Would you like to help fight domestic abuse? Message from Pastor Neil Schori

[EXCERPT]

“I believe that it is time to mobilize our communities to make a real difference for women whom are suffering in silence. In order to do that, we must mobilize. Because of my involvement in the Drew Peterson murder trial, I’ve received a lot of media attention, and I’m using it for good.

My desire is for every church in the country to be a safe place for abused women. In order for that to happen, we must have a plan, and pastors and parishioners must respond appropriately to the plan so that abuse victims get the real assistance they need.

The Evidentiary Affidavit of Abuse was created in response to the disappearance of Stacy Peterson. The goal was to eliminate the “hearsay” that Drew Peterson’s team claimed (unsuccessfully) was not legitimate evidence of Drew’s guilt. I’d love it if all of you would go to http://documenttheabuse.com and read about the Evidentiary Affidavit of Abuse. It will bring offenders to justice more quickly than Drew Peterson. It will also empower women and help them to get back their voices. I’ve used it repeatedly in my own church with incredible results. Not one woman has been killed since we started to use this incredible tool.

My goal is for churches and other concerned members of the community to learn to use this tool, but then to offer temporary safe families for victims of domestic violence. If just 5 families in each church in the nation would step up to this challenge, all 1.3 million victims of abuse would be safe from their attackers.

There are many domestic violence shelters out there that are doing tremendous work. But they need more people to step up and do the same kind of work that they are doing. They aren’t funded well enough to do it all, and they need our help.

Breaking the Silence,

Neil Schori”

Here is an example of an evidentiary abuse affidavit.

If you would like to be a partner in this effort, please contact Neil Schori.

Read a story about Neil’s efforts at the Chicago Tribune

~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.~

The following HTML tags are allowed: <a href=""> <abbr> <acronym> <b> <blockquote> <cite> <pre> <em> <i> <q> <strike> <strong>

About these ads

84 thoughts on “Would you like to help fight domestic abuse? Message from Pastor Neil Schori

  1. Some Snippets from Stacy St. Clair’s story:

    His attorney Joseph Lopez said he hasn’t seen any proof his client abused Stacy, but he has seen Schori’s advocacy work on social media and respects it.

    “There’s no room for domestic violence in America,” Lopez said. “If he can reach out to victims and help them, I applaud him. It may be the one good thing that comes from this case.”

    Much of Schori’s work, however, focuses on encouraging other religious leaders to join his cause. Churches historically have not been strong allies in the fight against domestic violence, he said, partly because most frown upon divorce and some encourage the idea of a submissive wife. He said his efforts are often shrugged off.

    “They tell me it’s not their ‘thing,'” Schori said. “I wonder, how can it not be?”

    Yet he keeps trying to convert his fellow clergymen. He said he owes that much to Stacy’s memory.

    “Her pain will have a purpose in the lives of so many women,” Schori said. “We’re going to make sure of that.”

    He may have to go it alone. Murphy-Milano’s health has declined rapidly in recent months, and she’s not sure she’ll live out the year. One of the most-quoted voices on domestic violence, she has prepared him to replace her on the national stage.

    “I basically have passed the baton to him,” she said. “I trust him with it because it’s Stacy legacy that he’s carrying — and he knows it.”

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-stacy-peterson-pastor-fights-domestic-viole-20120915,0,3684724.story

  2. That is about all Joel Brodsky is good at, throwing his “lawyeresque” Threats around. Incompetent bully he is. I applaud Neil Shori, but it is very sad to read that other churches and clergyman are shrugging this effort off. Must say, it doesn’t really surprise me

  3. Fantastic post! I’d like to invite everyone to check out the crime victims advocacy blog spearheaded by Susan Murphy Milano (and Neil Schori is a contributor):

    Time’s Up Blog
    Time’s Up on Facebook

    Posts will start being updated regularly again soon, but in the meantime, there are a lot of slightly older posts that can be very useful to victims of domestic violence and other crimes.

  4. Neil is a very courageous man…and appears to be doing a great job advocating for abused women.

    Apart from Stacy and Kathy, its also worth reminding ourselves of the other victims of Peterson’s crimes…ie the surviving family members.

    Here’s a website from a Washington-based organization that advocates for these survivors.

    http://vcvs.org/index.php?nid=168141&s=au

    The founder lost his own daughter around 25 years ago when she was killed by the a man she went on a date with.

    http://www.komonews.com/news/local/7911372.html

    The website gives a lengthy, but useful, narrative of the feelings and challenges faced by surviving family members and loved ones as they come to terms with the murders.

  5. I have a couple of questions relating to the search for Stacy.

    1) From reading the early media reports it appears that a cadaver dog made discoveries in the Peterson bedroom and by a pond near the local airport.. Were the dog’s finding officially confirmed? How did JB/DP explain away these findings?

    2) Drew Peterson’s step brother-in-law described the blue cylinder he believed he used to help Drew remove Stacy’s body from DP’s house as “Warm” to touch. What did he mean by this? Was he being literal? If so why would the cylinder be warm?

  6. Oxy,

    1.) ISP never publicly confirmed the dogs’ findings one way or another. Drew’s attorneys have stated that they never heard anything about the cadaver dogs hitting on anything.

    2.) You would need to ask Morphey what he meant by “warm”. He didn’t explain any further than that.

    Morphey has indicated that he believed the body of Stacy Peterson was inside the container, but any guess beyond that as to why the container was warm would be speculation which we discourage doing here.

  7. @ Facs…thanks for your timely response.

    1) I guessed there was nothing to the cadaver dog story, otherwise I’m sure we would have heard a great deal more about it…(similar to the furor that surrounded the cadaver dog findings in the McCann “abduction” case in Europe)

    2) Well its good to know I’m not the only one confused by Morphey’s reference. IIRCC he made that statement on more than one occasion and there is no indication that someone asked him to explain himself, which left me scratching my head.

  8. Morphey testified at the hearsay hearings in 2010. He also spoke to a reporter in 2009. His friend, Walter Martinek spoke out about what he was told that night, but as long as Morphey is available, I’d rely on his statements over anyone else’s about what he experienced that night.

    According to his statements, Morphey never saw what was actually in the container so he could only guess that he had moved Stacy’s body based on the earlier conversations he had had with Drew (“Do you love me?” “Enough to kill for me?”).

    Morphey has testified that the container felt warm to him. I assume he can tell warm from cold so I don’t find that confusing at all.

  9. The ISP never confirmed or denied any cadaver dog hits at Stacy and Drew’s house.

    There were reports of hits but, as I say, nothing publicly confirmed.

    FoxNews Kevin Tomich reports: “Yesterday [11/01] during the search of Peterson’s home a cadaver dog made a hit in the Peterson’s upstairs bedroom and also out in the pond next to Clow Airport in Boilingbook where Stacy Peterson’s car was abandon and where her husband has a plane.”

    http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_blue_container.htm

    I don’t know if the ISP has a habit of making public their findings when it comes to dogs, but in this case I have never seen any comment from them. So, the short answer is we (the public) don’t know.

  10. I am deeply saddened to hear that Susan Murphey Milano is battling cancer. What an amazing beacon of light her work has provided for so many woman. I can only believe that God has His hand in bringing these two individuals together, through Stacy and Kathleen’s tragic circumstances. Stay strong , Susan! Thank you for answering the call, Pastor Schori.

  11. I’ve been reading the posts regarding Stacy’s case and I have to agree with those that don’t think Stacy’s mom’s situation will factor into this case. The only person who attempted to place that out in the media was Drew Peterson and Joel Brodsky. How can a “missing person” be judged in a court of law as someone who deserted her family? Drew, himself, said Stacy “was” a good mother and loved her children. There’s just too much evidence in those first days of her disappearance. Drew did not have the time he thought he was going to have to “set up” Stacy’s murder. Drew Peterson will be convicted for Stacy’s murder with or without a body, should the state go through with the case. IMO In addition to missing and dead wives, does Peterson have other skeletons lurking in his closet that could add additional years onto his sentence? (Bindy Rock)

  12. The outspoken Cincinnati restaurateur can’t stop talking about it. In fact, Ruby is so passionate about the trial, he will come almost nose-to-nose and stare at you with his intimidating blue eyes while discussing it. He can’t stop text-messaging people about it. He can’t stop tweeting about it. And he can’t seem to get enough of the attention he is receiving after creating a sideshow while in Joliet, Ill., to support the victim’s family during the trial.

    Dining in his packed Downtown steakhouse one night last week, Ruby was frequently interrupted by strangers stopping by his table.

    “Jeff Ruby,” a woman says as they shake hands, “I just want to say thank you for what you did for those people in Chicago. You made us all proud.”

    Ruby is proud of his victims’ advocacy work, which he’s been doing for years. His office has received nearly 50 phone calls, emails and letters and countless Facebook messages recently from people across the country praising Ruby for standing up for the family of murder victim Kathleen Savio.

    http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20120915/BIZ/309150125/Jeff-Ruby-your-face

  13. Jeff Ruby may or may not be in it for publicity … I am still undecided on what I think there, but I admire what he did for the Savios, and reading that he got under Drew’s skin just made me grin. :grin:

  14. Many people who agonized over the trial and disappearance of Stacy Peterson — which triggered the Savio case — said the conviction brought some semblance of relief, although not full closure.

    “It is bittersweet,” said Carol Penning, Bolingbrook resident, village clerk and close friend of Stacy Peterson. “It is a relief because, to be honest, I never felt there as a chance of a conviction. I had resolved myself to the possibility that justice may not come for many, many years, but in this case it came last week.”

    Penning got to know Stacy Peterson when Stacy — then 17 years old — worked in the clerk’s office as a summer seasonal employee many years ago. That summer she began to date Drew Peterson, 47 years old at the time and still married to Savio.

    “We were very close,” said Penning, who said she talked to Stacy Peterson in the clerk’s office just a few days before Stacy’s disappearance in October 2007.

    “When we were done, she hugged me,” Penning said. “It was the last time I saw her.”

    http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/bolingbrook/topstories/x1606943245/Bolingbrook-glad-to-put-Peterson-case-in-the-rear-view-mirror

  15. Strange headline imo

    Bolingbrook glad to put Drew Peterson case in the rear view mirror

    IMO The Drew Peterson case isn’t over. The question remains: Where is Stacy Peterson?

  16. Kudos to Neil Schori. It’s so sad that in 2012 domestic abuse is still a taboo subject in some circles.

    How sad about Susan Murphey Milano. She has been an amazing voice for abused women everywhere.

  17. To many, organized religion is a male-dominated ecclesiastical heirarchy whose basic beliefs seem to have a theme of blaming women and demonizing them.
    Is there any reason why they would want to upset things by openly taking a stand against wife-beating ?
    Surely she must have done *something* to deserve the heap of abuse. Maybe she disobeyed the apostal Paul who said women should remain in the back of the church in silence. Maybe she didn’t submit enough.
    Either way, it must be her fault and thats why many churches do not get involved. They are a huge part of the problem which breeds domestic abuse in the first place.

    Thank you Pastor Schori for all you have done and continue to do.

  18. Amen, writer. The tradition is ancient and *wrong*. It hasn’t been that many generations since it was perfectly legal to beat your wife so long as she wasn’t killed or permanently maimed.
    Wife beating was never legal in the US, however. Has it made much of a difference?

  19. Mandy McGlothlin has an interview with Neil Schori, here:

    [EXCERPT]

    MM: Can you tell about the time you went to Drew and Stacy’s house for marriage counseling and the events that took place?
    NS: I went to Stacy and Drew’s house one time only. They couldn’t find a sitter for their kids, so I went to them. Stacy shared frightening details of Drew’s attempts to control and scare her while he was sitting with us. She cried and he showed no emotion whatsoever. At one point he stood up and said something like “ok…I think I’ve had enough today.” He shook my hand and left the room.
    I sat with Stacy and prayed with her then I decided it was time for me to see where Drew went. I slowly walked toward the front door and found him in his office. He had his hands clasped behind his back. I carefully closed the distance with him and asked him if he was ok. He said he was ok and then stuck his right hand out to me (while leaving his left hand behind his back).

    MM: Was there a part of your testimony that you were told you had to leave out due to the defense objecting and if so can you tell me what it was?
    NS: Stacy’s words were all that I was allowed to share in court. I believe they were all resounding in the jurors’ ears.

    MM: Is there anything you care to comment on that Stacy told you that would have further helped in the conviction of Drew?

    NS: Because of the likelihood of continued litigation, I will not comment on other statements of Stacy nor of Drew.

    MM: How many times in total did you meet with Stacy?
    NS: I met with Stacy probably 5 or 6 times…possibly more.

    http://www.chathousenews.com/2012/09/exclusive-silence-isnt-always-golden.html

  20. I hope everyone is enjoying the post-trial quiet this week. I’ve been cleaning like crazy and taking care of some repair projects now that the weather is cooler and I’m not on the PC 12 hours out of the day!

    So grateful for the conviction and can only imagine the calm it has brought to Kathleen’s family.

    May the guilty verdict, Jeff Ruby’s $100k reward offer and the frequent airings of the Lifetime movie continue to generate interest in and invigorate the investigation of the disappearance of Stacy Peterson.

  21. I am still reading, watching the individual FB pages, and hoping for news on Stacy. I cannot wait until sentencing, wish I could see the perps face, and wondering if he has finally realized that his gig is over. I guess he has all his hopes banked on JBs appeals. He will Never get out, in my opinion.

  22. I agree, LA. I’m sure you’ve seen Joel’s latest FB posts. He says there are no losers, only quitters. What else can he do? Drew Peterson is his meal ticket. It’s not like he has a successful law practice to return to.

  23. JB is going to give him hope. and for that fact JB should be abolished. There is no way, after all I have read, that any appeals will stand. Very strange relationship going on there, as we all know. JB has already come to the end of his road as far as lawyering credibility, so I assume, he believes the appeals are his only chance at redemption or credibility

  24. I’ve never seen before that Stacy met with Schori more than the one time at the coffee shop. It makes me nervous that she was telling Schori — in front of Drew — how controlling Drew was. Drew’s narcissistic personality would be incensed, which is probably why he walked out. His police training would have made him realize he needed to walk away. Otherwise, I suspect that he would have hauled off and belted her.

    Is Schori making an inference that Drew had something in his other hand??

    All this doesn’t sit well with me.

  25. JB really would have been better off at trying to be the best immigration lawyer that he can be. Ahhh but for those high hanging fruits that taunt us

  26. ATL, Schori’s testimony has always been that the conversation about Drew killing Kathleen took place at a Starbucks and that he often conducted his counseling sessions in a public setting. Schori asked along one of the church elders to sit nearby.

    http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/drew-peterson-hearsay-hearing-day-8-neil-schori-to-testify/

    http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2012/08/23/drew-peterson-trial-day-fifteen/

    Not to mention:

    Comment by Tom Schori
    December 19th, 2007 at 12:15 am

    To the best of my knowledge, the vast majority of Neil’s counseling sessions have taken place in full view (not in a private office) right there in Bolingbrook–either at Starbucks or Caribou. His friend church, Marco, was even there at the coffee shop observing on that fatefull day last August for the simple reason that he would be alone with a young woman.

    Neil has amazing wisdom.

    Tom Schori, Ph.D.
    Normal IL

    Was it police training or Drew’s pathological need to control that was coming into play when he bristled at what stacy was telling their marriage counselor?

    Neil has said in a couple interviews now that he felt the concealed hand was meant to intimidate him. it could very well have been empty, but a hidden hand is not a sign of trust or safety in any culture.

  27. I’m talking about the 12:24 post above with Mandy McGlothlin. In it, Schori says that he met with Stacy many times. (“I met with Stacy probably 5 or 6 times …. maybe more.”)

    He talks about a counseling session he had in their home and Drew’s reaction when Stacy said that Drew tried ” to control her and scare her.”

    I’d never heard any of that before — I thought that he met Stacy for the first time at the Coffee House. From the testimony I’ve read, it seemed as though Stacy had known Pastor Schori and requested to talk with him. His response was to meet her in public with someone as a witness. At that first and only meeting Stacy told him about Drew killing Kathy.

    I had no idea he met them in their home nor the accusations Stacy made in front of Drew, and Drew’s reaction as well as Schori’s account of when he went to find Drew afterwards.

    Have you heard that account before?

    (I realize that all the corroborating testimony says that Schori is very careful to meet people in public. That’s not the question or issue. I was simply shocked that Schori had multiple counseling sessions with Stacy, at least one of which was with Drew at their house and Stacy mentioned — in front of Drew — that Drew was abusive.)

  28. Oh gosh, ATL, Neil testified at both the hearsay hearings and at the trial that he was Drew and Stacy’s counselor prior to the conversation with Stacy at Starbucks. A lot of his testimony about what Drew said was barred back in 2010 because of therapist-client privilege. He has also not been able to testify to anything the two of them said together because of marital privilege.

    He’s only been able to testify to the words Stacy told him – not even as to what he saw with his own eyes at their house.

    Did you see this video that was posted last week?

  29. I think it’s interesting that Neil says there is more that he is not saying so as not to jeopardize a case against Drew in regards to Stacy.

    Can’t even begin to imagine what he knows…

    IMO, he’s handled himself very well over the last five years, while the defense has been slinging some awful allegations his way.

    I’m so glad that the man has kept his head and resisted the urge to speak out more.

  30. My prayers go out to Susan Murphy Milano and Neil Schori in his efforts to carry on her DV victim advocacy work. I did not know she was ill. Also cannot stop praying that Stacy is found. I think (based on experience of my own family) that while the Savio family is feeling relieved at the verdict they probably won’t believe it is really final until any appeal is over. Doing my best not to read Brodsky’s FB as it is just nonsense to me.

  31. [EXCERPT]

    The Chronicle: How much did you know about the case before you were selected as a jury member?

    Eduardo Saldana: Well, since Drew Peterson and I live in Bolingbrook, I kind of knew everything once it started to happen. But once you are in the case, you can’t really use that. You have to go in there and erase all that from your mind and just go through the process.

    What made you want to be the jury foreman?

    Prior to deliberations, I told one of my jurors that I would do it [and] that I want[ed] to do it. Once deliberations began, we had to select our foreman, and I just told them that I would volunteer. I thought that I would have to read the verdict and that was one of the reasons why [I wanted to do it], but the judge had to read the verdict. It doesn’t really matter. I enjoyed it.

    Was it difficult to not talk about the case?

    In the jury room, yes. It’s one of those things that we always wanted to talk about, but we couldn’t because the judge ordered us not to. So we had to read books, play games [and] just entertain ourselves. It was boring because we couldn’t talk about it.

    What about discussing it with family and friends?

    I couldn’t talk to my parents about the case. They knew I was at the case, [but they didn’t know] what was going on. I couldn’t tell them what I heard or anything like that. The rest of my family members don’t know that I was a juror.

    http://columbiachronicle.com/student-heads-jury-in-peterson-trial/

  32. “The rest of my family members don’t know I was a juror.”

    Seriously? He was on a television interview, wasn’t he?

  33. I do wonder if Drew was particularly excited to get people from Bolingbrook on the jury. Could he have thought they might be biased in his favor because of that? If he did he was wrong.

  34. And I still think Brodsky’s FB posts were done by his wife. Not enough spelling errors to be him and sounded like an angry woman. :D

  35. I hate things being so quiet while we are awaiting sentencing. Or what ever JB has to post on his FB page regarding appeals.

  36. I don’t mind the lull. It’s nice to have a breather and get ready for the next things to come.

    One thing this long haul has taught me is that there is a core group of bright, interested, invested people who are always on top of things and ready to meet up when something happens.

    I’m grateful for that and always happy to hear from old friends when there is news.

  37. And then there are some, like old Granny here, who forget major disclosures in the case! :-)

    The first thing that hit me on the photo of Greenberg and Glasgow was “what, no sunglasses”?

    I’m glad that Brodsky seems to have dried up and gone away. What a self-serving jerk.

  38. He’s got a status hearing on 9/25.

    08/23/2012 Contempt of Court CALLED IN BY CORY FOR JUDGE KINNEY
    08/23/2012 Contempt 01 Count 001 INDIRECT CRIMINAL CONTEMPT
    08/23/2012 CF – Minute Entry
    08/23/2012 CF – Warrant Issued
    08/23/2012 Petition for Adjudication of Indirect Criminal Contempt
    08/24/2012 Bond Type
    08/24/2012 Matter set for status before the Honorable Chief Judge Kinney
    09/06/2012 Warrant of Arrest Served

  39. Jurors at Vaughn trial deliberated less than one hour before delivering a guilty verdict!

    (George Lenard was representing Vaughn. You may remember that he was on the Peterson defense team for a while)

  40. I have no clue what Vaughn was accused of doing (other than murder), but I did hear a lot about how his trial was down the hall from Peterson’s trial. If this was even half as big as Drew’s case, I can’t imagine the pressure the Prosecutor’s office was under — trying two murder trials simultaneously. That staff mustn’t have slept at all in the last six months.

    Just WOW!

  41. 12/1/07

    OSWEGO – “They read the headlines. They saw the newscasts. But neighbors of Christopher Vaughn, who was charged Saturday with killing his wife and three children, still cannot quite wrap their minds around the tragedy.

    “Everything seemed normal,” said Norma Peterson, whose son saw 12-year-old Abigayle Vaughn and her mother at McDonald’s the day before [06/13/2007] their deaths [06/14/2007]. “They seemed like they were having a good time.” The boy, Abigayle’s classmate at Thompson Junior High, later found himself detailing the June 13 encounter to police.

    http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_p_peterson_files.htm

    Norma is married to Drew Peterson’s brother, Paul.

  42. Chris Vaughn’s murder case is the one that initially got me interested in online research and discussion.

    I’m not surprised the jury took so little time to deliberate. His first story of how his family died sounded like BS and when he changed it, it was even worse.

  43. Thank goodness for that core group of people who are on top of things!

    Sentencing postponed due to appeal or another reason? Thx.

  44. joel brodsky

    6:08 PM on September 22, 2012 It never ceases to amaze me how so many people have opinions on what the lawyers did or didn’t know or do, when they have no idea themselves what was done in the Peterson case.

    In 2010 we asked Judge White to throw out “Drew’s Law”, because it was both unconstitutional and an ex post facto law as applied to Drew Peterson. He denied that motion.

    Then after we won the “hearsay hearing” and the States Attorney appealed and decided to change his argument from the statute he drafted to the common law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing(now Ill. Rule of Evidence 804(b)(5) effective 1/1/11), we objected saying that the State proceeded to have a hearing under the statute so they couldn’t switch theories on appeal. The appellate court held otherwise and Judge Burmila was bound by that ruling.

    We then asked Judge Burmila to keep out the hearsay that Judge White ruled was unreliable out as a due process violation (you have a due process right to be tried based only on reliable evidence), but Judge Burmila denied that motion too (after receiving a lot of public criticism for being to pro defense – or at least pro Drew).

    So you see I do know the law and what the issue were and are for appeal. As to why the media still says that Drew Peterson was convicted based on “Drew’s Law”, you will have to ask them – but I wouldn’t hold my breath for an answer. They never admit when they get it wrong, which is most of the time.

    Anyway Judge Fabian is very correct in his prediction that innocent people will soon be convicted based on hearsay as prosecutors start to use more and more hearsay, which is nearly impossible to impeach. When it is one of you who are critical of my legal knowledge who are wrongfully convicted I hope that you can find a lawyer who knows nearly as much as I do about this issue, and the rules of evidence, so that at least your rights on appeal will be preserved.

  45. Thanks for posting that Noway.

    I read that misinformed editorial a few days ago and got ready to send Jeff Ward an email at least three times, but every time I decided not to waste my time. It’s the Sun-Times. Since when has accuracy in reporting trumped pandering to the public for them?

    We’ve been pointing it out here for months that Judge White’s decision on the hearsay statements based on the higher reliability of “Drew’s Law” statute was appealed and dropped and then the statements were allowed to be introduced under common law.

    In all of Glasgow’s post-verdict interviews he has accurately described what went down.

    But, Lopez and Brodsky continue to whine about “Drew’s Law” to the press and in social media knowing full well that it did not factor into anything that happened at trial. I don’t even know what the point of that is. Since it wasn’t a factor then they can’t appeal its use, and even if it had been a factor the law was already challenged in the supreme court and upheld.

    So it’s really swell, just swell, that Brodsky is now ready to say that he understands that the new hearsay statute was NOT a factor and that he’s baffled as to why the media doesn’t get that right. But he’s the guy who posted a link to that ridiculous Sun-Times editorial on his FB page, saying “Finally some people are starting to get it”.

    Does he realize what a moron he looks like, lauding an editorial based on bad information, and then saying that he understands it’s erroneous?

  46. from the Facebook of
    Joel A. Brodsky, Attorney at Law
    3 hours ago
    picture of man saying …
    “I DON’T ALWAYS GET ARRESTED FOR MURDER…
    BUT WHEN I DO I HIRE JOEL BRODSKY AS MY LAWYER”

  47. Yeah, “The Most Interesting Man in the World”.

    I’m sure Dos Equis would love the idea of their trademark being associated with a convicted wife murderer.

    But I’m not sure what’s so interesting about sitting in jail for three years and then looking forward to 57 more in prison.

    One thing Joel is right about though. Drew is going to “stay thirsty” since they don’t serve beer in the pokey.

  48. Re: Theo’s comment upthread, I think the postponement is of Jeff’s court date, not Drew’s.

    Jeff Ruby is on the schedule for a status hearing on the 25th but it looks as if that will change.

  49. Just posting this to corroborate that the defense team was claiming “Drew’s Law” came into play, when they, of all people, know that was not the case:

    josharrk We are all anxious but let us be civil we know when there is a law passed to get your client we are not supposed to win we get it!
    4:05 AM Sep 6th from Twitter for iPhone

    ….

    josharrk @facsmiley when they pass a law to target someone they are not supposed to win
    7:50 PM Sep 6th from Twitter for iPhone

  50. I think it is clear to everyone why the media is misinformed; his lawyers are too.

    Wish someone in media would call them on it. :roll: Preferrably national media.

  51. In 2010 we asked Judge White to throw out “Drew’s Law”, because it was both unconstitutional and an ex post facto law as applied to Drew Peterson. He denied that motion.

    This was actually in 2009. In either case, they lost that motion and later Glasgow asked for the evidence to be admitted under common law anyway.

    …we objected saying that the State proceeded to have a hearing under the statute so they couldn’t switch theories on appeal. The appellate court held otherwise and Judge Burmila was bound by that ruling.

    In an In Session interview Judge White said that the hearing would have been necessary no matter if the hearsay statements were argued under the statute or the common law.

    Still, it’s funny that the defense was trying to make the state actually stick to the the restrictions of the hearsay statue, after trying to get it tossed on constitutional and ex post facto grounds.

  52. A couple new events in the murder case:

    09/13/2012 Termination of Attorney Steve Greenberg
    09/20/2012 Impounded Document-NOTICE OF FILING & MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION

  53. @Ruth Ravve
    Interesting: one of Drew Peterson Defense attorneys threatens to sue the other defense attorney over defamation

  54. Seems like Greenberg is demanding a public apology from Brodsky within 24 hrs, accusing Brodsky of “incorrect, dishonest fabrications” and “childish” behavior in firing

Comments are closed.