Kathleen Savio death scene photo

It recently came to our attention that a photo of the death scene of Drew Peterson‘s third wife, Kathleen Savio, has been leaked.

Numerous investigators and experts have been given access to the official report of Savio’s death, and photographs of the scene were admitted as evidence in the hearsay hearing in February 2010, but only now has this photo been seen by the public. It shows the body of Kathleen Savio curled up in the bath tub of her home. She is in a semi-fetal position, on her left hip but with her upper torso rotated downwards, an ekg lead still attached to her right shoulder. A blue towel is folded on the tub nearby – a towel that was not present at the scene when neighbors first entered the bathroom, but which was photographed later after Drew Peterson had been left alone with Kathleen’s body.

It’s a heart-wrenching and disturbing photo so we are linking to it in this post rather than embed the picture. We advise you to view at your own discretion by clicking the link below.

[Death Scene photo of Kathleen Savio.]

If Kathleen had slipped and struck her head, might she have fallen in this position? Not according to Dr. Larry Blum’s testimony for the prosecution:

Blum said the position of Savio’s body in the tub — facedown with both feet pressed hard against the tub wall, her toes hyperextended — made it “highly, highly unlikely” she drowned accidentally.

Judging from the flow of blood, it appeared a 1-inch gash on the back of her head was inflicted after her body settled in the tub, Blum said.

The pathologist said he also reviewed 43 cases of bathtub fatalities in Illinois and that Savio’s death “falls so far out of the pattern for accidental.”

Documents: Kathleen Savio Murder Case: Death Inquest, Exhumation, and Autopsy Reports

~By commenting you agree to be bound by the rules of this blog. You can contact admins directly by sending an email to petersonstory@gmail.com.~

About these ads

44 thoughts on “Kathleen Savio death scene photo

  1. Thomas Pontarelli testified next. He was one of the four people who were in the home with Peterson when Savio’s body was discovered; his son, his wife, and another neighbor were the others.

    He said that he did not see any clothes or towels in the bathroom in which Savio’s body was found; he did not see a rug on the tile floor.

    That is not the case in this disturbing photo. How could this have had the outcome it did until the circumstances of Stacy’s disappearance led to Kathleen’s body being exhumed for further investigation.

    I’ll never understand this……

  2. Also…

    Emergency medical technician Louis Oleszkiewicz testified that a towel shown in crime scene photos alongside the tub was not there when he arrived.

  3. I couldn’t agree with you more Rescue. Something here stinks here with the way Kathleens body is postioned, anyone can see this. Why didn’t LE see it? Hmmm

  4. Lifetime movie on Drew Peterson captures his personality but takes some liberties

    BY DAN ROZEK drozek@suntimes.com December 29, 2011 8:10PM
    Updated: December 29, 2011 9:20PM

    Actor Rob Lowe takes on Drew Peterson in Lifetime’s upcoming movie about the former Bolingbrook cop who’s charged with murdering his third wife, Kathleen Savio, and remains a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

    So how accurately does “Untouchable” — based on the book “Fatal Vows” by former Herald-News reporter Joe Hosey — portray actual events in the notorious case?

    The film, which airs Jan. 21, captures Peterson’s cockiness and off-the-wall quips, but it definitely takes artistic license with some key points and a few minor details in the ongoing drama.

    Open door

    In a scene that gives the movie its title, Lowe as Peterson dramatically opens the garage door of his hostile neighbor, then warns her he’ll never be arrested because he’s “untouchable, (expletive).”

    Peterson apparently opened the door but never uttered the threat.

    The neighbor, “Karen,” is clearly based on Sharon Bychowski, a friend of Stacy’s who lived next door, led efforts to find her and became increasingly antagonistic toward Peterson as weeks passed.

    Bychowski has said Peterson used a remote she had loaned Stacy to open her garage door, but there’s no indication Peterson ever made that comment to her. Some, in fact, recall Peterson being tagged untouchable by those frustrated he hadn’t been charged in Stacy’s 2007 disappearance.

    Bolingbrook, Calif.

    The squad cars, police uniforms and building signs in the movie all say Bolingbrook. But the sprawling, Mediterranean-style houses, lush greenery and tall concrete walls along the streets scream California.

    Busted

    As the movie shows, Peterson was driving in Bolingbrook when he was arrested in May 2009 for Savio’s bathtub drowning death, and he did quip that the bust must have been about his unreturned library books. But Peterson didn’t joke about his handcuffs being “bling” until he made his first court appearance a day later in Joliet.

    Strip search

    After being arrested, Lowe as Peterson is taken into custody and ordered to change from his street clothes into a red jail uniform. To taunt the cops, he turns the perfunctory clothing swap into a strip tease, even humming to provide a soundtrack as he pulls off his shirt. That’s Hollywood at work, a law enforcement source said.

    “Never happened,” the source said.

    Search party

    The NYPD baseball cap, sunglasses and the red, white and blue bandanna Lowe wears in the movie while police search his home for evidence are right on target. But there wasn’t any emotional appeal to the TV cameras to give him back his life before he drove off in his SUV. Actually, he quickly fled back inside Bychowski’s house as soon as reporters recognized him under the bizarre disguise and converged on him to ask questions.

    Search party II

    Despite all the hoopla during the search scene in the movie, the actual police raid on Peterson’s house was even more wild and surreal.

    News helicopters jockeyed for room overhead and police cadaver-sniffing dogs prowled through his home and yard while Fox News commentator Greta Van Susteren and ex-O.J. Simpson cop Mark Fuhrman narrated the search live as TV cameras rolled.

    Grim-faced investigators carried out boxes and other parcels as reporters shouted questions that went unanswered.

    Religious conversion

    As Stacy Peterson, actress Kaley Cuoco at one point confides to the fatherly, white-haired minister who officiated at her wedding to Drew that she knew more about Savio’s death than she told police.

    Stacy allegedly talked to her minister, the Rev. Neil Schori, who didn’t perform the wedding ceremony, but was counseling the Petersons about their marital problems. And Schori is about 30 years younger than his movie counterpart — and good-looking enough that Drew contended Stacy had “a big crush” on him.

    No Joel

    In real life, defense attorney Joel Brodsky never seemed to be far from Peterson’s side, especially when TV cameras rolled and reporters prowled around.

    But there’s no Brodsky or any character like him hanging around Lowe in the movie, despite all the cops looking for evidence and reporters looking for stories. There are no lawyers in the picture at all, not even Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow, who some think bears a more-than-passing resemblance to Lowe as Peterson.

    Not our Joe

    Hosey is a key character in the film, but he’s portrayed as relaxed, polite and, well, Californian.

    Hosey, a native New Yorker and die-hard Mets fan, is far more brash, aggressive and intense than his soft-spoken, reel-life counterpart. The movie reporter drives a sedan. In real life, Hosey’s beat-up white pickup that always seemed to be parked in front of Peterson’s house.

    http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/news/crime/9712508-418/lifetime-movie-on-drew-peterson-captures-his-personality-but-takes-some-liberties.html

  5. Interesting story. We’ve already noted that the “I’m untouchable, Bitch” catchphrase probably never happened. It’s not surprising that the movie fictionalizes some elements. It’s a Lifetime movie, for cripes sake.

    Still, I’m somewhat gratified to learn that there is no Joel character in the movie. The last thing we need is more publicity for that putz.

  6. Yeah, well he’s busy researching his options to either stop the movie before it airs, or suing the pants off of someone. Oh, and getting them to pay his client because, after all, it is “his story.”

  7. The idea for humming “The Stripper” while Peterson is strip searched in the Lifetime movie most likely comes from Peterson’s own letter to the Sun-Times in which he stated:

    I was then strip searched, as in each raid, while all ten watched. I hummed the stripper song as I tossed them my clothes one piece at a time. When I got down to my underpants I told them if they tried to put dollars in my pants we were gonna fight. I was later told that they were trying to humiliate me but I don’t think they got the response they were looking for as I left them laughing.

    http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2011/12/13/why-no-one-needs-to-apologize-to-drew-peterson/

  8. Well. In all honesty, if the “The Stripper” incident is based on Peterson’s own remarks and embellishments, as published in The Sun Times from a letter he or his lead lawyer so kindly supplied them with, then he, once again, has no one to blame for sticking his foot in his mouth. No one would have a bat to club him with if he hadn’t willingly supplied it. :-)

  9. I’m just saying that the striptease stuff may well be inaccurate as far as what happened to Peterson on May 7, 2009, but was probably included based on his letter and tacked onto the May arrest because it makes for better TV. Overall, it seems kind of silly to pick apart the film for accuracy since it isn’t presented as a documentary (even though it’s based on real people and real-life events). If the decision to cast Rob Lowe as Peterson isn’t giveaway enough that this movie will not be a stickler for the facts, then what is?

    So far, my only beef is that the actors playing Stacy and Drew are only 20 years apart in age while in real life they had a full 30-year age difference. If you want to tell this shocking story why soften the age difference aspect? Anyone looking at this photo would imagine these two to be father and daughter – something that I wish the filmmakers had thought to play up to its full impact. Stacy was still a child when Drew started ‘dating’ her:

    http://petersonstory.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/drewandstacy.jpg

  10. Just a reminder of what Blum said when he testified about Kathleen’s death during the mini-trial:

    Blum, who said he laid down in Savio’s tub as part of his investigation, testified the injury to the back of Savio’s head may have been made shortly after her death and not as a result of a fall. He also pointed to a wound in the area of Savio’s diaphragm as one that wouldn’t have been caused in a fall.

    “The bruise was deep, down to the bone,” he said.

    He also agreed with Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow’s suggestion that the diaphragm injury might have been caused by what Glasgow called a “bear hug.”

    Blum also testified that Savio had no measurable drugs or alcohol in her system when she died – an effort to head off the argument defense attorneys have raised that perhaps Savio was in a condition that would have made a fall more likely…

    …The defense theory is that Savio slipped and fell in her tub, hit her head, then drowned. Dr. Blum, who performed the second autopsy on Savio’s body in 2007 strongly disagreed, saying, “The ugly facts of the injuries destroy that beautiful theory.”

    http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2010/02/05/drew-peterson-hearsay-hearing-day-13/

  11. In addition, Dr. Mitchell’s findings were that KS died from drowning. That fact is not disputed. The corner’s inquest panel was left to determine the manner of death, and it is now known they weren’t given an option of ruling her death undetermined; thus, ruling it an accident. It’s also been determined that at least two people on the panel have a different opinion about that.

    I remember listening to the defense’s expert witness at the hearsay proceedings. He relied on previous autopsies, crime scene photographs, police reports and other information, but said he would “revisit” his findings if certain information presented to him at the time was found to be incorrect. I find this particular testimony thought provoking:

    The pathologist said he believes Savio may have simply slipped or fainted in the tub. He also pointed to medical records that show she had a heart murmur, suggesting her heart may have stopped and caused her to slam the back of her head against a hard object and then fall into the tub and drown. Whatever happened, “she suffered a blunt force injury and that could have rendered her unconscious,” Jentzen said.

    Other witnesses have testified that Savio would never have bathed wearing jewelry. Jentzen said the fact that she was wearing what he called a “delicate” necklace strongly suggested to him that she didn’t struggle with an attacker.

    Jentzen, who has conducted thousands of autopsies, said he would have expected such a necklace to have somehow been damaged in an attack. “I’ve seen it numerous times,” he said.

    Yet, if you look at it from another perspective, from the convoluted way she would have had to have slipped, bounced off the walls, hit her head, and fallen into the tub, twisted, you would expect the surroundings to be somewhat of a mess. Bottles overturned, towel not laying neatly on the rim but fallen on the floor, and, at the very least, dried water splashes on the faucets, bath rim. There’s nothing askew, the tub is shiny clean, and there’s no evidence, that I’ve heard of, of water splashes from her falling into a filled tub.

    The towel issue is also controversial, since both Mr. Pontarelli and the F.D. paramedic said no towel was there prior to Peterson shooing everyone out, after which things later appeared.

    Why wouldn’t Dr. Jentzen think it odd that everything is in it’s place, the tub and surroundings are shiny clean and nothing is disturbed; yet, she suffered a slip and fall so catastrophic and violent, that it caused her death. It absolutely defies logic. He uses this idea to justify a delicate necklace not being broken in a non-existent violent struggle, yet a neat, tidy tub area, following what would appear to have been a sudden, catastrophic fall, doesn’t give him pause?

    Then again, he’s a paid defense expert witness, and it is his job to give other reasons for her death, whether they make logical sense or not. But, of course, if all of the jurors want video footage of the night and won’t consider the disturbing pieces of the puzzle, then Peterson will be acquitted.

    If if was humanly impossible for Peterson to have been near or in that house at the time KS died, then there’s nothing more to discuss. If he had the opportunity to be there, her death is believed by the jurors to have been a murder, and the testimony of the witnesses about hits, being better off with her dead, and ER records of his abuse, along with a letter written by KS to the State’s Attorney’s office, are believable, then he just may have something to worry about. We all want to know.

    http://www.fox19.com/story/12000594/pathologist-ex-cops-3rd-wife-died-accidentally?clienttype=printable&redirected=true

  12. I never even thought about it but you raised a good point. A 150-pound woman slips and falls into her full bathtub (the faucet was not running when she was found) and yet no water is displaced onto the surrounding bathroom floor? That makes no sense at all.

  13. Jentzen said the evidence clearly points to an accident – from the absence of any defensive wounds on Savio’s body to the condition of the bathroom when her body was found. He said the bathroom appeared normal, saying Savio’s glasses were folded and there was no sign of an intruder.

    There ARE defensive wounds on her body. The lead attorney, in fact, questioned Dr. Blum about the circumstances of defensive wounds, thus, acknowledging they were there:

    Under questioning by defense attorney Joel Brodsky, Blum said possible defensive wounds on Savio’s hand could have been caused by her cat or by careless workers removing evidence bags on her hands.

    Kathleen had an extensive door lock system, an alarm, and even a deadbolt lock on her inside door. Yet, the alarm wasn’t activated. Strange that she would be bathing late in the evening and was terrified of her ex-husband, yet she neglected to use any of her security on that fateful night. So yes, there was no sign of an intruder. If she was murdered, the guy walked right in. Somehow.

  14. My defensive wound point is, of course, that she did have them, the defense knows she did, yet their expert guy says she didn’t have them.

    Sounds like a hot shot defense thing going, heh?

  15. Blum testified the alleged murder scene was “pristine” with little blood, no splashed water and nothing around the tub knocked over, but he could not say whether the scene was staged.

    He faulted investigators for failing to perform a rape kit on Savio’s body but noted that the pathologist who did the original autopsy, Dr. Bryan Mitchell, was told by police “there was no sign of foul play.”

    “They used tunnel vision and didn’t look at the whole picture,” he said of investigators.

    Could not say whether the scene WAS staged. Can Dr. Jentzen say it WASN’T? Would he? Hell, he thought that towel on the tub was put there by Kathleen. We know it wasn’t, and now, so should he.

  16. It it plausible that a monster can murder, clean up the scene, get an alibi, schmooze with the investigators, reap large financial awards, go on to marry a young woman, misplace her, and act like he’s covered in Teflon, or untouchable, or is this all just a figment of our wild imaginations?

    Good thing the jury will sort this all out.

  17. I’m glad you brought up the security and the door locks. It’s been reported that she had extensive security in her home and yet when Peterson and his locksmith forced entry on March 1, only one lock on the front door was set.

    Can I venture a guess that it was the kind of lock that could be set while inside the home, and then click into place once the door was close behind you upon exiting? What do you want to guess that neither chain nor deadbolt were in place?

  18. Thanks for bringing up all this information today, Rescue. One gets tired of hearing that there is no evidence in this case besides hearsay. That’s what happens when a blathering attorney is allowed to saturate the media with sound bites.

    Fortunately the jury at Drew’s trial will be asked to consider all the evidence.

  19. I can only hope that the jury members have the same common sense which prevails on these blogs.

    Thank you for reminding us about the many pieces of evidence in this case.

  20. ۰̮̑●̮̑۰★⋰⋱☆⋰⋱★⋰⋱☆⋰⋱★⋰⋱☆⋰⋱★۰̮̑●̮̑۰
    ──────█─█ █▀█ █▀█ █▀█ █─█─────
    ──────█▀█ █▀█ █▀▀ █▀▀ ▀█▀─────
    ──────▀─▀ ▀─▀ ▀── ▀── ─▀──────
    █▄─█ █▀▀ █─█─█──█─█ █▀▀ █▀█ █▀█
    █─██ █▀▀ █─█─█──▀█▀ █▀▀ █▀█ ██▀
    ▀──▀ ▀▀▀ ─▀▀▀────▀─ ▀▀▀ ▀─▀ ▀─▀
    ۰̮̑●̮̑۰★⋰⋱☆⋰⋱★⋰⋱☆⋰⋱★⋰⋱☆⋰⋱★۰̮̑●̮̑۰
    ░░░█████░█████░░███░█████░░░
    ░░░█░░██░██░██░████░█░░██░░░
    ░░░░░░██░██░██░░░██░░░░██░░░
    ░░░░░██░░██░██░░░██░░░██░░░░
    ░░░░██░░░██░██░░░██░░██░░░░░
    ░░░██░██░██░██░░░██░██░██░░░
    ░░░█████░█████░░░██░█████░░░
    ۰̮̑●̮̑۰★⋰⋱☆⋰⋱★⋰⋱☆⋰⋱★⋰⋱☆⋰⋱★۰̮̑●̮̑۰

    PROSPERITY AND GOOD HEALTH WISHES TO EVERYONE.

  21. HLN is running a program hosted Vinnie Politan called “Biggest Trials of 2012″.

    Steve Greenberg is one of the guest attorneys on the panel, although he couldn’t say anything when they discussed the Drew Peterson trial. They showed some of the early video clips of DP, but the discussion from the panel seemed to be hampered with Greenberg as one of the guests. IMO

    Greenberg is getting a lot of air time. Greenberg did comment on another case about the importance of keeping a client’s mouth closed, and questioned why accused Jodi A. was talking to a reporter. I wonder if JB was watching ?

  22. Happy New Year everyone! Thank you for reading and thank you especially to the top five commentors of 2011!

    1. docsdaughter – 80 comments
    2. noway406 – 46 comments
    3. judgin – 43 comments
    4. bucketoftea – 40 comments
    5. meirish – 34 comments

  23. I’ve been reading back over the preliminary hearing posts from almost two years ago. I dearly hope Falat testifies at trial and that the jurors pay attention to what he has to say:

    Despite Falat’s objections, Collins interviewed Peterson in the lunchroom of the Bolingbrook Police Department, and Peterson was allowed to sit in on an interview with Stacy to check Peterson’s alibi.

    “I thought it was ridiculous,” Falat said.

    Stacy Peterson appeared “scripted” and often looked to Drew Peterson when she was unsure of an answer, Falat testified.

    The couple gave a very detailed timeline of their activities that Sunday, the day before Savio’s body was found, but they were more vague on what they did in the days just before and on March 1, 2004, Falat said. Peterson showed several signs of lying — volunteering information that wasn’t asked for and becoming very still while giving an account of his activities that Sunday, Falat testified.

    Falat said he wanted to re-question Peterson and his wife separately and suggested that Peterson’s children also be interviewed. They never were, he said, and Falat was taken off the investigation March 10.

    At first, Peterson’s demeanor was “very cooperative, almost jovial, but as we started asking him questions it into turned into arrogance and a little cocky,” Falat said.

    Falat said he asked a few questions about whether Peterson stood to gain financially from Savio’s death and about his time with his children during the weekend because they were his alibi for when Savio was killed.

    “That’s when he became sort of cocky and arrogant,” Falat said.

    When Peterson was asked what he was doing on the Sunday before Savio’s body was found, Falat said Peterson acted suspiciously.

    “When Mr. Peterson was talking, he was very still. He wasn’t moving his hands or anything, and he was staring at mostly Sgt. Collins, which was odd,” Falat said, adding that most people move their hands when they talk.

    During his explanation of what he did that day, Peterson also kept blurting out times when he and the children were doing things, without thinking, raising “some concerns,” Falat said.

    After Peterson left, Falat said he told Collins, “I believe Mr. Peterson was not being truthful.”

    http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/02/cop-stacy-petersons-answers-about-savio-seemed-scripted.html

    http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2010/02/04/drew-peterson-hearsay-hearings-day-12/

  24. Falat’s description of Drew could also apply to his behavior after Stacy went missing. IMO

    I like the black & white banner across the top of the site. Stacy looks determined. I think that picture should be looking at him all the time in his cell.

    Going back to the beginning is always a good thing to do. It’s amazing the things that stand out when you look back. There clearly was motive, financial gain, etc. Let’s pray we have a jury with common sense.

  25. Right, DD, there are a lot of details that have been brought out, but they’re just not in the forefront right now. I still don’t think it’s going to be a walk-in-the-park for DP come trial time. As long as they have a jury that will consider all of the evidence, that’s all that any one can ask for. The mooers and oinkers that insist there is no evidence are the ones that must want videos and pictures of the crime being committed. Like the Casey Anthony jurors, perhaps?

  26. Snippet….

    Pontarelli and his wife, Mary, lived next door to Savio in Bolingbrook. The couple and their 19-year-old son, Nick, who described Savio as “a second mom,” said she was afraid of Peterson and accused him of bugging her phone, sneaking into her house, and prior physical abuse, including once attacking her with a knife.

    The night her body was found, the Pontarellis said, Peterson appeared at their door to say he called a locksmith to his ex-wife’s home because he couldn’t reach her in two days to return their two sons after his weekend visitation.

    The family searched Savio’s home with another neighbor while they said a uniformed Peterson waited outside. Thomas Pontarelli said Peterson ran inside to investigate after hearing Mary scream. Peterson appeared “genuinely distraught” and teary-eyed after checking Savio’s pulse and finding no signs of life, Pontarelli said.

    “He said, ‘What am I going to tell my children?’” the neighbor testified.

    Pontarelli said he later overheard Peterson on his cellular phone tell who the neighbor presumed was a police dispatcher that the ex-husband knew he’d be a suspect.

    Pontarelli and a paramedic, Louis Oleszkiewicz, said they were surprised by what was missing in Savio’s bathroom.

    “I said, ‘Look around. Where’s her clothes? Where’s her towel?’” Pontarelli said.

    His wife, Mary, said she also thought it odd that Savio’s long raven hair was down rather than up in her usual clip. Mary Pontarelli said it appeared “like someone had placed her in there.” But, the defense team noted, a towel and a robe are visible in police photos of the bathroom.

    Defense attorney Andrew Abood shrugged off the prosecution’s theory that Peterson later added the items.

    “There would have been no time to set up a staged scene,” said Abood, who also pointed out the Pontarellis didn’t say anything negative against Peterson to authorities until years later. “The prosecution’s theory doesn’t fit the facts.”

    Thomas and Nick Pontarelli said they helped Savio before her death place deadbolt locks on both her front and bedroom doors, and she later accused Peterson of drilling a quarter-size circular hole in the latter lock. A hole large enough for a person to fit through also was found in the wall of Savio’s attached garage abutting her front room.

    Nick Pontarelli said he photographed the damage. Both photos were shown Monday in court.

    He testified Savio said, “if anything ever happened to her it wasn’t an accident.” She believed Peterson had recorded her calls and showed him audiotapes and a black box connected to a telephone in a basement bedroom where her ex-husband slept before he moved out in 2002, the teen said.

    Thomas Pontarelli said Peterson let him know he didn’t appreciate the family’s support of his ex-wife. Pontarelli said he spoke to Peterson after finding a .38-caliber bullet “standing straight up in my driveway.”

    “I have no proof that it was him,” Thomas Pontarelli said. “He said, ‘Any friend of hers is an enemy of mine.’”

    Nick Pontarelli said he had lunch at Savio’s house Feb. 28, 2004, and that she spoke with excitement about beginning a new chapter in her life. He didn’t notice any of the bruises that were found on Savio’s body some 48 hours later.

    “She said she wanted to move away as far as she could,” he said. But, he said, Savio “was getting really scared that the finalization of her divorce was coming up.”

    DP ran into the house to see why Mary was screaming. He was in uniform. Unless it’s been shown otherwise, he did not run into the house with gun drawn, not knowing if Mary was being attacked by an intruder. Odd, isn’t it?

    According to Attorney Abood, “There would have been no time to set up a staged scene..”

    No time for whom? I assume Mr. Pontarelli was making an intelligent observation, that no towels or clothes were around. He wasn’t accusing the murder defendant of anything at the time. In fact, this was prior to the paramedics or LE walking in on the scene, so how was it that anyone knew if Kathleen was or wasn’t murdered by an intruder, known or unknown? Stating afterwards that there was no time to set up a staged scene is incorrect, since Peterson did shoo everyone out of the room to await the authorities. He had access to towels and a robe. An observation about the scene prior to later pictures showing otherwise certainly should be important and powerful, especially since the only one that had anything to gain by doing so is the murder defendant. Brushing it off by the defense attorney is just more reason to believe that they don’t have contradictory information to show otherwise. Believe the defense, or believe the initial responders, merely restating what they observed at the initial scene???

    http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20100201/news/302019901/print/

  27. Testimony regarding Jeffrey Jentzen, the defense’s expert witness (which put Brodsky to sleep in the courtroom…)

    Assistant Will County State’s Attorney John Connor asked Jentzen if his opinion would change knowing that the police investigation was flawed. Illinois State Police investigators have testified they bungled the Savio case.

    Jentzen said it was a factor he would take into consideration.

    Dr. Jentzen was shown photographs that were taken after the room was cleared by Peterson, after which, at the least, a blue towel was photographed on the tub.

    http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/02/peterson-defense-says-it-will-call-just-one-witness.html

    Forensic pathologist, Dr. Jeffrey Jentzen, from University of Michigan, testified for more than two hours about the medical examiner’s report related to Kathleen Savio’s death in 2004. Dr. Jentzen maintains Savio died from blunt head trauma, most likely caused by hitting her head after she slipped and fell in her bathtub. ”All injuries she sustained could’ve been sustained by a simple fall,” Jentzen testified. Savio’s death was originally ruled an accidental drowning in 2004. Savio’s body was exhumed in 2007 after Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared. Police named Peterson the main suspect in Stacy’s disappearance.

    Dr. Jentzen also testified Savio had an irregular heart beat that could have caused heart failure, but there was no evidence of cardiac arrest in the autopsy report after her death. During cross examination, Dr. Jentzen said, When asked if an adult can drown in a bathtub, Dr. Jentzen replied, “Yes.” He added, an adult can drown in a very small amount of water, “in some cases less than an inch.” When asked if it was possible Savio’s death was the result of a homicide, Dr. Jentzen replied, “Homicides in a bathtub are very rare. It’s extremely rare…in my opinion it’s an accidental death.” Jentzen went on to say, “it’s possible, but unlikely. There’s not enough evidence to determine it was (a homicide).” Dr. Jentzen also referred to the gold necklace Savio was wearing at the time she was found in the bathtub. The necklace was still in tact, which he says is not typical during a “hostile struggle.”

    After court broke for lunch, Drew Peterson’s attorney, Andrew Abood, spoke about Dr. Jentzen’s testimony. “Everything he (Jentzen) said was convincing. He examined the case objectively The prosecutor (John Connor) tried to beat him up and in end he (Jentzen) walked away standing. They (prosecutors) don’t have any evidence she (Savio) didn’t die by accidental cause. We are stuck in this case with accidental death.”

    Well, yeah, it was convincing for Attorney Abood, but not to Brodsky, as his head bobbed gingerly during this crucial testimony.

    Kathleen’s death was ruled an accidental drowning by the Coroner’s Inquest Panel. That history is now open for interpretation, and we all know the FACTS surrounding that three-ring circus.

    Read more: http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/02/17/homicides-in-a-bathtub-are-very-rare/#ixzz1iVgHOWWo

  28. So far, we have the expert witness saying the bruises could have been caused by a simple slip and fall, her heart could have stopped, although the autopsy says otherwise, Also, if his theory is to be believed, after her heart stopped, she still was able to breathe, at least long enough to drown herself.

    He is adamant that a delicate necklace she was wearing would have been ripped off if she were involved in a violent struggle. This is the crux of the defense? A delicate necklace saves the day for them? What about the missing alibi witness? What about calling a locksmith instead of 911? What about running into a house during an unknown situation, after he sent innocent neighbors in? Wasn’t he at all concerned that the alarm might be set off when the locksmith did his thing to get in? What about a pristine bathroom, without towels, clothes, water splashed everywhere, blood splatters from a gash? Why should any weight be given this expert witness, who bases his opinion on reports and pictures? After all,

    During hearsay hearing, a crime scene investigator testified that he never took any evidence from the scene. Will County state’s attorney John Connor asked Jenzten if his opinion on Savio’s death would change if there was evidence of a flawed police investigation. Jentzen said, “it would invite me to review the case again.

    Besides a wound on the back of her head, prosecutors say Savio had bruises on the front of her body.

    “People in their normal life suffer bruises. Our bodies are not perfect. I think that’s the conclusion one can reach,” said Abood.

    That’s the conclusion one can reach? Okay then. But, if the defense is going to say that the bruises were caused by her horsing around with the kids, yet, those bruises were fresh, how is it explained that her children were not with her for the whole weekend prior to her death to cause those bruises?

  29. The conclusion I have reached? That Dr. Jentzen was a paid expert witness, who merely had to find a way to explain his version of an alternative reason for Kathleen Savio’s death, and his conclusion is certainly not compelling or convincing for me.

  30. I posted this on June 4, 2009, and I stand by it!!

    rescueapet
    June 4, 2009 at 4:39 pm [Edit]

    Let’s see if we can help the defense out here.

    Drew had the children for the weekend, so even though Kathleen liked to horse around with the kids and bruised herself up doing it, not this weekend. So, the fresh bruises on her body, well, this is how it probably went down.

    1) Kathleen decided to take a bath. She filled her tub full of water. We “know” that because it’s been reported that she drowned, but the water slowly leaked out. She was apparently fine during this bath tub filling because she was not found with the faucet running. Nope. Turned off. Bone dry tub. Apparently, while the tub was filling, she did not get herself night clothes or clean linens, so we’ll have to fill-in the gaps ourselves as to what she could have been doing during this time. After the tub filled, she turned off the running water.

    2) Prior to her filling the bath tub, she apparently got naked. The time of her nakedness, I suppose, can be debated. Maybe she got up in the morning, got naked, and spent the whole day walking around the house that way. See, that would explain why there were no disposed of clothes anywhere near the bath tub or in the adjacent bedroom. Also, after her bath, she intended to stay naked. I suppose she was going to air dry herself off, which explains why there were no clean towels nearby. Certainly, she had time to get clean, dry towels while the tub was filling, but didn’t. Yep, we’ll go with the air dry theory here.

    3) Okay, so now we have a naked woman, a running faucet, a tub full of water, no night clothes and no towels. She attentively shuts off the water, and then…….

    4) I know. She maybe stuck her head in the full tub of water to check on the leaky drain Peterson said was an issue with that tub (the kids told him the water leaked out during their baths, or something like that). While coming up out of the water, she bonks her head on the faucet, causing a gash to her head, which begins to bleed. She tries to stand up, furiously runs around the room in a frenzy, bruising herself up on everything, but manages to keep the blood from her gashed head from dripping anywhere. Instead of falling onto her bed, or near the phone to call for help, being delirious from the head gash, she goes back to the bath tub and falls in the tub full of water. See, it was all an accident, just like they said it was.

    The rest is history.

    http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/drew-peterson-denied-bond-reduction/

  31. I think a logical conclusion could also be drawn that Peterson expected someone else to have entered Kathleen’s house to discover her dead. After all, she had a boyfriend, and the badass could reasonably have believed that he might have shown up sometime during that weekend to find her. Instead, he resorted to his locksmith/neighbor fiasco. Anyway,

    Savio’s boyfriend of two years, Steve Maniaci, said he approached Drew Peterson outside Savio’s house on the night her body was found and asked if he had killed her. Peterson denied any involvement, Maniaci testified.

    “It sure worked out well for you, Drew,” Maniaci said.

    “She wouldn’t have won anyway,” Peterson replied, according to Maniaci.

    Maniaci said he told police about Peterson and Savio’s tumultuous relationship and the knife incident shortly after her body was found.

    None of that, however, made it into the official police report. The omissions clearly upset Maniaci.

    “That report is very short for the amount of time I spent with them,” he said.

    http://archive.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/02/witness-peterson-denied-killing-savio.html

    Prosecutors likely will rely on Maniaci’s testimony to help demonstrate there were signs Savio’s death was a homicide staged to look like an accident. Peterson’s attorneys have argued her death was accidental.

    Maniaci testified that two nights before her body was found, he saw no bruises on her elbow, finger or buttocks like the bruises clearly visible on photographs shot of Savio after her death.

    Asked whether he had seen scratches on her arms two nights before, Maniaci, barely able to look at the photographs, answered quietly, “No.”

    http://www.nwherald.com/2010/02/02/savios-beau-suspected-her-ex/ann1byn/?page=2

  32. That death scene photo is absolutely tragic, not only because it appears so obviously staged, but the fact professional investigators initially never saw anything wrong with it (!!)

    Kathleen could have never ended up in the position as shown, either sitting or standing, water or no water, soap or no soap in the tub.

    Her body is strangely contorted in a semi-foetal position with the feet unable to support her if she was either sitting down, let alone standing up in the tub (!!) and look at the position of the towel – OMG what were they thinking ?

    The towel is right next to the tap – one could NEVER open or close the tap with the towel in that position, it would be completely in the way, let alone if Kathleen would have been sitting in the tub, her arms would be resting exactly in that spot and the towel would have either ended up in the water or on the floor.

    It is all very, very dodgy, apart from the fact Kathleen would have been taking a bath any time between 2 am and 5 am ………….

  33. Court date for Stephen is coming up:

    STEPHEN PETERSON -VS- VILLAGE OF OAK BROOK ILLINOIS
    01-10-2012
    09:30 AM

    JUDICIAL REVIEW OF A DECISION OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY OTHER THAN A TAX COMMISSION

  34. Thomas Pontarelli said Peterson let him know he didn’t appreciate the family’s support of his ex-wife. Pontarelli said he spoke to Peterson after finding a .38-caliber bullet “standing straight up in my driveway.”

    “I have no proof that it was him,” Thomas Pontarelli said. “He said, ‘Any friend of hers is an enemy of mine.’”

    Hmmm. Just another indication of Peterson’s whimsical sense of humor, or the act of a criminal, intimidating someone who gets in his face? Is that why he’s cooling his jets in jail, with an exorbitant bond hanging over him???

Comments are closed.