Peterson hearsay hearings to continue Thursday


Witnesses who testified 1/21/10

Tom Morphey (step-brother of Drew Peterson)
Eric Peterson (estranged son of Drew Peterson)
Patrick Collins (Retired ISP Sgt. – Lead Savio investigator)

Hearings in the Drew Peterson murder case continue Thursday.  Judge White will hear from additional witnesses, eventually deciding which hearsay evidence will be allowed in the trial. Joel Brodsky, in a recent telephone interview, said that Judge White has not yet made a decision as to whether he will make public his rulings regarding what he deems admissible or not admissible. In light of the seriousness of the circumstances involved, namely, the murder charges pending against his client, Joel Brodsky apparently continues to see it in a different way.

Joel Brodsky, however, continued his irreverent approach to the murder case as he handed out pens with his name emblazoned on them to some media members. “If anybody else is good to me, then they get a pen,” he said as he dangled a large bag of Brodsky ballpoints before the courtroom gallery.

Source – Chicago Tribune ~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>

About these ads

260 thoughts on “Peterson hearsay hearings to continue Thursday

  1. Gosh I can see what looks like a substantial bruise on her left cheek as well as the black eye. I hadn’t noticed that before.

    Tht Joel knows no shame, does he? He’s got to really work his media connections if he’s gonna spin all of this off into a permanent talking head gig. Or something

  2. Other testimony focused on a cup of coffee bought at a Bolingbrook Starbucks at 8:44 p.m. Oct. 28, 2007, the day Stacy Peterson disappeared. Prosecutors intend to use videotapes and cash register data from the purchase to bolster Drew Peterson’s stepbrother’s allegation that the two men were together on the night she disappeared.

    Thomas Morphey has told police that Peterson used him to concoct a fake alibi for that day. The defense team dismisses the allegation as lies from a man with a long history of mental illness and multiple suicide attempts.

    Drew Peterson’s timeline, as published in “Exposed.”

    9:00 p.m. – Drew is at home when he receives a call from Stacy informing him she is leaving with another man.

    9:15 p.m. – Drew leaves to go look for Stacy.

  3. Sixty witnesses is a long list, especially when you consider the witnesses from yesterday.

    IMO, I think some of the witnesses, while they may be repeating what they believe to be the truth, or what they were told, may not necessarily have the impact that you’d expect on this crucial hearsay.

    Evidence, like receipts, video tapes, recordings, sightings of the defendant, that can connect the “hearsay” with actual time/events (see above), now that’s important.

    The defense will continue to character assassinate anyone and everyone who comes along, like Kathleen’s employers and relatives, Stacy’s relatives, etc. We’ve seen and heard it all before. That’s no brilliant lawyering. That’s working with nothing from nothing. Calling someone a drunk, or referring to them as mental cases, may work for them, but a jury is not going to be people that were pulled out of a cave, with no family members or friends. Jury members will have life events too. So, be careful what you wish for! The defense is worried about finding an impartial jury that hasn’t been up-to-date with the DP story. Heh, worry about getting a jury that isn’t going to cringe when you dissect a witness who may be a depressive, when, in reality, they may be taking anti-depressives themselves!

  4. rescueapet :

    Other testimony focused on a cup of coffee bought at a Bolingbrook Starbucks at 8:44 p.m. Oct. 28, 2007, the day Stacy Peterson disappeared. Prosecutors intend to use videotapes and cash register data from the purchase to bolster Drew Peterson’s stepbrother’s allegation that the two men were together on the night she disappeared.
    Thomas Morphey has told police that Peterson used him to concoct a fake alibi for that day. The defense team dismisses the allegation as lies from a man with a long history of mental illness and multiple suicide attempts.

    Drew Peterson’s timeline, as published in “Exposed.”
    9:00 p.m. – Drew is at home when he receives a call from Stacy informing him she is leaving with another man.
    9:15 p.m. – Drew leaves to go look for Stacy.

    Did Drew deny being with Tom M that night in that book or anywhere else?

  5. 9:15 p.m. – Drew leaves to go look for Stacy.

    On Dr. Phil, BTW, he admitted he was searching for Stacy, after she called, by the Canal. Why? If the whole friggin’ world is to believe his story that she ran away with another man, why did he admit to looking for her near the S&S Canal?

  6. GAR – I believe that Drew maintains that he never saw Tom Morphey on October 28. He says that the day before he drove him to apply for a job but instead they stopped to look at a storage unit.

    But, according to Morphey on October 28 Peterson showed up at Morphey’s home. They got coffee at a Starbucks drive-through and then Peterson droves him to a park off Weber Road and left him with the cell phone.

  7. GAR: His “official” timeline:

    5:30-6 a.m. – Drew returns home from his night shift. Before he goes to bed, Stacy tells him she is going to visit her grandfather in the morning.

    10-11 a.m. – The children wake Drew up and he notices that Stacy is not home.

    Noon-1 p.m. – Drew home with children.

    1-1:30 p.m. – Drew runs Sunday errands while Tom and Kris watch Anthony and Lacy.

    2 p.m. – Drew calls in to request the night off because he has accumulated sick time he could use before his December retirement.

    3:15 p.m. – Tom’s school friends pick him for a band concert.

    6 p.m. – Drew takes the three other children to McDonald’s.

    7: 30 p.m. – Drew and the children return home.

    8 p.m. – Tom returns from band concert.

    9 p.m. – Drew is at home when he receives a call from Stacy informing him she is leaving with another man.

    9:15 p.m. – Drew leaves to go look for Stacy.

    11-11:30 p.m. – Drew returns home as Cassandra Cales calls him looking for her sister. Drew tells her Stacy had left him and took clothes, money and her passport.

    11:45 p.m. – Drew walks to the airport to drive Stacy’s car back home. Midnight – Drew goes to bed.

    2:30 a.m. – Bolingbrook police call Drew to inform him that Cassandra Cales has filed a missing persons report for Stacy.

  8. VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Has your — did your client see Tom Morphey or talk to him on the Sunday Stacy disappeared?

    BRODSKY: Absolutely not.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Never saw him.

    BRODSKY: Never saw him.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Never picked him up in a park.

    BRODSKY: Never picked him up in a park or anywhere else.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Never took him to a coffee shop and put a cell phone down on the table.

    BRODSKY: Never, which would — it would seem to me that that could be verified by the fact that there’s no video of it. In this day and age, you know, every coffee shop, Starbucks or such, has video surveillance in it. And since there’s no video, I mean, once again, it goes to prove the lack of credibility of the story.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314129,00.html

    The day began with testimony about surveillance video from a Bolingbrook Starbucks on the day of the disappearance that showed a vehicle similar to Drew Peterson’s…

    http://www.morrisdailyherald.com/articles/2010/01/20/39070167/index.xml

  9. BTW, regarding the above timeline, as he gave to Derek Armstrong, this is not the timeline, we can assume, that he gave to the police. They’ve never been forthcoming about that. Why, I don’t really know, if it can be helpful to sorting out this mess for him and giving an air of credibility to his story. Telling?

  10. He later says he was looking for her car that he says she already told him it was at Clow airport. His biggest blunder. If he ever denied meeting Tom that night,it is another blunder if they got proof he was with him.

  11. Facs @ #13 – You rock! Thanks for reminding us that there are many things out there that just may come back to bite them in their asses.

    Of course, even if they have receipts and/or surveillance tapes, they could have been hacked by a computer genius, all while he was drinking a glass of wine and taking his meds for depression.

  12. Judging by what Brodsky said on Greta, I guess they’re not going to admit that Peterson/Morphey were together that day, no matter what the surveillance, receipts, witnesses say. Should be interesting.

    VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Has your — did your client see Tom Morphey or talk to him on the Sunday Stacy disappeared?

    BRODSKY: Absolutely not.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Never saw him.

    BRODSKY: Never saw him.

  13. “When I heard Kathleen was dead, I said to my husband, ‘He did it. Drew did it,'” says Carol, whose husband, Terry, Drew had hired eight years previously to work at his company.

    Terry presents his view of Drew’s relationship with Kathleen this way: “It was obvious that she was extremely afraid of him.”

    Carol says she didn’t like Drew from the very beginning. She describes seeing Kathleen one day when, “Her eye, it was all black and blue, and she had bruises on her arms.” Carol recalls being horrified.

    Terry spoke to Kathleen at the time. “I said, ‘I’ve got a big house, so you can come up there any time if you need to get away,’” he says.

    Carol reiterated the invitation. “I said, ‘I don’t want to interfere, but I just want you to know that you have a place to go if you need one.’ She thanked me, but I never received a phone call. Looking back on it, with what happened to Kathleen, I am 100 percent sure that Drew murdered Stacy.”

    Back in Dr. Phil’s studio, Terry describes Kathleen coming to work in sunglasses to cover up her bruises. He says, “I didn’t want to intrude into her domestic life, and her private life, and I said, ‘How are things?’ She says, ‘Not very good,’ and I said, ‘Well, you mean here, or … ?’ and she says, ‘No, at home.’ And I said, ‘What’s a matter at home?’ and she says, ‘We’re not getting along.’ And I said, ‘Oh, I’m so sorry.’ I said, ‘Does it get physical?’ and she said, ‘Definitely.’”

    “And that’s the concern,” says Dr. Phil.

    Are all these people crazy, Brodsky? Is your client the only sane one amongst them?

  14. Kyle Piry:

    About two weeks after Kyle and Drew broke up, she says they got into an argument. Kyle says the fight turned physical, and she ended up on the floor. She says, “He pushed me, he straddled me, pinned me to the ground in a police hold, pressed his knees against my arms to keep me down. I did call the police. They sent over an officer who happened to be one of his friends, and he convinced me not to press charges. Then it was a year and a half of him stalking me. Drew would follow me. He would pull me over. He wrote me tickets for silly things: bald tires, lights not bright enough. Sometimes he would just pull me over to harass me, and he always had a big smile on his face.

    Imagine, all these people, all these years, waiting for the opportunity to become famous, using Drew Peterson to do it. ;-)

    Just like Joel Brodsky…….

  15. There is a lot to be said about the large number of people coming out against Drew and the very few who stand to defend him (without being paid – or thinking they will be paid in future business if they win their case).

    I cannot believe that there would be that many people out to get one guy. How did he cross so many people? Where are his true defenders? His children and mother defend him but I see no friends or extended family standing up for him. I truly don’t think that you wouldn’t hear from all kinds of people who know me who would say there was no way I had anything to do with something if I were accused of it.

    Heck – even the little thug gangbangers in the city who are accused of shooting down an innocent child have more people standing up for them to the press. It is really, really odd IMO.

  16. Has anyone listened to the Mancow show to see if he has been talking about this case at all? I’m curious but not curious enough to listen for myself! :)

  17. thinkaboutit2 :

    There is a lot to be said about the large number of people coming out against Drew and the very few who stand to defend him (without being paid – or thinking they will be paid in future business if they win their case).

    I cannot believe that there would be that many people out to get one guy. How did he cross so many people? Where are his true defenders? His children and mother defend him but I see no friends or extended family standing up for him. I truly don’t think that you wouldn’t hear from all kinds of people who know me who would say there was no way I had anything to do with something if I were accused of it.

    Heck – even the little thug gangbangers in the city who are accused of shooting down an innocent child have more people standing up for them to the press. It is really, really odd IMO.

    Well said! No one to defend him that has been a part of his life before Stacy’s disappearance. Is it as though there’s a sigh of relief that they no longer have to fear the unknown.

    The witnesses from yesterday, for example, heard Kathleen tell them that the police would protect him. She was found dead, it was ruled an accident, and, yet, the defense wants to know why they didn’t go to the police? If she couldn’t get anyone to believe her, and she’s dead, why is it so far fetched to think they’d get anywhere? Kathleen’s sister couldn’t even get the authorities to listen to her.

    I think it’s going to take a lot more than that from the defense to convince anyone that he’s the victim and Kathleen and Stacy aren’t.

  18. Kathleen’s own letters to the authorities show that the system didn’t work. Some part has to do with the inherent problems of DV. Sadly the victim often drops charges or doesn’t want to pursue the matter. The sad truth is many law enforcement officials give up on DV victims because they don’t think the DV victim truly wants out.

    Those who have been in a DV situation though will say that sometimes they lost themselves or had such low self esteem they thought it was the best they could do to stay with their abuser.

    I don’t know the right answer to this one but truly hope that both of my girls follow my mom’s advice to tell the guy ” if you ever hit me you had better do a darn good job because you will NEVER get a second chance”.

  19. LOL, even his child bride-to-be posted a comment on her facebook that she gave up on him and his lies. I don’t know if it’s on her f.b. anymore, but it sure got saved by a few of us!

  20. The process of the investigation into Kathleen’s death is going to be a major factor, IMO, and will be significant in this case. However it went down.

    Wouldn’t it make sense that someone is going to have to explain to Judge White in this hearsay proceeding how things just went so wrong, and how her death could very well have been ruled a homicide had it not been for the meltdown in how it was investigated?

    Pffft with Brodsky and his “why didn’t you go to the police” garbage.

  21. thinkaboutit2 :

    Kathleen’s own letters to the authorities show that the system didn’t work. Some part has to do with the inherent problems of DV. Sadly the victim often drops charges or doesn’t want to pursue the matter.

    This won’t be lost on the judge or jury either. They haven’t been living in a bubble where domestic violence doesn’t exist. They’ll factor what they know into their consideration of the evidence and testimony.

  22. Facs said:

    This won’t be lost on the judge or jury either. They haven’t been living in a bubble where domestic violence doesn’t exist. They’ll factor what they know into their consideration of the evidence and testimony.

    Yeah, that’s just it. The jury won’t be oblivious to flaws related to the witnesses at trial. The jury would have to have been dropped from the sky, in a sack, by a pelican, to be free of adversity in their own lives, families, friends.

    That schtick is old. Explain why tapes show Drew in a place he says he wasn’t. Receipts for coffee outside of his home when he says he was at home. That’s what we all want to know.

  23. joehosey
    I think it’s a pretty safe bet that Team Peterson has lost another one. Looks like the gun case should be coming back to court.
    8 minutes ago from txt

    joehosey
    Appellate court hearing just ended. The judges have taken the case under advisement, so there’s no decision yet, but …
    10 minutes ago from txt

  24. That schtick is old. Explain why tapes show Drew in a place he says he wasn’t. Receipts for coffee outside of his home when he says he was at home. That’s what we all want to know.

    And why cell phone pings put him near the shipping canal which he explains by saying he was looking for Stacy’s car, after she supposedly called and told him it wat at Clow airport.

  25. Ah, friends:

    Christina Raines I met someone who i fell in love with and very happy with. I think i just about gave up on drew with all his lies i dont even really visit him anymore
    Yesterday at 1:35pm

  26. We asked Karen Conti how an appeal process would work, should Judge White rule in the State’s favor, based on this recent newspaper article:

    “Peterson’s defense team has a standing objection to the hearsay evidence and is expected to appeal if Will County Judge Steven White deems any of it admissible. They also plan to question the credibility and motivation of the witnesses called by the state. On Tuesday, nine people testified on the prosecution’s behalf.”

    KAREN CONTI: The new law says that these normally inadmissible statements may be used if the judge finds by a preponderance of evidence that
    * The adverse party murdered the declarant (person who made the statement),
    * The murder was intended to cause the unavailability of the declarant as a witness.
    * The time, content, and circumstances of the statements provide sufficient safeguards of reliability.
    * The interests of justice will best be served by admission of the statement into evidence.

    So, if the judge rules that the statements meet this burden, then the defense is saying that they will appeal that ruling. NOT on the issue of constitutionality, because that was already dealt with, but rather, on the issue of whether the prosecution met its burden and the judge assessed it correctly. This will be a difficult appeal, because whether
    witnesses are credible and whether that light burden is met are all things left to the wide discretion of the judge and will be upheld absent a serious abuse of discretion.

    I’m not sure when the appeal will go forward. Both parties may seek to have this non-final determination heard by the appellate court on an expedited basis so if there is a reversal, there will not have to be a retrial. It will be up to the trial court and appellate court whether they treat it as an issue to be expedited.

    If the matter is appealed now (in the interim), and the appellate court agrees that the statements come in, Peterson should not get another bite at the appellate apple when he appeals any conviction. Put simply, the appellate court will only hear this issue one time.

    And the bottom line is that the judge’s decision will very, very likely stand.

    Hope this helps.

  27. Just heard from someone who was in court yesterday and they mentioned that although the wait to get into court was pretty long that in the end there were empty seats. They also mentioned that pretty much anyone could get in, no-questions-asked.

    So if anyone is interested in getting a first-hand look at our justice system in action, there should be plenty more available seats and many more of these open hearings to come.

  28. Yeah, just take your Harrah’s player’s card, valet park, and walk on over to the hearings. Of course, just make sure you drop a buck or two into the slot machines.
    :-)

  29. rescueapet :
    Sixty witnesses is a long list, especially when you consider the witnesses from yesterday.
    IMO, I think some of the witnesses, while they may be repeating what they believe to be the truth, or what they were told, may not necessarily have the impact that you’d expect on this crucial hearsay.
    Evidence, like receipts, video tapes, recordings, sightings of the defendant, that can connect the “hearsay” with actual time/events (see above), now that’s important.
    The defense will continue to character assassinate anyone and everyone who comes along, like Kathleen’s employers and relatives, Stacy’s relatives, etc. We’ve seen and heard it all before. That’s no brilliant lawyering. That’s working with nothing from nothing. Calling someone a drunk, or referring to them as mental cases, may work for them, but a jury is not going to be people that were pulled out of a cave, with no family members or friends. Jury members will have life events too. So, be careful what you wish for! The defense is worried about finding an impartial jury that hasn’t been up-to-date with the DP story. Heh, worry about getting a jury that isn’t going to cringe when you dissect a witness who may be a depressive, when, in reality, they may be taking anti-depressives themselves!

    It is comical with Joel calling everyone else drunks, and drug addicts when Drew’s own best friend has a history of his own with drugs. Not to mention Drew and his close friends have been seen numerous times with booze in hand in the local clubs on many occasions. But, I guess that is ok for Drew and his friends to drink it up and not have an alchohol or drug problem just as long as they are on Drews side.

  30. rescueapet :
    9:15 p.m. – Drew leaves to go look for Stacy.
    On Dr. Phil, BTW, he admitted he was searching for Stacy, after she called, by the Canal. Why? If the whole friggin’ world is to believe his story that she ran away with another man, why did he admit to looking for her near the S&S Canal?

    Lol yes considering he claims she called him and said,” the car was at the airport” this was at 9pm. So why head down toward that way at 9:15pm when she just called at 9pm and said the car was in Bolingbrook? I am so glad he did all those interviews because everything he is saying is contradicting what is being proven as fact.

  31. Q4U – Yes, yapping away like he did, without his lawyer being able to control him, is going to be troublesome, me thinks.

    What if he insists on taking the stand? Look out.

  32. Thanks to Joe and Karen. That’s very interesting about perhaps not using up an opportunity for post-conviction appeal relating to the hearsay hearings. Are you listening, Joel?

    Hurrah about the gun charges appeal! That was such an appalling episode/decision by Schoenstadt.

  33. Looks like Drew is going to have an incredible problem if everyone he ever married, had children with, dated, associated with, was friends with, had business dealings with, including all these peoples friends, families and associates, are all of questionable character, then what does that say about Drew ???

    That makes him an extremely bad judge of character and for someone in the Police Force it makes it even less credible he only ever managed to attract people that turn out to be losers, so Joel Brodsky needs to be extremely careful where he goes with that line of Defense as it is not going to discredit these people, it is only going to put Drew himself in an extremely bad and unfavorable light !!

  34. questions4you :

    rescueapet :
    9:15 p.m. – Drew leaves to go look for Stacy.
    On Dr. Phil, BTW, he admitted he was searching for Stacy, after she called, by the Canal. Why? If the whole friggin’ world is to believe his story that she ran away with another man, why did he admit to looking for her near the S&S Canal?

    Lol yes considering he claims she called him and said,” the car was at the airport” this was at 9pm. So why head down toward that way at 9:15pm when she just called at 9pm and said the car was in Bolingbrook? I am so glad he did all those interviews because everything he is saying is contradicting what is being proven as fact.

    It’s very strange that reporters never questioned him on the statement about looking for Stacy’s car.I’m glad they didn’t for it is a big nail in his coffin(case) and he would of probably backpedaled from it as he did when he said he told the kids that mom wasn’t coming back.Reporters jumped all over that one. I don’t get it. Maybe they did the right thing and didn’t want to jeopardize the case?

  35. One can only wonder why Drew did this big turnaround in his story about Stacys car and him looking for it at the canal (!!), especially after Joel Brodsky’s incredulous statement: “if you give a time line you have to stick to it”

    Drew and Joel finally did give a timeline in Armstrongs book and then still didn’t stick to it – LOL !

  36. http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/01/peterson-lawyers-argue-case-over-weapons-charges.html

    Peterson lawyers argue case over weapons charges
    January 20, 2010 5:20 PM

    Appellate court justices were skeptical today of arguments put forward by Drew Peterson’s attorneys in the legal case over weapons charges that were brought, and then dropped, against Peterson in 2008.

    A lengthy hearing in the Peterson murder case was put on hold Wednesday so two lawyers from his defense team could argue the case before the 3rd District appellate court in Ottawa, Ill. John Connor, a top prosecutor on the Peterson case, observed.

    In 2008, Peterson was charged with possessing an illegally-modified assault rifle. When a Will county judge ordered the gun returned, state police revoked Peterson’s FOID card. Judge Richard Schoenstedt then dismissed the case after prosecutors refused to comply with his order to turn over internal documents that Peterson’s attorneys sought to prove their client was the victim of “vindictive prosecution.”

    Prosecutors appealed.

    Gary Gnidovec, an attorney with the state appellate prosecutor’s office, told the justices that Schoenstedt was wrong to order discovery because Peterson’s attorneys failed to demonstrate that prosecutors had an “animus” against Peterson and that, without it, no charges would have been filed.

    He said it would set a “very dangerous precedent” to allow defendants hoping to find some sign prosecutors have a vendetta against them to fish for such internal documents. Gnidovec also questioned whether the court had legal standing to rule on a separate appeal filed by Peterson’s attorneys.

    Peterson attorney Andrew Abood argued that the circumstances of the case were too narrow to open a “Pandora’s box.” He said Peterson’s attorneys should have had the chance to present evidence that prosecutors had “selectively” charged their client.

    Joel Brodsky argued that federal law shielded Peterson from even being charged with the weapons offense.

    The appellate court typically doesn’t issue its ruling for several months after oral arguments.

    –Steve Schmadeke

  37. When you triangulate a cell phone ping, I’m not sure how close you can come to the actual location, but I’m pretty sure they take 3 towers that the signal is the strongest from and estimate it has to be in a certain triangle of location.There are houses,restaurants,bars, warehouses near that area as well.So he could easily explain looking for her in the area. I remember there was a program about the science and it even mentioned the Peterson case as an example.I missed most of it however and would like to see it again.Drew had probably figured they knew where he was at during the call so had to make up some reason for being there.

  38. Ringing their own bell…

    Wednesday, January 20, 2010
    Drew Peterson Hearsay Hearings

    The Abood Law Firm was in the Will County Court for arguments regarding hearsay in the matter of the State of Illinois v Drew Peterson.

    Andrew Abood was particularly effective in his cross examination of a Bollingbrook, Illinois Police Lieutenant. In the officer’s testimony, he stated that Drew Peterson had worked with him for over ten years. He also testified he had never seen Peterson angry or violent during his duties as an officer. He referred to Peterson as “Good Police Officer”.

    Andrew Abood was accompanied at the hearing by Gina Sandy, and Clinton Van Nocker, both of the Abood Law Firm.

    http://aboodlaw.com/2010/01/drew-peterson-hearsay-hearings.html

  39. I’m wondering what else Coughlin may end up telling us down the line. Like, why did easy-going-never-angry Mommykiller punched him in the head? As is partner he may know a bit about Drew’s various extracurriculars.

  40. Funny you should bring that up just now Bucket. ;)

    Mr. Abood thinks pretty hightly of his cross examination, but that doesn’t erase Coughlin’s testimony that Drew was “mad” when he punched Coughlin in the head, nor that he stated his life would be easier if only Katheen would die.

  41. bucketoftea :

    I’m wondering what else Coughlin may end up telling us down the line. Like, why did easy-going-never-angry Mommykiller punched him in the head? As is partner he may know a bit about Drew’s various extracurriculars.

    The man worked with Drew 10 years, yet, he’s a witness for the State, and had to be CROSS-EXAMINED by the defense.

    Doesn’t say much for what yet another bud thinks of the dude, does it?

    Heck, if Drew knocked a co-worker in the head…..

  42. 10 years is a long time and Drew has been very busy one way and another. That couldn’t have been Coughlin in that video in the snow outside Drew’s who lept into his squad car only to be stared down by Drew, could it?

  43. bucketoftea :
    I’m wondering what else Coughlin may end up telling us down the line. Like, why did easy-going-never-angry Mommykiller punched him in the head? As is partner he may know a bit about Drew’s various extracurriculars.

    Yeah, at best this man would have seen/heard a lot of things that didn’t make any sense if statements Drew has made about his police work so far are anything to go by (!!)

  44. facsmiley :Ringing their own bell…

    Wednesday, January 20, 2010Drew Peterson Hearsay Hearings
    The Abood Law Firm was in the Will County Court for arguments regarding hearsay in the matter of the State of Illinois v Drew Peterson.
    Andrew Abood was particularly effective in his cross examination of a Bollingbrook, Illinois Police Lieutenant. In the officer’s testimony, he stated that Drew Peterson had worked with him for over ten years. He also testified he had never seen Peterson angry or violent during his duties as an officer. He referred to Peterson as “Good Police Officer”.
    Andrew Abood was accompanied at the hearing by Gina Sandy, and Clinton Van Nocker, both of the Abood Law Firm.

    http://aboodlaw.com/2010/01/drew-peterson-hearsay-hearings.html

    What kind of a press release is this?!?! It doesn’t even say what designer he was wearing or who styled his hair?!?! How can I possibly evaluate an attorney’s skills without hearing about their appearance? ;-)

  45. Interesting that Drew is often described as not one to get angry. I can totally see that because it’s true he doesn’t often seem to display anger. But I’ve also read numerous reports of him acting in a bullying and aggressive manner and although that is different from being “mad”, it’s also a lot scarier if you ask me. It shows how he likes to be in that position of control.

    One of the posters on this very blog described what it was like to be arrested by Drew:

    scott15
    2008/07/27 at 12:01am
    Me and Drew have met in the past, even though I was innocent since someone else admitted to the crime, it will never take away the memory of his gun at my head and his comments to me.

    scott15
    2008/07/27 at 12:18am
    I was told by his coworkers back then that he is an ass and overreacts.

    scott15
    2008/07/27 at 12:23am
    …not sure if it is word for word this was 16 yrs ago but it was along the lines of you are a piece of shit, don’t deserve to live, a low life mf, please try to run.

    scott15
    2008/07/27 at 12:24am
    And when you feel the gun muzzle against your head you do not move.

    To be fair, this poster stated that he believed in maintaining a position of innocent until proven guilty.

  46. So, on direct examination Coughlin testified to DP punching him in the head and on cross, he says he’s never seen him mad?… I wonder if Abood’s recollection of that stunning cross examination of his will be recognizable from actual Court records?

  47. Facs @ #60. I remember those posts of Scott well. That is an excellent point on how berserk he was at that moment. At that time, Scott could well now be a distant memory.

    Wow. Just wow.

  48. JAH – I’ll have to ask my husband about that – he never came home from a day on the job and admitted to getting whacked by one of his fellow officers. But, hey, may be Bolingbrook is different.

  49. justanotherhen :
    maybe Police officers get punched in the head by their collegues as a matter of true affection (!!)

    Just a variation on the fist bump….his fist to your head.

  50. givarat :

    This is very interesting stuff I’m reading about cell phone tracking. Did you know they can monitor you talking even with your cell phone off if so warranted? Also your cable TV can receive audio input as well. That means then they could of tracked Drew whereabouts that whole night Stacy went missing. Sorry to get off subject but this is interesting and scary.
    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060928064721AAjkdik

    I’m not real clear on how the cell phone tracking/pings work, but I do know that the battery of the phone would have to be removed in order to stop tracking.

    As a matter of fact, when Derek Armstrong first came on the scene of this mess and became the celebrity author he so wanted to be, he wrote a story on one of his websites that he came to Illinois/Bolingbrook to do his investigations, removing his cell phone battery while he drove around the area, so no one could track his whereabouts. Another one of Drew’s cohorts being dropped down from the Mother Ship.

  51. Joel Brodsky, however, continued his irreverent approach to the murder case as he handed out pens with his name emblazoned on them to some media members. “If anybody else is good to me, then they get a pen,” he said as he dangled a large bag of Brodsky ballpoints before the courtroom gallery.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    If you write a favorable story about Joel Brodsky and his brilliant defense, you get a free pen – LOL !!

  52. If you write a favorable story about Joel Brodsky and his brilliant defense, you get a free pen – LOL !!

    What kind of attorney has pens made, to distribute at a crucial hearing to defend a man in an upcoming murder trial? If that isn’t nuts, I don’t know what is.

    In one day, a press release is posted that describes the beauty of one of the partners, her marital status, and what she brings to the defense. Then you have the lead chair passing out pens with his name on them. Not surprising, but it doesn’t compare to hawking chicken wings and a bar for the use of his client on a radio show. Then, today, you have the other guy patting himself on the back for what a great job he did cross-examining a witness, by posting it on his firm’s website.

    Do you think this is all a ruse to get us all worked up about how goofy these lawyers are, having us think they’re the ones in charge – only to find out later they’re just dummies, front guys, and the real attorneys will be stepping in soon?

  53. Rescue – Waiting for the “real attorneys” reminds me of something one of my nieces said about her newborn baby brother when he was two-weeks old, “When is this baby’s REAL FAMILY going to come get him out of our house? I’m tired of having to be nice to it.”

  54. Cell phone pinging is relevant to billing (where you ring from/to and for how long) and on the night Stacy went missing Drew had not removed the battery from his phone.

    He wouldn’t have any need to at that stage, because he didn’t think he would ever be called to task for anything, considering what he already had gotten away with in the past and over time.

    It wasn’t until suspicion fell on him re Stacys disappearance he became cautious about activity on his phone, so it’s doubtful there would have been any tracking available pertaining to anything prior to Stacy’s reported disappearance.

  55. If you want to read more accounts of bullying and aggression, just dip into Armstrong’s book. Lots and lots from Drew himself about mean-spirited “pranks” and bullying that he participated in…and of course “cons”.

    It doesn’t take an angry person to control, belittle and do away with people around him…

    IMO, anger is irrelevant.

  56. CHANEY: Correct. Initially the Will County State`s Attorney said that the autopsy results will not be made public, and as we know, they`re either just still pending or they know what the results are and they`re not just letting us know.

    LALAMA: And very quickly, Dr. Marty Makary, I mean, just a couple of seconds, you know, even if we did find the results, it`s kind of hard to connect somebody after all of these years, right?

    DR. MARTY MAKARY, PHYSICIAN: Absolutely. But what we do know is that there was clearly air in the lungs. And any time there`s air in the lungs and a drowning, that means that the epiglottis has spasmed. There was a struggle. And water was not able to get through that valve. So that is a very important finding that we know about.

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0712/13/ng.01.html

  57. Andrew Abood was particularly effective in his cross examination of a Bollingbrook, Illinois Police Lieutenant. In the officer’s testimony, he stated that Drew Peterson had worked with him for over ten years. He also testified he had never seen Peterson angry or violent during his duties as an officer. He referred to Peterson as “Good Police Officer”.

    I guess I’m getting “slap happy,” but I can’t stop laughing about this atta-boy piece Abood put on his website.

    Oooooo, it doesn’t take much to make this man happy, does it? Can you just picture him shaking with excitement cuz he got the witness to answer honestly a question that was asked of him? He never saw Peterson mad during his “duties” as an officer. What amout did he ever see him angry outside of his duties, in all those 10 years?

    See how that works?

  58. How is Joel going to explain that away? Air in her lungs showing there was a spasm epiglottis, which shows there was a struggle! He is claiming she hit her head, passed out, and drowned in the tub. Isn’t consistent with an accidental drowning, as claimed by his client.

  59. Do you think this is all a ruse to get us all worked up about how goofy these lawyers are, having us think they’re the ones in charge – only to find out later they’re just dummies, front guys, and the real attorneys will be stepping in soon?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    It is hard to imagine anyone wanting to deliberately causing so much damage to a case with having Joel/Abood, etc attending important hearings, submitting bizarre semi literate motions concerning serious issues and deliberately losing appeals, in order for real attorneys to step in later as the damage control alone would be insurmountable to get the case back on track, unless of course there is unlimited money behind Drew, but that then begs the question, why wasn’t he bailed out at the time, so maybe the attorneys we see at present are what we are going to see til the end (!!)

  60. Personally, someone who can be violent WITHOUT being angry is much, much scarier (and, I think, creepier and sicker) than someone acting inappropriately due to extreme emotion.

  61. rescueapet :
    JAH – I was joking, really.

    I figured that rescue, but I have often wondered too if the present attorneys are for real or if we’re watching animation (!!)

  62. Since Aboob didn’t pass out nifty little pens he had to praise himself. I hope he didn’t break his arm patting himself on the back.

  63. justanotherhen :

    rescueapet :
    JAH – I was joking, really.

    I figured that rescue, but I have often wondered too if the present attorneys are for real or if we’re watching animation (!!)

    It’s pretty bad when you have to put out your own fluff press releases, joke about passing out pens, and post atta-boy comments on a lawfirm website. How come they’re the only ones who think they’re worth anything, and there’s not been a positive, supportive article written yet about their lawyering?

    Could it be they suck, they’ve lost every motion they’ve argued, and they’ve failed to get their client’s bond reduced?

    Could it be they’ve taken on a lawyer to fight JPMorgan/Chase who does orgasm counseling on the side, use a therapist who needs to be beamed back up to the main spaceship, and hired a cluckhead author who won’t leave Canada now for fear he’d have to sit in an American courtroom and testify to the truth?

    Naw. We’re mean. We make all this stuff up. Don’t we?

  64. Joel Brodsky, however, continued his irreverent approach to the murder case as he handed out pens with his name emblazoned on them to some media members. “If anybody else is good to me, then they get a pen,” he said as he dangled a large bag of Brodsky ballpoints before the courtroom gallery.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I need to know –

    Did the Courtroom Gallery scramble to get one of Joels free pens ??

  65. http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/napervillesun/news/2002693,Peterson-gun-charge-hearing_JO012010.article

    Peterson gun charge may come back to haunt him

    January 20, 2010

    By JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com
    OTTAWA — Drew Peterson’s lawyers struggled to stop a felony gun charge from coming back to court just a day after prosecutors threw nine witnesses at the former cop in hope of proving he killed his fourth wife to keep her from testifying that he drowned his third wife.

    Two of Peterson’s attorneys — Joel Brodsky and Andrew Abood — argued that Will County Judge Richard Schoenstedt was right to dismiss a felony unlawful use of a weapon charge against Peterson.

    Peterson was arrested in May 2008 on a charge of unlawful use of a weapon for owning a Colt AR-15 assault rifle with a barrel shorter than the state-mandated 16 inches.

    In November 2008, Schoenstedt ordered the state’s attorney’s office to surrender internal documents to Peterson’s defense team so they could prepare to argue Peterson was the victim of a vindictive prosecution.

    Assistant State’s Attorney John Connor refused to comply with the order, and Schoenstedt dropped the charges.

    On Wednesday, Gary Gnidovec, a lawyer with the state’s attorney’s third district appellate prosecutor’s office, made the case that Peterson’s attorneys showed no evidence of vindictive prosecution and that that they wanted to get their hands on the state’s attorney’s internal documents so they could try to find one.

    Appellate Judge Daniel L. Schmidt pointed out that allowing defendants access to the state’s attorney’s files without proof of vindictive prosecution might put a strain on the legal system. He also noted that “very few prosecutors are just wild about any of the people they prosecute.”

    At the same hearing, Abood and Brodsky tried to appeal Schoenstedt’s refusal to grant Peterson immunity from prosecution under a federal law that allows police officers to carry and conceal weapons.

    Appellate Judge Vicki Wright questioned whether they should be allowed to appeal that decision since, if the dismissal is reversed, the case will have yet to reach its conclusion.

    Schmidt, Wright and Judge Mary K. O’Brien took the matter under advisement and will release their ruling at a later date.

    Hearsay hearing

    Peterson and his attorneys will be back in the Joliet courthouse today to face another round of witnesses in the hearing to determine whether any hearsay evidence will be used against him at his murder trial.

    Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio, was found drowned in her bathtub in March 2004. The state police considered her death an accident until Peterson’s next wife, Stacy Peterson, vanished in October 2007.

    Peterson was arrested and charged with Savio’s murder in May. The state police believe Stacy Peterson may also be the victim of a homicide.

    Within two weeks of Stacy’s disappearance, the state police named Drew Peterson as the only suspect in their investigation but have yet to make an arrest in the case.

  66. Your welcome Facs! Thank you!! For doing such an awesome job keeping everyone up to date on what is going on with the case. Rescue, and yourself are doing an awesome job. :)

  67. Some information about Cell phone pings and triangulation:

    There are two ways that celluar (cell) phones are located, depending on the
    cell phone itself, and the technology that is built in to that cell phone.
    Older cell phones are located via a process of signal triangulation, while
    newer phones have a Global Postitioning System (GPS) built in to them. In
    practice, one, the other or both can be used to locate a cell phone.

    Triangulation can be done on most any cell phone, depending on the location
    of the cell phone and any nearby towers. GPS locating depends on the cell
    phone being so equipped. There is a federal mandate that pretty much all
    cell phone companies, including Verizon, will be able to locate a cell phone
    based on one, the other or both methods.

    “Cell phones are two way radio transmitters that work by connecting to a
    nearby tower and exchanging data. Despite the FCC’s limitation on maximum
    power output of a cell phone, they are still able to connect with towers
    miles away at UHF frequencies … Because cell phones put out a constant RF
    output (sometimes pulsed) they can be tracked using the tower triangulation
    method where the network administrators can find your precise location with
    their administrative network access.”

    “Phase II of the FCC regulations will begin to be implemented in the fall of
    2001. During Phase II, wireless carriers and the PSAPs will be upgrading
    their systems to provide more exact geographic coordinates. Two methods will
    be employed:

    1) triangulation: new receivers will be added to the tower arrays that will
    be able to perform triangulation; and 2) global positioning receivers (GPS)
    may be added to new wireless phones.”

    http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/555018.html

    There is more links and more information on it. Just scroll down past the first part of the article till you get to the information about it.

  68. facsmiley :

    VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Has your — did your client see Tom Morphey or talk to him on the Sunday Stacy disappeared?
    BRODSKY: Absolutely not.
    VAN SUSTEREN: Never saw him.
    BRODSKY: Never saw him.
    VAN SUSTEREN: Never picked him up in a park.
    BRODSKY: Never picked him up in a park or anywhere else.
    VAN SUSTEREN: Never took him to a coffee shop and put a cell phone down on the table.
    BRODSKY: Never, which would — it would seem to me that that could be verified by the fact that there’s no video of it. In this day and age, you know, every coffee shop, Starbucks or such, has video surveillance in it. And since there’s no video, I mean, once again, it goes to prove the lack of credibility of the story.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314129,00.html

    The day began with testimony about surveillance video from a Bolingbrook Starbucks on the day of the disappearance that showed a vehicle similar to Drew Peterson’s…

    http://www.morrisdailyherald.com/articles/2010/01/20/39070167/index.xml

    I’d love to have seen the look on JB’s face when he learned there was a video at the Starbucks!

  69. thinkaboutit2 :
    There is a lot to be said about the large number of people coming out against Drew and the very few who stand to defend him (without being paid – or thinking they will be paid in future business if they win their case).
    I cannot believe that there would be that many people out to get one guy. How did he cross so many people? Where are his true defenders? His children and mother defend him but I see no friends or extended family standing up for him. I truly don’t think that you wouldn’t hear from all kinds of people who know me who would say there was no way I had anything to do with something if I were accused of it.
    Heck – even the little thug gangbangers in the city who are accused of shooting down an innocent child have more people standing up for them to the press. It is really, really odd IMO.

    In the beginning there was Steve Carcerano, a neighbor, who was steadfast in support of Drew. But, he seems to have dropped out of the picture too. It will be interesting, come the trial, if Steve is still supporting Drew.

  70. Amazing technology isn’t it? I’m sure they did a lot of homework on where Drew was in both cases regarding his cell phone.If you recall Glasgow said that was one of the reasons the Grand jury was going on so long is because of pages and pages of data from cell phones had to be processed in the investigation. I’m sure we are going to get a lot more info on that part of the case as the trial progresses.

    I think we are going to hear the biggest part of this trial in the next few weeks.This is Brodsky’s chance to test the waters as to say before the actual trial so there may not be too many mystery’s left to hear after the pretrial is over.I’m still waiting however for Brodsky’s shock that the prosecution has nothing.Or however he put it again.They have some pretty solid stuff in my opinion.And that’s only after day 1.Yea according to Brodsky 800 or so witnesses are deemed uncredible while his one lone person Drew is an angel with no credibility issues.Go figure.

  71. justanotherhen :
    I wonder if the Defense has 800 or so witnesses to say Drew is innocent (!!)

    I am sure they will end up with bringing a “key” witness to the court one day, providing fake alibi for Drew. I would not wonder if it were 800 people. Drew could have organized a party then ;).

  72. mollymcgee :

    facsmiley :

    VAN SUSTEREN: All right. Has your — did your client see Tom Morphey or talk to him on the Sunday Stacy disappeared?
    BRODSKY: Absolutely not.
    VAN SUSTEREN: Never saw him.
    BRODSKY: Never saw him.
    VAN SUSTEREN: Never picked him up in a park.
    BRODSKY: Never picked him up in a park or anywhere else.
    VAN SUSTEREN: Never took him to a coffee shop and put a cell phone down on the table.
    BRODSKY: Never, which would — it would seem to me that that could be verified by the fact that there’s no video of it. In this day and age, you know, every coffee shop, Starbucks or such, has video surveillance in it. And since there’s no video, I mean, once again, it goes to prove the lack of credibility of the story.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314129,00.html

    The day began with testimony about surveillance video from a Bolingbrook Starbucks on the day of the disappearance that showed a vehicle similar to Drew Peterson’s…

    http://www.morrisdailyherald.com/articles/2010/01/20/39070167/index.xml

    I’d love to have seen the look on JB’s face when he learned there was a video at the Starbucks!

    I love this story because Greta already had the complete background on this story and let Joel bury himself nicely.

    That’s what you get when neither the client or his lawyer keep their mouth shut.

    From memory Mark Fuhrman was doing all the running around, investigating this that and the other and Mark Fuhrman doesn’t miss much (!!)

  73. Hehehe Remember this one? Drew says he never loses his temper! Never gets angry, but there was a video I am still looking for it that shows him live losing it!
    Here is transcripts of it, I believe this is the show he was on when he did it. I don’t want to post the words up here because he cussed at Lenny and Paula. So I will X it out :)

    http://www.acandyrose.com/2008-07-24-FoxNews-PaulaStark.htm

    DREW PETERSON: Lenny and Paula, you’re a piece of XXXX!

    TARA WILLIAMS (VOICE OVER): Drew Peterson is angry at former friends Lenny Wawczak and Paula Stark. They claim the state police came to them with a court order and asked them to wear a wire for seven months to record intimate conversations with Peterson.

    PAULA STARK: I really can’t wait for everything on the wire to come out at the trial and like I said everybody will get a much better picture of what’s going on.

    DREW PETERSON: If they were wired up like they said, bring it on … bring the wires.

  74. For the locals, or anyone that wants to watch Fox News @ Noon (also streamed live), saw this:

    craig_wall Drew Peterson back in court today on hearsay
    evidence. Could be more explosive testimony today. Live update on Fox Chicago at noon

    about 2 hours ago from API

    ** I think this is the streaming live link. When the news starts at noon, you should be able to see the streaming newscast.

    http://www.myfoxchicago.com/subindex/video/live_video

  75. Did the surveillance video from the drive-thru capture the license plate of the car? What good would surveillance of the drive through do otherwise? Was it a clear shot of Drew’s ugly mug?

    So many questions …

  76. Yes I heard the same thing! I wonder who else they are going to have testify today. I think they are working on proving he killed Stacy to silence her. It said this:

    http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/drew-peterson-hearsay-hearings-resume

    Drew Peterson Hearsay Hearings Resume

    Updated: Thursday, 21 Jan 2010, 7:44 AM CST
    Published : Thursday, 21 Jan 2010, 7:15 AM CST

    FOX Chicago News

    Chicago – Hearsay hearings will resume today for Drew Peterson.

    A judge is hearing arguments on a new state law that was enacted specifically for this case.

    It permits hearsay evidence in first-degree murder cases.

    The prosecution is trying to convince the judge that Peterson is behind the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

    They claim Peterson did something to Stacy because she was about to tell police that Peterson had killed his third wife – Kathleen Savio.
    Peterson is charged with first degree murder in Savio’s 2004 death.

  77. Folks – As a gentle reminder, please don’t repost news stories that may already have been posted. Check first. Comments will be plentiful, and the board will tend to run slow.

    Thanks!!!

  78. noway406 :

    Did the surveillance video from the drive-thru capture the license plate of the car? What good would surveillance of the drive through do otherwise? Was it a clear shot of Drew’s ugly mug?

    So many questions …

    You know, come to think of it, I recall that when Peterson was on Mancow and Cass called in, she kind of “threw” some digs at him about him being somewhere he shouldn’t have been. I don’t remember the full exchange, but I now recall her enlightening him about being seen somewhere. So, I must assume there’s more to this than meets the eye, so to speak.

  79. Peterson hearing resumes with stepbrother’s testimony
    January 21, 2010 11:25 AM

    A relative who claims he helped Drew Peterson carry out a heavy barrel the night Peterson’s fourth wife Stacy disappeared has taken the stand today in a hearing over whether hearsay evidence should be allowed when Peterson is tried for the murder of his third wife.

    Tom Morphey, Peterson’s stepbrother, testified that the day before Stacy disappeared, Peterson asked him if he could kill for Peterson.

    “How much do you love me?” Peterson asked, according to Morphey, 42. “Enough to kill for me?”

    Morphey said he told Peterson no, and Peterson then asked, “Can you live with knowing about it?”

    “I always assumed that you killed Kathleen,” Morphey said he replied, referring to Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio, who had been found dead in a bath tub more than three years before.

    “No,” Peterson answered, according to his stepbrother, “I would never hurt Kathleen. She was a great mother.”

    Morphey said the conversation occurred the morning of Oct. 27, 2007, the day before Stacy Peterson, Peterson’s fourth wife, disappeared. Peterson had picked Morphey up at Morphey’s home and the two were traveling in Peterson’s Yukon Denali SUV.

    Morphey has said he fears the barrel he helped carry out contained Stacy’s body. Peterson has not been charged in connection with Stacy’s disappearance, but he has been charged with murder in the death of Savio.

    Testimony is expected to continue into the afternoon.

    The hearing is an outgrowth of a new state law that has come to be known as Drew’s Law. Will County prosecutors are calling witnesses to testify that before her death Savio feared that her former husband would kill her.

    The law allows prosecutors to introduce as evidence statements from victims who allegedly were killed to prevent them from testifying against their attackers. Prosecutors are expected to call dozens of witnesses over the next several weeks.

    On Tuesday, a co-worker of Savio testified Savio told him about how Peterson confronted her with a knife and told her he could kill her if he wanted to.

    — Steve Schmadeke

    http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/01/peterson-hearsay-hearing-resumes-today.html

  80. “I always assumed that you killed Kathleen,” Morphey said he replied, referring to Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio, who had been found dead in a bath tub more than three years before.

    “No,” Peterson answered, according to his stepbrother, “I would never hurt Kathleen. She was a great mother.”

    Hearsay, hearsay, hearsay. Brodksy doesn’t want that to come in, does he???????

    Of course, what cluckhead WOULD admit to murdering his ex-wife?

  81. LOL, Facs at #111.

    Just what did the law firm/publicist accomplish by putting out such a fluff piece like that, only to get responses like “go get them” on her facebook page?

    Go get who? The State for prosecuting a murder suspect? The witnesses in the case? Looks like this wasn’t lost on the news organizations that got a copy of this manufactured press release.

    Now, is he guilty or is he not guilty? I don’t care what Reem Odeh modeled, or how beautiful she is.

  82. ** Morphey added to what we’ve already seen that Drew asked him to rent a storage locker so that he could store an air-tight container for at least six months, after which time he’d dispose of it.**

  83. Also, Craig Wall was asked about DP’s demeanor. He said he was focused on Morphey, but when he looked over at DP, his face was red with anger, as though he were sunburned.

    Mophey also detailed a conversation in which DP told him Stacy was having an affair, and he had to get rid of her because she’d get his money.

  84. I’m not certain, but I think she taunted him about 11:55/58?am on that Sunday morning. Did he go out briefly? It wouldn’t even matter where because he said he was at home.
    You know, come to think of it, I recall that when Peterson was on Mancow and Cass called in, she kind of “threw” some digs at him about him being somewhere he shouldn’t have been. I don’t remember the full exchange, but I now recall her enlightening him about being seen somewhere. So, I must assume there’s more to this than meets the eye, so to speak.

  85. I am thinking that the surveillance video might be about he said he was at home at that time, even when the phone call came in from Stacy. But the video might be showing he was NOT at home the time he said was. I am not sure but maybe that is what is about?

  86. I just don’t get why we aren’t getting more details reported to us.Noway made a good point that there are more questions than answers coming out of this.Did the video of the vehicle reveal a license number?Did Brodsky shoot it down as to say they couldn’t prove it was Drews?They may as well just of kept this from the public with the info we are getting.

  87. Noway – they run the weather stuff until the actual news broadcast starts. At least, that’s the way I understand it. Since Jeepers and Bucket said the live stream did work, it must have cut-in at the noon broadcast. Then it reverts back to live doppler weather.

    Sorry.

    BTW, Noway, Fox News has a live broadcast at 9:00pm, CST. So, you should be able to watch the live stream then, if you wish.

  88. I remember another incidence of Drew’s anger: in the corridor of a tv studio pink in the face and calling Paula and Lenny “pieces of shit”.

  89. Yes it was in a studio hallway. I can’t seem to find that video? He was angry, said that, and pointing into the camera right? I am thinking that is same one right?

  90. I remember that as well Bucket and it was interesting. But I still say Drew’s anger is a moot point. IMO he didn’t kill in a moment of passion. He killed for material gain, and to remove “problems” from his life.

  91. He was also reported to be quite angry when he got home one afternoon, only to find that his young son was schmoozing with his auntie, having his picture taken with her. Remember? He was “upset.” Because his Drew Highness didn’t want his son to be making contact with his missing wife’s sister, the child’s aunt. Evil man.

  92. I remember that, too, Bucket & Q4Y.

    And what recall was thinking how young both Kitty and Stacy were when he came into their lives and how frightening he must have been…

    I so hope he is scared.

  93. FACS maybe they had phones wiretapped? Maybe Morphey’s cell was? Not sure either but that is very interesting. Why would Drew tell Morphey tell them you want to talk to a lawyer if he did nothing wrong?

  94. That’s a moment I actually would’ve liked to be able to see DP’s ugly mug, when he found out ANY conversation he had with Morphey had been taped.

    I hope being able to testify against DP will help Tom.

  95. questions4you :
    FACS maybe they had phones wiretapped? Maybe Morphey’s cell was? Not sure either but that is very interesting. Why would Drew tell Morphey tell them you want to talk to a lawyer if he did nothing wrong?

    It sounds like his phone was tapped.Yea that was early on and if Stacy just ran away she may have came back so why tell him to get a lawyer unless he was expecting her to disappear for a long time and the police to come around asking questions.

  96. http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/peterson/2004329,Peterson-hearsay-day2-stepbro-JO012110.article

    Some “new” info:

    Excerpt

    The state police recorded a telephone conversation between Morphey and Peterson in november. Peterson ordered Morphey not to talk to the police or press and repeatedly told Morphey not to discuss their situation on the phone.

    Attorney George Lenard began attempting to chip away at Morphey’s testimony and will continue to do so this afternoon.

  97. If Morpheys phone had GPS tracking to where they could prove and back up his story it would prove where they were like Tom has said all along. They don’t have to show that now though, this is just about the hearsay, and proving he rid of Stacy to silence her about Kathleen.

  98. Maybe, when Cass went to ISP to report Stacy was missing, they started to record Drew’s phone calls very soon? The conversation with Tom must have taken place early on as then Tom was not available for Drew.

    I think Drew could have been informed about it and that is why he asked Robinson to provide a phone for him.

  99. BTW, unless we get a full report on George Lenard’s looks, whether he’s stunningly handsome, wears nice ties, married, single, and has kids, I’m not going to pay attention to anything he says or does. That just wouldn’t be right. If a press release is manufactured, well, then, maybe I can change my opinion.
    ;-)

  100. That is what I am thinking Cyrhla, they said they granted him immunity when they went to visit him at the hospital(ISP). So maybe they set everything up there at hospital, and Tom agreed to it maybe. I am glad they have that on tape, doesn’t look good for Drew at all. If he was so innocent as he is claiming he wouldn’t be worried, or telling Tom to say he wants an atty.

  101. As far as I can remember, Tom’s girlfriend said Drew called Tom when he was still at home. But I may be wrong. I must look for this info.

  102. You know this defense doesn’t answer to the “facts.” They dance around that stuff by damning the messenger.

    I doubt anyone will offer a clear explanation as to why Starbuck’s has a video of a likeness of DP’s vehicle, or why there’s a recording of him with Morphey. All they can do is discredit the witness’s memory, credibility, and make him appear as though he’s delusional. Guess it’s up to the individuals listening to determine whether it factors in to the concrete evidence.

    Sure is strange for a murder suspect to be hushing up someone about “things” though.

  103. I agree with you Rescue. This is there whole defense is to just say everything and everyone is not a credible witness.I’m sure Brodsky’s statements afterward are going to repeat that Tom isn’t credible because of his drug and alcoholism.

  104. How can Glasgow believe Morphey’s testimony will be taken seriously? Neither one of them has given ANYONE a pen!

  105. Seriously you know how many millions of people have drug, and or alchohol problems. Is he trying to say that all these millions of people don’t remember what they did that day just because they were under the influence of something? I admit it sometimes impairs your memory, or lack of judgement but come on, this is to in detail, and these facts are adding up for Brodsky to even go there.

  106. Well, take the surveillance video, for example. The defense HAS to pick apart its quality, whether it’s absolutely positive that the two in the car were men, if they were the same build, if that can even be determined.

    I am sure it could even be that it’s a slam dunk it’s Drew and TMorphey in the vehicle, and the vehicle is the same make, model and color of Drew’s, but the defense will tell you you shouldn’t believe your lying eyes. You all know how that works.

  107. P.S. I should add that given the testimony of the witness, and the fact that a similar vehicle is on a surveillance tape around the time he is suggesting they were there, has to be weighed vs. a defense lawyer picking apart the quality of the picture or what it may or may not show. At least the State has something to show for it. All the defense has to show is Drew’s word he was at home.

  108. rescueapet :Well, take the surveillance video, for example. The defense HAS to pick apart its quality, whether it’s absolutely positive that the two in the car were men, if they were the same build, if that can even be determined.
    I am sure it could even be that it’s a slam dunk it’s Drew and TMorphey in the vehicle, and the vehicle is the same make, model and color of Drew’s, but the defense will tell you you shouldn’t believe your lying eyes. You all know how that works.

    What about believing your ears too! If DP was driving his SUV and pulled up to the driveup window, the video will show he most likely said something. :)

  109. You’d think that the video has to be fairly clear since they are put up there in case of a robbery to identify the culprit or at least their vehicle license number.It kind of does seem like they are withholding a lot of info until later in the trial unless the scheme team wants to drag it out of the prosecution.It appears that they aren’t trying to do that as Brodsky suggested they would and probably just praying that they can appeal all this hearsay evidence.So I was probably wrong and there will be more surprises to come.I was just going by what Brodsky said he was going to do and it appears so far he isn’t doing it.

  110. Brodsky isn’t happy on this video. He doesn’t feel he can properly cross-examine witnesses, because he doesn’t know who the State is going to call. He says this is ridiculous. He hopes people stand up and take notice, and that they need to wait and be patient until the “other” side comes out.

    Who’s he talking to? Judge White is the one that makes the decisions here. Duh. Not “the people.”

    Yeah, like we give a rat’s butt what he wants.

  111. People: Take a stand for Brodsky. Umm, call a Senator, a Governor, the President. IDK, call somebody. Rise up, take notice. Be patient. Wait for the other side to come out. It’s not fair. Drew’s breaking out in a rash, and Brodsky’s whining about unfairness.

    Nope, sorry, Brodsky. We did stand up and take notice. Unfortunately, it’s not want you want to hear.

  112. Isn’t it just better if Atty Brodsky doesn’t say anything, nothing at all? Saying he can’t properly cross-examine the witnesses, because he doesn’t know who the State is going to call, is beyond reason.

    Does he mean he doesn’t know who the State is going to call that day? In the total hearsay pretrial? What does that mean to a layperson, when he says he can’t properly cross-examine witnesses? Isn’t two years of digging into these persons’ background sufficient time to discredit them? I’m not getting why he’s got such a dejected look on his face in this video.

  113. Excerpts

    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.

    Peterson’s attorneys have raised questions about using Morphey as a witness. He suffers from a bipolar disorder and has admitted to drinking too much.

    Morphey has acknowledged both issues and on Thursday prosecutors presented evidence that verified what Morphey said happened. That included video footage and witness interviews showing that both men made a trip to Starbucks around the time of the blue barrel incident.

    http://www.mywesttexas.com/articles/2010/01/21/ap/headlines/us_drew_peterson.txt

  114. Yikes! Eric testified for the State? I want to know what he said on the stand. I also want to know what Drew’s reaction was to seeing his eldest offspring throwing dear old dad under the proverbial bus. This should be interesting.

  115. OMG.
    Drew’s eldest son, Eric Peterson, testified about a brutal
    incident of domestic violence Drew allegedly perpetrated against Kathleen Savio.

    2 minutes ago from txt

  116. Okay, cue the model….make up, hurry!! They must be frantic since they didn’t know who the state would call. Spot light….

    My heart aches for those children.

  117. All this time, Drew KNEW his son Eric was estranged from him due to this incident? And, yet, he carried on after Stacy’s disappearance as though he didn’t have a care in the world?

    Eric is a true, decent man. He took a stand.

  118. On cross-examination, again, Morphey was asked why he did not call 911. He testified he was afraid Drew would shoot him. He said Drew was always known to carry a gun.

  119. Yes, Eric is the one who has not spoken to his father since the death of Kathleen Savio, I believe. He’s never uttered a word publicly, and not much is known about him, except that he and Drew are estranged.

    Guess we’ll know more now.

  120. I know he’s a grown man, Facs… I’m just old, so he’s a ‘kid’ to me. However, if there’s any single rite of passage guaranteeing adulthood, I’d say having to take the stand against your father in a murder case might be it.

  121. I don’t know what’s going to come out about Eric Peterson’s testimony, but what a sad state of affairs. On one hand, you have an adult son of this madman supposedly recounting a brutal beating of his father’s wife. Yet, you have the two teens, Kathleen’s own sons, under their father’s control, propping him up on tv and saying he’s the best dad in the world.

    The sad reality of this all is that we probably all can assume what the truth is. Please don’t tell me the other adult son is now going to be pitted against his brother, all for the sake of their father.

    OMG.

  122. Eric seems like a decent young man. He was smart to stay away from his father, and have the courage to testify against him today. Wtg Eric, for being honest, and coming forward.

  123. Interesting I wonder what the ex girlfriend witnessed when she was living in the house before Kathleen died. Isn’t looking good for Drew at all. Hmm never gets mad, or never hit her, but yet we have pictures, people from work, and his son who came forward SO FAR that witnessed abuse.

  124. rescueapet :
    ** Morphey added to what we’ve already seen that Drew asked him to rent a storage locker so that he could store an air-tight container for at least six months, after which time he’d dispose of it.**

    That looks like he (Drew) had no immediate plans for disposal.

    Makes you wonder why he wanted to go down that road.

  125. Channel 9 News @ 5:00 – Defense atty, Lenard, highlighted Morphey’s problems with alcohol and depression. Outside of court, Brodsky said Morphey’s credibility will hurt the prosecution. Said he told different people different stories, changed the dimensions of the barrel numerous times. Brodsky said we’re seeing why the State’s case is “going to fall apart.”

    Oh, so he says.

  126. noway406 :

    How long ago was the domestic abuse that Eric witnessed?

    LOL, Noway, I’m trying to get the news on here as fast as I can. Nothing out on that yet on any of the broadcasts in Chicago.

    I need a drink.

  127. justanotherhen :

    rescueapet :
    ** Morphey added to what we’ve already seen that Drew asked him to rent a storage locker so that he could store an air-tight container for at least six months, after which time he’d dispose of it.**

    That looks like he (Drew) had no immediate plans for disposal.
    Makes you wonder why he wanted to go down that road.

    Yea this is definitely very interesting. The report above even goes as far to say Drew told Morphy he was going to store Stacy there.Is this some sort of assumption on the press’s part? This may mean also that she is being stored somewhere as we speak in that barrel.Otherwise it was moved by an accomplice or perhaps even Drew.

  128. coffeeocity :

    I know he’s a grown man, Facs… I’m just old, so he’s a ‘kid’ to me. However, if there’s any single rite of passage guaranteeing adulthood, I’d say having to take the stand against your father in a murder case might be it.

    No kidding and imagine how Drew must have felt watching his son testify against him. I’ll bet his face went from red to white as a sheet.

  129. My sister had a friend who was murdered. Found them buried inside a brick wall. Searches, nothing turned anything up. It was someone who got arrested, and was facing big time in jail over something that came forward and told where his body was. Sad but true, could be the something like this here.

  130. rescueapet :
    I don’t know what’s going to come out about Eric Peterson’s testimony, but what a sad state of affairs. On one hand, you have an adult son of this madman supposedly recounting a brutal beating of his father’s wife. Yet, you have the two teens, Kathleen’s own sons, under their father’s control, propping him up on tv and saying he’s the best dad in the world.
    The sad reality of this all is that we probably all can assume what the truth is. Please don’t tell me the other adult son is now going to be pitted against his brother, all for the sake of their father.
    OMG.

    The tragedy is with all the children, their love and loyalty for their parents versus what they’ve seen and heard, versus what they’re told as “truth”

  131. rescueapet :

    noway406 :
    How long ago was the domestic abuse that Eric witnessed?

    LOL, Noway, I’m trying to get the news on here as fast as I can. Nothing out on that yet on any of the broadcasts in Chicago.
    I need a drink.

    You DESERVE a drink, Rescue & I wish I could be the one to buy it for you! xox

  132. rescueapet :
    Channel 9 News @ 5:00 – Defense atty, Lenard, highlighted Morphey’s problems with alcohol and depression. Outside of court, Brodsky said Morphey’s credibility will hurt the prosecution. Said he told different people different stories, changed the dimensions of the barrel numerous times. Brodsky said we’re seeing why the State’s case is “going to fall apart.”
    Oh, so he says.

    “changed the dimensions of the barrel numerous times”

    Does Joel Brodsky imply Tom Morphey didn’t bring his tape measure and accurately measured the barrel before he took it out of the house.

    Maybe Joel should ask how many steps Tom took the barrel down the staircase and if he doesn’t get that right, he must be lying (!!)

  133. Nothing’s been mentioned by any of the reporters that they broke for the day, so I’m wondering if that’s why nothing’s out yet about Eric’s testimony.

  134. I think Joel is thinking of how the description of the container changed numerous times in the media. Of course, that had nothing to do with Morphey since Tom only gave his account once that I know of (on Good Morning America) and described a heavy sealed container that was warm.

    The other accounts were from people like Mims who said something about a cable box, and Martinek who described what he remembered what Morphey had said…oh right…hearsay.

  135. I’m not quite sure myself what part of this is hearsay. I realize the statements Kathleen made to her co-workers is hearsay, but Morphey’s actions aren’t, nor would Eric’s recounting of a domestic violence incident be if he possibly witnessed it. These seem to be State witnesses who are testifying to incidents that occurred after the two victims made statements to other people about their fear of Drew, and then died or disappeared. To me, it appears that the State is using actual witness to bolster the people who recounted the hearsay statements.

    Does that make sense?

  136. Hi Everyone~! Brodsky Ballpoints? OMG What an idiot.

    Thanks for keeping us all up to date.

    I feel sorry for Eric. It has to suck to know what your father is. The younger kids will have alot to deal with as they grow up. Sad all the way around.

  137. Hi Harley!

    The only add’l news that has been reported about Eric’s testimony is that he witnessed a domestic violence attack, apparently, by his father against Kathleen in the ’90’s.

    I think I got that right.

  138. facsmiley :
    I think Joel is thinking of how the description of the container changed numerous times in the media. Of course, that had nothing to do with Morphey since Tom only gave his account once that I know of (on Good Morning America) and described a heavy sealed container that was warm.
    The other accounts were from people like Mims who said something about a cable box, and Martinek who described what he remembered what Morphey had said…oh right…hearsay.

    I know, that’s why Joels comment is so utterly ridiculous.

    Tom would know if the container was big or small, was a box or barrel, had a lid, no lid, handles or whatever and there’s absolutely no need for him to state anything different than what he took out of the house, so where is Joel even trying to go with this ????

  139. I meant to emphasise the “killed” part, so it will have to be much more than the hearsay statements themselves, won’t it?

  140. facsmiley :Hey Harley.
    It sad to think that Drew claims to do everything for the sake of his kids. He’s ruined their lives.

    YEPPER! He is such a pig! I guess the nickname people give to cops sooooooooooooo applys to Drew! Of course not all

  141. http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/01/21/general-us-drew-peterson_7293959.html

    Peterson’s stormy marriage with Savio was mentioned Thursday in afternoon testimony.

    A son from Peterson’s first marriage to Carol Brown described watching Peterson in 1993 dragging Savio into the house by her hair.

    “She was screaming for help,” said Eric Peterson, who described Savio as drunk. “He was pulling her down the stairs.”

    Eric Peterson, who once spent weekends with Savio and Peterson, has been estranged from his father since 1993.

    Wouldn’t that be estranged since 2003? I suppose they’ll fix that in a later edition.

  142. givarat :

    justanotherhen :

    rescueapet :
    ** Morphey added to what we’ve already seen that Drew asked him to rent a storage locker so that he could store an air-tight container for at least six months, after which time he’d dispose of it.**

    That looks like he (Drew) had no immediate plans for disposal.
    Makes you wonder why he wanted to go down that road.

    Yea this is definitely very interesting. The report above even goes as far to say Drew told Morphy he was going to store Stacy there.Is this some sort of assumption on the press’s part? This may mean also that she is being stored somewhere as we speak in that barrel.Otherwise it was moved by an accomplice or perhaps even Drew.

    Around 6 months from the end of October 2007, brings it to around April 2008.

    What was Drew planning/doing in April 2008 ??

    One can only hope Tom Morphey also asked the same question (and got an answer !!)

  143. Wow. Not many of us, I presume, can say we’ve never been drunk. I know it’s been many, many years since I decided I didn’t want to drive the porcelain bus anymore and have to endure the cocktail flu, but I don’t think being in that state deserves getting dragged by the hair into the house, and pulled down the stairs.

    My goodness, isn’t a police officer the one that answers domestic calls such as this to bring peace and order? Sounds like Drew Peterson got caught up in the ugly side of what he was sworn to stop.

  144. Was it April 2008 when Drew went to Wisconsin with “Denise”? and her kids? Too many women, too many trips. :(

  145. If anything, it only makes Eric’s testimony more compelling to me. When we are being honest, no one is being perfect.

  146. It’s been a long two years, but just a reminder about this, regardless of what Brodsky is now saying about Morphey’s credibility. Why does he continue to yap about this, when it’s Judge White’s decision to make, not ours? Why doesn’t he just tell Judge White instead of telling us that the State’s case is falling apart? Why doesn’t he just STFU?

    Drew Peterson was reportedly seen loading a large barrel into the back of his truck just hours after Stacy Peterson was last seen alive.

    Family sources say a neighbor reported seeing Drew and an unidentified man loading the barrel into the back of his now confiscated Yukon Denali.

    “We had heard this before about Drew Peterson carrying a barrel with somebody,” said Pamela Bosco, spokesperson for Stacy Peterson.

  147. Rescue… that is the thing. He has made such a BAD name for Police Officers. HE is everything that a GOOD COP is NOT. He has lied, cheated, and so GROSSLY abused that power. It is pathetic. I am really glad to see that this will finally get him what he deserves. That old saying… “What goes around, comes around” Touche!!! Jackass Drew!! I just wish he were caught a long time ago and never allowed to have more children!

  148. Harley – I have a feeling many of his fellow officers wouldn’t mind seeing him dry up and blow away, if you get my drift. He has no substantial backing of fellow officers. He only has a few groupies standing up for him. I’m saying it has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence. I’m saying no one is coming forward to at least give him support. They don’t think enough of him to do so–they know what he’s capable of, whether he killed his two wives or not!

    He’s a poor excuse of a human being, let alone someone that is meant to straighten out other people’s messes.

    Most of the time, police officers don’t get to see people at their best; usually it’s at their worst. This guy gives that situation a whole new meaning. He lived it!

  149. I agree he is supposed to be the role model, the protector! Not the abuser, and the enabler. He was doing everything he hauling in everybody else for. What kind of crock is that, not a good way to show people in community that it is alright for the law to do it, but not the citizens.

  150. If you’ll remember from earlier on the blog, Brodsky was reported as saying he can’t properly cross-examine the witnesses because he doesn’t know who the State is going to call.

    In a later blab, he says we’re seeing why the State’s case is “going to fall apart.”

    Once again, Mr. Brodsky, make up my mind for me. This is the best lawyering money can buy?

  151. I have the feeling by the time this trial is over with Joel won’t have very many clients lol. If he isn’t disbarred before first before he goes under :)

  152. Sorry, but there is a “flaw” in the last word of this article, where Eric is asked if he still loved his father and if he was a good father.

    If you look closely, though, the word “no” is attached to one of the email addresses at the end of the article. Look and you’ll see what I mean.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/ct-met-0122-drew-peterson-hearing-20100121,0,4671344,full.story

    Drew Peterson’s stepbrother recounts night he helped Peterson remove blue storage container
    Thomas Morphey says he is convinced Stacy Peterson’s remains were in container

    By Erika Slife and Steve Schmadeke, Tribune reporters

    January 21, 2010

    Drew Peterson has dismissed his stepbrother as a druggie, a drunk, a liar and psychologically unbalanced. But Thursday, Thomas Morphey took to the witness stand composed, serious and unflinching as he recounted the night that he says he helped Peterson remove his wife’s body from the couple’s Bolingbrook home.

    In a hushed Will County courtroom, Morphey testified that the two carried a heavy, blue container — containing what he thought was Stacy Peterson’s body — out the front door of the house and into the back of Peterson’s GMC Yukon Denali. Afterward Peterson turned to him and said, “This never happened.”

    “I won’t tell a soul,” Morphey said he replied.

    The dramatic testimony came on the second day of a special pretrial hearing to determine whether to allow hearsay statements in the murder case against Peterson, 56, who is charged with killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Morphey, 42, is believed to be one of the prosecution’s star witnesses because of his claims he helped Peterson dispose of his fourth wife, Stacy, who vanished on Oct. 28, 2007.

    Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, is a suspect in her disappearance but has not been charged.

    Morphey did not waver Thursday in his recollection of the days leading up to the disappearance of Stacy, who was 23 at the time.

    He acknowledged he has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and battles manic depression. He admitted to being treated for drug and alcohol abuse.

    But he said his memory was clear about the morning of Saturday, Oct. 27, 2007, when Peterson allegedly drove Morphey to an industrial park and on the way asked Morphey, “How much do you love me?”

    “I said, ‘I do,'” Morphey told the court. “He said, ‘Enough to kill for me?'”

    Morphey said he replied it was not something he could live with.

    “Could you live with knowing about it?” Peterson allegedly asked.

    “I always assumed you killed Kathleen,” Morphey said he told Peterson, to which Peterson allegedly replied, “‘No, I would never hurt Kathleen; she was a great mother.'”

    Morphey said Peterson then told him Stacy was cheating on him and wanted a divorce.

    “He said she would take everything,” Morphey testified. “He would have to continue to work for the rest of his life.”

    He said Peterson told him he would give him $200 to rent a storage unit under Morphey’s name and store a container there.

    “I said, ‘What about the smell?'” Morphey said. “He said (the container) would be airtight.”

    Peterson allegedly said Morphey would check on the unit “from time to time to make sure there was no odor.” Peterson would return in six months after the “smoke cleared” to take care of it. If something happened to Peterson during that time, Morphey testified, Peterson allegedly told him to “drop it in the canal.”

    Morphey said that he later called Peterson to tell him he couldn’t take part in the plan, but that Peterson still picked him up the next day for help in removing the container.

    Peterson’s attorney George Lenard interrogated Morphey about inconsistencies in his story, such as why he described the container to Illinois State Police as no taller than his knees and on Thursday said it was 3 1/2 feet tall.

    Morphey, who said he tried to commit suicide shortly after helping Peterson remove the container, blamed any irregularities on his mental state at the time.

    “It’s the most traumatic thing that ever happened to me in my life,” he said. “Things were coming at me pretty quick.”

    Peterson’s adult son Eric also testified Thursday, seeing his father for the first time since moving out of Peterson’s Bolingbrook home in 2003, in part out of anger that his father was dating Stacy, a much younger woman.

    Eric Drew Peterson testified that while spending the weekend at his father’s home in 1993, Peterson dragged Savio — who was screaming and pleading for someone to call police — through the front door by her hair and arm.

    Asked whether he still loved his father and whether he thought he had been a good dad, Eric Peterson paused for a long time before twice answering,

    eslife@tribune.com

    sschmadeke@tribune.com“>”no.”

    eslife@tribune.com

    sschmadeke@tribune.com

    Copyright © 2010, Chicago Tribune

  153. rescueapet :
    If you’ll remember from earlier on the blog, Brodsky was reported as saying he can’t properly cross-examine the witnesses because he doesn’t know who the State is going to call.
    In a later blab, he says we’re seeing why the State’s case is “going to fall apart.”
    Once again, Mr. Brodsky, make up my mind for me. This is the best lawyering money can buy?

    The best lawyering jive can buy.

  154. If you’ll remember from earlier on the blog, Brodsky was reported as saying he can’t properly cross-examine the witnesses because he doesn’t know who the State is going to call.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Since all witnesses for the Prosecution are liars with traffic violations, financial, alcohol and drug problems, what difference does it make to Joel who’s going to be called.

    He could have prepared his defense en masse and be on target every single time (!)

  155. Word is tomorrow they are supposed to go back to the retired State police officer and his statements to the night Kathy was found…

  156. questions4you :

    Word is tomorrow they are supposed to go back to the retired State police officer and his statements to the night Kathy was found…

    I wonder if that means Hardy, the one that was at the inquest? His testimony should be interesting.

  157. Peterson allegedly said Morphey would check on the unit “from time to time to make sure there was no odor.” Peterson would return in six months after the “smoke cleared” to take care of it. If something happened to Peterson during that time, Morphey testified, Peterson allegedly told him to “drop it in the canal.”

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Oh oke, the 6 months is explained here.

    Drew just wanted to wait “until the smoke cleared”

    Little did he know …….

  158. rescueapet :

    questions4you :
    Word is tomorrow they are supposed to go back to the retired State police officer and his statements to the night Kathy was found…

    I wonder if that means Hardy, the one that was at the inquest? His testimony should be interesting.

    Ya mean Hardy, the cop that never was there at the scene? or the one that was…

    I think they are talking about the ISP that was on the scene and was on the witness stand, coming back to finish his testimony.

  159. This is my first post but I’ve been following from the beginning. I feel like I know you guys – and I just wanted to say that you all are AWESOME! I know what it’s like to fear your husband and think no one could believe what you are going through, and to see it all finally coming out is such a relief. Thank you all for your dedication. I’m sure Kathleen and Stacy never imagined how many lives they would touch. To Stacy and Kathleen I hope you know how much you are loved and that your lives did mean something – How dare that man think he could just erase them and go on with life. I hope he’s haunted every night.

  160. Peterson allegedly said Morphey would check on the unit “from time to time to make sure there was no odor.” Peterson would return in six months after the “smoke cleared” to take care of it. If something happened to Peterson during that time, Morphey testified, Peterson allegedly told him to “drop it in the canal.”

    Anyone else think plan “B” went into effect early and that Drew took it upon himself?

  161. I didn’t see that ISP officer witness identified by name… did I miss it? It should be interesting if it is Hardy.

  162. Oh, I wish this board had a “Thank You”, or “Karma” or “Applaud” button. I give kudos to each of you.
    What’s Ric Mims doing these days? Wonder if he’s on the prosecutor’s list, too.
    I must say, I am pleasantly surprised at what we’ve received so far.
    Uncontested by the pen man, I must also say.

  163. facsmiley :

    Peterson allegedly said Morphey would check on the unit “from time to time to make sure there was no odor.” Peterson would return in six months after the “smoke cleared” to take care of it. If something happened to Peterson during that time, Morphey testified, Peterson allegedly told him to “drop it in the canal.”

    Anyone else think plan “B” went into effect early and that Drew took it upon himself?

    Yeah, most likely as soon as Cassandra was on to him he realized he didn’t have 6 months grace (!!)

  164. With regard to Morphey’s testimony, I can understand how the defense would look to pick apart what he told LE, or the GJ. That’s supposed to be what happens. We’ve been hearing all about his character flaws for two years now, so none of this comes as a shock. Isn’t this the whole reason Drew picked Morphey to help him? Because he knew he was easily manipulated and on shaky ground to begin with?

    Still, if Morphey says they were out and about at a certain place, at a certain time, and there’s witnesses and/or surveillance to coincide with that, that, to me, speaks volumes. Phone logs apparently have come up in this too.

    Also, there is a mysterious “neighbor” who has been reported to have seen two people carrying something out of Drew’s house. That remains to be seen if that person is going to be involved in the pretrial proceedings to further back-up Morphey’s testimony.

    We’ve heard Drew himself tell national tv viewers that he never gets mad. Today, his estranged son said otherwise. He said his father pulled his wife by her hair, while she was screaming for help, and dragged her into the house.

    Once again, the lawyer of the decade is giving sound bites to his unadoring public about how unworthy the State’s case is. Tell it to the Judge!!!

  165. Remember there’s also the attempt by Drew and Thomas Morphey to actually rent a storage Unit, but Thomas did not have proper ID or whatever he needed.

    Even Drew himself finally admitted to wanting to rent a storage Unit that particular day to store “tires”

    So for all these events that “never happened”, Drew has backed them up himself – LOL

  166. bucketoftea :
    I’m not certain, but I think she taunted him about 11:55/58?am on that Sunday morning. Did he go out briefly? It wouldn’t even matter where because he said he was at home.
    You know, come to think of it, I recall that when Peterson was on Mancow and Cass called in, she kind of “threw” some digs at him about him being somewhere he shouldn’t have been. I don’t remember the full exchange, but I now recall her enlightening him about being seen somewhere. So, I must assume there’s more to this than meets the eye, so to speak.

    Drew took the children over to Sharon’s house after lunch, about 1:00pm, on Oct. 28th, and then left to run an errand. Sharon later said he was only gone for about 15 minutes.

    I wonder if Drew was seen somewhere during that 15 minute time frame?

    Then, we’ve got a big chunk of the afternoon when Drew supposedly went to the airport to put a sticker on his plane. He may have been seen somewhere during that time frame too – maybe not going directly to the airport, or going somewhere else after the airport.

  167. coffeeocity :
    That’s a moment I actually would’ve liked to be able to see DP’s ugly mug, when he found out ANY conversation he had with Morphey had been taped.
    I hope being able to testify against DP will help Tom.

    It’s going to be difficult for JB and crew to deny Drew ever saw Tom Morphey on October 28th, as the wire tap is proof.

    I yoo hope testifying against Drew will give Tom a sense of relief and help him recover.

  168. Lisa Bloom Should the statements by Drew Peterson’s deceased wife Kathleen Savio — that he threatened to kill her, that she feared for her life, that he’d make it look like an accident — be admissible in his trial, though they are hearsay? Illinois court is conducting a month-long hearing on the question this week. I’m analyz…ing on CBS Early Show 7:30 a.m. tomorrow morning. Thoughts?
    about an hour ago

    Reem Odeh Can I comment? I’m not sure if that would be appropriate. Ok, well anyways, my answer to your status is NO.
    about an hour ago

  169. There is also evidence Lenny said on the blog that Drew tried to rid of over at Lenny and Paula’s and he didn’t it was said, and Lenny and Paula gave it to ISP. I wonder what that was, and if that will be brought up also? It isn’t the gun because that was asked and he said No that wasn’t it.

  170. Once everything gets pieced together, you will find Drew helped convict himself by placing himself right in the middle of every single scenario and once you’re in that situation you can’t unring the bell !

  171. rescueapet :
    Yes, Eric is the one who has not spoken to his father since the death of Kathleen Savio, I believe. He’s never uttered a word publicly, and not much is known about him, except that he and Drew are estranged.
    Guess we’ll know more now.

    Somewhere I remember reading that when Eric learned of Kathleen Savio’s death, he didn’t believe it was an accident. It was suggested that he thought his father had something to do with it.

  172. justanotherhen :

    rescueapet :
    ** Morphey added to what we’ve already seen that Drew asked him to rent a storage locker so that he could store an air-tight container for at least six months, after which time he’d dispose of it.**

    That looks like he (Drew) had no immediate plans for disposal.
    Makes you wonder why he wanted to go down that road.

    I’ve wondered………with all the river/canal searches and never finding Stacy, if that’s exactly what Drew did with the blue barrel/container with her body in it? That container might be in some storage unit, rented under a false ID, and paid for well in advance. Drew could have someone who owed him making rental payments.

  173. Even in these very early days with only a few witnesses on the stand, it is already apparent how much damage Drew and Joel have done to their own case.

    If they had kept quiet like everyone advised them to, the Defense would have had something to build on but as it is now, they are already trying to plug big holes in Drews story and time line and Joels inadvertent admissions of all sorts and this is only the second day !!!!!

    Good Grief !!

Comments are closed.