is videotaped footage of an autopsy performed on Savio by pathologist Dr. Michael Baden. He conducted the 2007 autopsy at the behest of her family after another pathologist chosen by Will County prosecutors had examined her exhumed remains.

A Fox News employee taped the autopsy as part of a TV news program focusing on Peterson.

"Somebody allowed a TV station to videotape an autopsy?" a seemingly surprised White asked during a Thursday hearing.

But White put aside his surprise to say that if defense attorneys can't obtain a tape of the autopsy, he may ban Baden from testifying during the trial.

Savio's 2004 bathtub drowning death just after her divorce from Peterson originally was ruled an accident. But her body was exhumed in late 2007 after Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, vanished from the couple's Bolingbrook home.

Savio's death then was ruled a murder -- and her former husband was charged last year with her slaying. Peterson remains a suspect in Stacy Peterson's still-unsolved disappearance but hasn't been charged in that case.

While the judge refused to push back the trial, he has yet to rule on several key issues, including whether Peterson's attorneys can have access to State Police reports regarding Stacy Peterson's disappearance. 
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:1211878074&start=1

July 2, 2010
Judge allows disputed autopsy in Peterson murder trial

A Will County judge ruled today that a renowned pathologist CAN testify against Drew Peterson, despite defense claims that his autopsy was tainted by Fox News' involvement.

Defense Attorney Joel Brodsky had argued that Fox News producer Steph Watts "irretrievably compromised" the autopsy Michael Baden performed on Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Brodsky says Watts testified today that he handed over the Fox News material that aired, not the raw tape. Watts also said he didn’t help move Kathleen’s body.

 Judge Stephen White said, "At this point, there's no reason to bar the testimony." 

 Today's ruling comes less than a week before Peterson's much-anticipated murder trial.

 Jury selection is scheduled to begin July 8. In Session will have complete coverage of the trial.

http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/02/judge-allows-disputed-autopsy-in-peterson-murder-trial/

Drew Peterson trial is postponed and will not start tomorrow. Beth Karas reporting from Chicago.
Drew's attorney's are attempting to get him released on bail now......

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7541896
Prosecutors: Drew Peterson trial will be delayed
Updated at 01:36 PM today
AP 

July 7, 2010 (JOLIET, Ill.) -- Prosecutors say Drew Peterson's trial on charges of killing his third wife will be delayed while they appeal a judge's decision to exclude some evidence.

Jury selection was set to begin Thursday in Peterson's trial in the 2004 drowning death of ex-wife Kathleen Savio.

Will County Judge Stephen White ruled that he would not allow a jury to hear some of the hearsay -- or second-hand -- evidence. That evidence makes up the bulk of the prosecution's case.

There is no apparent physical evidence linking Peterson to Savio's death, no witnesses and no confession.

State's Attorney James Glasgow says he will appeal the judge's decision but did not say exactly what hearsay statements were excluded.

WTF? I could just scream.

Lopez is as much of an ASS as Drew :roll:

Peterson attorney says prosecution 'chickened out'
(AP) – 26 minutes ago

CHICAGO — The defense attorney for Drew Peterson says an appeal on hearsay evidence in the former police officer's upcoming murder trial signals to him that prosecutors have no case.

Prosecutors on Wednesday appealed a judge's decision to exclude some evidence in Peterson's trial on charges he killed his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004. The appeal delays the trial. Jury selection was set to begin Thursday.

Peterson's defense attorney Joseph Lopez says prosecutors "chickened out." He believes the appeal will be denied and the charges dismissed.

Will County Judge Stephen White ruled that he wouldn't allow a jury to hear some of the hearsay — or second hand — evidence that makes up the bulk of the prosecution's case.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below.

JOLIET, Ill. (AP) — Former police officer Drew Peterson's trial on charges of killing his third wife will be delayed while a judge's decision to exclude some hearsay evidence is appealed, prosecutors said Wednesday.

Jury selection was set to begin Thursday in Peterson's trial in the 2004 drowning death of ex-wife Kathleen Savio.

But Will County Judge Stephen White ruled Tuesday he would not allow a jury to hear some hearsay — or second hand — evidence.

That evidence is considered crucial because prosecutors have not yet produced physical evidence linking Peterson to Savio's death, first-hand witnesses or a confession.

State's Attorney James Glasgow said Wednesday he will appeal the judge's decision but did not say exactly what hearsay statements were excluded.

Peterson has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in Savio's death and has denied involvement in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who has not been seen since October 2007.

Savio's death originally was ruled an accident after her body was found in an empty bathtub. Her body was exhumed after Stacy Peterson's disappearance, and Savio's death was then ruled a homicide.

Peterson was arrested and charged in Savio's death in May 2009. He's been named a suspect but not charged in Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

During a hearing earlier this year to determine what hearsay evidence a jury would be allowed to hear, several witnesses testified Savio told them she feared Peterson would kill her and had even sneaked into her house and held a knife to her throat and threatened her life.

They also presented witnesses who told of conversations they had with Stacy Peterson, including a pastor who testified Stacy told them she had helped Peterson concoct a fake alibi the weekend Savio's body was found.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbfkKdZZEPQinpLBXO6Df3-5s2SwD9GQDCJG2

Lawyers to seek Peterson's release during appeal
(AP) – 32 minutes ago

JOLIET, Ill. — Former police officer Drew Peterson's trial on charges of killing his third wife will be delayed and he could be released on bail while prosecutors appeal a judge's decision to exclude evidence considered crucial to the case, attorneys said Wednesday.

Jury selection was set to begin Thursday in Peterson's trial in the 2004 drowning death of ex-wife Kathleen Savio.

But Will County Judge Stephen White ruled Tuesday he would not allow a jury to hear some hearsay — or second hand — evidence, including statements Savio allegedly made to others. Such evidence is considered crucial to the case because prosecutors have not yet produced physical evidence linking Peterson to Savio's death, firsthand witnesses or a confession.

State's Attorney James Glasgow didn't say exactly what hearsay evidence was excluded. In talking about the appeal, he pointed to a June 24 Illinois Supreme Court ruling that upheld the conviction of a Naperville man in the 2005 slayings of four family members. The court unanimously rejected the man's argument that hearsay statements from his sister shouldn't be allowed.

"As State's Attorney, I am obligated to appeal the judge's ruling to ensure that every legally admissible statement may be presented at trial," Glasgow said in a written statement.

Peterson has pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in Savio's death and has denied involvement in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who has not been seen since October 2007.

The appeal could mean Peterson will be released from jail. Glasgow said Illinois law doesn't allow a defendant to be held during such an appeal unless there are "compelling reasons" to do so, and Peterson's attorneys said they'll seek his release.

Savio's death originally was ruled an accident after her body was found in an empty bathtub. Her body was exhumed after Stacy Peterson disappeared, and Savio's death was ruled a homicide.

Peterson was arrested and charged in Savio's death in May 2009. He's been named a suspect but not charged in Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

Peterson's attorneys said the appeal didn't come as a surprise and they believe the case eventually will be dismissed.

"They chickened out. They knew they didn't have a case," said Joseph Lopez, one of Peterson's defense attorneys. "They're telling the appellate court, we don't have a case without this hearsay."

Hearsay evidence — statements not based on a witness' direct knowledge — are allowed in trials under a new state law if prosecutors can prove a defendant may have killed a witness to prevent him or her from testifying. The law was so closely linked to the Peterson case that some have dubbed it "Drew's law."

A hearing was held earlier this year to determine what hearsay evidence a jury would be allowed to hear.

A person familiar with the case told The Associated Press that among the statements White ruled a jury can't hear was one from Stacy Peterson's pastor, who said she told him she'd given Peterson a false alibi the weekend of Savio's death. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the judge's orders have been sealed.

That person said the pastor, Neil Schori, will still be allowed to testify about other conversations with Stacy Peterson.

For example, Schori can testify Stacy Peterson told him of seeing her husband, dressed all in black, dumping his clothes and women's clothing that did not belong to Stacy into their washing machine the night before Savio's body was found in her bathtub, the source said.

The person also said White ruled one of Savio's co-workers couldn't testify. During the hearing to determine what hearsay testimony would be allowed at trial, Issam Karam said Savio told him about a night at her home when Peterson, armed with a knife, allegedly grabbed her throat and told her there was nothing she could do to protect herself from him.

White did rule, however, that he would allow a letter to a then-assistant state's attorney in which Savio outlined allegations that Peterson has physically abused her. During the hearing, the former prosecutor testified that she did not remember receiving the letter, the source said.

But the appeal likely signals that the prosecution's case could be in trouble, said Terry Sullivan, a Chicago attorney and former prosecutor who has followed the case.

"It signals to me that without the hearsay they're in trouble," Sullivan said. "Now it's pretty well an admission that shows they don't want to go to trial without that hearsay testimony. You can read whatever you want into it."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hbfkKdZZEPQinpLBXO6Df3-5s2SwD9GQF65G0

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/foxvalleysun/news/2471482,4_1_JO07_PETERSON_S1-100707.article
Will Drew Peterson get his chance to speak?
July 7, 2010

 JOLIET -- Drew Peterson's mouth ran for more than a year and a half after his fourth wife vanished.

All this stopped 14 months ago when he was jailed on charges he murdered his third wife. But with his eagerly anticipated trial set to start tomorrow, will Peterson's lawyers give him the chance to talk his way out of it?
Joel Brodsky, the longest-serving of Peterson's six attorneys, won't say if his client will take the stand. In fact, Brodsky is not sure who he will call to testify.

"It depends what evidence the state puts on," said Brodsky, who is trying his first-ever murder case with the eyes of the world watching.

Brodsky said he will make the first impression on the jury after it is seated, as he is tasked with the opening argument. And he claims to have some tricks up his sleeve.

"There's going to be some surprises in my opening. It will be informative and entertaining," said Brodsky, who predicted that he is going to get under the skin of his adversary, State's Attorney James Glasgow.

"You'll probably hear him grunt and groan," Brodsky said.

Glasgow's spokesman, Charles B. Pelkie, said the state's attorney is "ready to go to trial" along with a prosecution team comprised of seven assistant state's attorneys. Peterson has six attorneys of his own, four of which joined after an acrimonious split between Brodsky and East Lansing, Mich., attorney Andrew Abood. Abood's departure led to Joliet lawyer George Lenard leaving the case as well.

"I'm sorry we lost George," Brodsky said. "I'm not sorry we lost Andrew."

Along with Brodsky and the four new additions to the defense Team, Peterson is also represented by Brodsky's law partner, Reem Odeh. While Odeh has been out of the picture in recent months, she insists she is still a vital part of Drew Peterson's defense.

"We have hundreds of other cases at this office," she said, pointing out that someone has to tend to her law firm's day-to-day affairs while Brodsky is down in Joliet taking care of the Peterson case.

Odeh did say that once the trial starts, she will be tabbed to question the two teenage sons Peterson and his slain third wife, Kathleen Savio, had together, noting that she and the boys, Thomas and Kristopher Peterson, have a solid relationship.

"Yes, I do," she said. "I've worked very closely with them since the beginning of the case."
Savio's death
Peterson is charged with murdering Savio in March 2004. The state police investigated Savio's death and quickly determined she was the victim of a freak bathtub accident.

Three and a half years later, the state police were forced to revisit their investigation of Savio's death after Peterson's next wife, Stacy Peterson, mysteriously disappeared in October 2007.

Stacy's unexplained absence prompted the police to reclassify Savio's death as a homicide and to identify Peterson as the sole subject in their investigation. They got around to arresting him about 17 months later.

The five-plus years between Savio's death and Peterson's arrest -- along with the lack of physical evidence the state police collected when they first had the case -- will be a big advantage to the defense, Brodsky believes.

"You don't have an eyewitness, you don't have a murder weapon, you don't have fingerprints, you don't have DNA," Brodsky said.

But the prosecution does have motive -- Peterson was due to lose a staggering amount of the couple's assets to Savio when the financial issues of their divorce were finally settled, and a court date to finalize the matter was looming when she died. Equally compelling is the vital hearsay evidence they have tying Peterson to the crime.
Hearsay decision
Various, contradictory accounts of what hearsay evidence will be allowed at Peterson's trial have been reported. Brodsky called all the versions "inaccurate."

"I think even the prosecution is saying the reports are inaccurate," he said.

Prosecutors have asked Judge Stephen White to reconsider his decision on what hearsay evidence will be allowed in regard to a recent Illinois Supreme Court decision, apparently in hopes of getting all that they asked for admitted at trial.

On top of the clear motive and potential hearsay evidence, Peterson's attorneys also must overcome what seems to be a universal dislike of Peterson, who never hesitated to cultivate his image as a crass womanizer.

"Is a jury going to convict a man even when the evidence shows he's innocent, just because they don't like him?" asked an incredulous Brodsky.

"Maybe in Nazi Germany," he said. "I don't think the people of Will County will do that."

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/foxvalleysun/news/2471482,4_1_JO07_PETERSON_S1-100707.article
July 7, 2010 (With article in above post)
THE TIMELINE
Peterson case
• Oct. 29, 2007: Stacy Peterson's sister, Cassandra Cales, reports to the Bolingbrook police that Stacy is missing.

• Oct. 31: Drew Peterson speaks publicly for the first time about his wife's disappearance and claims she ran off with another man.

• Nov. 9: The state police announce that, after maintaining since March 2004 that Kathleen Savio's death was accidental, they have changed their minds and now believe she was the victim of a homicide. They then identify Drew Peterson as the sole suspect in the Savio homicide investigation.

• Nov. 13: Savio's body is exhumed from its grave. A state-sanctioned autopsy is conducted the same day.

• Nov. 14: Peterson flies to New York and appears on the "Today" show. During his interview he asks for a lawyer to represent him on the cheap. Attorney Joel Brodsky takes Peterson up on this.

• Nov. 16: Celebrity medical examiner Michael Baden performs yet another autopsy on Savio's body, this one at the behest of her family and the Fox News channel. Baden declares that Savio was the victim of a homicide.

• Feb. 21, 2008: The state announces the November autopsy shows Savio was slain. Peterson says, "You're kidding me."

• May 21: Peterson is arrested on a felony gun charge for allegedly carrying an illegal assault rifle when he was a cop.

• Oct. 1: "Fatal Vows: The Tragic Wives of Drew Peterson," by Joseph Hosey, hits bookstores.

• Nov. 19: The state legislature passes a law allowing hearsay evidence into murder trials. The legislation is dubbed "Drew's Law."

• Nov. 20: Rather than surrender internal communications, prosecutors drop the gun charges.

• April 21, 2009: Savio's family files a wrongful death lawsuit against Peterson.

• May 7: Peterson is taken into custody at a busy intersection near his home and jailed on charges he murdered Savio.

• July 14: A state cop on the Peterson case asked the accused wife-killer's 24-year-old fiancee out on a date, says Brodsky.

• Jan. 19, 2010: A landmark hearing to determine what hearsay evidence will be permitted at Peterson's trial begins. The hearing lasts a full month with dozens of witnesses testifying. Judge Stephen White keeps his decision secret until the start of the trial.

• April 14: Two of Peterson's four attorneys quit the case. Four Chicago lawyers replace them.

• July 8: Jury selection is set to start for Peterson's murder trial.

Drew Peterson Stays Locked Up
July 8, 2010 - 2:22 PM
 An Illinois judge denied a defense request to release Peterson, now that his murder trial is being delayed.
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/07/08/drew-peterson-stays-locked-up/

ACkkkkk, this is long enough!

Monday, July 12, 2010
`Drew's Law' may let Drew skate
Share | Sunday's story,  "Table turns for Peterson case prosecutor -- Drew's Law advocate now finds himself fighting it in pretrial appeal" would be amusing if the back-story weren't so grim.

Saddled with a botched police investigation, Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow pushed for a state law that would allow prosecutors to use hearsay statements against Drew Peterson at trial....

 (But) on the eve of Peterson's much-anticipated murder trial, Glasgow delayed the case Thursday by appealing a ruling on the admissibility of some hearsay evidence. He argues that the judge's decision — made under the guidelines established by Drew's Law — should have adhered instead to less-restrictive common law....

 The new statute requires judges to consider two things: whether the statement is reliable and whether the bulk of the evidence shows that the defendant made the witness unavailable to testify....   

Though (trial Judge Stephen White)  ruled in the state's favor (on the question of whether it was likely he killed his third wife and caused the disappearance of his fourth wife), White still barred the majority of hearsay witnesses because they did "not provide sufficient safeguards of reliability."...

Five weeks later, the Illinois Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Eric Hanson, a Naperville man sentenced to death for the 2005 slayings of four relatives. In a unanimous decision, the high court ruled that common law does not require judges to weigh a hearsay statement's reliability.  (.pdf of that ruling is  here ; extended excerpt in text below)

(White) said Thursday he is bound to follow the guidelines established under Drew's Law. Hanson was convicted before passage of the Glasgow-backed statute and therefore faced a different standard, he said.

"When you codify common law … that codification (Drew's Law) takes precedence over the common law," White said.

In other words, Drew's Law may turn out to be Drew's ticket to an acquittal. Yet as I wrote here nearly two years ago, I don't see how using hearsay against Peterson is going to pass muster with recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions.


I. Forfeiture by Wrongdoing

Defendant’s first argument is that the circuit court erred in admitting the testimony of Jennifer Williams relating to a conversation Jennifer had with her sister, Katherine. In that conversation, Katherine mentioned that defendant had threatened her.

Prior to trial, the State filed a motion to forfeit defendant’s right to cross-examine these statements made by Katherine. The State argued that defendant sought to prevent Katherine from serving as a witness against him and did so by killing her.

In a hearing on the State’s motion, Jennifer’s testimony was consistent with the testimony she would later give at trial.

Katherine phoned her shortly after she and Mary had confronted defendant about the credit cards he had obtained in Mary’s name.

Defendant had admitted to Mary and Katherine that he had gotten the credit cards issued and had run up debt.

He also promised he would pay the money back to his parents.

At that time Mary and Katherine agreed that neither of them would tell Terrence about what defendant had done.

After Mary had left the room, however, Katherine told defendant that she would tell Terrence about defendant’s scheme.

Katherine told Jennifer that defendant responded by saying, “If you tell dad, I will f---ng kill you.”

Jennifer testified that Katherine was very upset during the phone conversation. Jennifer urged Katherine to tell Terrence what had happened, but Katherine demurred, saying she had promised Mary not to tell Terrence.

When Jennifer had a second conversation with Katherine the next day, Katherine said she “had a very unsettling feeling about what Eric had said.” She told Jennifer that she had stayed home from work and turned on her home security system.

Lastly, Jennifer testified that she had found a printout of a credit report in Mary’s name. The report had Mary’s handwriting on it, and the report was found in Mary’s dresser drawer.

Several items on the report were circled and other had question marks next to them. On cross-examination, Jennifer acknowledged that she did not know why Katherine would tell defendant she was going to tell Terrence what defendant had done, but then tell Jennifer that she would not be telling Terrence.

She also admitted that she did not call the police after Katherine told her about defendant’s threat, but explained that she was trying to honor what Katherine had asked, that she not tell anyone else.

At the hearing, the State also proffered testimony which tracked what would eventually be its case in chief. This testimony included the estimated timeline of the murders, defendant’s whereabouts the day of, and days following, the murders and a summary of the forensic evidence discovered at the scene of the murders.

The State also referred to a letter from defendant to Bob Stutelberg in which defendant reported that he had told Katherine to stay out of his business and out of his life. Further, he told Katherine that if she did not, she would “regret it.”

According to the letter, Katherine responded by asking if defendant was threatening her.

Defendant responded, “No, I’m promising.”

Arguing the motion, the State admitted that Katherine’s statements to Jennifer were hearsay. However, pursuant to the doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing, defendant had forfeited his right to cross-examine Katherine on those statements.

The State argued that it had proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defendant committed a wrongdoing, murdering Katherine with the intent to undermine the judicial process or destroy the integrity of the criminal justice system by keeping Katherine from going to the police or testifying against him.

Defendant argued in response that the State had not proven any wrongdoing. Specifically, defendant questioned whether one person could have committed these murders, and could not demonstrate that defendant was in the Tsao home at 10:43 p.m. when the laptop was accessed for the last time.

Defendant also challenged the State’s forensic evidence as insufficient to prove any wrongdoing. The circuit court concluded the State had proved forfeiture by wrongdoing by a preponderance of the evidence.

The court specifically found that the State proved defendant committed the murder and proved that defendant did so with the intent to make Katherine unavailable as a witness.

The court, therefore, granted the State’s motion and allowed Jennifer’s testimony to be introduced at trial.

In reviewing this issue, we first note that the State argues defendant has only challenged the circuit court finding that, by a preponderance of the evidence, defendant made Katherine unavailable.

Defendant conceded at oral argument that he is not challenging the finding that he acted with the intent to make Katherine unavailable. Therefore, we will not review this finding concerning intent. Instead, we address defendant’s contention that the circuit court erred by admitting Jennifer’s testimony because the doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing does not permit admission of non-testimonial hearsay.

Defendant also suggests that even if non-testimonial hearsay may be admitted under the doctrine, the reliability of the statements must be considered in the admission decision.

Lastly, defendant argues that the State’s proffered testimony was insufficient to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant committed Katherine’s murder.

A reviewing court will not reverse the circuit court’s ruling on a motion in limine absent an abuse of discretion. People v. Kirchner, 194 Ill. 2d 502, 539 (2000).

However, defendant is not arguing the circuit court abused its discretion. Rather defendant argues that the court had no discretion to admit Jennifer’s testimony because the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine requires that the statements be testimonial and because the statements must show some measure of reliability.

Defendant correctly argues that these questions are ones of law to be reviewed de novo. People v. Caballes, 221 Ill. 2d 282, 289 (2006).

The doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing is a common law doctrine. As early as 1878, the United States Supreme Court acknowledged that if “a witness is absent by [a defendant’s] own wrongful procurement, he cannot complain if competent evidence is admitted to supply the place of that which he has kept away.” Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145, 158, 25 L. Ed. 244, 247 (1878).

The doctrine was later codified, at the federal level, by Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(6) as an exception to the general hearsay rule. Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(6). More recently, the Supreme Court, in Crawford v. Washington, recognized that the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine, in addition to serving as an exception to the hearsay rule, also “extinguishes confrontation claims on essentially equitable grounds.” Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 62, 158 L. Ed. 2d 177, 199, 124 S. Ct. 1354, 1370 (2004).

In People v. Melchor, our appellate court first recognized Rule 804(b)(6) as the law of Illinois. People v. Melchor, 362 Ill. App. 3d 335, 345 (2005). This court confirmed the appellate court’s recognition of the doctrine in People v. Stechly, 225 Ill. 2d 246, 268-69 (2007).

However, defendant argues that Stechly adopted the doctrine only in the context of testimonial statements to be analyzed under Crawford. The doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing is not limited to evidentiary questions that raise Crawford concerns. Rather, Rule 804(b)(6) is a general exception to the hearsay rule.

We have already expressed that the rule is coextensive with the common law doctrine. Stechly, 225 Ill. 2d at 272-73.

This conclusion is based on the Supreme Court’s acknowledgment that Rule 804(b)(b) codifies the forfeiture doctrine. Davis v. Washington, 547 U.S. 813, 833, 165 L. Ed. 2d 224, 244, 126 S. Ct. 2266, 2280 (2006).

Therefore, although left unsaid in Stechly as a matter of Illinois law, we now expressly recognize that the doctrine serves both as an exception to the hearsay rule and to extinguish confrontation clause claims.

Traditionally, most hearsay exceptions allow the admission of non-testimonial evidence. Crawford, 541 U.S. at 56, 158 L. Ed. 2d at 195, 124 S. Ct. at 1367. Defendant provides no argument, other than a possible lack of reliability, for why the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine should not also permit non-testimonial statements.

As we next discuss, lack of reliability is an insufficient rationale. Therefore, we hold that the doctrine may be applied to admit both testimonial and non-testimonial statements.

Turning to reliability, defendant misapprehends the purpose of the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine by arguing for requiring indicia of reliability.

Had Katherine not been made unavailable by defendant’s wrongdoing, she might have testified as to the threat defendant made against her. Defendant would have then had an opportunity to test Katherine’s reliability by cross-examining her, perhaps asking why she did not go to police if she really thought she was in danger. He could have also asked whether she fabricated the threat because she was angry with defendant.

Under the circuit court’s findings, however, defendant forfeited his ability to challenge the reliability of Katherine’s statements by improperly preventing her from testifying. Requiring additional indicia of reliability would, therefore, undermine the equitable considerations at the center of the doctrine.

Nor is reliability a significant consideration with respect to Jennifer’s testimony relating her conversation with Katherine. Unlike Katherine, Jennifer was present and able to testify. Thus, defendant had every opportunity to demonstrate that Jennifer was exaggerating, or even fabricating, the conversation she had with Katherine.

Defendant cross-examined Jennifer, pointed out to the jury the seemingly contradictory dates given for the phone conversation and asked Jennifer why, if she thought Katherine was upset and serious about the threat, she did not call the police after the conversation. Notwithstanding such arguments, a reasonable jury could conclude, and we can presume did conclude, that Jennifer was telling the truth and that Katherine indeed reported that defendant had threatened her.

The jury was aided in this effort by the State’s entering into evidence defendant’s letter, and the credit report found in Mary’s bedroom, which could be construed to support the conclusion that Jennifer was reliably relaying what Katherine had told her. I

n summary, the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine by its application obviates the need to consider reliability.

Under the doctrine, defendant had the opportunity to challenge the reliability of Jennifer’s testimony through cross-examination. Further, by his own wrongdoing, defendant forfeited his right to challenge the reliability of Katherine’s statements to Jennifer.

Accordingly, we hold that so long as the declarant’s statements are relevant and otherwise admissible, statements admitted under the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine need not reflect additional indicia of reliability.

Additionally, based on the testimony elicited at the hearing, discussed above, we cannot say that the circuit court’s finding that defendant caused Katherine to be unavailable was arbitrary or unreasonable.

The circuit court, therefore, did not abuse its discretion in granting the State’s motion to allow Jennifer’s testimony.

Here is the Background section, which actually appears earlier in the ruling:

 Defendant was convicted of killing his sister, Katherine Tsao, and Katherine’s husband, James. He was also convicted of killing his parents, Terrence and Mary Hanson. The bodies of the four victims were found in James and Katherine’s home (the Tsao home) on September 29, 2005. Katherine and James had been bludgeoned. Terrence and Mary had been shot in the head.

Police later determined that Terrence and Mary had been shot in their own home (the Hanson home) and then had been wrapped in tarps and transported to the Tsao home. An investigation into the murders led police to the defendant after police spoke with defendant’s other sister, Jennifer Williams.


Jennifer told police that Katherine telephoned her six weeks prior to the murders, to tell Jennifer that defendant had been engaged in a scheme to obtain credit in their parents’ names. Katherine also told Jennifer that defendant had threatened Katherine by saying that if she told their father what defendant had been doing, he would kill her.


The investigation quickly centered on defendant, leading to his arrest. Prior to trial defendant filed several motions in limine, mostly attempting to prevent admission of opinion and hearsay testimony stemming from the investigation. One of these motions sought to prevent reference to Jennifer’s belief that defendant was responsible for the crime. This motion was denied. The State also filed a motion in limine seeking to admit testimony from Jennifer regarding her phone conversation with Katherine six weeks before the murders. The circuit court granted this motion over defendant’s objection.....

Defendant has challenged both of these rulings. The case proceeded to trial. At the guilt phase of the trial, the following evidence was heard.


Chiuchih Tsao, James’s brother, testified that he and James worked together at a trading company. The last time he saw James and Katherine alive was around 5 p.m. on the day of the murders, when the two left work for the day. He then testified that James did not show up for work the next day. He thought it very strange that James did not arrive for work, so he went to the Tsao home.


When he arrived, he first rang the bell. Then, when no one answered, he peered in a window. From the window, Tsao saw a woman on the floor with blood around her.


He called his daughter, who, when she arrived at the house, called the police. The fire department arrived first and broke down the front door. Tsao testified that he saw a person sitting on the couch when he went into the house. He went upstairs but did not see anyone there. At that time police asked him to leave the house.


During his testimony, Tsao also identified a watch that he had bought for James. John Eul, an Aurora firefighter, then testified to the events following the emergency call to the Tsao home. Eul testified that when he and his partner arrived, they forced down the front door and entered the house. Inside they saw the bodies of Katherine, James, and Mary. Eul testified that they then determined the scene was not safe and exited the house.


Katherine Von Holten, Mary’s coworker and friend, testified that she became worried when Mary did not show up for work on September 29. She testified that Mary had not called in to say she would be late. After noon, Von Holten called Mary at her house phone and cell phone but received no answer. At that point she and another coworker drove to the Hanson home. They entered the Hanson home with the help of a keypad code provided by Jennifer Williams. Inside the home, they noticed nothing out of the ordinary, other than a strong fire burning in the fireplace. Mary’s coworkers then left a note for Mary. The note was left next to a note, written by defendant, which read: “Mom, dad, see you Sunday. Have fun in Galena.”


Next to this note was some cash. The note included a postscript that indicated this money was for “payment this month.” While Von Holten was at the Hanson home, Mary’s nephew, Bob Stutelberg, arrived. Von Holten testified that Stutelberg also looked through the house. Stutelberg then drove the three of them to the Tsao home. By the time they arrived, emergency personnel had already arrived. Stutelberg testified that defendant called him the morning of September 29. He testified defendant told him he was on his way to Midway Airport to catch a flight. Defendant asked if he would make it in time. Stutelberg testified defendant was going to be flying to California. He also testified that defendant mentioned he did not get much sleep the previous night, as his mattress was “rotten.” I

n a second telephone call from defendant, defendant informed Stutelberg that he was at the airport and was going to make his flight. Stutelberg also testified that on September 29 he received a call from one of Terrence’s coworkers. The coworker told Stutelberg that Terrence had missed a meeting that morning. Stutelberg testified that it was unusual for Terrence to miss meetings. Stutelberg tried contacting Terrence and Mary by phone, but was unable to reach them. At this time, Stutelberg drove to the Hanson house, where he encountered Mary’s coworkers. Stutelberg, too, mentioned that other than the fire in the fireplace, nothing appeared out of the ordinary in the house. Stutelberg then accompanied Mary’s coworkers to the Tsao home. Stutelberg further testified that between 5:30 and 6 p.m. he called defendant on his cell phone to tell him that the police were saying they found four bodies in the Tsao home. Stutelberg turned the phone over to Detective Nilles of the Aurora police department, who had a conversation with the defendant.


Christine Undesser testified that she and the defendant had gone out together on September 28, the night of the murders. She testified that she and defendant were out from 7 p.m. until around 9:30 p.m. During the evening defendant mentioned that he was flying to California to meet with Allison Beck, his ex-fiancée. Defendant drove Undesser to her home, arriving around 10 p.m. She and defendant talked for 15 minutes and then defendant left.


Allison Beck testified that she and defendant had known each other for six years. They began dating in 2002 and eventually decided to get married. When they were engaged, she and defendant moved to Illinois from Phoenix, living with defendant’s parents. Beck testified that during the time they lived together, she had seen defendant looking through papers on Terrence’s desk. She also testified that defendant had mentioned he would get an inheritance if his parents ever passed away. In 2004, Beck broke off her engagement to defendant. At some point she moved to California, yet remained in contact with defendant. She testified that during the time they were dating, defendant was spending more money and buying nicer things. I

n May 2005, Beck inquired about defendant’s finances and he replied that he was doing very well at his job. However, Beck also had spoken with Katherine several times in August 2005. As a result of these conversations, Beck checked her credit. During one phone conversation, defendant asked if Beck had been speaking with Katherine. Beck responded, falsely, that she had not been talking with Katherine.


According to Beck, defendant responded, “If I ever find out, you are going to get it.” Beck asked him if that was a threat. Defendant replied, “It’s a fact.” Beck then testified about the week leading up to the night of the murders. She had invited defendant to a concert in Los Angeles.


Defendant had agreed to go, and planned to fly to California on September 29. Beck testified defendant had told her his flight left Chicago at 9:30 a.m. and that he would be leaving his house at 6:30 a.m. in order to arrive at the airport in time.


On the evening before he was to fly to Los Angeles, defendant called Beck around 11:30 p.m., Central time. Defendant said he had a bad connection, and asked Beck to call him back on his parents’ home phone number. Beck did call him, and Terrence answered the phone at first. Defendant then answered another phone in the house, and Terrence hung up. Beck and defendant then had a conversation about his trip to California. The next morning, defendant again called Beck to say that he was running late to the airport because of traffic, but that he was going to be on a later flight.


When defendant arrived, Beck asked him what he did on the plane and defendant replied that he slept the entire time. He said he did not know why he was so tired. Deborah Chereskin, a neighbor of the Hansons, testified that she took her dog out in the backyard at 1:50 a.m. on September 29. Chereskin’s backyard abuts the backyard of the Hanson house. Chereskin testified that when she took her dog out, all of the lights in the Hanson house were turned on, including the basement window where defendant’s bedroom is located. State’s witnesses then testified regarding the crime scene at the Tsao home.


Sergeant Nisha Kalra, an evidence technician and photographer, testified to the layout of the Tsao home, and identified several pictures depicting the location and position of the victims’ bodies, a laptop computer, bloodspatters and other forensic evidence. Detective Christopher Berard, of the computer forensics division of the Naperville police, testified that the hard drive taken from the computer found near James’s body was last accessed at 10:43 p.m. on September 28.


Next, Jennifer Williams, sister to both Katherine and defendant, testified as to defendant’s spending habits in the months leading up to the murders. Williams also testified to the conversation she had with Katherine six weeks before the murders. In that conversation Katherine told her that defendant had admitted to opening up credit accounts in his parents’ names and had charged around $80,000 to these accounts. Defendant had admitted this both to Katherine and to Mary. Defendant promised to pay the money back and asked that Katherine and Mary not tell Terrence. Williams testified that Katherine told defendant she was going to tell Terrence anyway. At that point Katherine told Williams that defendant had threatened her, saying, “If you tell dad I’ll f***ing kill you.” Katherine called Williams that same day to tell her about the confrontation. Williams testified that Katherine called her again the following day. Katherine called to say she did not go to work because “she was really freaked out” about what defendant had said the day before. Over the next few weeks, Katherine and Williams continued to talk about the situation over the phone, but Williams did not provide any more specifics. Williams also testified that on the night of the murders, Katherine had called her twice, at 10 and 10:06 p.m. Williams was out of the house the first time Katherine called, but Katherine spoke to Williams’s daughter.


The second time Katherine called, Williams did not answer, as she was getting ready for bed. The following morning, Williams tried calling Terrence to ask about a home repair issue, but there was no answer. Williams testified she also tried to reach Mary at work, as well as Mary’s cell phone and Katherine’s cell phone.


She called again later in the morning, and then made repeated attempts to call each of them. She also spoke with Bob Stutelberg, and she asked him to drive over to house to check on her parents. Williams testified she also spoke with Mary’s coworkers and provided them the entry code for the garage door. Later, from the Tsao home, Mary’s coworkers put Williams on the phone with Detective Nilles, of the Aurora police department. During that conversation, Williams told Detective Nilles that she “was really worried because my brother had threatened my sister.” Williams testified as to a copy of Mary’s credit report she found when cleaning out Mary’s bedroom dresser. The credit report was dated August 13, 2005, which was the day before Katherine called her about defendant’s threat.


Lisa Stewart, a custodian of records for Southwest Airlines, testified that the airline’s records showed defendant had purchased a ticket from Chicago to Los Angeles, departing at 11:15 a.m. and arriving at 1:30 p.m. A return flight was booked at the same time, for flight on October 2, leaving Los Angeles at 11:15 a.m. and arriving in Chicago at 5:10 p.m. Stewart also attempted to testify to a note included in those records. That note read “if passenger checks in, please contact the LAPD ***. Passenger is very dangerous.”


This testimony drew an objection from defense counsel and the objection was sustained. Stewart then testified to another reservation defendant had made for a flight on September 30, leaving Los Angeles at 7:15 p.m. and arriving in Chicago at 1:05 a.m. on October 1. Stewart testified defendant did not board either of defendant’s booked return flights. Sarah Voss, an airlines record custodian for United Airlines, testified that defendant had booked a flight on September 29, leaving Los Angeles at 11:05 p.m.


Voss confirmed that defendant did board this flight. The State called several witnesses to explain how various evidence samples were collected and how the case was investigated. The witnesses, mainly police officers, testified that bloodstains were found in the Hanson home, that the Hansons’ mattress had been switched with a mattress in the guest bedroom, that the murderer had attempted to repair the headboard where bullets had penetrated and that a cordless drill was found.


One witness testified that a bullet fragment was found in an attic joist near the Hansons’ bed. The State later argued this evidence demonstrated the calculated nature of the crime.

John Collins, a firearms and tool mark expert, testified that the bullet found in the joist matched other bullets found within Terrence and Mary.


Collins also testified as to tool marks made in an attempt to repair the headboard of the Hansons’ bed and testified that the plastic garbage bag found under Terrence’s head came from a box of garbage bags found at the Hanson house. He compared markings on a plastic zip lock bag found in defendant’s car, containing green latex gloves, to a box of zip lock bags at the Hanson home, and concluded that the bag found in the car came from the same manufacturer as the box of bags in the Hanson home.


Dr. Scott Denton, a medical examiner, testified to his autopsies of James and Katherine Tsao. He described in detail the various injuries sustained by both victims. He confirmed that James’s and Katherine’s deaths were caused by skull and brain injuries as a result of blunt trauma to the head. He also testified that James lacked any indication of defensive wounds. However, Denton did conclude that injuries to Katherine’s forearms were defensive wounds. Denton also testified that Katherine’s ring finger had been broken. He opined it was broken by being bent backwards. On cross-examination, Denton acknowledged that her ring finger had no indentation from a ring and no cuts or bruises. Denton further testified that he did not know if Katherine was wearing a ring when she was killed.


Similarly, Dr. Jeff Harkey, chief forensic pathologist for the Du Page County coroner’s office, testified as to his autopsies of Terrence and Mary Hanson. Harkey concluded that each victim died as a result of a single gunshot wound to the head. Harkey also concluded, based on a stippling pattern on Terrence’s head, that a second gunshot was fired near Terrence’s head but did not hit him.


Craig Morehouse, a Wisconsin state trooper, testified that he initiated a traffic stop of defendant’s vehicle north of Madison, Wisconsin. He further testified that he informed defendant that there was a warrant for his arrest in Illinois, and took defendant to a nearby county sheriff’s department. Reynaldo Rivera, an evidence technician with the Aurora police department, testified that he examined defendant’s vehicle after his arrest. Rivera testified he began by taking photographs, and then examined the contents of the vehicle. Specifically, he testified that he found a clear zip lock sandwich bag containing rubber or vinyl gloves. The gloves had a brown, reddish flaky substance on them. Rivera also found a gold Rolex watch in the center console of the vehicle along with a silver, princess-cut diamond ring.


Tamara Camp, a DNA analyst, testified that she tested swabs taken from both crime scenes, as well as from items found in defendant’s vehicle the night he was stopped by Wisconsin police. Camp identified several samples that contained DNA profiles matching those of James and Katherine Tsao and Terrence and Mary Hanson. Profiles matching Terrence and Mary were found both at the Hanson home as well as inside Terrence and Mary’s SUV. Camp testified that she identified a DNA profile matching James on the watch found in defendant’s SUV. Camp also testified that although she noticed a brown speck on the ring found in defendant’s SUV, she was unable to identify a DNA profile. Lastly, Camp testified that stains on the green gloves found in defendant’s vehicle tested positive for blood, and that the gloves contained a DNA profile matching that of Terrence. Michael Nilles, a detective with the Aurora police department, testified as to his investigation of the murders. When he arrived at the Hanson home, he encountered Belinda Robinson, Mary’s coworker who had gone to the home to check on Mary. Belinda handed Nilles a cell phone. On the other end of the phone was defendant’s sister, Jennifer Williams. Nilles testified that this phone conversation led him to consider defendant a suspect.


After that conversation, Mary’s nephew, Bob Stutelberg, gave his cell phone to Nilles, telling Nilles that defendant was on the phone. During this conversation, Nilles confronted defendant with, among other things, the statement “Jennifer thinks you did this” and told defendant that he knew defendant had an argument with Katherine over his using his parent’s identities to get credit cards. Nilles informed defendant that he was sending two detectives to Los Angeles to meet with defendant. Nilles testified to a series of calls between himself and defendant, including a conversation in which defendant acknowledged being at the airport and Nilles told defendant that it seemed as if he was running from the police, which defendant denied.

Nilles further testified that on Friday morning, September 30, he received a phone call from defendant, who indicated he was still in Los Angeles. However, following a phone call with the FBI, Nilles had reason to believe defendant was actually back in Illinois, and instructed local police agencies to look for defendant traveling north toward Wisconsin. Following defendant’s apprehension in Wisconsin, Nilles traveled there and interviewed defendant. Defendant was advised of his Miranda rights, which defendant waived. Defendant repeatedly denied being involved in the murders. The State also questioned several witnesses regarding the GPS device recovered from defendant’s vehicle. The State elicited testimony that tracked the movements of defendant’s vehicle on the evening prior to the murders as well as its movements the morning before the bodies were discovered and the following day, when defendant returned to Illinois.


Testimony also revealed the device was turned off between 7:30 p.m. the day of the murders and approximately 9:30 a.m. the day after. During the trial, the State also called several witnesses to establish the basis for the identity theft charges against defendant. As defendant is not challenging the evidence or the convictions on these counts, we need not describe this testimony in detail. For the defense, Jennifer Cones, a forensic scientist certified as an expert in fingerprint identification and comparison, testified that she examined a fingerprint found on the bag containing bloodstained gloves that was found in defendant’s car. Comparing this print to defendant’s fingerprints, she concluded that the two did not match.


However, on cross-examination, she acknowledged that she did not compare the print to the fingerprints of Terrence and Mary Hanson. Defendant testified next. He acknowledged that he had used his mother’s and father’s names in order to secure credit, which he then used to purchase various items. He then admitted that in the middle of August his parents confronted him with credit reports and defendant admitted that he had been charging purchases to these credit cards. According to defendant, he convinced Mary that he would stop and that he would begin to pay her back. When he was separately confronted by Terrence, defendant testified, his father agreed to allow defendant to take out a consolidation loan in Terrence’s name, in order to pay off some of the current debt. Defendant then testified as to his whereabouts the evening of September 28, prior to the murders. He met with Christine Undesser at a bar and returned to his parents’ house, where he was living, around 11 p.m.

Defendant testified that Terrence was awake in his office when defendant arrived home. Around 11:15 defendant called Allison Beck in Los Angeles. The connection was not good, and defendant asked Allison to call him back on his parents’ house phone. When Allison called, Terrence answered, but defendant answered shortly after and told Terrence, “I got it.” Defendant then talked to Allison until approximately 11:30. Defendant testified that after this phone call, he put a movie into his DVD player and fell asleep during the movie, probably around 1:30 a.m. Defendant testified that the following morning, he woke up, went to a convenience store to buy cigarettes, took a shower, finished packing for his trip to Los Angeles and left the house. He testified he planned on driving to James and Katherine’s house in order to return Katherine’s wedding ring and the watch belonging to James.


According to defendant, Katherine had taken the ring off while painting some flower pots. As for the watch, defendant testified that Katherine had wanted to order Terrence a watch and needed to know how many links were needed for the chain. According to defendant, Katherine was going to order the watch because Terrence did not always do things in a timely fashion. If Katherine helped get the right measurements, she would order the watch so Terrence would not have to do anything. Katherine had James’s watch in order to compare it to Terrence’s wrist for sizing purposes and defendant testified that Katherine left the watch at the Hanson home. Defendant testified that although he intended to return the items before he went to the airport, he was in a hurry to get to the airport and forgot to stop by their house.

On the way to the airport, defendant realized that he did not have his driver’s license and that he was not going to be able to get to his flight on time. He returned to his parents’ home to get his license and called to book a new reservation to Los Angeles. On his second attempt to get to the airport, defendant called Bob Stutelburg to ask where to park and whether he thought defendant would be able to make his flight in time. Defendant testified that he did get to the airport in time and boarded his flight to Los Angeles

. While in Los Angeles, defendant learned from Stutelberg that there were four persons dead in James and Katherine’s house. Defendant denied killing any of the victims. The jury returned a verdict of guilty as to all four counts of first degree murder. The jury also found defendant guilty of the armed robbery of James and Katherine Tsao and of the aggravated kidnapping of Terrence and Mary Hanson.


The jury found defendant guilty of the identity theft of Terrence and Mary Hanson. In the eligibility phase of defendant’s sentencing trial, the jury returned a verdict finding defendant to be eligible for a death sentence.The verdict was based on defendant being 18 years or older at the time of the murders and that the deaths were a result of the intent to kill more than one person, the murders were committed in a cold, calculated and premeditated manner pursuant to a preconceived plan scheme or design, James and Katherine were killed in the course of an armed robbery and Mary and Terrence were killed in the course of an aggravated kidnapping. At the sentencing hearing itself, the State first argued that the fact there were multiple victims and the fact that the murder was committed in a calculated and premeditated manner were both sufficient aggravating factors.


The State also argued that defendant’s criminal history, which included home invasions, retail theft and property damage, was an aggravating factor. The State referred to testimony from witnesses detailing other incidents involving violence and threats made by defendant. Lastly, the State asked the jury to consider the impact statements of the victims’ family members. In mitigation, counsel for defendant argued that the murder was committed while defendant was under the influence of an extreme mental or emotional disturbance. Defendant relied primarily on the testimony of Dr. Dawkins, who concluded that defendant would not be a risk of harm to others in a structured environment such as prison. After weighing the evidence in aggravation and mitigation, the jury returned a verdict that death was the appropriate sentence. The court declined to enter a written order setting forth a basis for disagreement with the jury’s verdict, as permitted by section 9–1(g) of the Criminal Code of 1961 (720 ILCS 5/9–1(g) (West 2006)).

Instead, the circuit court concurred in the decision of the jury and sentenced defendant to death. The court found that the convictions for armed robbery and aggravated kidnapping merged into the convictions for murder and so did not enter sentences on those counts.


The circuit court did sentence defendant to concurrent terms of 15 years for defendant's identity theft convictions. Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 603 and section 9–1(i) of the Criminal Code, defendant now appeals directly to this court. 134 Ill. 2d R. 603; 720 ILCS 5/9–1(i) (West 2006).


http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2010/07/drews-law-may-let-drew-skate.html

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/plainfieldsun/news/2521066,6_7_NA23_PETERSON_S1-100723.article
Judge: Clock hasn't run out on Peterson's gun charge
uly 23, 2010
By JOE HOSEY jhosey@stmedianetwork.com

JOLIET -- Drew Peterson's murder trial is on hold, but the felony gun charge the cops arrested him on more than two years ago looks like it's finally on the fast track.

Judge Richard Schoenstedt tried to kick-start the trial into action Monday morning, but Peterson's attorney, Joel Brodsky, was not prepared.

Brodsky argued Monday that a speedy trial term had lapsed and that Peterson should skate on the charges.

Peterson was arrested in May 2008 for allegedly possessing an assault rifle with an illegally short barrel. Brodsky claimed Peterson was allowed to carry the gun because he was a Bolingbrook police sergeant.

Peterson bailed himself out of jail the same day he was arrested and had a right to go to trial within 160 days, not including time off the clock for delays his attorneys created.

But in November 2008, Schoenstedt dropped the charges when prosecutors refused to surrender internal communications to Peterson's lawyers. The appellate court determined Schoenstedt goofed and sent the case back last week.

In the meantime, Peterson returned to jail in May 2009 for allegedly killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio. His murder trial was set to start a week and a half ago, but a last minute appeal by State's Attorney James Glasgow put this case in limbo.

The way Brodsky had the days counted on the gun case deadline, the prosecution blew its chance to nail Peterson by two days. The judge didn't buy it, but to be on the safe side, he offered to start the trial immediately. After a lengthy, private conference with Peterson, Brodsky backed off.
If I had two more weeks, I could be ready to go to trial," Brodsky said. "I couldn't get ready in one day. That wouldn't be fair to Drew."

Familiar face returns

While Brodsky was the only one of Peterson's six current attorneys present in court Monday, a lawyer from the former cop's past turned up and stuck around all morning. Andrew Abood, who abandoned Peterson's murder case, showed up to quit the gun case, too.

While Abood was filing a motion to withdraw, Brodsky filed a motion signed by Peterson to fire him. Schoenstedt accepted Abood's paper instead of Brodsky's.

Asked if he was subpoenaed to testify at Peterson's murder trial, Abood said, "I heard I might be on the list," and added, "I don't think I'll be called, I'll tell you that."

Abood, who jumped ship on the murder case after clashing with Brodsky, sat next to Peterson in the jury box prior to Monday's hearing. The two men spoke for more than 20 minutes, smiling and laughing throughout.

"Drew and I are fine. Drew's great," Abood said of their conversation. He also said he offered to buy Brodsky lunch.

"I can buy my own lunch," Brodsky said.
Constitutional issue?

Of the gun charge being back in court, Brodsky accused Glasgow of trampling on the constitutional rights of not only his client, but everyone in Will County.

"Will County residents don't have the right to a speedy trial, the right to confront witnesses, the right to bear arms," he said, pointing out that Peterson must remain in jail during what might prove a lengthy appeal process, that Glasgow is trying to get hearsay evidence allowed at Peterson's murder trial, and that Peterson was charged with possessing an assault rifle he supposedly was permitted to carry as a Bolingbrook cop.

"Does Mr. Glasgow think Will County residents have any constitutional rights?" Brodsky asked, making Peterson a symbolic victim of the state's attorney's tyranny.

"Drew just happens to be the poster boy, so to speak," Brodsky said. "If (the Constitution) doesn't apply to him, it doesn't apply to anybody. Everybody in Will County should be concerned."

Glasgow's spokesman, Charles B. Pelkie, took exception to Brodsky's criticism.

"These are comments that are not befitting of the profession that he's in," Pelkie said.

"Joel should argue these points in court," he said. "When he does argue these points in court, he's often wrong."

DON'T MISS THE DANA PRETZER SHOW TONIGHT.  EMAIL DANA WITH QUESTIONS FOR RITA COSBY:

dana@scaredmonkeys.com

(http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o100/klaasen3/Sub9%20June%202010/Pretzer081710.jpg)

Aug 23, 2010 2:01 pm US/Central Peterson Back In Court For Murder, Gun Cases
Murder Case Is On Appeal, Illegal Gun Case Is Still Pending

As they await a court ruling so former Bolingbrook police sergeant Drew Peterson's murder trial can resume, defense attorneys also busy are fighting felony gun charges against him.

Peterson is charged with the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in a dry bathtub in March 2004. Her death was originally ruled an accident, but was reclassified as a homicide after Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy, disappeared in 2007.

Separately, Peterson is charged with keeping an illegal gun, specifically an AR-15 rifle on which the barrel is illegally short. Peterson is also charged with illegally transferring the firearm to his son.

The gun was seized during the investigations into Savio's death and Stacy Peterson's disappearance.

Will County Judge Richard Schoendstedt dismissed the gun charges in 2008, after prosecutors refused to hand over key internal documents. Peterson's attorneys had argued the gun charges amounted to vindictive and selective prosecution.

But in February of this year, an appellate panel revived the gun charges. Defense attorneys attempted again to get the charges tossed, arguing that a federal exemption allowed Peterson to possess the gun because he was a police officer.

At a hearing Monday before Judge Schoenstedt, Peterson's attorneys called three witnesses from the Bolingbrook Police Department.

One witness, Bolingbrook police Sgt. Jeff Drabek, said he and Peterson had both been members of the REACT SWAT team, which had been authorized to carry military-style automatic weapons such as the AR-15. He also said because the Bolingbrook Police Department did not have enough of the weapons in its arsenal to accommodate the whole REACT team, the officers were permitted to buy their own weapons.

Prosecutors contend that the federal exemption on weapons has to do with police officers being allowed to carry concealed firearms while off duty, not with modified military-style weapons such as the one Peterson had.

In a separate motion, the defense is also mounting a Second Amendment argument against the gun charges. The state statute that bans automatic weapons with barrels under a certain length is being challenged on claims that it violates the right to bear arms, following the McDonald v. Chicago ruling in the U.S. Supreme Court that forced the City of Chicago to toss its handgun ban.

Prosecutors won a continuance for a hearing on that defense argument, saying the defense had failed to notify the Illinois Attorney General about the Second Amendment motion.

In a separate hearing Monday, Will County Judge Stephen B. White said he planned to continue to hold the jury that had been picked for Peterson's murder trial, but he doesn't know for how long.

Peterson's trial was delayed last month, following an appeal by prosecutors. Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow is appealing Judge White's ruling regarding which statements will be allowed into evidence under the hearsay exception being used in the case.

A jury was impaneled before the appeal was announced.

Meanwhile, White is retiring, and says another judge will be taking over the Peterson murder case. He said no further status hearings on the case are expected until a ruling is issued on prosecutors' appeal.

Peterson sat quietly in a blue Will County Jail jumpsuit with shackles on his legs during the two hearings, which were held in different courtrooms. Judge Schoenstedt allowed defense attorneys to have Peterson's handcuffs removed as they called witnesses for the hearing on the gun charge.
http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/drew.peterson.court.2.1874615.html

(http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm166/crankycrankerson/Stacy%20Peterson%20-%20Kathleen%20Savio%20%20-IL-/AR-15%20The%20Altered%20Weapon/82310courtforGunCharge.jpg)

Drew Peterson's son suspended after testifying on dad's weapons

Attorney questions timing of move by Oak Brook police

By Steve Schmadeke and Stacy St. Clair, Tribune reporters
August 28, 2010

Three days after testifying that he let his father, Drew Peterson, hide weapons in his home, Oak Brook police officer Stephen Peterson was suspended from his job, village officials said.

The Thursday decision was directly related to Stephen's testimony, a source said.

Stephen Peterson, 31, has been suspended at least five times in the six years he's been an Oak Brook police officer, according to state records and prior police statements.

His father, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, is charged with murder in the 2004 drowning of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, as well as with owning an illegal gun. Peterson is also the sole suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

On Monday, his son testified that Peterson called him shortly after Stacy disappeared, then brought two bags holding two or three guns into his North Aurora house.

"They were his favorites and he didn't want anything to happen to them," Stephen testified Monday.

Stephen Peterson later turned the weapons over to Illinois State Police, according to testimony from a retired state police investigator.

Oak Brook Village Manager David Niemeyer said Peterson's son was placed on paid administrative leave Thursday pending the outcome of an internal investigation. He declined to comment on why Stephen was suspended, saying it was a personnel matter.

Drew Peterson's attorney Joel Brodsky called the move "pure vindictiveness" and "baseless" and said no new information had emerged during Monday's hearing for Oak Brook to act on. He suggested the move was intended to get at Drew and noted that Stephen was caring for his two younger siblings.

"What's next — they're going to catch (Drew Peterson's daughter) Lacy running across the street and charge her with jaywalking?" Brodsky said.

Stephen Peterson's prior suspensions have been for running improper database checks on 10 village employees, driving an Oak Brook squad car and appearing in uniform before a grand jury investigating Stacy's disappearance, making a rude comment to a citizen and sending an inappropriate message on a police computer, according to past police statements.

He could not be reached for comment.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/southsouthwest/ct-met-peterson-son-suspended-0829-20100828,0,5208008.story

Oh BOOHOODREW.....your son Stephen is a 31 year old man...NOT a kid. Hey Drew.....your KID is 31, how old does that make you  ::MonkeyDevil:: You effin POS

Chicago Sun Times
September 7, 2010 Tuesday
 
Drew Peterson: Back off my kids
 
Drew Peterson is making an impassioned media plea on behalf of his children; specifically his son, Stephen, an Oak Brook policeman who is on suspension because of what Peterson claims is the result of "malicious prosecution."

Drew Peterson, who is in jail awaiting trial on charges of murdering his third wife, Kathleen Savio, dispatched a letter to his attorney Joel Brodsky urging the press to "watch over" what he considers vindictive legal proceedings against Stephen, the caregiver of four of Drew Peterson's six children.

Oak Brook Police are investigating Stephen Peterson's court testimony that he accepted guns from his father after Drew Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy, vanished in 2007.

The letter, which was given to Sneed by Brodsky, contains references to five of Drew Peterson's six children. Missing is a reference to Peterson's eldest child, Eric, the product of marriage to his first wife, Carol, and from whom he is estranged. (There were no children from Peterson's marriage to his second wife, Victoria.) Peterson is also a prime suspect in the disappearance of Stacy, the mother of his two youngest children, Anthony and Lacy Ann. The following is an excerpt of Drew Peterson's letter, spelling and punctuation errors and all. The entire letter can be viewed online at suntimes.com.

Its been almost three years since my wife Stacy went missing with the Illinois State Police and the Will County States Attorney's Office launching probably the largest, most obsessive and expensive investigation in U.S. history. The investigation has thus far turned up rumors, gossip hearsay and out right lies and more recently the bodies of a lot of raccoons and possums all at the expense of the hard working Illinois tax payer. This investigation has threatened, harassed, pestered and hounded just about every loved one, friend, family member, fellow employee and love interest I have ever know. . . . On several occasions my home and property have been searched and vandalized by these obsessive thugs with my little children being terrorized in the process. Our heroes. I was taken from my family without being able to say goodbye to my kids with my kids being also taken into custody and turned over to The Department of Children and family Services. This process would be scary for an adult much less a four and five year old. My 31 year old son Stephen, an Oak Brook Police Officer, stepped up and took custody of my four kids just after having a child of his own. My son Stephen is a good man and a dedicated father and policeman. Stephen got his Bachelors degree in law enforcement at Western Illinois University just so he could fulfill his dream of becoming a policeman. My little girl Lacy Ann just started Kindergarten with her daddy unable to be at her first day of school. Anthony is now in 2nd grade full of life and love just happy to be a kid with his friends. Thomas is now a senior, number one in his class, and now the Vice President of the National Honor Society. He is an athlete and plays trumpet in his school and area church bands. Kristopher is also an athlete and an honor roll student now in his Junior year of high school. All my children are exceptional kids just wanting a happy childhood after their little worlds were turned upside down almost three years ago. It's not bad enough their father is in jail being held unlawfully after the state appealed a Will County Judges decision to not allow bad evidence at trial, but now my children's well being and security is now in jeopardy again. For the third time, in less than three years, my son Stephen is again being brought up on departmental charges of misconduct by Oak Brook Chief Sheehan stemming from trumped up gun charges I'm now facing in a Will County Court. The charges Stephen faced in the past were brought when he took a squad car to a Will County grand Jury while on duty under supeona for the case against me. The second charge was for the use of the departmental computer which were said to be unauthorized. Nothing could be more ridiculous. . . . I have no doubt that the Illinois State Police and the Will County States Attorney's Office are also involved in this action against my son in an attempt to get at me. . . . During a prior action against my son Chief Sheehan referred to Stephen as "Drew" at least three times during the hearing so we know where his head is. . . . I'm not looking for any sympathy for me. I can handle myself. But I am asking the media to closely watch over these proceedings to help protect my son Stephen, being my children's caregiver, against the malicious prosecution he is now facing. What will it take to stop the madness being perpetrated against my family in an attempt to get at me. . . . Someone somewhere has to stand up and say STOP. . . . If I gave my life, which I would gladly do to protect my kids, would that stop the harassment against my family? . . . I'm devoting all my resources that I have available to fight this atrocity against my son.
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:1258100220&start=1

Sounds like the son is as big a POS as Drew. 

You got that right!!

Drew talks about his children being put in jeopardy.......duh!!!
So what in sam hell does he think he's doing by sending the media a picture of all his children. The man is as evil as a day is long. Freaking media whore!

Pfft.....what a piece of chit.  ::MonkeyCool::

http://seamusoriley.blogspot.com/2010/09/drew-peterson-letter-from-jail.html
Wednesday, September 08, 2010
Drew Peterson Letter from Jail

(http://bestsmileys.com/angry1/5.gif)


Chicago Sun Times
October 2, 2010 Saturday
 
Peterson grins as felony weapons charge fails again  
 
A Will County judge for the second time has dismissed a felony weapons charge filed against former Bolingbrook police officer Drew Peterson.

The ruling Friday by Judge Richard Schoenstedt prompted a broad grin from Peterson, though the 56-year-old ex-cop still remains jailed on charges he drowned third wife Kathleen Savio in 2004.

But the decision could help his police officer son, Stephen, who faces dismissal from the Oak Brook Police Department for allegedly taking the modified AR-15 rifle from his father before a search of Drew Peterson's Bolingbrook home in November 2007.

Oak Brook police in August suspended Stephen Peterson from his job after he acknowledged taking the rifle and at least one other gun from his father just after the Oct. 28, 2007, disappearance of Drew Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy.

Schoenstedt's dismissal of the gun charge bolsters Stephen Peterson's contention that he did nothing wrong in holding the guns for his father for several days after Stacy Peterson's disappearance, said attorney Tamara Cummings.

"It pretty much supports our position -- there never was anything improper about him taking the guns," said Cummings, who represents Stephen Peterson.

In dismissing the weapons charge against Drew Peterson, Schoenstedt ruled that prosecutors hadn't shown he was barred from owning the short-barrel, assault-style AR-15 rifle.

"Under different circumstances, the officers of the Bolingbrook Police Department would have been able to possess . . . this very weapon," Schoenstedt wrote in his ruling.

Defense attorneys had argued that Peterson as a police officer was allowed by federal law to own the weapon, which they said he used in his law enforcement duties.

"It was absolutely the correct decision to make," said Joel Brodsky, one of Peterson's attorneys.

Will County prosecutors in May 2008 charged Drew Peterson with felony unlawful use of a weapon, contending he had illegally modified the rifle by shortening the barrel.

Schoenstedt, however, dismissed that charge in November 2008, though prosecutors appealed his ruling. An appellate court later reinstated the charge and sent the case back to Schoenstedt.

Prosecutors could still appeal the judge's latest dismissal of the charge, though a spokesman for Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow said no decision has been made.

Peterson's pending murder trial has been delayed by an appeal from prosecutors seeking to admit second-hand, hearsay statements against him from several key witnesses, including Savio herself.

Peterson remains a suspect in Stacy Peterson's still-unsolved disappearance but has not been charged. 
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:1275557139&start=11

http://www.cayleedaily.com/2010/10/drew-peterson-to-stay-in-jail-pending-trial/
Drew Peterson To Stay In Jail Pending Trial
10/07/10

Chicago Daily Herald 
November 24, 2010 Wednesday
 
Peterson’s son will learn his fate next week
 
A hearing on whether to fire Oak Brook police officer Stephen Peterson, son of murder suspect Drew Peterson, will go on as scheduled Nov. 30.

Oak Brook’s Board of Fire and Police Commissioners on Monday denied Peterson’s request for a continuance.

Peterson has been on paid leave from his $67,422-a-year position since August. Earlier this month, commissioners rejected Chief Thomas Sheahan’s motion to halt Peterson’s paychecks.

Sheahan is seeking Peterson’s dismissal.

Peterson, a six-year veteran of the force, is accused of violating department rules when he briefly stashed his father’s "favorite" guns so law enforcement authorities wouldn’t find them. He also is charged with failure to tell his superiors.

The guns included an assault rifle with a prohibited shortened barrel. Oak Brook rules limit an officer’s off-duty firearms to handguns, which must have departmental approval.

Peterson admitted under oath that he hid the guns his father brought to his house on Oct. 30, 2007 — just a few days after Drew Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy, 23, went missing. Drew Peterson, a retired Bolingbrook police sergeant, has not been charged in her disappearance, but is awaiting trial for first-degree murder in connection with the 2004 bathtub drowning of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Police raided Drew Peterson’s home two days later, on Nov. 1, 2007. Drew Peterson told them his son had the three guns and Stephen Peterson turned in the weapons.

Officer Peterson later knowingly broke department rules by talking about the internal investigation into his conduct with numerous people, including several fellow officers, Sheahan charged.

Tamara Cummings, who is Stephen Peterson’s police union attorney, has said the officer is being unfairly targeted because of his father’s notoriety. In a news release, she called the charges "meritless" and "vindictive."

But his father aside, Stephen Peterson "has a long history of disciplinary issues as an Oak Brook police officer," according to documents submitted to the Board of Fire and Police Commissioners. That disciplinary history includes a 25-day suspension without pay for running unauthorized police data checks on village employees’ cars. The 25-day suspension was later reduced.

The board is expected to hear testimony from both sides at the Nov. 30 hearing before making a decision on Peterson’s employment. If necessary, the hearing will continue to Dec. 9.

Neither Peterson’s attorney nor Charles E. Hervas, attorney for the police chief, could be reached for comment Tuesday. 
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100020825&docId=l:1309983006&start=4

This man disgusts me. His arrogance/false bravado is enough to make me gag.
I followed this case for a while but then I just couldn't stand it anymore.

I haven't read back through all of the threads so I am not privy yet as to what information our astute monkey's came up with in regards to this case.
I am wondering though if there has been any links to Drew, Stacy or possibly other family members to Spencer, Ill? Did any of them own, consider to own,  or know someone there who owned quarter horses or property in Spencer, Ill. where quarter horses were kept? TIA.

PS I am following up on research I was doing before I had taken a break from this case. It's been a while. If any other monkey would like to contribute to this line of research please do.

11:21 p.m. CST, November 30, 2010


Drew Peterson's son defends not telling anyone about receiving guns, money from his father
Hearing Tuesday on Oak Brook police chief's bid to fire Officer Stephen Peterson

Oak Brook police Officer Stephen Peterson was questioned for more than an hour Tuesday night about why he failed to notify authorities when his father, a suspect in his fourth wife's highly publicized disappearance, gave him three guns and $236,800 cash a day after she vanished

Peterson, 31, repeatedly told an attorney for Oak Brook police Chief Thomas Sheahan, who is seeking to fire him, that he didn't see any reason to share the information either with investigators or his own supervisors, even after he was subpoenaed earlier this year.

"I felt it had nothing to do with my duties as an Oak Brook police officer," Peterson said. "(My father) was upset. I was there to help him out."

Peterson, who remains on paid leave, has been brought up on three charges before the Police and Fire Commission, which began a formal hearing on them Tuesday.

(More at link with picture)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-stephen-peterson-hearing-20101130,0,228931.story

(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:5u8ATAi2l6N4tM:http://cakesbyval.net/images/2_Peas_in_a_Pod.JPG)

BOOHOODREW......too funny.   ::MonkeyDevil::
And yes,they do seem to be two peas in a pod.   ::rhino::

lol ... Siamese pigs in a blanket......

http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-stephen-peterson-hearing-december10,0,1328418.story

This is Drew's son

Oak Brook Police Officer Stephen Peterson faces disciplinary hearing
Oak Brook Police and Fire Commission expected to decide January 10th whether he should be dropped from force

OAK BROOK, Ill. —
The Oak Brook Police and Fire Commission is expected to decide on January 10th whether Officer Stephen Peterson should be dropped from the force.

The 31-year-old is the son of former Bolingbrook police officer Drew Peterson.

Drew is charged with killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio, and is suspected of playing a role in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

At a hearing last night, the Oak Brook police chief said Stephen Peterson should be fired for obstructing justice. The chief said Stephen never reported his father gave him three guns, and more than $200,000 a day after Stacy vanished.

"This should have raised a flag with Officer Peterson," said Chief Thomas Sheahan. He later added: "In my own opinion, if it was a toaster, it's a piece of evidence and he should have cooperated with state police."

This was the third time Stephen Peterson went before the commission. He has been disciplined four times before on charges ranging from running improper background checks, to sending an inappropriate message on his patrol car computer about a "female civilian."

He has been on paid leave since August.

What you wanna bet they drop his azz like a hot potato?  That is what you get when you do wrong!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/sns-ap-il--drewpeterson-son,0,5863011.story
Decision delayed on firing of Drew Peterson's son
January 10, 2011

OAK BROOK, Ill. (AP) — Suburban Chicago fire and police commissioners have delayed making a decision about whether to fire Drew Peterson's son.

Drew Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, is charged with murder in the death of his third wife and is a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth.

His son Stephen Peterson is a police officer in Oak Brook. He was suspended in August after he testified that he hid several of his father's guns after his stepmother's disappearance.

WLS-AM reports that the Oak Brook Board of Fire and Police Commissioners was supposed to continue public hearings about Stephen Peterson's employment on Monday.

But commissioners say they need more time to make a decision. They've postponed the hearing until Feb. 2.

Drew Peterson is jailed in lieu of $20 million bail.

http://www.suntimes.com/3318603-417/peterson-savio-sneed-thomas-drew.html
Drew Peterson's son takes a stand
January 16, 2011

The Peterson file . . .

Sneed has learned Thomas Peterson, son of accused wife-murderer Drew Peterson — and of Kathleen Savio, the woman Peterson is accused of killing — is taking a legal stand in defense of his father.

In an impassioned letter sent to Sneed, Thomas Peterson wrote:

“My name is Thomas Peterson and I am now 18 years old, I am an adult, I can now make my own decisions, and nobody has the right to speak for me anymore.”

† Translation: Now that he is no longer a minor, Thomas, an honor student at Bolingbrook High School, has signed a document releasing his father from all financial claims arising from the death of his mother: specifically the wrongful death suit filed on his behalf by his aunt and grandfather.

The letter states:

“I am not stupid. I am first in my class at Bolingbrook High School, an Illinois State Scholar, Vice President of the National Honor Society, and have over a 4.7 grade point average — accomplishments higher than what most people would dream of achieving.

“Because I know my father is innocent, I am releasing him from the lawsuit brought by Henry J. Savio and Anna Doman on my behalf while I was a minor.

“Nobody is pulling the wool over my eyes. I know to an absolute 1000% moral certainty that my father Drew Peterson is innocent in the death of my mother Kathleen Savio.

“Do not forget I was with my father the entire weekend that my mother died.

“How Henry J. Savio can sue my father on my behalf is just crazy. I have only met Henry J. Savio once in my entire life, and that was for five seconds at my mother’s funeral.

“Other than that he never ever came to see me, even when my mother was alive. He never called me, never wrote me, never sent me a birthday card, or gift, or a Christmas card or gift; I don’t even know what the man looks like. He should just leave me, my father, my family and my way of life alone. “As to Anna Doman, we had little contact with her while my mother was alive and none after. Anna also never called, wrote, sent a birthday card or gift. Nothing. She too should just do what she did before, and leave us alone.

“People should not say that I am some poor little kid afraid of his father. I have a great life, great friends, a great family, and I am hopefully going on to medical school following my undergraduate studies, hopefully at Harvard because I have the grades and test scores to achieve it. It is my father Drew Peterson that gave me this life.

“He supports me, loves me, and set me on the path to success (I can safely say I would not be where I am now educationally without his constant support and motivation), and I love him. I pray he will be free soon so that he can give the same drive to my brothers and sister that he gave to me, and be back with his family where he belongs.”

† Upshot: Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney, tells Sneed he plans to send the document excising Thomas Peterson’s name from the Savio suit to attorneys for the Savio family by Monday. The wrongful death suit was also filed on behalf of Thomas’ brother and Savio’s youngest son, Kristopher, 16. His name is not included in his brother’s document because he is still a minor, Brodsky said.

† Backshot: Although relatives of Savio have said Drew Peterson blocked them from having contact with the children, Brodsky vehemently denies that is true.

† Buckshot: With the exception of Peterson’s eldest son, Eric, all of Peterson’s children live in his Bolingbrook home and are cared for by Stephen Peterson, an Oak Brook police officer who is under suspension for allegedly obstructing the probe into his father’s missing fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

† Background: Kathleen Savio’s 2004 bathtub death was originally classified as an accidental drowning. But after a 2007 exhumation it was reclassified as a homicide and Drew Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, was charged with the murder.

† Foreground: Peterson, who’s been locked up since May 2009, remains in Will County Jail in lieu of $20 million bond.

For more details check out Brodsky’s website, joelbrodskylaw.com, or search “Joel A. Brodsky, attorney at law” on Facebook.

Drew Peterson still wreaks havoc upon his family even from jail. I feel very sorry for this young son Thomas as he seems to be a very good person. I know he does not want to believe his father could have killed his mother. He gives his father credit for who he is, but although he was young when his mother was murdered, she also had influence on him. I have no doubt Drew kept the kids from his mother's family just like he controlled everything else in his life.

His police officer son Stephen has been drawn into Drew's vile way of life. He was willing to lie for Drew, sacrifice his morals and his job is in jeopardy because of this. Evil men like Drew have a way of controlling the people closest to him, and they sometimes end up thinking he is a god of some sort. Somehow they can never see him for what he is. I don't know if it is a type of mind control or what, but even when they are grown they cannot see the evil, illegal and immoral things Drew does because Drew is always able to explain things away to them. I have seen this situation myself on a personal level. It is a very sad situation.  ::MonkeyNoNo::

Brother of Kathleen Savio speaks out.

http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2011/01/15/brother-of-kathleen-savio-people-that-knew-her-loved-her-people-that-did-not-know-her-noticed-her-people-left-behind-mourn-her/

This morning a letter from Tom Peterson, Drew Peterson and Kathleen Savio‘s son, was published in the column of Chicago Sun-Times gossip columnist, Michael Sneed. It was annotated with explanations and commentary (most likely provided by lawyer Joel Brodsky) and also directed readers to Mr. Brodsky’s new web site and Facebook page, where they can read about his rates and give him a call if they ever need the services of a defense lawyer.

We are happy to present this letter from Kathleen Savio’s brother, Henry M. Savio, with no annotations and no links nor directions to anything.

My name is Henry M. Savio. I am the brother of Kathleen Savio. My sister Kathleen was Tom and Kristopher’s mother. I read every new story that is written about the Peterson case; every word that is written that mentions my beloved sister and the man that took her away from our family. I hear every news-cast and wonder if they feel anything when they read. Sometimes the news focuses on Stacy, the missing fourth wife of Drew Peterson. I know what they are going through. I pay attention when I hear people remark on the case. My reality is that my sister has become a news case. My sister, the girl that I grew up with that I expected I would know forever, reduced to a case for everyone to speculate about.

I am writing this because I want to hear something about my sister that does not involve, include or revolve around Drew Peterson or his family. While people know my sister’s name they don’t know anything about her. She has been dehumanized and reduced to a case that people speculate about in the lunch room as a distraction from a tedious day at work. Now when I see a case like this on the news, I do consider what the families of these victims and go through. I wish that everyone watching this case or other similar cases would take a moment to imagine someone they love becoming what might as well be a number. People have a morbid fascination with death and tragedy. We want to feel something and when we turn on the news and are safe in our homes it is easy to say, “That poor woman, I hope he gets what he deserves”. It matters to me a great deal that my sister’s death is avenged but it won’t bring her back. When all the news shifts to another tragedy that is dragging out in the courts and in the media, we will still be here and she will still be gone.


Kathleen “Kitty” Savio was a bright, determined and spirited woman. She was considerate and compassionate towards others. She had that “IT” factor that beautiful women often posses. She was one of those women that commanded your attention just by entering a room. People that knew her loved her. People that did not know her, noticed her. People left behind mourn her.

I know that this is probably not going to be published or edited out but she was afraid for herself and made this known to all of us. None of us could have conceived it would end this way. No one ever thinks this will happen to them and when it does, it happens too quickly to comprehend it. We lost her because we did not think this could happen. My children have lost an Aunt, and they think of that everyday. Her downfall was that she was not going to continue to be abused. She was not complacent and she was not going to subject her children to a home filled with anger and control. Kris and Tom both know the abuse that she endured, and they prayed for that abuse to stop as well. She was a fighter. She was not a quitter and that was her demise. Kathleen Savio was not a victim. She was courageous until the end of her life, and she was their mother.

To her son, Thomas, I am glad that you are moving on with your life. Your mother would be proud of everything you are achieving. Every goal you accomplish is a testament to the first 11 years of your life, what was instilled in you by her. You were faced with the worst tragedy a child can know, the death of your Mother; my sister. I am grateful that the Kathleen’s estate is paving the way for your education in the medical field. We realize that that is what will be getting you through school. My only hope is that as you continue your medical studies the facts in your mother’s case will interest you enough that you may find the evidence, weigh it out, and contemplate things that are not visible to you now. Not to mention, the whereabouts of your stepmother Stacy, and the question where she really is. My children, and family tried to make contact with you but it was not allowed. Your father for all that is he is or isn’t, was clear in what was not to be allowed. Not only did I lose my sister but I lost her children, something I know would not make her happy. Sadly, I know that she would understand. If you ever want to reach out and remember your mother through the memory of people who loved her, reach out to me. I am heartbroken that you would consider or believe that I would not want you and your brother in my life. You are my sister’s child and therefore engrained in my life whether you know or acknowledge it. Kathleen will always resonate in her family’s lives. If our lives continue to move separately and our paths never cross, I hope that you will keep your mother’s memory because very soon, everyone else will forget our family and move on with their lives. I will never forget you. You will always be in our hearts.

Your Uncle, and the Savio Family,
Henry M. Savio

BRAVO! Henry M. Savio!!  ::MonkeyDance:: :smt038 :smt041

Fanny......  " type of mind control "  BINGO!

I commend Henry Savio. I hoped he would speak out and address Thomas Peterson. It was a very heartfelt letter, and I am glad it was published. I tend to believe it was published in it's entirety. I hope someday the families can come together. There are evil men in this world. I have not a doubt in the world that Drew Peterson is one of them. There is not a redeeming quality in his whole life. I should not be the one to judge. God is the one that should and will judge him and me. But I am only human and I do judge Drew Peterson. He is way beyond contempt and redemption. I hope God will understand how I feel.

http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/drew_peterson/drew-peterson-son-thomas-kathleen-savio-lawsuit-letter-20110117
Drew Peterson’s Son Thomas Wants Off Kathleen Savio Wrongful Death Lawsuit
January 17, 2011

Chicago - Drew Peterson's son Thomas now says he wants his name taken off a lawsuit filed on his behalf.

Peterson is currently in jail, accused of killing Thomas Peterson's mother, Kathleen Savio. Some of Savio's relatives have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Peterson on Thomas' and his brother's behalf.

Now that Thomas is 18-years-old, he is asking the court to remove him from the lawsuit. Thomas Peterson said in a letter that he loves his dad, and that they were together the entire weekend that his mother was killed. Thomas Peterson said there's no way his dad killed his mother.

Drew Peterson's attorney, Joel Brodsky, said that Thomas Peterson barely knows the relatives who filed the lawsuit.

"[Thomas] felt that Henry Savio, who he's never met his entire life except for five minutes at his mother's funeral, and Anna Doman, who hasn't reached out to him since his mother died, had no business messing in his life," Brodsky said. "He feels strongly about that and he wanted to take a stand."

Henry Savio and Anna Doman refused to go on camera, but they did release a letter saying that if Thomas and Kris Peterson ever want to reach out to their mother's family, they will be there.

Savio and Peterson were in the middle of a bitter divorce when she was found dead in a dry bathtub. Her death was initially ruled an accident, but two years ago, Peterson was arrested and charged with her murder.

Peterson is also suspected in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, who disappeared in Oct. 2007.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/3346824-418/peterson-savio-drew-kathleen-sister.html
Savio’s brother says she’s become a ‘faceless name’
January 18, 2011

Henry M. Savio said his late sister has become a faceless name in a storyline that seems to focus on Kathleen Savio’s former husband and ex-Bolingbrook cop Drew Peterson, who is charged with her murder.

“I want to hear something about my sister that does not involve, include or revolve around Drew Peterson or his family,” Henry M. Savio wrote in a weekend letter to the Chicago Sun-Times. “While people know my sister’s name they don’t know anything about her. She has been dehumanized and reduced to a case that people speculate about in the lunch room as a distraction from a tedious day at work.”

In an interview, Henry M. Savio said it was his nephew’s letter to Sun-Times columnist Michael Sneed — excerpted in Sunday’s editions — that prompted him to write. Thomas “Tommy” Peterson, 18, is Kathleen “Kitty” Savio’s oldest son with Peterson and in his note to Sneed declared his father’s innocence. Particularly stinging, Savio says, is the teen crediting his father for his academic and other successes: “He supports me, loves me, and set me on the path to success.”

But Savio said it was his sister who pushed her boys to do well in school, including Thomas Peterson who was just 11 when his mother died in 2004.

“I want to let my sister’s kids know [they] should remember her. It seems like Drew tried to erase her from their memory. She’s probably the reason [Thomas] got good grades,” Savio said.

He said he would tell them directly, but he’s not in regular contact with his sister’s sons, Thomas and younger brother Kris, 16, because Drew Peterson has kept the Savio clan at arm’s length.

Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney, calls that “ridiculous” saying that the Savios haven’t reached out to the boys — even during the 19 months their father has been in the Will County jail, awaiting trial for allegedly drowning their mother.

Brodsky took particular umbrage at Henry M. Savio’s comments that Drew Peterson was behind the note Thomas Peterson penned to Sneed.

“He doesn’t believe his father is innocent, he knows his father is innocent. He’s not under some Svengali hypnotism.”

Kathleen Savio, Peterson’s third wife, was found dead in a dry bathtub and her death was ruled an accident. But the case was reopened several years later after Peterson’s fourth wife Stacy Peterson disappeared in 2007; she still hasn’t been found and Peterson is a suspect but has not been charged.

Today, as Peterson sits in a Will County jail, their two boys along with Stacy Peterson’s young son and daughter live under the same roof in Bolingbrook with Peterson’s adult son from another marriage.

After everything that has happened, Brodsky said, Kathleen Savio’s and Peterson’s sons have a clear memory of their mother.

“Tommy and Kris know their mother loved them — there’s no question about that,” Brodsky said.

http://beaconnews.suntimes.com/news/3423600-418/peterson-evidence-hearsay-appeal-court.html
Peterson’s hearsay appeal set for Feb. 16
January 21, 2011

OTTAWA — An appeal of hearsay evidence rulings in the Drew Peterson murder case will be before the Illinois Appellate Court on Feb. 16.

Oral arguments will begin at 1:15 p.m., said Gist Fleshman, clerk of the Third District Appellate Court in Ottawa.

A request by a Chicago TV station to film the proceedings is pending before the court as well, Gist said.

After oral arguments are presented, it could take the judges one to six months — or longer — to make a ruling.

“It depends on the complexity of the issues involved,” he said.

A ruling also could be delayed if the judges are not in total agreement.

“Or they may agree on the outcome, but not how they’re getting there — the analysis,” Fleshman said.

The average length of time for a decision is three months.

Third appeal

This is the third appeal involving Peterson’s troubles with the law. The first two involved a gun charge and a request to re-open his third wife’s estate, Fleshman said.

The latest appeal involves hearsay evidence prosecutors want to present in Peterson’s murder trial.

In July, Will County State’s Attorney Jim Glasgow appealed a pre-trial ruling by former Will County Chief Judge Stephen White who excluded some hearsay evidence as inadmissible.

White sealed his ruling, so information on which statements were allowed and which were excluded is not public. But the oral arguments before the Appellate Court will be open to the public, Fleshman said.

“The attorneys should avoid discussing in detail anything that is sealed,” he said.

Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police officer, was charged in May 2009 with drowning his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004. The case has drawn national media attention.

Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared in October 2007. After she disappeared, authorities reviewed Savio’s death and reversed the cause of death from accidental to homicide.

Police say Peterson is a suspect in Stacy Peterson’s disappearance, which is considered a possible homicide by authorities, but no charges have been filed.

Hearsay evidence is secondhand evidence presented by someone who does not have direct knowledge of events.

A law passed in 2008 makes hearsay evidence admissible if it is proven that a witness was murdered to keep the person from testifying.

In June, the Illinois Supreme Court rejected an appeal in a case where hearsay evidence was used to convict a Naperville man of killing four family members in 2005.

http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/news/3521807-418/peterson-drew-glink-savio-civil.html
Did Peterson pressure son on financial decision?
January 28, 2011

OLIET — Lawyer Martin Glink fears accused wife killer Drew Peterson may have put “undue influence” on his son, Thomas, 18, who recently released his father from all financial claims.
(snip)

Civil suit

Glink was in Joliet on Thursday morning to file an amended complaint in a civil lawsuit pending against former Bolingbrook cop Peterson and his uncle James Carroll, who was the original executor of Kathleen Savio’s estate.
Savio was Peterson’s third wife. She was found “drowned” in a dry bathtub in 2004 and the death was ruled accidental. The case was reopened and ruled a homicide after Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy, disappeared in 2007. Peterson was charged with murdering Savio in May 2009. He is a suspect in the disappearance and presumed homicide of Stacy Peterson, though no charges have been filed.

Glink is representing Savio’s sister Anna Doman and father Henry Savio in the wrongful-death lawsuit. His amended civil complaint gives more details on the alleged “breach of fiduciary duty” by Peterson and Carroll.

“Essentially, they took all of Kathleen Savio’s assets, what was marital property, and funneled them over to Drew, who is prevented from getting the assets because they were already divorced,” Glink said. “As a fiduciary, you have a duty to do things properly.”

‘The whole thing is ridiculous’

In a letter published by Sun-Times columnist Michael Sneed earlier this month, Thomas Peterson defended his father who he said was innocent of the murder charge. Thomas also criticized Doman and Henry Savio, for bringing a wrongful-death lawsuit against his father.

“I think it’s ridiculous,” Thomas said. “They’re trying to take money from my dad and basically give it back to us.”

Lawyers for Peterson and Carroll have 28 days to respond to the amended complaint, Glink said. The next status hearing date was scheduled for May 19.
(snip)
As the civil case heads to trial, the murder charge against Peterson is headed to the 3rd District Appellate Court in Ottawa for oral arguments Feb. 16.

In July, Will County State’s Attorney Jim Glasgow appealed a pre-trial ruling by retired Will County Chief Judge Stephen White who excluded some hearsay evidence as inadmissible. The appellate court will consider the matter after the oral arguments.

http://shorewood-il.patch.com/articles/savio-attorney-peterson-son-still-on-board
Savio Attorney: Peterson Son Still on Board
An attorney representing the family of Kathleen Savio in their probate fight with Drew Peterson has confidence in his case.
January 27, 2011

(snip)
"We're pretty confident our breach of fiduciary duty count will now stand," said Arlington Heights Attorney Martin Glink following a brief appearance Thursday at the Joliet courthouse annex.

Not only that, but Glink says Peterson's third oldest son, Thomas Peterson, who turned 18 on Jan. 5, is still a part of the case. This despite a letter Thomas supposedly wrote claiming he wants out.

"I question seriously if that was due to some undue influence, unfortunately," Glink said of the letter Thomas supposedly wrote releasing his father from any financial responsibility resulting from the lawsuit brought by his mother's family.
(snip)
One of Peterson's lawyers, Joel Brodsky, filed a release on behalf of Thomas to have the young man dropped from the case, Glink said.

"He's basically saying, 'I'm letting my father go regardless of what a jury may find,' even if his moneys have been misspent," Glink said

But filing a release is not enough to make it happen, Glink said.

"If someone is unduly influencing him, it's a different story," he explained.
(snip)
Stacy remains missing. The state police believe she was the victim of a "potential homicide" and named Peterson their sole suspect in her possible death, but have yet to charge him -- or anyone else -- with harming her.
(snip)

Wow, now much ego THERE, is there?   /cough

http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2011/02/04/drew-peterson-hearing-the-hearsay/
Drew Peterson: Hearing the hearsay?
February 4, 2011

http://beaconnews.suntimes.com/news/3735427-418/tv-crews-at-peterson-hearing-a-first-for-ottawa-court.html
TV crews at Peterson hearing a first for Ottawa court
February 10, 2011

OTTAWA — Two legal trends will be evident when the Drew Peterson hearsay case gets under way Wednesday before the 3rd District Appellate Court.

The first is a move toward making more video and audio available to the public from Supreme Court and Appellate Court proceedings.

 ::snipping2::

The second trend is for more states to allow hearsay evidence in trials. In Illinois, there are a few situations in which hearsay evidence is admissible. A relatively new state law adds another scenario in which hearsay can be used in court: when there is proof a witness was murdered to keep from testifying.
 ::snipping2::
Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, was charged in May 2009 with drowning his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004. Prosecutors want to use hearsay evidence, reported by Savio’s relatives and friends, during the trial.

But a Will County judge rejected some of the evidence in a pre-trial ruling. That ruling was appealed just as Peterson’s murder trial was about to start.

Oral arguments will be heard before the appellate court at 1:15 p.m. Wednesday.
Making history

When a WGN-TV camera begins to roll Wednesday, it will be the first time live proceedings will be videotaped in the Ottawa courthouse, Fleshman said.

Cameras have been allowed at the Supreme Court and appellate court levels in Illinois since the 1980s.

Footage of Supreme Court proceedings has been available online for the past couple of years, and audio tapes of appellate court proceedings have been online for about a year, he said.

No cameras are allowed at the circuit court level.

Oral arguments were filmed last year when 3rd District Appellate Court judges held a session at Bradley University, Fleshman said. But next week will mark the first time oral arguments have been videotaped in Ottawa. All previous requests were denied.
 ::snipping2::

Only one camera will be allowed, and it will be limited to the back of the courtroom, he said. The WGN cameraman will act as a pool reporter with the video being shared among news outlets, he added.

 ::snipping2::
More about the Pre-Trial Appeal and Hearsay Issues...

O/T BUT IMPORTANT FOR ALL TO READ:

http://scaredmonkeys.net/index.php?topic=9451.0

Drew Peterson trial will be streaming live on www.wgntv.com at 1:00 today Chicago time.

Thank you!

You're welcome -  just part of my PSA duties.   ::MonkeyCool:: ::MonkeyCool::

I wonder if Drew Peterson will enjoy being on camera?  Even though he's still incarcerated, having cameras in the courtroom means he'll get more media  attention. Will he play up to the camera?  I would love to see the smirk wiped off his face.  JMHO

Muffy, he is an attention wh*re. He will be playing to the camera with his silly smirk. I personally would like to wipe that smirk off his face with my fist.  ::MonkeyMad::

Tks, I came to post the same as I just saw it announced on Foxnews cable.   I'll be watching & I totally anticipate Drew to play to the cameras...he totally repulses me.

PS Chicago is central time

drew peterson won't be at the hearing according to this news brief....

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/16/drew-peterson-hearing-telecast-live/

While this live hearing is making precedent it is being reported that Drew Peterson will NOT be attending:

Drew Peterson Hearing Will Allow Cameras into Court
Updated: Wednesday, 16 Feb 2011, 10:30 AM CST
Published : Wednesday, 16 Feb 2011, 10:30 AM CST

FOX Chicago News

Chicago - History will be made Wednesday when an Illinois court hearing in the Drew Peterson murder case will be broadcast live.

The former Bolingbrook police sergeant is accused of killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004.

Peterson will not be at the hearing.

Attorneys will argue over the prosecution's plan to admit so-called hearsay statements at the trial.
 ::snipping2::
http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/drew_peterson/drew-peterson-hearing-savio-hearsay-evidence-live-stream-court-20110216

It seems  Drew Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky seems to think arrogantly yelling his argument makes his point, all he's giving me is a headache!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chibrknews-peterson-prosecutors-argue-against-drews-law-20110216,0,1247679.story
Peterson prosecutors argue against 'Drew's Law'
By Stacy St. Clair Tribune reporter
2:58 p.m. CST, February 16, 2011
In attempting to get hearsay statements admitted in Drew Peterson’s murder case, Will County prosecutors today found themselves arguing against the very law they helped create.

Saddled with a botched police investigation several years ago, State’s Attorney James Glasgow had pushed for a state statute that would allow hearsay statements against Peterson at trial. Dubbed Drew's Law by legal experts and legislators, he hailed the bill's passage as a way of letting Peterson's third and fourth wives speak from the grave.

Glasgow acknowledged the strange turn as he asked the Third District Appellate Court to ignore his statute in favor of the less-restrictive common law. “Ironically, I’m in a unique position here,” he told the three-member panel. “I wrote the statute.”

The proceedings — which were televised live, a first in state history — focused on prosecutors’ desire to admit several hearsay statements at trial.
 ::snipping2::

from the article quoted by Trimm:
 ::snipping2::
Stacy Peterson’s siblings, Cassandra and Yelton Cales, attended the hearing, as well as Savio’s sister, Susan Doman. “Justice will prevail,” Cassandra Cales said. “It's just a long emotional roller coaster ride. We'll get there someday...I believe in my heart justice will be served."

Drew Peterson's son fired from Oak Brook P.D

 ::snipping2:: 

The charge that led to the younger Peterson’s dismissal stemmed from the legal troubles facing his father.

As CBS 2′s Pamela Jones reports, the three-member board upheld an accusation that the younger Peterson failed to cooperate fully with Illinois State Police in the days immediately following the October 2007 disappearance of his father’s fourth wife, Stacy.

 ::snipping2:: 

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/02/19/drew-petersons-son-fired-from-oak-brook-p-d/ 

  ::MonkeyShocked:: So what is going to happen to Drew's younger children? Doesn't Stephen have custody of them? No job, no way to support the children, right????

 



Hi, JSM.  According to the article, "...his father transferred $236,000 to him for the care of Drew's 4 youngest children."  His lawyer is going to appeal the decision.  He has 35 days to do so.   

http://www.kwqc.com/Global/story.asp?S=14066019
Drew Peterson's son fired from police job
February 20, 2011

OAK BROOK, Ill. (AP) - Suburban Chicago fire and police commissioners have fired Drew Peterson's son.
Drew Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, is charged with murder in the death of his third wife and is a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth. His son Stephen Peterson was a police officer in Oak Brook. He was suspended in August after he testified that he hid several of his father's guns after his stepmother's disappearance.

On Saturday, the Oak Brook Board of Fire and Police Commissioners found that Stephen Peterson obstructed the investigation into the disappearance of Drew Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, by hiding his father's guns
 ::snipping2::
Stephen Peterson has 35 days to appeal the board's decision.

Peterson angry over son's firing

 ::snipping2::

“I am very angry that the police and fire board of Oak Brook are in the police chief’s pocket and that they can’t make a fair decision on their own,” said Peterson, who commented via his attorney, Joel Brodsky.

Peterson’s comments were e-mailed by Brodsky to The Herald-News. The former Bolingbrook police sergeant is being held at the Will County Jail while awaiting trial on charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

“When I gave Steve my guns there was no investigation to impede,” Peterson said. “They were my favorite guns, and I was going to give them to Steve when I retired anyway. I only gave him three of the dozen or so guns I owned, and I kept most of my guns in my house and the police confiscated them all, so how could giving him those three guns impede anything?”

 ::snipping2::

http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/news/3991297-418/peterson-angry-over-sons-firing.html

 :smt022 Boo Hoo Drew :smt022

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-il-drewpeterson-teen,0,570539.story
Son of Drew Peterson is valedictorian, musician
March 20, 2011

BOLINGBROOK, Ill.—
Drew Peterson's 18-year-old son is making a name for himself outside the allegations against his father.

Tom Peterson is a suburban Chicago high school valedictorian, tennis team member and trumpet player with Ivy League aspirations. That's despite the difficulties over the past few years.
 ::snipping2::
Tom Peterson says the allegations have caused a lot of anxiety. He says he believes in his father's innocence but doesn't consider him a role model. He tells The Chicago Tribune that his father is "lost in his ego."  

Drew Peterson missed a chance to be on camera? he must have gained a lot of weight or looks bad, otherwise he would never miss a chance to be on camera..cocky you know what that he is...

http://www.wrex.com/Global/story.asp?S=14442569
Drew Peterson's ex-sister-in-law speaks at domestic violence seminar
WREX
April 13, 2011

ROCKFORD (WREX) - The Rockford Rescue Mission helps educate other organizations and individuals on how to handle domestic violence.

Speakers at Wednesday's seminar talked about domestic violence from legal, family, and pastoral points of view. One of those speakers was Sue Doman.  She's Kathleen Savio's sister. Savio is Drew Peterson's 3rd wife.  He's accused of drowning Savio in her bathtub.
 ::snipping2::

http://plainfield.patch.com/articles/stuck-in-stir-drew-peterson-marks-two-years-in-jail-as-slain-wifes-family-waits-for-day-in-court

Stuck in Stir: Drew Peterson Marks 2 Years in Jail As Slain Wife's Family Waits For Day In Court
Drew Peterson's third wife was killed more than seven years ago. His fourth wife has been missing for three and a half years. Peterson has spent the last two years in a jail cell waiting for a jury to decide his fate.

By Joseph Hosey | Email the author | May 6, 2011

Two years ago tomorrow, Drew Peterson climbed inside his missing fourth wife’s Pontiac Grand Prix, pulled out of his cul-de-sac and drove away to run some errands.

Peterson didn’t make it a mile before a small army of state cops descended on him, pulled him out of the car, snatched off his sunglasses and took him to jail.

Peterson has sat there since, waiting in the Will County Adult Detention Facility to be tried on charges he killed his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

In the two years Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, has been locked up, one of the sons he had with his slain third wife was named valedictorian of Bolingbrook High School. A son he had with his first wife lost his job as an Oak Brook police officer due to his involvement in allegedly obstructing a state police search of Peterson’s home. That son’s marriage ended in divorce while Peterson has been incarcerated. He now lives in his father’s Bolingbrook home where he takes care of his four younger half-siblings, two of whom were born to Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, the driver of the Grand Prix, who vanished in October 2007.

 ::snipping2::

thanks for the update Grace

YW, cookie.

The article states that the new lawyer for Vaughn is George Lenard; he once represented Craig Stebic (Lisa) and Drew Peterson.  I wonder what will happen to Peterson's high-priced lawyers now that the governor has cut the funding for defense.


http://channahon-minooka.patch.com/articles/christopher-vaughns-lawyers-quit-case-after-money-well-runs-dry

Christopher Vaughn's Lawyers Quit Case After Money Well Runs Dry
Deprived of cash from the state's capital litigation fund, the lawyers for an Oswego man charged with gunning down his wife and young children dump the case.

By Joseph Hosey | Email the author | May 10, 2011

When Christopher Vaughn faced the death penalty, his attorneys had access to millions of dollars in state money to fund his defense and buy their time.

But after Governor Quinn banned capital punishment in March, that money went away, and on Tuesday, so did Vaughn's lawyers.

 ::snipping2::

Rozak appointed the public defender's office to the case. George Lenard, a Joliet attorney with a private practice who also works as a part-time public defender, landed the lead role in Vaughn's defense.

Among the more notable clients Lenard has represented are Craig Stebic and Drew Peterson. Stebic's wife, Lisa Stebic, vanished in April 2007. Stebic has not been charged with harming his missing wife.

  ::snipping2::

Lenard quit the Peterson case after a dispute with attorney Joel Brodsky, whose involvement drove two other lawyers away from the Peterson camp as well.

 ::snipping2::

http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/news/5412525-418/curtains-for-drew-peterson-case-is-subject-of-chicago-play.html

Curtains for Drew Peterson? Case is subject of Chicago play
By BRIAN STANLEY bstanley@stmedianetwork.com May 17, 2011 02:13AM

CHICAGO — Perhaps Godot was in jail too?

Unless the former Bolingbrook cop can post $2 million bail by Thursday, the first performance of “Waiting For Drew Peterson” will also be missing the title character.

The Annoyance Theatre and Bar begins previewing its new show this week. Performances are scheduled to run through July 7.

The theater company, known for the long-running “Coed Prison Sluts” and “The Real Live Brady Bunch” will now present “an absurd look at our fascination with murderers, celebrity culture and the Internet.”

 ::snipping2::

The show centers around sisters Pam and Sue who believe Peterson was wrongly accused and fall in love with him from afar. Portrayed by co-writers Nancy Friedrich and Amy Speckien, the sisters decide to their show support by waiting in their house until Peterson is released.

“(They) post on Facebook declaring his innocence, sell clutter on eBay to fund his defense and do yoga,” according to publicity materials. “Ultimately, though, Drew can only love one of them. The polite facade is dropped as Pam and Sue go to war for Drew’s love.”

Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney, said Peterson is amused by the play.

 ::snipping2::

http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/news/5498849-418/bolingbrook-high-valedictorian-thrives-despite-turmoil-of-being-drew-petersons-son.html

Bolingbrook High valedictorian thrives despite turmoil of being Drew Peterson’s son
By Catherine Ann Velasco cvelasco@stmedianetwork.com May 22, 2011 02:31AM

BOLINGBROOK — Bolingbrook High School valedictorian Tom Peterson is intrigued with how he can overcome obstacles while some people can’t.

And, he has faced some major ones.

His dad, Drew Peterson, has been charged with the murder of Tom’s birth mother, Kathleen Savio. Drew Peterson is also a suspect in the disappearance of Tom’s adoptive mom, Stacy Peterson.

For the past two years, his dad, a retired Bolingbrook police sergeant, has been held in Will County Jail on a $20 million bond, waiting for his trial to begin.

Meanwhile, Tom never gave up on his goal to be No. 1 at Bolingbrook High School, getting A’s in his honor and Advanced Placement classes and keeping extremely busy.

“I just kept my eye on the prize. My dad always taught me to go for the best and be the best you can be and nothing less. I always thought, ‘Why not?’ so I did,” Tom said. “My mom did that a lot with me, too. So I developed this mindset … that I can be the best at everything, and I did just because it brought me some sort of joy out of it, I guess.

 ::snipping2::

http://bolingbrook.patch.com/articles/lawyer-calls-drew-peterson-case-very-weak

Lawyer Calls Drew Peterson Case 'Very Weak'
Joseph "Shark" Lopez gets big win in court with another client.

By Brian Feldt | Email the author | May 26, 2011

Joseph "Shark" Lopez, one of the five lawyers defending Drew Peterson against charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio, said the accused wife-killer should be happy about the lawyer's latest court victory.

Lopez recently won a first-degree murder case brought against known gang member Anthony Collazo, who allegedly killed a pizzeria manager.

“Mr. Callazo is extremely happy to have been cleared of this charge of murder,” Lopez said in a report.  "I am sure that Drew Peterson is also pleased because there was more evidence against Mr. Callazo then there is against Drew Peterson, and the jury found him not guilty.  This just shows how very weak the case against Drew Peterson is.”

http://shorewood-il.patch.com/articles/drew-peterson-lawyers-drews-not-a-danger-to-anyone

Drew Peterson Lawyers: Drew's Not a "Danger to Anyone"
The court papers asking for Drew Peterson's release from jail insist it's safe for him to be out and about.
By Joseph Hosey | Email the author | 12:36pm

Retired grandfather Drew Peterson was a mere 100 miles from the Mexican border yet didn't make a run for it even though he figured he was going to be arrested for his wife's murder.

That is just one of the reasons Peterson should be released from the Will County jail, according to court papers his attorneys filed Monday in hopes of getting him sprung from the the clink.

 ::snipping2::

The murder trial has been held up for nearly a year as the appellate court mulls over a prosecution appeal of what hearsay evidence can be used against Peterson, a former Bolingbrook cop who pulled the plug on his law enforcement career rather than face an internal inquiry regarding Stacy's disappearance in late 2007.

In the motion for Peterson's release, his attorneys informed the appellate judges that they don't "wish to hurry the court in making its decision" but that Peterson should be a free man while they are figuring out what to do.

 ::snipping2::
 

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv/2011/06/15/2011-06-15_rob_lowe_to_play_accused_wife_killer_drew_peterson_kaley_cuoco_cast_as_fourth_wi.html?r=entertainment

Rob Lowe to play accused wife killer Drew Peterson, Kaley Cuoco cast as fourth wife Stacy
BY Kathleen Perricone
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
Wednesday, June 15th 2011, 11:10 AM

Pretty-boy actor Rob Lowe is about to take on his ugliest role.

Lifetime confirms that he will play Drew Peterson, the former Illinois police sergeant accused of the murder of his third wife and who is the only suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

"The Big Bang Theory" actress Kaley Cuoco will costar with Lowe as Stacy, who was 30 years younger than her husband when she went missing four years after she and Drew were married. Stacy's sister reported her missing after not hearing from her. Drew has maintained she had called him days before and said she was leaving him for another man.

 ::snipping2::

Drew was indicted by a grand jury in May 2009 and charged with the murder of Savio. He's currently sitting in jail and awaiting trial.

The Lifetime TV movie is tentatively titled "The Drew Peterson Story aka Ladykiller" and will begin filming

http://shorewood-il.patch.com/articles/drew-peterson-accused-bolingbrook-wife-killer-told-to-stay-put-by-appellate-court

Drew Peterson, Accused Bolingbrook Wife-Killer, Told to Stay Put by Appellate Court
Jailed for more than two years on murder charges, suspect learns he's not going anywhere, at least for the time being.
By Joseph Hosey | Email the author | July 5, 2011

Accused wife-killer Drew Peterson’s latest plea to get out of jail again fell on deaf ears, as the appellate court shot it down last week and told him he’s not going anywhere.

Jailed since May 2009 on charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio, Peterson, 57, has been waiting on the appellate court to return a decision on what hearsay evidence can be used against him at trial.

The appellate court has been mulling over the matter for just shy of a year.

 ::snipping2::

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-drew-peterson-0710-20110710,0,1355434.story

Drew Peterson said to be pleased by Anthony verdict
Ex-cop heard the news through jailhouse grapevine, lawyer says
By Steve Schmadeke and Stacy St. Clair, Tribune reporters
July 10, 2011

Among those encouraged last week when a Florida jury found Casey Anthony not guilty of murder was none other than Drew Peterson, who quickly heard the news through the jailhouse grapevine, his attorney said.

Joel Brodsky said his client, held for more than two years on charges that he drowned his third wife, was pleased that jurors in the high-profile case based their decision solely on the evidence.

"The jury is not to judge people morally; it's to judge whether there is sufficient evidence," Brodsky said. "There was more evidence against Casey Anthony — circumstantial evidence — than there is against Drew Peterson. It's good to see a jury do the correct thing."

Others didn't draw the same comparison.

"Every case needs to be judged on its own merits, and we are preparing to move forward with this prosecution," responded Charles Pelkie, a spokesman for the Will County state's attorney's office. "The state's attorney has great faith in our system of justice and jury system."

 ::snipping2::

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-drew-peterson-demands-halt-to-movie-about-him-20110714,0,7708434.story

Drew Peterson demands halt to movie about him
Staff report
10:05 a.m. CDT, July 14, 2011

Lawyers for Drew Peterson are demanding that filming be halted on a made-for-TV movie about the former cop, arguing it invades his privacy and is nothing more than a "character assassination" that would "prejudice any potential jury pool."

The lawyers ask the makers of the movie to "cease and desist" all work on the movie by Friday or face legal action.

"Please govern your conduct accordingly," attorney Walter Maksym ends his seven-page letter to Lifetime Entertainment, A&E Television Networks, Disney and others.

Maksym even sent a copy to actor Rob Lowe, who has been chosen to portray Peterson, accused of murdering his third wife Kathleen Savio and a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

 ::snipping2::

http://www.ocregister.com/entertainment/peterson-308707-movie-lowe.html

Published: July 18, 2011 Updated: July 19, 2011 6:31 a.m.
Actor Rob Lowe shoots movie in O.C.

By PETER LARSEN / THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

Thought you saw Rob Lowe around Los Alamitos recently? Only he looked a little older than you thought he would be? Relax, you’re not hallucinating. The busy actor is shooting a Lifetime network movie in the Rossmoor neighborhood, with his hair dyed gray for the role.

“Untouchable” is the movie in which Lowe plays the real-life character of Drew Peterson, an Illinois police sergeant who allegedly killed his third wife, and who was suspected but not charged in the disappearance of his fourth.

 ::snipping2::

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-drew-peterson-decision-20110727,0,754366.story

Court won't allow hearsay in Peterson case
Prosecutors filed appeal too late, justices say
By Stacy St. Clair and Steve Schmadeke, Tribune reporters
July 27, 2011

Will County prosecutors suffered a significant setback in the Drew Peterson case Tuesday, as an appellate court refused their request to allow certain hearsay statements in the ex-Bolingbrook police officer's murder trial.

In a divided opinion by the 3rd District Appellate Court, the justices ruled that the Will County state's attorney's office missed the 30-day appeal deadline when it sought to overturn a trial court's decision barring 8 of 14 hearsay statements. Prosecutors contend the testimony is crucial to their efforts to convict Peterson for the drowning death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

 ::snipping2::

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/brodsky-peterson-hearsay--126227043.html

Brodsky, Peterson Claim Victory in Hearsay Ruling
By Jeff Goldblatt |  Wednesday, Jul 27, 2011  |  Updated 6:07 AM CDT

Accused murderer Drew Peterson and his attorney, Joel Brodsky, claimed victory Tuesday evening, hours after an appellate court upheld limitations on so-called hearsay evidence.

"The nutshell is we won’t have to face the majority of the hearsay," said Brodsky. "The hearsay we will have to face we were going to face one year ago.  We’re really not that concerned about it."

 ::snipping2::

Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/brodsky-peterson-hearsay--126227043.html#ixzz1TRIZxfXb

With the decision of Appellate Court in PDF in the link.

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/drew_peterson_prosecutors_filed_hearsay_appeal_too_late_appellate_court_rul/

Drew Peterson Prosecutors Filed Hearsay Appeal Too Late, Appellate Court Rules
Posted Jul 27, 2011 9:55 AM CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Jurors deciding the fate of former Bolingbrook, Ill., police officer Drew Peterson won’t be allowed to consider a variety of hearsay evidence because prosecutors failed to appeal a trial court ruling within a 30-day window, an appeals court says.

The Illinois Appellate Court’s 3rd District ruled Tuesday that prosecutors missed a deadline in one of three interlocutory appeals challenging evidence rulings. Peterson was accused of killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio, after his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared. The Chicago Tribune covered the decision (PDF), which split 2-1 on the missed deadline.

 ::snipping2::

http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/news/6864758-418/exploring-the-final-frontier-politics.html

Exploring the final frontier: politics
August 7, 2011 7:32PM
Updated: August 7, 2011 9:03PM

Incumbent Will County State’s Attorney Jim Glasgow might have some competition in the March primary.

Frankfort DUI attorney and “Kennedy Democrat” Ronald Rodger kicked out a press release last week that said he “is exploring” a run for the office. In the release, Rodger took a swipe at Glasgow for his office’s handling of the Drew Peterson murder case.

“The office ... is in jeopardy of losing another high profile case,” he said. “The courts recently ruled crucial evidence of the Drew Peterson case inadmissible because (prosecutors) missed a deadline for filing motions.”

 ::snipping2::

Going to restate this, Will County is the arm pit of America.
 ::MonkeyMad::

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2029003/Rob-Lowe-ditches-silver-fox-locks-returns-brunette.html

Back to brat pack brown: Rob Lowe ditches his silver fox locks and returns to brunette
By Jade Watkins
Last updated at 12:47 AM on 23rd August 2011

 ::snipping2::

Lowe's grey makeover last month was for the television movie 'Untouchable'; the story of police officer Drew Peterson, who is currently awaiting trial charged with the murder if his third wife.
The actor spent nine hours daily in hair and make-up to become Peterson, including adding wrinkles and a moustache to his usually flawless face.
It was announced in June that Lowe had won the role of Peterson, whose story has gripped the United States.
In 2009 the former police sergeant was arrested for the murder of his third wife Kathleen Savio, following the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacey Peterson.
Savio died on March 1, 2004, five months after her divorce from Peterson

 ::snipping2::

Peterson is still awaiting trial and is imprisoned in Will County Adult Detention Center.

 ::snipping2::

---------------

Status:  No court date has been assigned; his Bail Amount is $2,007,500.00.

http://www.willcosheriff.com/pages/Cimis/details.asp?lname=peterson&Submit=Submit&CIMIS_NUMBER=20090003825

http://www.digitalspy.com/tv/news/a336545/rob-lowe-drew-peterson-character-was-transformative.html

Rob Lowe: 'Drew Peterson character was transformative'
Tuesday, August 23 2011, 12:22am EDT
By Jennifer Still, Entertainment Reporter

 ::snipping2::

"It's just a very different style than anything I've ever done before and I think people are going to be surprised."

Lowe also revealed that the crew shot two different endings to accommodate the results of the real-life trial, adding: "Drew Peterson is awaiting trial for the murder of one of his wives, and he could very easily be off by the time the movie comes out in January. In fact, we shot two endings just to protect ourselves."

 ::snipping2::

http://pr.officialwire.com/main.php?action=posted_news&rid=143349

"DREW" The Movie Announced
Drew Peterson’s true story to appear on the big screen
Published on 23 August 2011
by Media Office
(OfficialWire)
STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT (USA)
OfficialWire PR News Bureau

Chandler Foster, Managing Director of Hollywood East Film Finance, has been holding onto a big announcement to add to his impressive list of projects: "The Drew Peterson Family Saga as experienced by celebrity shrink Dr. Dan will be coming to a theater near you soon, exclaimed Foster. "The screenplay is based on the book, "Analyzing Monsters – The Drew Peterson Saga”. "Analyzing Monsters” was used as a reference in A&E’s, "Drew Peterson Biography” in which Dr. Dan appeared throughout.

Dr. Dan helped the Peterson family escape the media madness surrounding the disappearance of fourth wife Stacy Peterson.” "If still alive, Stacy could be considered an accomplice to third wife Kathleen Savio‘s murder if indeed "Kitty” was "drowned in a dry bathtub” added Dr. Dan.. ”Drowning is the cause of death in all three autopsies. The dry bathtub scenario is held to by many in the media and public,” shared Dr. Dan.

The prosecution refused to act on a recommendation by Dr. Dan via Peterson Attorney Joel Brodsky that Stacy be granted immunity in writing allowing her to cooperate if she were able. The prosecution denied the request. The case was initially ruled an accident by the County coroner and a grand jury. An exhumation and autopsy by even OJ Simpson case coroner Michael Baden has challenged the accidental death ruling and believes it to have been a homicide.

 ::snipping2::

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-prosecutor-appeals-to-supreme-court-over-hearsay-evidence-in-peterson-trial-20110826,0,3662452.story

Prosecutor appeals to Supreme Court over hearsay evidence in Peterson trial
By Stacy St. Clair
Tribune reporter
1:03 p.m. CDT, August 26, 2011

Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow’s quest to have hearsay statements used during Drew Peterson’s murder trial continues as the prosecutor filed an appeal with the Illinois State Supreme Court today.

The move -- which could further delay the high-profile case – comes about a month after an appellate court ruled that Glasgow missed the 30-day appeal deadline when he sought to overturn a trial court's decision barring 8 of 14 hearsay statements.

 ::snipping2::

Glasgow largely built his case around pathology reports and the 14 hearsay statements that he says would allow Savio and Stacy Peterson to speak from the grave. He even pushed for a new statute -- dubbed Drew's Law -- to allow secondhand testimony.

Though White found the preponderance of evidence showed Peterson's wrongdoing, he still barred the majority of hearsay witnesses because they did "not provide sufficient safeguards of reliability."

 ::snipping2::

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Drew-Peterson-s-lawyers-push-for-release-from-jail-2147314.php

Drew Peterson's lawyers push for release from jail
Updated 11:10 a.m., Tuesday, August 30, 2011

CHICAGO (AP) — Drew Peterson's attorneys are asking the Illinois Supreme Court to release the former Bolingbrook police sergeant from jail because prosecutors' appeal to the same court has delayed his murder trial.

Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky says he sent the appeal by FedEx on Monday. It comes days after Will County prosecutors appealed an appellate court ruling that prevents them from using several hearsay statements Peterson's ex-wife Kathleen Savio allegedly made before her body was found in her bathtub in 2004.

 ::snipping2::

http://www.suntimes.com/opinions/7387860-474/house-arrest-not-jail-is-fair-for-drew-peterson.html

House arrest — not jail — is fair for Drew Peterson
EDITORIAL August 31, 2011 7:46PM

 ::snipping2::

Peterson’s lawyers, in a motion filed with the Illinois Supreme Court on Tuesday, argue that their client should be freed altogether while awaiting trial, and we’re sympathetic to that view. Much of the evidence presented at a hearing 14 months ago that resulted in Peterson’s continued jailing was of the hearsay variety — what one person allegedly said to another person — and, as we have argued before, we doubt the constitutionality of such evidence.

But the state Supreme Court may well view the matter differently and allow such evidence — precisely what prosecutors have asked the court to do this fall — and that makes Peterson a legitimate flight risk if he is not grounded by at least a monitoring bracelet. A bright guy, he might reasonably calculate that his odds of winning at trial are grim if the hearsay evidence is allowed.

 ::snipping2::

http://www.suntimes.com/7756856-417/drew-peterson-to-stay-in-jail-during-appeal.html

Drew Peterson to stay in jail during appeal, state Supreme Court rules
By Dan Rozek Staff Reporter drozek@suntimes.com September 19, 2011 6:04PM
Updated: September 20, 2011 2:08AM

Murder suspect Drew Peterson will remain behind bars while the Illinois Supreme Court weighs a critical appeal from Will County prosecutors.

The court late Monday refused to order his release from the Will County Jail, where he has been detained on $20 million bond since his May 2009 arrest on charges he drowned his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

But the ruling left Peterson’s attorneys “hopeful” the high court will not hear the appeal from prosecutors, which could clear the way for Peterson to stand trial in the next few months.

“We’re obviously disappointed that Mr. Peterson won’t be released but we’re also hopeful that this is an indication that the Supreme Court is not going to hear the state’s appeal,” defense attorney Joel Brodsky said.

Attorneys for the 57-year-old former Bolingbrook cop sought his release after Will County prosecutors in August asked the Supreme Court to consider whether so-called hearsay evidence can be used when Peterson is tried for Savio’s 2004 drowning death. Peterson also remains a suspect in the still-unsolved disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

 ::snipping2::

The Supreme Court likely will announce later this year whether it will consider Glasgow’s appeal on the hearsay evidence.

 ::snipping2::

http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/09/21/39967.htm

Wednesday, September 21, 2011Last Update: 4:06 AM PT
Drew Peterson's Lawyer Could Face Disbarment
By JOE CELENTINO

CHICAGO (CN) - In a sharply worded opinion, the 7th Circuit ordered prominent Illinois attorney Walter Maksym to show cause why he should not be removed from the court's bar, calling his filings in a 2007 civil case "unintelligible" and "riddled with errors."
   
Maksym has been a dominant presence in the news this summer as he represents Drew Peterson against charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, has been in jail since 2009 without trial on suspicion of murdering his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.
     
Monday, the state Supreme Court rejected Maksym's claims that the long wait violates Peterson's right to a speedy trial. Maksym also threatened to sue Lifetime cable network over plans to produce a film about the case, with Rob Lowe starring as Peterson.
   
But the federal appeals court rebuked Maksym for his handling of a different case.

 ::snipping2::

The court ordered a copy of its order forwarded to the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission.
     
Maksym told the Chicago Tribune that he was undergoing treatment for cancer at the time of the filing.
     
"It was an isolated period where I was suffering from health problems that affected my ability to practice," he said
 

http://shorewood-il.patch.com/articles/did-drew-peterson-kid-get-dirty-deal-from-oak-brook-police-chief

Did Drew Peterson Kid Get Dirty Deal From Oak Brook Police Chief?
The union lawyer fighting to get Drew Peterson’s cop son back on the Oak Brook force accused the former police chief of concealing evidence she says could have won his case.
By Joseph Hosey 5:59am

The attorney representing Drew Peterson’s son claims the former Oak Brook police chief hid evidence as part of a vindictive plot to boot the accused wife-killer’s kid from his department.

In a motion penned by Fraternal Order of Police attorney Tamara Cummings, the lawyer charged that former Chief Thomas Sheahan “intentionally concealed or directed to be concealed the existence of witnesses and witness testimony” that might have helped Peterson’s son Stephen Peterson when he was fighting to keep his job as an Oak Brook cop.

 ::snipping2::

Stephen Peterson was fired from the Oak Brook Police Department in February. He has yet to get his job back, but Sheahan was right about him losing his wife and house. It is not known if his dog has died or if he ever even had one.

Stephen Peterson’s infamous father, Drew Peterson, cost him his job when he had him stash three of his firearms before the state police could execute a search of Drew Peterson’s Bolingbrook house in October 2007.

 ::snipping2::

IIRC, Stephen's wife was with the FBI.  I wonder what she thinks of her ex and his daddy now?

The article below states that his wife is a federal agent with the inspector general's office for the U.S. Housing Department.  It seems that the marriage didn't last long; they got married in 2007.

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/iteam&id=7636226

 ::snipping2::

This is not the first time Drew Peterson's police officer son has been in trouble. Stephen Peterson has been suspended on at least five occasions in his short career. His resume of punishment includes a suspension in April, 2008 for violating Oak Brook Police Dept. rules. He wore his police uniform and used a village squad car to drive to Joliet for his appearance in front of a Will County grand jury that was investigating his father.

That suspension followed an I-Team report in Dec. 2007 that Illinois state investigators had subpoenaed the personnel files of three men with connections to the village of Oakbrook Police Department. Among them was Steve Peterson.State authorities removed Steve Peterson's police personnel file and other records of his patrol activities during key period of his step-mothers' disappearances. In 2007 the I-Team was by investigators that state police seized the Oakbrook department personnel files of two of Peterson's closest friends on the force. One had resigned while under investigation for professional misconduct. The other was terminated for lying and unauthorized access of criminal files.

Those who know Drew and Steve Peterson say the men are more like best friends than father and son. Drew was Steve's best man at his wedding in 2007. Stephen Peterson's wife Teresa is a federal agent with the inspector general's office for the U.S. Housing Department

 ::snipping2::

More frivilous claims and lawsuits from the Peterson camp..like father like son.

The whole point of his termination was that he was a constant problem child and like his Dad Drew couldn't follow orders ..and neither could his two best buddies on the force..who are also gone.

Plain and simple both Steve and Drew knew that Steve taking and concealing his father's firearms during the disappearance of his stepmom was against the law..they were both cops..they knew what they were doing was wrong..and Drew thought everyone would look the other way.  Drew was a dirty cop and his son was too..they both thought they were above the laws they were entrusted to enforce.

She can say whatever she wants about the chief ..his cooperation or lack of cooperation have nothing to do with taking and concealing firearms during a LE investigation...case closed.

I second your opinion Gypsy.   ::rhino::

http://www.suntimes.com/news/sneed/9122765-452/turnabout-cardinal-george-given-communion-by-rev-pfleger.html

Turnabout? Cardinal George given communion — by Rev. Pfleger
By MICHAEL SNEED msneed@suntimes.com November 29, 2011 7:02PM

 ::snipping2::

The Peterson file . . .

Incarcerated murder suspect Drew Peterson’s teenage sons — Tommy, 18, and Kris, 17 — visited their father Saturday for the first time since he was arrested in 2009 on charges he killed his third wife, Kathleen Savio — who is also their mother. (He is also suspected in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.)

◆ Backshot: “Drew hadn’t wanted his kids to see him in jail — but it’s been so long and he decided the kids are mature enough now to come see him,” said a source.

◆ Upshot: Peterson’s sons spoke to him for about 30 minutes via video conference. “They both still stand by his side,” said the source. Tommy is a freshman at Penn State University and Kris is a senior at Bolingbrook High School. Peterson is in Will County jail awaiting trial.

 ::snipping2::