Exclusive: Michelle LeFort, Lisa Ward’s co-author speaks out.
Author, Michelle LeFort
UPDATE 4:18 pm: It would now appear that Victoria Connolly and Lisa Ward have received cease and desist letters and that Joel Brodsky may have sent one to Ms. LeFort at an old address. We’re going to need to hold off on any further questions for a bit.
Since the news broke that Drew Peterson’s former step-daughter, Lisa Ward was speaking out and writing a book with allegations of abuse, there’s been plenty of discussion, here on the blog and elsewhere. We’ve wondered, why is she speaking up now? Why is she writing a book? Who is this author she is working with? Why is Drew’s lawyer hopping up and down and barking like a terrier?
Co-author, Michelle LeFort emailed us this morning with the answers to some of the questions we have been asking.
As for the “cease and desist” demand that Joel Brodsky announced he has issued against the author, she states that she, Vicki Connolly, and Lisa Ward, “have never been given a cease and desist letter-not one of us.” As to Joel Brodsky’s public claims that money is the motivating factor in coming forward, LeFort denies it. “We have made NO money as Mr. Brodsky, wonder attorney, might suggest and all hold down respectable jobs.”
LeFort does not believe that by speaking out, they are endangering the case against Drew Peterson.”We refuse to violate any testimony in this fiasco. Peterson needs stopped. We are trying to believe justice has the opportunity to prevail.”
This morning Ms. Lefort also posted a comment at Justice Café. We paste her comment here in toto, for you to read.
I am Michelle LeFort. I’m sorry that we cannot comment on some of the questions that you raise in this blog and that the administrator asked me to comment on. I am happy to make a statement and had emailed as well.
Vicki (the correct spelling) had a car accident March 1, 1990 in Naperville unincorporated. She did NOT date Jeffrey Archer (personally verified by his wife, his parents and Vicki as well.) Jeffrey was killed, and had been having an affair, but it was with someone else and his wife knew about it. It could have been misconstrued to have been Kathleen Savio, but, again, it was not someone who had anything to do with this case according to his wife.
(NoWay –hello, Darlin)
Lisa and Vicki have not come forward until now, because they are afraid. The legal team for Drew Peterson isn’t even the worst of it, but the sheer unabashed fear they faced for the duration of the time they spent with Drew. Money and Power are all I have seen in researching this case for nearly two years as HIS motive. We have waited to come forward for the very reason that Brodsky is proving all over the Internet-it comes down to name-calling. EVERYONE who says anything negative about Peterson is called a liar. Please tell me you see the antics. Are either of these men capable of rigorous honesty? They bash everyone. We really didn’t want to see our names smeared in the headlines with everyone else’s. We are human; we have feelings; we have fears; we are not backing down, just trying to do the right thing. We commend Cassandra, Anna and Sue, Neil, Steve … we understand what you go through and we’re sorry.
For women and children who have suffered domestic violence, the intrinsic fear they face is so deep that they rarely overcome it and move on without fearing their abuser.
Understand that Vicki and Lisa have undertaken the commitment to tell their story in a safe environment, a court of law first and then to detail that in books they are writing so that they don’t have to worry about Peterson/Brodsky (the incredible duo) trying to contaminate their lives. Facing this after years of trying to heal, they are still terrified that threats they received can be delivered. Their lives have been riddled by the murder of Kathleen Savio and the disappearance of Stacy Peterson in so many ways. Can you imagine if you had been married to Drew Peterson, what would it be like of a day? People calling you repeatedly wanting to know what he’s like. Being called to testify before the Grand Jury not once, but multiple times. The media hounding you for interviews, the spotlight shining on your life? Justice is their only concern. They have no monetary gain at this point and if a book deal is signed, they have it in place to donate a portion of the proceeds to the Domestic Violence Association of Illinois in the name of Stacy Peterson and Kathleen Savio. I have never witnessed two women who want nothing but justice and have a RIGHT to tell their story-like Vicki and Lisa, whom I have grown to love and respect. Feeling safe enough for them to do so will include a conviction in court and then their stories will be available. Please know that they must keep their families in mind when they make decisions regarding this case. As well, they have to testify at the trial and will not make their testimony a public affair until they have given that testimony to the appropriate source: THE JURY!
Not one cease and desist order was filed or letter seen, delivered or served at this point. My legal team has not received anything, including this so-called letter and Brodsky knows who they are and where to find them. As of Thursday, before the airing of Inside Edition, nothing had been delivered and I’m not interested in his ‘letter writing’ ability publicized by press releases sent out by Glenn Selig. When a judge tells me to cease and desist, I will comply. However, that will never happen, there would have had to have been something to base that order on and Brodsky has nothing. I am not legally bound to Brodsky OR Peterson, never have been, never will be. I was the first author that Glenn Selig approached to write Peterson’s story … I’ve seen what they have done to the other authors approached and I faced a similar situation, but did not want to make it public, because my intention to tell the story I found with decency and humanity is my only concern. There IS a story, one that will curl your toes, make you angry and fall in line to everything you have heard in this case. Testimony for the prosecution is what I want to hear … Don’t you? Vicki will not be heard before her testimony, because she is possibly the key witness for the prosecution. Vicki’s story is what you WILL want to hear, trust me on that.
The trial will start soon and we can all rest that justice will prevail and Kathleen Savio (severely abused by Drew Peterson according to her family and friends) and Stacy Peterson (who had been to Kathleen’s divorce attorney days before disappearing) will finally see that justice. Their family and friends, loved ones who have suffered maximum amounts of pain publicly, will finally rest at ease that justice was served and may begin to heal from the travesty they have faced. It’s been a long journey in this case, one we will never forget, but the outcome is just around the corner and I believe that justice will be served. I want to hear the gavel slam …
I have followed your blog the duration and am familiar with what most of you have said. There were days I wished I could tell you what was going on, how things were moving forward, but it wasn’t the right time. We have kept a lid on things, because it was the right thing to do. October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month and Lisa chose to tell some of her story now, in reference to DVAM, in order to have women that face this situation possibly hear that getting out is possible and that you can heal. In time, all is possible. Please understand that this trial has cost everyone involved but Drew Peterson grave emotional tension, horrendous stress and fear.
The gavel slamming is the key …
Thank you, Michelle for your thoughtful and detailed response!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~By commenting you agree to be bound by the rules of this blog. If you spot a rule violation, send an e-mail to petersonstory@gmail.com.~
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>
Gosh, I hate it when a “cease and desist” letter goes missing, don’t you?
One thing I do know, I don’t put any stock in anything much of what Brodsky says. I’m pretty good at research after all these months, but I don’t think finding an accurate or true statement by Brodsky, as it relates to the Drew Peterson cases, is waiting to be found. Rather, the statements he has made that have been proven inaccurate are numerous.
Ms. LeFort – if you can, would you please clarify who you mean by “Steve?”
Thanks so much, Ms LeFort for sharing and clarifying what you can with/for us. It’s really appreciated.
Good point, Rescue. My immediate reaction was that she was referring to Steve Maniaci, but I suppose there’s an outside chance it could be Steve Peterson.
You would think at some point that Brodsky would get the message that he’s used up all of his free passes as being credible when he opens his mouth threatening and bashing anyone who has anything negative to say about Drew. How many times does he have to get busted by the gals at Justice Cafe before he gives it up? Some folks don’t ever learn lessons from their mistakes. He seems to be incapable of spewing anything but dishonest garble. He’s established a record of dishonesty for almost two years now. If he has any hopes of landing a big book deal when this is all over, he’s certainly gone about it the wrong way. Why would anyone want to buy anything he’s penned knowing that it will be filled with untruths to whine about his misunderstood client and to coverup his own incompetence as a criminal lawyer?
“…Ms LeFort does not believe that by speaking out, they are endangering the case against Drew Peterson.”We refuse to violate any testimony in this fiasco. Peterson needs stopped. We are trying to believe justice has the opportunity to prevail.”
***
First of all, Ms LeFort, I thank you as well, for responding to this blog.
I am confused about the statement, “We refuse to violate any testimony…”
I’m sure the meaning is not what it looks like at first glance, so would like to know-is this is a legal term, or is there something just I am missing?
Thanks to whomever can help me out, here.
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/stacy.peterson.search.2.490122.html
How many times have the words “fear of” appeared in a sentence that refers to Drew Peterson????
I guess all those times that carloads of girls drove past Drew’s house to ask for autographs or pictures, he didn’t realize that it was on a dare.
Now that it looks like he is in jail for the duration, I wouldn’t be surprised to see even more people speaking out.
I have never read this comment, rescue. Thanks for posting it.
If Carol Brown said she was also abused, I would not wonder.
Cyrhla – Carol Brown has publicly denied any abuse by Drew Peterson, and merely confirmed he cheated on her.
However, she did make this remark also:
Source: acandyrose.com
Rescue, I meant that she may do it now, when Drew is in prison and she can feel safe
or simply to reread because there was so much information given at the very beginning that we could miss them. My first impression on Carol was that she is not telling the truth (or at least the whole truth).
I though I had read all the interviews and comments on the case but there is still a lot to discover
I can remeber Rick Mimms mentioning Eric as well, but I have never though that Eric was afraid of him.
Well, Cyrhla, Carol Brown is the ONLY surviving Peterson spouse that has children with this man, but I would think that her concern is for her children more than it would be for herself, in making public statements. Obviously that can’t be said for Drew, since he’s used character assassination whenever it suited him when speaking of Kathleen and/or Stacy. Throw in a little help from his lawyer in that regard.
So, if she continued to lay low and stayed away from the fray, I could certainly understand that, especially when it comes to protecting her two sons from any unwelcome public attention at this point.
Cyrhla, I think that anyone around him who knows or suspects he’s guilty, knows or seriously suspects other things he may have done, would be afraid. His dad being such a big “disciplinarian” and all…
Carol Brown has always struck me as either being in deep denial about her first husband, or that she is otherwise attempting to minimize the embarrassment for the sake of Steve and Eric. Since when is it that being on the receiving end of a cheating, philandering, and controlling husband that you don’t feel you’ve been at least emotionally abused? Her comment questioning the lawyer’s ethics who represented both of them seems like a feeble attempt to deflect the blame from Drew’s shoulders for having wrecked their marriage. Drew’s child support contribution of $250/month for the boys seems pretty feeble, IMO, considering his police officer salary. If he was such a great guy, why wouldn’t she have taken him back to court to have the support amount increased as the financial demands would have dictated as the boys progressed through their teenage years? Perhaps she didn’t want to rock the boat, because she too was afraid of him. Carol Brown strikes me as a woman who was happy to have landed herself a good second husband, who also happened to be a high school friend of Drew’s, and she didn’t want to make any waves for anyone, because she knew the outcome would be unpleasant.
Knowing how much he has got away with for all those years, I do not wonder people have not even tried to do anything about it. I would not dare to criticize Carol or anyone for not stepping forward. I only blame those who knowingly helped Drew do all those things (and are still helping).
However, I admire all those who did not let Drew get away with it this time.
Silly Drew! He just wasn’t counting on those big-hearted hellcat sisters of Kathleen’s joining forces with feisty little Cass so quickly. He and Brodsky can talk all the trash they want to about what dysfunctional families Kathleen and Stacy came from, but he really miscalculated what brave, loving people these folks all turned out to be.
I appreciate this statement very much, and feel for these women. We’ve all seen what Joel and Drew do to anyone with the guts to speak up about him.
Well, I have this to say.
Brodsky himself used bought and paid for pictures that were, at the time, ten years earlier of Tom Morphey. Peterson bought them from an old gf of Morphey’s, as I understand it. I can find the information to portray myself as being accurate in saying this.
Once he got his hands on those pictures, he tried every which way he could to get them on tv while he was being interviewed, opening up his pie hole.
He tried to get Dan Abrams to show them, but the show rejected that idea. Also, he tried to get Legal Pub, an attorney blog of sorts, to publish it, and wanted all to think Morphey was a drug head, smoking a pipe. Only problem is, he misrepresented the facts. But, the idea was to destroy the character of the man that said he helped Drew Peterson carry something out of the house.
So, whatever Brodsky says and does, and no matter how much he puffs himself up, he’s the pot calling the kettle black.
Damn.
From Legal Pub
Stepbrother: Drew tries to discredit me
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/1469992,Stepbrother-Drew-tries-discredit-me_jo031009.article
March 11, 2009
By JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com
BOLINGBROOK — If he is supposed to be such an unreliable, delusional, mentally ill alcoholic, Thomas Morphey wants to know, then why has Drew Peterson gone to such lengths to discredit him?
“From the very beginning, they have done nothing but paint me in a certain light,” said Morphey, the stepbrother of the celebrated murder suspect. “If there was nothing to hide, why would they go to the extremes that they have?”
Thomas Morphey says his stepbrother Drew Peterson and his attorney Joel Brodsky have done their best to smear and discredit him since he told authorities what he knew of the disappearance of Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy.
It might have something to do with Morphey recently accusing Peterson of asking him to kill for him the day before Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, was last seen alive.
And on the next day — Oct. 28, 2007 — Morphey said he helped Peterson carry a blue barrel out of the Peterson home and down to a waiting sport utility vehicle. Morphey believes Stacy Peterson’s body was in the barrel.
Morphey said the experience left him despondent and fearful for the welfare of his longtime girlfriend and her three children. He attempted suicide two days after Stacy vanished, he said, in hopes they might escape Peterson’s malice.
Morphey survived the drug overdose. The next day, he said, State’s Attorney James Glasgow offered him immunity from prosecution in exchange for his testimony. The Herald News has obtained a copy of the immunity offer, which demands the full story of what he was up to with Peterson the weekend of Oct. 27, 2007, along with his disclosure of any knowledge he has of the “kidnapping or murder of Stacy Peterson.”
Peterson’s pattern
Since then, Morphey said, Peterson and his attorney Joel Brodsky have done their best to smear and discredit him.
In fact, Brodsky held a press conference Tuesday in Chicago in which he questioned why Morphey has not gone before the grand jury and his viability as a witness.
“If they found him credible, (Morphey) would have been one of the first witnesses they would have brought in and they would have based the entire investigation and the entire case on his testimony,” Brodsky said at the news conference called to rebut Morphey’s first public allegations against his stepbrother that were first reported in The Herald News.
Morphey said he sees a pattern in this, with Peterson ripping anyone who dares speak ill of him — including ex-wives, a former fiancee, a minister and two friends, Len Wawczak and Paula Stark, who worked with the state police to record his conversations.
“It’s been anyone who has anything negative to say from the get-go,” Morphey said.
Morphey also accused Peterson and his friend, Steve Carcerano, of paying one of Morphey’s former girlfriends $500 for photographs depicting Morphey in a less than favorable light.
Brodsky, without success, attempted to distribute the photographs, one of which allegedly showed Morphey smoking marijuana. The woman, Holly Steele, confirmed in September that she sold the photographs to Peterson and Carcerano.
Carcerano said he remembers accompanying Peterson to purchase photographs of Morphey but did not know the name of the woman they obtained them from. He also disputed the $500 price tag for the pictures but did not give a figure for them.
Morphey described the picture ploy as “the stunt that they tried to pull in the beginning, buying 10-year-old pictures and trying to make them seem recent.”
More witnesses?
Despite the backlash from Peterson and Brodsky, Morphey said he has no regrets about breaking his 17-month silence to go public about the role he believes he played in Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.
“I feel like a weight’s been lifted,” he said.
And Morphey hinted there may be more potential Peterson witnesses going public.
“I don’t think it will be too long before Len (Wawczak) and Paula (Stark) have had enough where they say what they need to say,” he said.
This is just classic Joel: bluster, swear, and threaten. Even people who’ve got nothing to be scared of get frightened and back down under the threat of a legal snafu. Geoff Pinkus backed off when Joel threatened him with legal action for saying that he turned down the offer of free wings because he was afraid he’d “choke” on them. It’s not many people who are ready to take on a fomenting lawyer in full display.
I keep forgetting to mention the time when he tried to get Joe Hosey fired! Luckily, news organizations are equipped with nets and tranquilizers to deal with the likes of leBrodsque.
I don’t believe it’s what these people are saying that they’re afraid of when Brodsky barks, it’s his threat of lawsuit. Lawyers charge hundreds of dollars an hour for their services, and Brodsky is obviously using this to get his targets to back off.
He gets away with his disgusting remarks day in and day out, but he sure as hell tries to intimidate everyone he can if HE decides he doesn’t like what they’re saying.
What’s funny about all this is he is 0 for 0 in winning anything.
As far as coming forward is concerned:
There’s something like 40.000.00 pages of discovery, “literally hundreds of witnesses” (850 ?) relating to the Kathleen Savio case ALONE and based on these figures one can only imagine what is still being investigated by the State about everything else that’s been coming to light since Stacy’s disappearance.
It is therefore not a matter of people not coming forward, it is much more a matter of people not going public that’s important right now !
Why give Drew and Joel an early platform for their vindictive responses ?
Better let Joel make a fool of himself in the Courtroom (!!)
Well, Cyrhla, Carol Brown is the ONLY surviving Peterson spouse that has children with this man, but I would think that her concern is for her children more than it would be for herself, in making public statements. Obviously that can’t be said for Drew, since he’s used character assassination whenever it suited him when speaking of Kathleen and/or Stacy. Throw in a little help from his lawyer in that regard.
So, if she continued to lay low and stayed away from the fray, I could certainly understand that, especially when it comes to protecting her two sons from any unwelcome public attention at this point.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Absolutely and when Drew and Carol married they were both very young (Carol was barely out of high school ?) so Drew obviously did not have a long history of anything to compare with at that stage either.
Carol was 17 and Drew was 20 when they married.
Considering what Drew and Joel come out with in public, I wish the States Attorneys office would reveal how many boxes, pages of discovery and witnesses, Joel has submitted for the Defense (!!)
October 11, 2009 at 6:17 pm | #24
Quote
Carol was 17 and Drew was 20 when they married.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thank you facs !
I don’t mean to blame anyone for being intimidated. I don’t think many people are prepared to deal with legal threats.
Wow.
Hey, Noway – I guess that ’shout out’ answers your question?
I’m sorry I am late getting here and missed the opportunity to have questions answered, but I can wait.
Is Joel more worried about what Lisa and Vicki have to say than he let in. I think so!
I found it very interesting that Joel first stated that Vicki and Lisa were free to say whatever they wanted, that his only concern was the (alleged) breaching of the contract with LeFort.
The fact that he sent letters to Vicki and Lisa as well makes it seem as if he is concerned over much more than just a perceived breach of a non-disclosure or confidentiality clause. What is he so afraid of?
Also sounds like a big-ass cluster of sour grapes on his part.
In the Cease and Desist letter dated Oct. 5, 2009, Peterson’s attorney writes: “As I assume that Ms. Ward and Ms. Connolly are not aware, Ms. Michelle LeFort had entered into a written contract to collaborate and co-write a book about the life story of Drew Peterson from Mr. Peterson’s perspective in February of 2008. Ms. LeFort breached her agreement and then withdrew from this collaboration agreement in March of 2008. In withdrawing from the collaboration agreement, Ms. LeFort agreed that any work she did concerning the life story of Drew Peterson belonged to her collaborating author, who still owns those rights.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Call me confused, but doesn’t this statement by Joel Brodsky relate to ownership of any work Michelle LeFort may have done in regard to co-writing the life story (from his perspective) of Drew Peterson ??
Since Michelle LeFort is not publishing a book about Drew Petersons Life Story From His Perspective, how does it make sense for Joel Brodsky to issue a Cease And Desist to Michelle LeFort/Lisa Ward/Vicki Connolly for that particular work ??
HUH ???
Can I guess the book title of Drew Petersons life story (From His Perspective) is going to be:
(How) I DID IT
What happens now that the cease and desist order has been received by Michelle (and Vicki and Lisa)?
or possibly:
EVERYONE MADE ME DO IT
I’m with Noway on the “Wow”. I appreciate seeing the response from Ms. LeFort. It seems possbile that Stacy’s disappearance could have created the total unraveling of Drew’s power over so many people. So far these two women have not done anything that would make me believe Drew over them. Having been a victim of abuse by an extended family member myself – I fully understand that it is sometimes easy to push it down and pretend it didn’t happen and the difficulties of talking about it.
It seems that the defense team seems to hold no boundaries on what to say about anyone on the prosecution’s side.
It floored me just a little that Vicki is possibly the key witness for the prosecution (as stated above by Michelle).
Noway – In answer to your question about what happens next, Ms. LeFort said she was going to have her attorney handle it as quickly as possible.
I’m not surprised that she wouldn’t be a key witness – but the key witness? The part that would make her key IMO would be if she will get up on the stand and say that he told her he could kill her and make it look like an accident. If she also opens up about physical abuse along with his control tactics (bugging their home, following her, etc) that would be important as well.
I recall there being a report that right after Kathleen’s death that Drew called her. I wonder what she will testify that he said. So far all we heard is that he called her and said they may ask her questions. Maybe she never got called or he had threatened her?
It’s going to be a while before this trial actually starts. I can’t wait to see the real testimony instead of having to just imagine what it will be…
It seems possbile that Stacy’s disappearance could have created the total unraveling of Drew’s power over so many people. So far these two women have not done anything that would make me believe Drew over them.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Absolutely !
And if anyone was still hesitant, Drews arrest would have been another catalyst.
TAI, it was “the” that got me. Not “a” key witness but “possible the key witness.”
And thanks for that info, Rescue,
Noway – I did get that. That’s why I said I could see her being “a” key witness but questioned the “the” key witness part. Could testimony such as I commented about make her “the” key witness?? If she will testify that he told her during an argument that he could kill her and make it look like an accident or if she will testify that when he called her he threatened her or something to that effect then I’d say she could indeed be “the” key witness.
I am still floored there are literally “hundreds” (850 ?) of witnesses for the Prosecution and these are witnesses with valuable and relevant information pertaining to the Kathleen Savio case alone.
One can only imagine how many people must have actually come forward for the Prosecution to end up with such a massive resource of credible witnesses !!
The mind boggles how many people have held back and for how long because of what Drew could do to them (!!)
I think everyone is floored to hear 850 potential witnesses. I still cannot wrap my head around that number either.
There IS a story, one that will curl your toes, make you angry and fall in line to everything you have heard in this case. Testimony for the prosecution is what I want to hear … Don’t you? Vicki will not be heard before her testimony, because she is possibly the key witness for the prosecution. Vicki’s story is what you WILL want to hear, trust me on that.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I don’t think anyone doubts there is a story pertaining Drews involvement with Vicki/Lisa that is ugly and horrendous and when the time is right it definitely needs to be told, but with the upcoming trial a lot of what Drew is capable of will already be revealed without Lisa having to presently subject herself to additional and renewed humiliation by Drew and Joel, especially considering this is such an extremely sensitive/delicate/hurtful subject for her in particular since all this happened as a young girl in her formative years when she had no control over where she lived or who her step father was.
JAH, I think it’s up to Lisa to decide how extremely sensitive/delicate/hurtful a subject this is. If she wants to tell her story, who are we to tell her she can’t?
EXACTLY facs !
I agree. If Lisa has finally found the courage to make her voice be heard, God bless her. For every person that speaks out, there are hundreds of others too afraid or too embarassed to do so. Abuse is often hidden behind closed doors and becomes the secret burden that so many women have had to carry through their lives.
Yes, that is so true about having the courage to speak out if it’s to help others. But, at this point, Brodsky is threatening them with his usual scare tactics, and has sent Ms. Connolly and Ms. Ward the letter he says he did, which is to stop working with Ms. LeFort. So, at this point, he’s trying to quiet these woman from speaking out against his client, even though his press release says differently. Scaring and intimidating people with legal action has worked for him in the past. He just can’t win a motion in court, when it really counts.
I am so sick of that bullying creep. I’d like to wind up a big one and land it right up along side of his damn bald head.
I think you and facs discussed the issue above. People are afraid of the legal fees, court costs, etc. You’re right, this is nothing but plain intimidation and the trampling of an individual’s freedom of speech.
Just because an attorney says something, it doesn’t mean it’s so. I sm in hopes someone comes forward and stands up to Brodsky’s intimidation tactics.
Susan Murphy Milano has a new post up on her site with her latest view on the recent Drew Peterson and Brodsky news. I love her headline!
http://murphymilanojournal.blogspot.com/
Rescue and Facs (and all of the JC team)-
In case you haven’t been told lately, the work you’ve been doing on this site makes a difference.
Sugar – I’d like to be there to watch you land one upside the head of the boogie man.
Docs – Thank you very much for your good thoughts! We appreciate that.
***
I guess Broadway Brod thinks he’s not getting enough Drewpy dough. Maybe this is his way of supplementing his income. Who knows? Someone may have to pay a dime.
Wouldn’t you have thought that Gloria Allred’s fame and nobility in defense of women and children’s causes would have been so much more productive and helpful right now for Vicki Connolly and Lisa Ward, rather than jumping in to represent a 23 year old that moved in with a man who was, at the time, suspected of making his wife disappear? A man who was chasing skirts for months and months after his wife disappeared, leaving him with four minor children.
I guess getting jilted at the alter by Drew Peterson after a short engagement is much more important. See, how screwed up this all is?
Rescue – Unfortunately, I think “fame” beat out “nobility” in Ms. Allred’s professional choices quite awhile back.
The Peterson media team made Chrissy out to be the latest story drama in Drew’s life. Foolish people.IMO In her haste to secure an “in” regarding the Peterson trial, Gloria overlooked that the heart of the story was in the words of the surviving women and their families. Drew is meeting his ghosts of Christmas Pasts.
You’re right, Rescue. An experienced individual such as Gloria, should have been more selective with her client choices.
LOL He’s meeting the ghosts of ghostwriters of the past, too!
It’s precisely down to Allred’s “experience” that she had to nab Chrissy quick as she was looking to be a famehead lawyer’s last opportunity to attach their bloodsucking mouth parts to the crimes of Drew Peterson. Her daughter has shown hints she even goes so far as to pinch hit for the wrong side.
Ah, Bucket, you have such a true way of saying it. You speak wisely.
How can you fairly comment on a case in the media when the family is receiving income from connections with the defense? Seems like a conflict of interest to me. CNN should think about their credibility. IMO
Oh, it’s all so jive. I’ve really been appalled at the way Amanda Knox’ trial is reported in the US. The interviewers just simper at their family (and even offer help!) while they lie their heads off and don’t even acknowledge the real victim. It’s pretty scary to me.
LOL It reminded me how we were all throwing our slippers at the tv over Larry King et al. Ah, happy days.
Ha, you mean when Sir Assalot tugged on his ear to show his love for Ashley?
Yeah, those were the days.
ROFL. Ashley *swoon*. Lenny, mate, you’re legend.
and so are you and Facs, of course!
“In 1980, Peterson filed for divorce and appointed an attorney. Brown, who was not working at the time, could not afford a lawyer, so Peterson’s attorney oversaw the divorce proceedings. “That would be the controlling-type thing that he would do,” she said.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well hmmm, if your affairs are being handled by the same lawyer as your soon to be ex-husband, that lawyer is not going to be looking after your interest.
That lawyer is going to be looking after the (ex) husbands interest only, which is why Drew organized it that way.
He started young !!
Will Drew ever tell where Stacy is? This is a little read about why convicts don’t tell (all logical, but here’s the psychologists)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8292395.stm
That Drew … what a nice guy. I mean Carol wanted the divorce. She couldn’t afford an attorney. What else could he do?
Something is tugging at my memory but I can’t put it into words that will get me a good Google result.
Didn’t Kathleen use an attorney who usually handled cases for police officers? I don’t remember what the situation was, just that Kathleen used someone in a legal situation who had more of a connection to police officers … help!
Going back to Lisa’s interview with GVS from November 2007, I find this quote interesting:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,311218,00.html
Seems like Drew was very eager to make sure people (like Stacy) were “debriefed” before speaking with police about the situation.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317115,00.html
Noway – I’m not sure what capacity you mean when you refer to Kathleen using an attorney, but, if you will recall, she did use Harry Smith for her divorce.
I’m finding some very interesting quotes from Vicki, early November, 2007:
http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2007/nov/16/news/chi-peterson_16_nov16
I got a call a few minutes ago from an associate who listens to Man-Cow and said that a caller called in with a *joke* that went as follows:
” ..Nobel committee awarded to the ” young piece award ” to Roman Polanski..”
According to my associate, the Man-Cow expressed his displeasure at the bad taste of the callers joke and that was that and to this I say BS !!
They have screeners who screen calls, not to mention a 15 second delay button. On the Man-Cows show, it’s perfectly OK to make a sick joke at the expense of a then 13 years old child who was drugged, anally and orally raped and sodomized and denied justice for this assault because the coward fled America. This victim is now a middle age woman still dealing with the trauma but to Man-Cow, she is unimportant and a source of intertainment for his listeners. Considering the free air time the Man-Cow allocated toward the thing known as Drew and his jackass of a lawyer, I really have to wonder why he hates women and mocks and trivializes crimes commited against women and young girls.
This is most definitely not OK.
A shock-jock relies on the indignation of listeners and the attention it gains him. Without ratings he’s out of a job. The best defense is to not listen!
How many times have we seen this with Peterson’s other wives?
Vicki Connolly:
I do not listen to him. He is boring. He does ,however, have an audience and he doesn’t care who or what he wrings out for a paycheck. Decent people everywhere should be concerned about this because women matter and assaults against women should be everyones business.
Heh – Shock jock himself loves to bring up the fact that he has young daughters.
Scary, isn’t it? How he makes money to raise his daughters is his concern, not the morals he lacks as an “entertainer.” I take him as I see him – a waste of time that I can never get back by listening to him.
More from that same article:
It’s really fascinating how so much of importance was said in the very first days of Stacy’s disappearance, and after two years it just affirms what the rest of us have been learning all this time. Drew’s courtship of Chrissy would appear to have been following the same model.
Females represent a commodity to him and that includes his daughters and why should they be the exception. Gotta wonder how ( in the future of course) he would react if one of them came home battered and bloodied after a *date*…
Heh – he left out the part on how he tries to manipulate their thinking — how he tries to convince them he’s the center of their universe, and only him.
But, in a lucid moment, Ms. Raines managed to think for herself long enough to hire Gloria Allred to nail his sorry ass for some monetary reason, I assume.
No, I don’t mean Harry Smith. I’m back now and have time to search for it. Dang, but it’s scratching the inside of my head.
Is it Jeff Ortinau, noway?
Power of attorney and Jeffery Ortinau, Attorney at Law, 430 W. Boughton Rd, Bolingbrook, Il 60440
Maybe it was him.
LOL, yes. I think that’s who it is but I can’t find him in the Who’s Who or much about him, but for some reason, I think he’s associated with the Bolingbrook PD …
He used to be a BB police officer.
04/24/2002 Kathleen Peterson SPECIFIC POWER OF ATTORNEY (Notorized by Drew Peterson)
Transcribed by http://www.acandyrose.com
I, Kathleen Peterson (Grantor) hereby appoint JEFFERY ORTINAU as my agent to exercise the powers described in this instrument in my name and on my behalf.
My agent is authorized to represent my interests at the real estate closing to be held on, APRIL 25, 2002 in connection with the purchase of real estate located at 6 PHESANT CHASE BOLINGBROOK and legally described as follows. Lot 118 IN PHEASANT CHASE UNIT 3, BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE PART OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 37 NORTH, RANGE 10, EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED OCTOBER 15, 1996 AS DOCUMENT NO 296-92632, IN WILL COUNTY, ILLINOIS.
Permanent Index No: 02-18-401-037
My agent is authorized to sign on my behalf mortgage, note and other documents from Aegi? Mortgage Corporation (New America Financial Inc.) and such closing statements settlement statements, title insurance forms and other documents necessary to complete the closing on said property.
This power of attorney shall become effective on APRIL 24, 2002 and shall terminate upon the completion of the closing on the property located at 6 PHESANT CHASE COURT BOILINGBROOK, IL 60440.
I have executed this instrument on APRIL 24, 2002 ________________ SIGNED KATHLEEN PETERSON (Signature of Grantor)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on this 24th day of April 2002 who is personally known to me to be the same person who name is subcribed to the foregoing instrument.
Notarized by: Drew W. Peterson
Prepared by Jeffery Ortinau, Attorney at Law, 430 W. Boughton Rd, Bolingbrook, Il 60440
Admin Note: Original doc here/
http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/documents/kathleen-savio-murder-case-divorce-will-and-estate/#mm
http://www.mapunion.org/mazzone.html
Case Summaries by Jeff Ortinau
Same person?
For sure.
http://www.mapunion.org/ortinau.html
http://casehelpers.6.forumer.com/viewtopic.php?t=996
Why would Kathleen use a police department attorney
Good job Cyrhla! I had a memory of that as well but couldn’t find the right search terms to get a good result.
Maybe Ortinau was someone she and Drew had used before, someone that Kathleen was familiar with, in the same way that Stacy sought out Harry Smith for her divorce advice, even though he had been Kathleen’s attorney. We can only guess at this point.
P.S. I updated the Who’s Who with his name.
I do not know if it has anything to do with this power of attorney (signed on 24th April 2002) but Kathleen reported to the police officer on 18th July 2002:
“Kathleen also mentioned a previously unreported incident when Drew cut a hole in her bedroom door to gain entry and removed jewelry and money. I observed the drywall and door. She advised that Drew later gave her back the pair of earrings when he came to the house with another unidentified police officer to have her sign a legal document, at which time he returned the earrings to her. She advised that she did not file police reports on either of these incidents but did advise her attorney.”
So were the earrings his insurance to make certain the document was signed without a fight? Gah…
I don’t know if it would necessarily be a police department attorney. Sometimes, attorneys affiliate themselves with the Fraternal Order of Police in different police jurisdictions, and offer reduced fees to officers for various things, such as Wills, real estate closings, etc.
My BIL was a union plumber, and they had access to attorneys who offered the same sort of reduced fees to the union workers. So, especially when someone hasn’t got the first clue who to use as an attorney sometimes, they turn to attorneys who they might be somewhat familiar with through the union meetings
One thing we know about Kathleen, she was not one to be silent in the face of a wrong against her. If she felt that Ortinau had not served her well, I’m sure we would have some letter or statement about it.
I think Kathleen simply wanted Drew to move out and could have written this document for this reason. Drew might have promissed something else to her for exchange.
We do not know if it was this document Drew told Kathleen to sign when he was at her home with those earings and another officer and we do not know if Ortinau saw Kathleen signing it. However,Drew notarized this power of attorney and property records show it was used. All in all, Drew needed it to buy a house at 6 Phaesant Chase Ct and did not want Kathleen to have anything (=financially) to do with it. IMO.
Right. Since they were not divorced it was a sticky wicket. I’ll bet she was happy just to get him out of her house and thought that she eventually be sole owner of her own and receive half of all their shared assets in the divorce settlements.
Well, we know how that turned out…
i have been serving on the MAP Board for approximately twenty years. I retired from the Bolingbrook Police Department after 27 years of service at the rank of Sergeant. At the present time, I am MAPs legal advisor and attorney, licensed to practice law in Illinois since 1991. My objective is to assist MAP members and all those who serve in law enforcement.
Are spouses MAP members? Or was he really “assisting” Drew?
I’d say he was assisting Drew, but since Kathleen was still his wife….it was still in a MAPs capacity. It makes sense to me that Kathleen would want Drew to get his own house (and leave hers).
That came from the link above http://www.mapunion.org/ortinau.html (Cyrhla #90) … the lowercase “i” is a result of formatting being lost during the copy and paste.
Questionable practice at best. I don’t believe it to be cusomary for a title company to accept this document to waive homestead rights since the title company acts as agent for the lender. I see a lawsuit coming.
I guess I’ll have to wait and see if he’s one of the ones who testifies (of the 800+ witnesses).
While reading through the Who’s Who, I saw Bill Belcher, Jr., was listed as a witness at Kathleen’s autopsy. Does anyone know in what capacity he was there? Who is he?
I believe Belcher’s name appears on the Inquest. Maybe an official from the Coroner’s Office?
Instrument: R2002072859 Old Doc Ref No: Book/Page:
Recorded: 4/30/2002 9:13:00 AM Consideration: $220,000.00 Pages: 2
Document Type: Trustees Deed Comments:
Document Date: 3/4/2002
Grantor: LA SALLE BANK
128436 LSB
Grantee: PETERSON DREW W
—————-
Instrument: R2002072860 Old Doc Ref No: Book/Page:
Recorded: 4/30/2002 9:13:00 AM Consideration: $ Pages: 2
Document Type: Appointment Comments:
Document Date: 4/24/2002
Grantor: PETERSON KATHLEEN
Grantee: ORTINAU JEFFERY
—————-
Instrument: R2002072861 Old Doc Ref No: Book/Page:
Recorded: 4/30/2002 9:13:00 AM Consideration: $226,600.00 Pages: 17
Document Type: Mortgage Comments:
Document Date: 4/25/2002
Grantor: PETERSON DREW W
Grantee: MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC
As you can see the operation took place on the day of signing this power of attorney, i.e. 24 April 2002.
Noway – the way I’m reading it from the actual autopsy, he appears to be with the ISP, because he and another individual are listed that way.
Rescue, I had seen that but no title was listed for him (but all others did).
Patrick O’Neil, Coroner
Bryan Mitchell, M.D. , Examiner
Kevin Stevenson, Deputy Coroner
Bob Diehl, Illinois State Police
Bill Belcher, Jr., No title listed
I don’t know Noway — I read it as him being listed as a partner with Diehl, but I don’t know that for sure.
Uncle.
Interesting that the doc doesn’t say in what capacity he was there.
“On June 7, 2004, an autopsy was performed on Riley Fox by Scott Denton, M.D., and morgue technician Bill Belcher. ”
Found that mention here (forum posting about Riley Fox case):
http://www.talkaboutchit.us/index.php?topic=6947.msg116034#msg116034
Same guy?
June 7, 2004, autopsy was performed on Riley Fox by Scott Denton, M.D., and morgue technician Bill Belcher. Sexual assault kit, containing the swabs, was taken immediately to the Illinois State Police Crime Lab.
LOL … I’m minutes behind!
I was questioning the ethics of Drew notarizing Kathleen’s signature, but it’s legal.
http://www.stevenstitle.com/NotaryPublic.html
“A Notary Public is a public officer appointed under authority of State law who has the power under the law to administer an oath, to certify affidavits and to take acknowledgments. Documents and signatures are authenticated by recognition of the notary seal being affixed to the document.
The role of the Notary Public is to prevent fraud and forgery. The notary acts as an official and unbiased witness to the identity of a person who comes before the notary for a specific purpose. The Notary Public thus plays an important role in commercial and legal transactions.
Frequently Asked Questions
May I notarize my own signature and/or the signatures of my spouse, children and other relatives?
A notary public may not notarize his or her own signature and may not notarize any document in which the notary’s name appears as a party to the transaction. A notary may notarize the signature of his or her spouse, children and other relatives.”
I was a notary, and in that capacity, I was informed enough to know I could not notarize my own signature, nor any document that I was a party to. I was required to have an insurance bond also. The cost, if I remember, is minimal. I was also required to appear at the County Clerk’s Office and sign into a book of some sort to register as a notary.
How and why this got past anyone is beyond me, but I assume that is where the insurance bond will kick in if it was done incorrectly or illegally, no?
Another notary we have in this story is Nicole A Payne notarized an affidavit signed by Alex Morelli and Gary L Marcolina verifying that they had witnessed the signing of the found will on March 2 1997 [August 11, 2004]. I do not know if Nicole A. Payne is still a public notary but she is still a BB police officer.
http://www.bolingbrook.com/docs/bb_report.pdf
She is married and her name is Wlodarski now.
http://www.bolingbrook.com/index.php?page_id=99
So it was okay for him to authorize Kathleen’s signature giving power of attorney to Jeff Ortinau even though it was for a real estate closing that he (Drew) was party to?
BTW, Drew was represented by Alex Beck and subsequently by Joseph Mazzone who is also a MAP member.(look at noway’s post #90).
Everything was ok, right?
They already knew on March 3th, 2004 that it was an accident.
March 3, 2004
BOLINGBROOK — State police questioned a local officer who found his estranged wife dead in her bathtub after trying to return their two children from visitation Monday. The officer, Sgt. Drew Peterson, faces no criminal charges and continues to work for the Bolingbrook Police Department. “At this point, I don’t even consider this a homicide,” said Lt. Larry Brouk, a state police investigator. “The matter currently is nothing more than an investigation into the death of Peterson’s estranged wife, 40-year-old Kathleen Savio.”
An autopsy performed on Savio Tuesday afternoon revealed no signs of foul play, said Coroner Patrick O’Neil. Her cause of death is undetermined pending the results of …
[I just have this excerpt, unfortunatelly; it comes from http://www.highbeam.com)
Cyrhla … here is a bit of the rest:
An autopsy performed on Savio Tuesday afternoon revealed no signs of foul play, said Coroner Patrick O’Neil. Her cause of death is undetermined pending the results of the autopsy.
http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/questions-about-the-peterson-cases-post-them-here/
While the autopsy revealed no signs of foul play, they were still waiting for the results of the autopsy to give them the cause of death?
And Bucket posted:
There is a Larry Brouk who is now Forest View, Cook County police chief.
http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2009/04/03/questions-about-the-peterson-cases-post-them-here/#comment-44674
Thanks, noway
That’s cool they got it all figured out before the inquest. Very handy.
I think they were waiting for the results of the toxycology test.
Drew probably told them that Steve Maniaci stuffed Kathleen with drugs.
This reeks of improprities ! Gotta wonder if this lawyer was an officer with the title company……………..if so, he’s in deep doo doo
Folks, please refrain from speculating about any wrongdoing on the parts of people, unless it can be supported with documentation. Many people are and were associated with Drew Peterson. It’s not fair to put them all under a cloud of suspicion simply by association.
Imagine if this was a member of your family.
Sorry … I was questioning the wrongdoing of Drew Peterson and him notarizing Kathleen’s signature on a document to which he would be connected (the real estate closing). But I don’t have any supporting documentation. I was sort of hoping some expert would say ‘no, that’s not okay’ or ‘yes, that is okay’ …
That’s fine to ask that, Noway. I was trying to rein in the speculation about Jeff Ortinau and various notaries before it gets to the point of libel.
One thing I’ve learned after following Brodsky all these months is to expect the opposite of what he says.
Peterson’s exes talk to grand jury
Not concerned, heh?
http://politicom.moldova.org/news/petersons-exes-talk-to-grand-jury-109341-eng.html
October 13, 2009 at 12:01 pm | #82
Quote
Heh – he left out the part on how he tries to manipulate their thinking — how he tries to convince them he’s the center of their universe, and only him.
But, in a lucid moment, Ms. Raines managed to think for herself long enough to hire Gloria Allred to nail his sorry ass for some monetary reason, I assume.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LOL – I don’t think Ms. Raines was ever that lucid, but Gloria Allred was !!
VAN SUSTEREN: Do you remember when wife number three died, did anyone contact your mother about it?
LISA: Actually, he had contacted my mom and told her about it.
VAN SUSTEREN: What did he say happened?
LISA: He just said that there was an accident with his wife, and you know, somebody might try and contact her to find out some information.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes he appears to be ringing around when there’s accidents with spouses, but when someone doesn’t answer the door for a couple of days and he can’t bring his children back or Stacy just ran off into space he doesn’t bother !!
PETERSON: If I’m the devil because I took better care of her than she’s ever been taken in her life, then I guess I’m the devil. I provided her with a loving home, a clean home. I took her kids in as my own and started raising them as my own. Even though it was a short period of time, that’s how they were treated.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yeah, that’s what you do when you know someone for 4 months (!!).
You take them into your home, you take her kids in as your own and start raising them as your own (!!)
It’s more the sort of thing you do when you know someone for a long time, like since they were 15 and have a long history with you (!!)
You might think that JAH, but actually he did the same thing with Vicki:
That’s why I’m saying that we see this pattern with DP, where he treats every woman the same. He overwhelms and rushes them. He wants them in his house, under his control, ASAP.
Noway, I was thinking that, too, but when I re-read your post (#88) that gave the power of attorney to JEFFERY ORTINAU, it never mentioned Drew Peterson. In Texas, all attorneys are automatic notary publics-don’t know about Illinois, but at any rate, the ATTORNEY should have known it was questionable, at best. And so should anyone who read it afterward, wouldn’t you think?
Gatekeep, I posted the above before I read all the comments. If you believe my post above is inappropriate, please feel free to delete.
Speaking of control… How many cell phones has Drew purchased or transferred to women since Stacy’s disappearance?
That’s why I’m saying that we see this pattern with DP, where he treats every woman the same. He overwhelms and rushes them. He wants them in his house, under his control, ASAP.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Oh absolutely Facs, no doubt about that, but at the same time this man was never monogamous, regardless if he was married, getting married, dating, single or in between.
There seems to always be a 15 year old in the background somewhere and it is just too co-incidental Christina also made mention she has known Drew since she was 15, which would have been completely irrelevant to anything had she really only met him a few months prior to the “engagement” as the story Drew is trying to sell everyone (!!)
Cell phones that he could monitor by GPS I reckon…
Mark Fuhrman Goes Into ‘The Murder Business’
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
This is a rush transcript from “On the Record,” October 13, 2009. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
Interesting! Thanks, Rescue.
YW.
Kind of makes you think about the day Stacy vanished, doesn’t it? I guess it’s logical to think the creep was in a fit of rage at the time he confronted Stacy, acting out so severely that he wound up killing her accidentally. If so, I still don’t consider that an accident — since, IMHO, being so mad as to attack someone physically isn’t accidental. That kind of a person has issues to begin with. It’s been reported extensively that Peterson was a control freak when it came to his family, and he doesn’t seem to take non-compliance very well.
It’s hard to imagine that this man allegedly had to scramble to figure out a way to get Stacy out of the house, without his kids being aware of it.
Hmmm, of course, no one knows except from Drew…But how does it go with Thomas Morphey story? Looking for a storage unit and asking Tom if he could kill for him? Cass relation from her Saturday visit? . There are so many people who say Drew acts methodologically, that I do not think it was an accident. He could have gotten so emotial because Cassandra queered his pitch. IMO
I agree. IMO her demise was planned. I’m not sure if he knew he was going to do it that morning, but if he didn’t, why the storage unit run with Morphey the day before and, “Do you love me enough to kill for me?”
And I don’t think he ever meant Rosetto to be the intended victim. Rosetto didn’t know that he had killed Kathleen. Stacy knew and had to be silenced once her loyalty to him ended.
Of course, we can’t know until and if the killer ever decides to confess…
Regardless of how efficient his planning may or may not have been, I have come to believe he felt ENTITLED to complete control over the women in his life. Complete control including not only every ‘who/what/where/when/why & how’ of their lives, but their LIFE itself.
Looks like Drew has a new court date with a status of “Prove Up” on the docket but the case number looks different than before:
PETERSON DREW 101409 WCCA 900 09L000326 Case
PETERSON DREW 111809 WCCA 900 09MR000648 Prove-Up
PETERSON DREW W 102909 402 930 09CF001048 MURDER/INTENT TO 1 Status
PETERSON DREW W 102909 402 930 09CF001048 MURDER/INTENT TO 2 Status
Looks like estate/wrongful death/insurance case?
SAVIO HENRY J 11 18 9 WCCA 900 09MR000648 Prove-Up
SAVIO KATHLEEN 11 18 9 WCCA 900 09MR000648 Prove-Up
I think so. Guess I’m confused then what the other one is for that he has court for today. Maybe it is a two-part case??
Looks like Henry Savio is on both of those case schedules as well. I’m thinking one was to reopen her will and the other was the civil suit against Drew for Kathleen’s death.
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7064866&rss=rss-wls-article-7064866
Peterson civil case can proceed
Wednesday, October 14, 2009 | 4:09 PM
October 14, 2009 (CHICAGO) (WLS) — A Will County judge ruled Wednesday that the civil lawsuit against Drew Peterson can proceed.
The family of Peterson’s third wife Kathleen Savio filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Peterson.
The former Bolingbrook police officer is also charged in criminal court with murdering Savio.
Peterson’s attorney had asked that the judge issue a stay on the Savio family’s civil case pending the outcome of the criminal case.
“The judge didn’t stay the case, didn’t freeze the case. But he also said that Drew or indicated that Drew can take his Fifth Amendment privilege in answer to any question or any pleading,” said Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney.
Savio’s death was originally ruled an accident, but the case was determined to be a homicide after Peterson’s fourth wife Stacy disappeared.
Ooops, guess you beat me to it, TAI.
“The judge didn’t stay the case, didn’t freeze the case. But he also said that Drew or indicated that Drew can take his Fifth Amendment privilege in answer to any question or any pleading,” said Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney.
******
WOW, that’s some fancy lawyerin’ there, Mr. B.! Gettin’ the judge to allow your client to take the 5th. Gee!! No other attorney could’ve possibly gotten a judge to agree to that!
(Can’t help but imagine the judge was speaking in a somewhat exasperated tone.)
I wonder what the judge actually said (errr indicated)…
Can’t you just hear him stuttering this out?
You wonder what the judge actually said, TAI.
Bend over, Brodsky, here it comes again!
Drew may take the fifth, but I get the feeling that some other people will have plenty to say…
New post is up!
http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2009/10/14/civil-case-against-drew-peterson-to-proceed/