On September 4th, Illinois’ State’s Attorney, James Glasgow, and Attorney General, Lisa Madigan, filed separate objections to motions filed by Drew Peterson’s defense team, which challenged the constitutionality of the so-called “Hearsay Law“.
The objections maintain that the new statute violates neither ex post facto nor confrontation right principles.
Even if you normally have a hard time wading through legal documents, I’d urge anyone with an interest in this case to read through these objections. The quality of the research, the clearness of argument and the absence of silly evidence (i.e., quoting of Google searches) is in striking contrast to the motions that have been filed thusfar by Peterson’s defense.
UPDATE 9/11/09: The defense has filed a response to the objections by the State. It is the last motion to be filed regarding this issue before the hearing on October 2. Scroll down to read the reply. All of the motions can be found on the documents page.
Attorney General’s Filing of Objections to Defendant’s Motion to Declare 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 Unconstitutional
State’s Attorney’s Response to Defendant’s Motion to Declare 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 Unconstitutional
UPDATE – Filed September 11, 2009: DEFENDANT’S REPLY TO THE RESPONSES OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS AND THE WILL COUNTY STATES ATTORNEY TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DECLARE 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Line and paragraph breaks are automatic in comments. The following HTML tags are allowed:
<a href=""> <abbr> <acronym> <b> <blockquote> <cite> <pre> <em> <i> <q> <strike> <strong>