Civil case against Drew Peterson to proceed

Peterson civil case can proceed

October 14, 2009 (CHICAGO) (WLS) — A Will County judge ruled Wednesday that the civil lawsuit against Drew Peterson can proceed.
The family of Peterson’s third wife Kathleen Savio filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Peterson.

The former Bolingbrook police officer is also charged in criminal court with murdering Savio.

Peterson’s attorney had asked that the judge issue a stay on the Savio family’s civil case pending the outcome of the criminal case.

“The judge didn’t stay the case, didn’t freeze the case. But he also said that Drew or indicated that Drew can take his Fifth Amendment privilege in answer to any question or any pleading,” said Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney.

Savio’s death was originally ruled an accident, but the case was determined to be a homicide after Peterson’s fourth wife Stacy disappeared.

Read the story at ABC7/WLS, Chicago

Thanks TAI, for posting the news.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~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>

Exclusive: Michelle LeFort, Lisa Ward’s co-author speaks out.

Author, Michelle LeFort

UPDATE 4:18 pm: It would now appear that Victoria Connolly and Lisa Ward have received cease and desist letters and that Joel Brodsky may have sent one to Ms. LeFort at an old address. We’re going to need to hold off on any further questions for a bit.

Since the news broke that Drew Peterson’s former step-daughter, Lisa Ward was speaking out and writing a book with allegations of abuse, there’s been plenty of discussion, here on the blog and elsewhere. We’ve wondered, why is she speaking up now? Why is she writing a book? Who is this author she is working with? Why is Drew’s lawyer hopping up and down and barking like a terrier?

Co-author, Michelle LeFort emailed us this morning with the answers to some of the questions we have been asking.

As for the “cease and desist” demand that Joel Brodsky announced he has issued against the author, she states that she, Vicki Connolly, and Lisa Ward, “have never been given a cease and desist letter-not one of us.” As to Joel Brodsky’s public claims that money is the motivating factor in coming forward, LeFort denies it. “We have made NO money as Mr. Brodsky, wonder attorney, might suggest and all hold down respectable jobs.”

LeFort does not believe that by speaking out, they are endangering the case against Drew Peterson.”We refuse to violate any testimony in this fiasco. Peterson needs stopped. We are trying to believe justice has the opportunity to prevail.”

This morning Ms. Lefort also posted a comment at Justice Café. We paste her comment here in toto, for you to read.

I am Michelle LeFort. I’m sorry that we cannot comment on some of the questions that you raise in this blog and that the administrator asked me to comment on. I am happy to make a statement and had emailed as well.

Vicki (the correct spelling) had a car accident March 1, 1990 in Naperville unincorporated. She did NOT date Jeffrey Archer (personally verified by his wife, his parents and Vicki as well.) Jeffrey was killed, and had been having an affair, but it was with someone else and his wife knew about it. It could have been misconstrued to have been Kathleen Savio, but, again, it was not someone who had anything to do with this case according to his wife.

(NoWay –hello, Darlin)

Lisa and Vicki have not come forward until now, because they are afraid. The legal team for Drew Peterson isn’t even the worst of it, but the sheer unabashed fear they faced for the duration of the time they spent with Drew. Money and Power are all I have seen in researching this case for nearly two years as HIS motive. We have waited to come forward for the very reason that Brodsky is proving all over the Internet-it comes down to name-calling. EVERYONE who says anything negative about Peterson is called a liar. Please tell me you see the antics. Are either of these men capable of rigorous honesty? They bash everyone. We really didn’t want to see our names smeared in the headlines with everyone else’s. We are human; we have feelings; we have fears; we are not backing down, just trying to do the right thing. We commend Cassandra, Anna and Sue, Neil, Steve … we understand what you go through and we’re sorry.

Step-daughter, Lisa Ward, alleges sexual abuse by Drew Peterson

Lisa Ward

Drew Peterson’s Former Step-Daughter Speaks Out Exclusively to INSIDE EDITION
Airdate: 10/9/2009

“How does a father do that to a child?” Tears flow from a woman who says she suffered beatings and sexual abuse at the hands of her notorious former stepdad, Drew Peterson.

“I was beat with a belt, with my pants down.”

Peterson is now behind bars, charged with the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. He’s pled not guilty.

“He looked…cold, heartless, exactly the same person that I’ve known my whole life,” says Ward of seeing Peterson, on TV, for the first time in years.

Lisa Ward was just 8 years old when her mom Vicky met and fell in love with Peterson in 1984. From day one, Lisa says she was terrified of Peterson, who was working as an undercover narcotics cop.

“He grabbed me back of head pushed and said whether I liked it or not he was going to marry my mother and he was going to be my father and I would respect him.”

She says her new step-dad was a control freak with a volatile temper. “You could just feel the tension throughout the house. You would just cringe, and hope that rage wasn’t coming back at you.”

And Lisa makes a shocking allegation about humiliating punishments she says continued into her early teens: “He would make me go into his room and pull down my pants and expose myself to him completely so I could be spanked bare bottom. The more I fought the worse it was.”

When her mom was hospitalized after a near-fatal car crash, she says Peterson did unspeakable things to her. She was only 14.

“He had told me that he missed my mother so much that he didn’t want to be without her. He asked me to come lay down with him. He had tried to touch me in an inappropriate way. I went in my room locked my door, and I thought to myself that can’t be happening,” she says tearfully.

Drew loses big. Change of venue denied, hearsay law upheld in Peterson case.

Drew Peterson defense team arrives at the Will County courthouse. Photo - Warren Skalski

Hearsay law upheld in Peterson murder case
October 2, 2009 4:32 PM

A Will County judge today upheld the state’s new hearsay law, which prosecutors plan to use in their murder trial against Drew Peterson.

Under the law, which took affect in December, prosecutors plans to submit as evidence letters and statements by Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio, to friends and family before she was killed in 2004.

Peterson’s attorneys have argued that the so-called “Drew’s law” violates a defendant’s 6th Amendment right to cross-examine witnesses; goes against state and federal constitutional provisions against retroactively applied laws; and “erodes the presumption of innocence” by asking a judge before the trial even starts to find that Peterson murdered Savio to silence her.

But Judge Stephen White sided with prosecutors and allowed the law to stand.

Peterson’s attorneys said they would notify prosecutors whether they intend to introduce their own hearsay evidence by Oct. 29, their client’s next court date.

Peterson, in custody at the Will County Jail in Joliet, is also considered a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Eearlier, Peterson lost his bid to move his murder trial outside of Will County.

Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, has argued that widespread publicity would make it difficult for the former Bolingbrook police sergeant to get a fair trial in Will County.

The motion cited stories about Peterson that ran in the Chicago Tribune, CNN, Huffington Post and local television stations.

Some of the stories detailed the order of protection Savio took out against Peterson and the letters she mailed out before her death. The motion argued that they exposed jurors to “highly significant information which may not be admissible at trial.”

Peterson’s attorneys also objected to a 2008 press release from the Will County state’s attorney’s office that announced that results of an autopsy on Savio’s exhumed remains concluding her death was a homicide.

The complete autopsy was not released, only the manner of death, which his attorneys said “prejudiced the jury pool in regards to the most contested fact of the entire case — namely the manner of death.”

– Steven D. Schmadeke

Read the story at the 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>

Kathleen Savio’s death inquest – a sister testifies

Susan Doman

If you’ve been following this blog, you know that we’ve been trying to locate the full transcript of the coroner’s jury inquest into the death of Kathleen Savio from May 1, 2004.

To date we’ve been able to share with you the pages containing the testimony of Herbert Hardy (pages 7-15). We’ve now located the first six pages of the transcript, in which Susan Doman (then Savio) testifies, and we’re pleased to be able to share them with you.

EXCERPT:

Q. Is there anything else you’d like to add, ma’am?

A. Yes. I just — it’s very difficult for my family because of my sister telling us all the time, and I can figure, everyone, everything — one that she has seen that if she would die, it may look like and accident, but it wasn’t. She just told me last week, and she was terrified of him. He always threatened her. He had her in the basement one time. He did, many, many things to her. He only wished for her to go away.
And it’s just very hard for me to accept that, what happened. His reactions after this were a laughing matter. Cleaning everything out, ready to get rid of the house. It’s very hard.

Sue Doman’s testimony is especially interesting at this time, as this Friday is the date of Drew Peterson’s next hearing in which the defense will be arguing against the constitutionality of the “hearsay law”.

View this document on Scribd

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~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>

Drew Peterson defense team starts blog

(Click to see full size)

UPDATE SEPTEMBER 28: That was fast. The blog that is the subject of this post is no longer there.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I just noticed that a site which formerly contained links to Drew Peterson’s defense documents (and is still entitled: Drew Peterson Documents) has now morphed into a blog with updates about the Peterson case.

Members of the Peterson’s defense team already send out frequent press releases, update the Abood Law and Brodsky & Odeh web sites with news and legal briefs, and Joel Brodsky continues to grant radio interviews even though Judge Stephen White has asked to preapprove all media appearances by all attorneys involved in the case.

The judge issued specific guidelines to Peterson’s attorneys on pre-trial publicity and media interviews, asking that the lawyers inform the judge of any pre-arranged media interviews and supply him with copies of any press releases sent out on the case.

Why does the defense continue to court the public even after filing a motion for a change of venue which complains that “media overexposure” has made it impossible for their client to obtain a fair trial of his peers?

Should we be expecting a return of the Drew Peterson Defense Fund website, where “For the cost of a few cups of your morning coffee, you (could) help to ensure that Drew can afford to support his ongoing legal defense” and “find his missing wife”?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~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>

Drew Peterson defense adds reinforcements to the team

Peterson defense expands team
September 17, 2009 5:27 PM

To help get a handle on some 40,000 pages of discovery documents in the Drew Peterson murder trial, the former Bolingbrook police sergeant’s attorneys have brought on a team of recent law-school graduates and third-year law students.

A court order allowing daily face-to-face visits with Peterson’s legal team was recently expanded to include Michael L. Raff, Anthony Nehme and Kendall Hartsfield.

Joel Brodsky, one of Peterson’s attorneys, said a third-year student named Melissa Anderson also is assisting.

“It’s the crème-de-la-crème,” Brodsky said of the Chicago-area law-school products, declining to say whether they are getting paid.

The team, with help from another group associated with Peterson’s Michigan attorney Andrew Abood, are about 80 percent of the way through the mountain of paperwork, Brodsky said…

–Steve Schmadeke

Read the story at Chicago Tribune Breaking News
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~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>

Suffer the Consequences, Drew Peterson?

Some of us have discussed how we have perceived the defense’s motions as being silly, at times. Such as asking for a change of venue when the defendant, and Joel Brodsky (scroll down slightly to his 5/3/2008 thoughts on media exposure), have done anything but avoid the media, making it difficult, so the defense says, to seat an unbiased jury in Will County. Some of us may also be wondering if they should suffer the consequences of their actions, as if it’s fair to expect the Judge to grant their request, when it was their own doing.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Karen Conti was able to answer some questions for us involving pretrial motions. In the end, the obvious is noted. Regardless of how and why this defendant currently finds himself in unfavorable situations, the defendant is, and should be, entitled to a fair trial process.

Q: Of course, it’s understood that credibility with the judge and/or jury is important. In the case of pretrial motions and oral arguments, what will the Judge be looking for? Are case cites only part of what he’ll base his rulings on? If not, what other factors does he consider in pretrial motions? If there are case law cites that support each side’s legal position, how does the judge make a final determination? Does attorney credibility weigh-in in determining whose case law cites are more on point?

CONTI: In ruling on pretrial motions, the judge relies heavily on what the statutes and cases decided in the past interpreting the law say. The judge, in deciding some issues, has great discretion. It depends on the issue. Attorney credibility does not weigh in except that judges will tell you that when an attorney is not honest in interpreting a case or misstates facts, the judge loses confidence in the integrity of the pleadings and will question whatever that attorney files. But, for the most part, it is up to the judge to check the attorneys’ research and make sure that both attorneys are accurately and fairly making their arguments.

Lisa Madigan and James Glasgow file objections to Peterson’s challenging of the “Hearsay law”

Lisa Madigan and James Glasgow

On September 4th, Illinois’ State’s Attorney, James Glasgow, and Attorney General, Lisa Madigan, filed separate objections to motions filed by Drew Peterson’s defense team, which challenged the constitutionality of the so-called “Hearsay Law“.

The objections maintain that the new statute violates neither ex post facto nor confrontation right principles.

Even if you normally have a hard time wading through legal documents, I’d urge anyone with an interest in this case to read through these objections. The quality of the research, the clearness of argument and the absence of silly evidence (i.e., quoting of Google searches) is in striking contrast to the motions that have been filed thusfar by Peterson’s defense.

UPDATE 9/11/09: The defense has filed a response to the objections by the State. It is the last motion to be filed regarding this issue before the hearing on October 2. Scroll down to read the reply. All of the motions can be found on the documents page.

Attorney General’s Filing of Objections to Defendant’s Motion to Declare 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 Unconstitutional

View this document on Scribd

State’s Attorney’s Response to Defendant’s Motion to Declare 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 Unconstitutional

View this document on Scribd

UPDATE – Filed September 11, 2009: DEFENDANT’S REPLY TO THE RESPONSES OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS AND THE WILL COUNTY STATES ATTORNEY TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DECLARE 725 ILCS 5/115-10.6 UNCONSTITUTIONAL

View this document on Scribd

~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>

Drew Peterson Lawyer in Trouble

John Paul Carroll

Peterson attorney faces discipline
2007 murder trial focus of agency complaint

September 2, 2009

By JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com
A member of Drew Peterson’s legal team is in trouble with the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Committee for allegedly holding out on his clients in a murder case after prosecutors offered them a plea deal.

The Aug. 20 complaint accuses attorney John Paul Carroll of violating the rules of professional conduct by failing to reveal the plea deal until after his two clients were convicted on all charges.

Carroll was representing brothers Jaime and Edgar Castro in a 2007 Kane County murder case. The Castros were charged with killing Julio Gurrola, who attempted to steal a pound of marijuana from them at gunpoint.