Drew Peterson murder trial: The defense team

Drew Peterson’s public relations firm, The Publicity Agency, has announced a page for news related to the Peterson defense. The page contains bios of the most current defense team line-up.

Missing are attorneys Reem Odeh, Andrew Abood and George Lenard, who defended Peterson during 18 days of hearings 2009-2010. They left the team after citing irreconcilable differences with Joel Brodsky. Also missing is attorney Walter Maksym, who was asked to leave the team after being disciplined for poorly written legal briefs. What follows is an abbreviated version of the bios as presented by the Publicity Agency:

Joel A. Brodsky

Joel Brodsky was admitted to the practice of law in the State of Illinois in November, 1982, and is in his 30th year of the practice of law. Mr. Brodsky has been admitted to practice in all Illinois State Courts, the Federal Courts for the Northern District of Illinois, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court. He is also a member of the Federal Trial Bar.

Mr. Brodsky has tried numerous felony and misdemeanor criminal cases before both juries and bench. In addition to his criminal practice, Mr. Brodsky takes civil cases in areas that interest him. He has represented clients in child custody and visitation matters where issues such as religion, junk science evaluations, and visitation interference have been at issue. He has also represented clients in both Illinois State Court and Federal Court in commercial matters such as legal malpractice and trade secrets cases. He has also handled a number of appeals to the Illinois Court of Appeals and the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

Steven A. Greenberg

For more than 25 years, attorney Steven A. Greenberg has defended people accused of serious crimes in Illinois. He has handled dozens of challenging federal cases involving drug crimes and white collar crimes, more than 100 murder cases, and countless narcotics cases. His record of accomplishment includes hundreds of other state and federal felonies. Mr. Greenberg appears frequently on national and local news shows, including Fox News, CNN and MSNBC, providing commentary on high-profile criminal cases and important legal issues. He is a Chicago attorney with a national reputation and has repeatedly been selected to appear in Illinois Super Lawyers and in Illinois Leading Lawyers.

Ralph E. Meczyk

Ralph E. Meczyk has tried over one hundred and fifty jury trials to verdict in both State and Federal District Courts throughout the United States. He has also tried hundreds of bench/judge trials, motions to suppress evidence, and motions to quash arrests in those same venues.

Mr. Meczyk has also had the rare privilege of arguing a case before the United States Supreme Court. In 2004 he briefed and argued a landmark search and seizure case (Illinois v. Caballes) before Chief Justice Rhenquist and the other eight justices of that court.

Joseph R. Lopez

Joseph R. Lopez, has been a criminal defense attorney for 25 years. He graduated from Chicago-Kent College of Law in 1983. From 1985 to the 1990s, he was dubbed the in-house counsel for the notorious “Cali Drug Cartel” from Cali, Colombia. From the 1990s to the present, Joseph has also defended some of the Chicago Outfit’s most ruthless hit men including Anthony “The Hatchet” Chiramonti, Tony “Tough Tony” Calabrese, and Frankie “The German” Shwiess. Most recently in the biggest mob prosecution since Al Capone, he represented Frankie “The Breeze” Calabrese in Operation Family Secrets in which a jury returned a verdict on 7 of the 13 mob hits charged against The Breeze. In addition, Mr. Lopez has been known to represent members and leaders of many of Chicago’s most ruthless street gangs including the Satan Disciples, Latin Kings and 26ers and has appeared in Federal Courts from coast to coast representing members of different Mexican Drug Cartels. Joseph has been awarded the “”Super Lawyers” certificate for multiple years. He has been named the Marquis “Who’s Who In America” for outstanding achievement. Mr. Lopez was appointed by the Illinois Supreme Court to serve on the Capital Litigation Committee, which screens applicants for certification in death penalty cases.

Darryl A. Goldberg

As a criminal defense lawyer, Darryl A. Goldberg takes an aggressive and proactive approach in defending his clients’ rights and freedom. He believes in building the strongest and most effective defense possible and vigorously seeks either a dismissal of the charges or victory at trial. Darryl Goldberg is a trial lawyer who is not afraid to go to trial. Based in Chicago, Illinois, he defends clients throughout Illinois and across the country in both state and federal courts. Whether your enemy is your local states attorney or the United States government, Mr. Goldberg is experienced and ready to fight for you. He provides zealous representation for all major felonies, including federal drug and conspiracy charges, white collar crimes, murder, weapons possession, sex crimes, racketeering (RICO) charges and numerous others.

Lisa M. Lopez

Lisa Lopez was licensed to practice law in Illinois in 2010. While attending the John Marshall Law School, she earned the rare distinction of winning both Best Brief and Best Oralist in the Dean Fred F. Herzog Moot Court Competition. She later served as an Associate Justice on the Mott Court Honors Board and Technical Director of the Horizon Program. Ms. Lopez gained experience into her first high-profile trial in the momentous Family Secrets trial.

Ms. Lopez is a trial lawyer in the making having participated in numerous federal and state trials. She is admitted to practice in the Northern District of Illinois as well as the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals and will soon apply for admission to the federal trial bar having earned the necessary credentials. She is also the Second Vice President of the Women’s Criminal Defense Bar Association.

SOURCE: Peterson Defense Team PR page

~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

20 thoughts on “Drew Peterson murder trial: The defense team

  1. Maybe the defense lawyers can do a bio for their murder defendant client. However, I think the information about his second wife saying he could kill her and make it look like an accident, his third wife saying the same and dying, and his missing fourth wife, might be a little tricky to handle.

    Isn’t it something, though, that one man’s problem can be another man’s opportunity.

    We shall see…..

  2. Peterson lawyer criticizes handling of tub in Savio case
    By Janet Lundquist jlundquist@stmedianetwork.com July 16, 2012

    A lawyer for Drew Peterson said Sunday that Will County investigators tried to stiff the couple that bought Kathleen Savio’s Bolingbrook home after removing the bathtub, carpeting and other items from the house.

    Joel Brodsky said in an email that Rodolfo Hernandez, who lives in the house where Peterson’s third wife, Savio, was found dead in 2004, had to hire a lawyer to get reimbursement for the items that were taken.

    “And all they payed (sic) him for was the value of the tub and faucet, not for any labor of a plubmer (sic) to have to re-install the tub (the most expensive part),” Brodsky wrote in an email. “He told me he is made (sic) at the cops because they mislead (sic) him about being paid, and now he won’t do anything without a court order.”

    No one answered the door at the Hernandez home Monday afternoon, and the family’s phone number is unlisted.

    Charles B. Pelkie, spokesman for the Will County state’s attorney’s office, said Monday that Brodsky’s email was simply an attempt to “stir up controversy,” that the office and the state police have been communicating directly with Hernandez on the investigation, not an attorney, and have made sure he was fully compensated for his time and trouble.

    “Through the entire process, we did everything that we could to make sure that the inconvenience to Mr. Hernandez and his family was limited, that he was completely compensated for any of the alterations that were made to his bathroom,” Pelkie said.

    Peterson sold the Hernandezes the home where Savio lived during their divorce in 2004, about eight months after Savio ’s death — six months after her demise was first ruled accidental.

    In 2007, after Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, vanished and sparked a national media frenzy, investigators reopened Savio’s case.

    Since then, the Hernandez house has been visited regularly by police, prosecutors, reporters and random sightseers. The visits became more frequent after state police arrested Peterson for Savio’s murder in May 2009.

    Through the years, investigators have taken the bathtub Savio’s body was found in and other evidence from the house.

    Prosecutors would like to show jurors that tub during Peterson’s upcoming murder trial, which begins Monday, either in the courtroom or reinstalled back inside the Hernandezes’ house.

    http://heraldnews.suntimes.com/13812054-417/peterson-lawyer-criticizes-handling-of-tub-in-savio-case.html

  3. Dang, it’s like you can almost count the drops of drool on the chests of the defense team now that they are finally close to the Big Media Payoff they were all promised for sticking with it and working pro bono on the Peterson case.

    Let the book deals begin!

  4. Oh dang. I realize that being a lawyer doesn’t necessarily qualify one to win a grade school spelling bee, but having a grasp of the basic skills would not seem that elusive.

    Ms. Lundquist, I hope you found the misspellings of an advanced college-educated man to be as disturbing as I do.

    Anyway, getting past that fiasco, I think it’s funny that Brodsky would moan to a reporter about the house occupants not being paid (I think I got that right), when he, in fact, failed to pay thousands of dollars owed to a defense expert he had a part in hiring to analyze evidence relating to Kathleen Savios death. That expert did his analysis, but wasn’t hired by the defense. He didn’t come to quite the conclusion that they had hoped for. ;-)

    http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2010/04/30/medical-examiner-says-petersons-defense-stiffed-him/

  5. Rescue, I remember that well.

    Since when does an attorney pay the bill of an expert witness? That was fully the responsibility of Drew Peterson and Joel Brodsky showed himself to be a small-minded, dishonest man when he foisted the bill on a departing attorney.

  6. Excuse me, I just need to make sure this gets the full attention it deserves, This was written by Mr. Joel A. Brodsky, lead defense attorney for Drew Peterson:

    “And all they payed (sic) him for was the value of the tub and faucet, not for any labor of a plubmer (sic) to have to re-install the tub (the most expensive part),” Brodsky wrote in an email. “He told me he is made (sic) at the cops because they mislead (sic) him about being paid, and now he won’t do anything without a court order.”

  7. Must give his co-counsel that warm and fuzzy feeling about being so damn good at what he does.

    Umm, what is it again that he does? Oh yeah, stirs the pot to get attention, even if he can’t spell or write basic grade school sentences. And drives the bus. The Drew Peterson legal counsel bus.

    Spell check is your friend, Joel.

  8. Drew Peterson Lawyer Trying To Say Something About Death Tub

    The supposed “lead” attorney for accused wife-killer Drew Peterson sent the Herald-News an email about the county allegedly playing it cheap.

    By Joseph Hosey

    Just a few days ago we heard about the couple who bought the former home of accused wife-killer Drew Peterson and how they had no idea his slain wife’s body was found in their bathtub until much later.

    Now the so-called “lead attorney” for the disgraced former cop is calling out Will County investigators in an email to the Herald-News, claiming they stiffed the couple on plumbing repairs associated with removing the tub to preserve it as evidence.

    The story quotes Brodsky’s email:

    “’And all they payed (sic) him for was the value of the tub and faucet, not for any labor of a plubmer (sic) to have to re-install the tub (the most expensive part),’ Brodsky wrote in an email. ‘He told me he is made (sic) at the cops because they mislead (sic) him about being paid, and now he won’t do anything without a court order.’”

    We haven’t run this email by a law professor yet, but if we understand Brodsky, he is saying the new owner, Rodolfo Hernandez, is made at the county because they mislead him and only payed for the tub and not the plubmer.

    That’s a serious allegation. If it’s true, something should be done about it. Those plubmers can get expensive, especially if they have you over a barrel.

    http://joliet.patch.com/articles/drew-peterson-lawyer-trying-to-say-something-about-death-tub

    ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!

  9. That is too funny!! Good job Joe. Joel will probably be pretty made when he reads that. LOL!

  10. Heavens, another lawyer who appears to be a mite challenged when it comes to written expression:

    Joseph R. Lopez ‏@josharrk
    we are ready for the drew peterson lets go

    The word you’re looking for here Joe, is “trial” – the Drew Peterson trial.

    Fixed that for ya.

  11. HAHAHAHA!! Maybe he’s not ready for the trial, just ready for Drew. Giving himself a little peptalk.

  12. LOL, too late!

    Joseph R. Lopez ‏@josharrk
    jury will only hear what is presented on the courtroom not all the scuttlebutt and innuendos it may surprise some people.

    Joseph R. Lopez ‏@josharrk
    not on but “in the courtroom” I would hate to have JC start blowing smoke like they did to Joel on JC.

  13. FYI, HLN producer, Graham Winch, has a story up today that he researched here at JC. He says we have an incredible blog and that our hard work really shows.

    http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/07/16/drew-peterson-kathleen-savio-court-date

    We might be working together more in the future or maybe not. It’s awkward to work out details of give and take. As a volunteer-run, not-profit, ad-free blog, we don’t really have anything to market and that puts us in a weird position, since the usual offer is for a talking head spot with the name of your blog, and we aren’t exactly looking for that. We’ve got nothing to sell.

    Our agenda is to counter the bad-mouthing and hyperbolic sound-bites of the defense team (and the rumor-mills) and to serve as a repository of the facts about what is going on in the cases of Stacy Peterson and Kathleen Savio, and also to provide a troll-free environment for discussion.

    That said, what do you do when someone contacts you and pretty much tells you they have been mining your site for info. At that point you know they’re going to use it one way or another…what should we ask for in return?

  14. Call me picky, but since Mrs. Lopez has such high distinctions in her mini curriculum vitae, she might want to proof read it a little better. Mind you, this is directly taken from the PR page of the attorney bio’s.

    …. Best Brief and Best Oralist in the Dean Fred F. Herzog Moot Court Competition. She later served as an Associate Justice on the Mott Court Honors Board and Technical Director of the Horizon Program.

    I believe that would be Moot Court Honors Board, not Mott. If you’re going to hire a PR firm, it’s best to get one than can spell and/or proof read better than the lead attorney, no?

  15. LOL at Baldsky’s Blunders…….Make it stop….ROFLMAO….By the way, Fac’s and Rescue, you two are great.

  16. In skimming through Joe Lopez’s bio, I guess his section wasn’t proof read closely either.

    In addition to the Peterson trial, Mr. Lopez is also involved in another high profilel case. He represents Chicago Mob muscle man, Mario Rainone, who’s fame precedes him. He once told a loan debtor that “he would cut off is children’s heads and plant them in the front yard.”

    Would it be “whose” and “his”? My gosh, that’s terrible. This is a PR agency. This is their business. This is their bread and butter, and they can’t get it right?

  17. Hiya Irish. Aww, thanks.

    Just pointing out that proper spelling and grammar must not make a difference if you are a PR agency, at least this one, and have an advanced degree, such as in law.

    Personally, I think it’s pitiful. Can you imagine reading a newspaper article or story with mistake after mistake, as if the reader is supposed to be as grammatically and spelling challenged as the author?

Comments are closed.