Your thread – case discussion

This thread is for everyone to discuss aspects of the Peterson case (e.g. grand jury, searches, Kathleen Savio’s death, Stacy Peterson’s disappearance, media coverage, etc…).

About these ads

95 thoughts on “Your thread – case discussion

  1. #
    freedom, on April 23rd, 2008 at 9:09 pm Said: Edit Comment

    sure- funny you mention that I was just reading on this unsolved tragedy.
    I wish all missing could get as much coverage as Stacy’s case.
    why are there so many missing in that area? that is strange to me.

    Police Sources: Stebic Investigation Expanding

    http://www.nbc5.com/news/13476532/detail.html
    ————————————————————————————
    #
    basherette, on April 26th, 2008 at 2:57 am Said: Edit Comment

    P.S.- If anyone is still wondering-

    Jim Morphy, who is Tom Morphy’s older brother and DiP’s stepbrother, testified at Thursday’s Grand Jury meeting.
    #
    basherette, on April 26th, 2008 at 7:02 am Said: Edit Comment

    P.P.S.- That should have read: Jim Morphey, who is Tom’s oldest brother…

    Sorry about that. Damn insomnia.
    —————————————————————-
    #
    58apache, on April 26th, 2008 at 11:32 am Said: Edit Comment

    Did Drew ever report Stacy missing with any organizations? I mean, it would sure show some concern on his part if he had reported her missing.
    ———————————————————
    #
    58apache, on April 26th, 2008 at 11:47 am Said: Edit Comment

    Anonymous, what I found odd was after Drew received the 9:00 pm phone call, he has not indicated and noone has reported that he called anyone else. Logic tells me that he would have at least tried to call Cassandra or other family members to see if she were with them. She was his wife, and I’m sure he could somehow show that he was concerned for her whereabouts.
    #
    Anonymous, on April 26th, 2008 at 11:47 am Said: Edit Comment

    But isn’t Drew now looking for Stacy with the help of his private detectives?

    That would indicate he thinks she is missing, no?

    Even though you are right Truthisthere, he did say she left him.
    ——————————————————
    #
    58apache, on April 27th, 2008 at 7:07 pm Said: Edit Comment

    I was very pleased to see that Tom Morphey’s brother came out to speak for his brother.

    It is quite apparent that Tom Morphey will be the key witness for the prosecution if Drew goes on trial for the disappearance and possible homicide of Stacy Peterson. I bet Joel Brodsky wishes he had never said that Drew and Tom were never together on 10/28/2007.

    I am glad that Tom is doing well and being protected. It must be hard when you realize that you will have to testify against your own brother, albeit step brother, in a murder trial.
    #
    amandareckonwith, on April 27th, 2008 at 7:09 pm Said: Edit Comment

    It’s going to be hardest on their parents, 58.
    —————————————————————-
    #
    58apache, on April 27th, 2008 at 7:21 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Yes, I agree, that the parents, and other family members are in a tough spot. When Drew’s mother went public and spoke negatively about Stacy I was immediately concerned that she might regret saying that later. Of course, parents will typically stick up for their children, it’s only human nature and I don’t blame her for that.

    But now that Jim and John Morphey have come out public in defense for Tom it must be hard on Drew’s mother and step-father. I wish them well and don’t want them to feel guilty. I truly pray for them to be able to cope with the possibility of a trial.
    #
    ———————————————
    #
    basherette, on April 27th, 2008 at 7:29 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Any non-trolls interested in discussing the will? I noticed some more discrepancies…
    ———————————————————–
    #
    58apache, on April 27th, 2008 at 7:34 pm Said: Edit Comment

    When Tom’s brothers describe him it appears that he is a genuine good guy who is trusting and friendly to all he meets. I was disturbed early on to learn that when he worked at Drew’s bar that he was always intimidated by Drew and wondering what Drew thought of him.

    I am looking forward to the neighbor’s testimony, as well, who claimed to have witnessed Drew and Tom putting a container in Drew’s Denali on 10/28/2007. Hopefully, they will be able to answer the questions and clear all the speculation in this case.
    ————————————————
    #
    58apache, on April 27th, 2008 at 7:50 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Today I read the article in the Sun Times and Chicago Tribune about the case of Lisa Stebic. Honestly, the similarities between her disappearance and Stacy Peterson’s disappearance are almost, creepy.

    The difference in the two cases is that Lisa’s husband stayed out of the limelight and most, including me, could not recognize him in public.

    Yet, Joel Brodsky, has taken the strategy that Drew should be in the public eye on a weekly basis. I think all the interviews on TV and newspaper interviews will be a detriment to defending Drew. I am thinking that Joel Brodsky is now wondering if he took the right path. With all of the interviews in print or on tape, I am thinking this will give the prosecutors an opportunity to scrutinize Drew’s actions on or about 10/28/2007.
    ———————————————–
    #
    58apache, on April 27th, 2008 at 8:05 pm Said: Edit Comment

    I am wondering why Drew’s teenage sons have not been allowed to testify before the grand jury. If I were innocent, I would go out of my way to allow my family to testify before a grand jury.

    Hopefully, Drew’s two teens will be allowed to testify this week so that they can help exonerate their father. One can only hope.
    #
    amandareckonwith, on April 27th, 2008 at 8:06 pm Said: Edit Comment

    The Ruttenberg family has shown nothing but class and dignity.

    Todays Lisa Walk was to benefit Guardian Angel Community Services. All proceeds were donated.

    I posted a video on kimmers (of the dove release).
    ======================
    #
    basherette, on April 27th, 2008 at 8:17 pm Said: Edit Comment

    58apache, on April 27th, 2008 at 8:05 pm Said:
    I am wondering why Drew’s teenage sons have not been allowed to testify before the grand jury. If I were innocent, I would go out of my way to allow my family to testify before a grand jury.

    Hopefully, Drew’s two teens will be allowed to testify this week so that they can help exonerate their father. One can only hope.
    ______________________________

    There is a hearing scheduled for Apr. 29th regarding whether or not DiP’s two teenage sons will be testifying before the GJ. DiP hired a lawyer to squash a GJ subpoena the boys received, hence the hearing.

    Here’s a link:
    http://www.chicagotribune…pr05-copy,1,4468252.story
    #
    =================================
    #
    NoWay406, on April 27th, 2008 at 8:50 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Basherette, if you’re still here … what did you notice about the will?
    ==============================
    #
    58apache, on April 27th, 2008 at 9:11 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Thank goodness that the Will county coroner has come forward to tell the public that Kathleen Savio’s death was a homicide.

    Now the family members of Kathleen can go forward with their efforts to find justice for Kathleen. Of course, I don’t understand why Drew Peterson would be so insistant in appealing the re-opening of her estate if he were innocent.
    ============================
    #
    basherette, on April 27th, 2008 at 10:30 pm Said: Edit Comment

    NoWay406, on April 27th, 2008 at 8:50 pm Said:
    Basherette, if you’re still here … what did you notice about the will?
    ___________________________

    Here’s the link:

    http://media.myfoxchicago…n/peterson_saviowill1.PDF

    Go to the 2nd page- DiP says he wants to be “cremated and buried next to his wife’s remains”.

    Which leaves me wondering about 2 things:

    1) Why is there no mention of what Kathleen wants done when she passes away? DiP lists his preference, but Kathleen leaves no such directives. Why wouldn’t she do the same, especially since he makes his choice so clear?

    2) Why does DiP assume that he will outlive his wife? It doesn’t say “I would like to be cremated and buried.” It says he wants to be “cremated and buried next to his wife’s REMAINS”.

    Which raises another question-

    3) How does he know that she’s going to be BURIED at all? She hasn’t specified what she wants done after death- only HE has. Why would he state that she will be “buried”?

    I believe the will is a forgery. And I think that he didn’t bother to put any after death instructions for Kathleen because she was ALREADY dead and buried. When you think about that, and then re-read his directive: “cremated and buried next to my wife’s remains”, it’s glaringly and damningly obvious that Kathleen was *already dead* when that page was written. Since she was dead, he didn’t bother to write any burial instructions for her, cause whatever she would have wanted didn’t matter- she was already DEAD.

    Hell of a slip-up.
    =======================================
    #
    facsmiley, on April 27th, 2008 at 10:37 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Wow, Basherette, that is VERY interesting.
    #
    basherette, on April 27th, 2008 at 10:37 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Sorry- that link for the will was incomplete. Here’s the entire link:

    http://media.myfoxchicago.com/john/peterson_saviowill1.PDF
    ==========================
    #
    sureyouwill, on April 27th, 2008 at 10:50 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Hey bash, wow that is interesting! You’re right, why is d talking in the past tense (well answering my own ? I guess it’s because the so called “will” was mean for both of them assuming they went on a trip and both died, right?). Sounds very fishy. I haven’t actually looked at the link but I would assume LE would have caught that too, don’t you think? HOPEFULLY!
    ===============================
    #
    basherette, on April 27th, 2008 at 10:56 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Yes, I hope so too. I’d also like to see LE process both pages and see if Kathleen’s fingerprints are on it.

    I doubt they are.
    ===========================
    #
    sureyouwill, on April 27th, 2008 at 11:01 pm Said: Edit Comment

    Do you think its possible to pick up prints from a doc like that? Especially now since its probably been circulated so much? That was a good cath though Bash, he’s talking like she is or intends to be dead prior to him. Wow! I know LE is good at what they do and don’t need our cereal box detective work to solve the case for them, but boy I hope they have realized the same as you!
    ==============================
    #
    basherette, on April 27th, 2008 at 11:08 pm Said: Edit Comment

    If they can get fingerprints from objects dating back before the CE, then they should have no problem getting Kathleen’s prints off that will- but they have to be there in the first place.

    I don’t think they are.

    Same with the paperwork had to sign so Drew could by another house (for him and Stacy) while he was still married to Kathleen- I’d like LE to process that for Kathleen’s fingerprints too, because her own family questions the veracity of her signature on it.
    ====================

  2. “They’ll just keep going until the case goes cold,” Brodsky said. “And it will eventually, and that’s that”

    Did anyone else find this quote particularly creepy? According to Drew and Brodsky, Stacy ran off somewhere and is alive and they are actively looking for her overseas. In that scenario you might expect Stacy to resurface at any time, so why would Brodsky anticipate a cold case?

    Of course, if his client had murdered his wife and disposed of her remains so well that she hadn’t been located after 6 months, he might assume that the remains will never be found. Which would better explain why he expects the case to eventually go cold.

    Ick.

  3. noway, i have to disagree. it seems like if you put “buried with my spouse” sounds like she is still alive. but its just semantics. savio murdered, DP admits to Stacy, Stacy tells pastor, but way way too late in the game, now each of them have a reason to get rid of each other, way too much motive on both sides, money, kids, houses, all leads to greed. to me it seems its worse when you start out with nothing, and you have a taste of the good life and then that’s taken away, its worse than if you never had a taste of that apple at all. if Stacy didn’t have that guillotine
    of savios murder hanging over her, she would have been so much better off getting a divorce, custody of the kids, the house, everything. but they had too much dirt on each other and now one more is probably buried under that dirt. just why didn’t she confide in her best friends and sister? if she and Sharon were such best friends, why didn’t she know? Pam Bosch? Cassandra? i cant wait for this to get to court and become public record. that way no one can hide the truth. alot of people are going to be stunned by some of the revelations.

  4. facsmiley, on April 28th, 2008 at 4:02 pm Said:
    “They’ll just keep going until the case goes cold,” Brodsky said. “And it will eventually, and that’s that”

    , so why would Brodsky anticipate a cold case?

    _________________________________________
    or if there is no evidence, crime scene, body, clues, murder weapon, that might be a reason for case to go cold, dontcha think?

  5. Basherette, I read the PDF of the will and it made me wonder if maybe Kathleen already had a burial plot (perhaps part of a prepurchased family plot) so only Drew needed to specify that he wanted to be placed with her.

    I don’t really find it all that strange an addendum.

  6. “Cold case refers to a criminal investigation (or “case”) that remains unsolved and “on the books.”

    If Stacy is still alive as Brodsky and Drew claim, and they are actively searching for her overseas, why would they expect the case to remain unsolved and on the books? One thinks they would expect that she will resurface at some point, which would solve the case and remove it from the books.

    Yet Brodsky is expecting a cold case. Which means he expects it will never be solved. It’s an odd statement for the defense to be making.

  7. I think it was Bash that said she believes the Will of KS is a forgery.

    I have been a witness to countless Wills, having worked for a probate and estate planning attorney. We would watch the individual initial each page and sign the Will, and then we would all sign as witnesses, below their signature. We were also required to sign an additional page, attesting to witnessing the Will being signed in each other’s presence, and the number of pages it contained. The Will was then notarized by yet another individual.

    In this case, the Will was presented in Court, accepted, filed and the estate was probated. If there was, I assume, any question about it’s validity at that time, the witnesses may have been asked to verify their signatures, or asked questions by the probate judge.

    Assuming that wasn’t done, and if the Will was a forgery, wouldn’t DP have had to reconstruct the witnesses’ signatures also? KS’s signature and the witnesses’ signatures are on the same page, so if the page/signature is forged, so are their signatures.

    Thus, now that the Will is in question, so are the witnesses’ signatures. I do know that Alex Morelli, who was DP’s former BB police partner is one of the witnesses, and he is no longer speaking to, nor wants anything to do with, DP. Says he turned his whole word upside down.

    To me, that is very telling about that issue, the one regarding Savio and DP.

  8. facsmiley, on April 28th, 2008 at 4:28 pm Said:
    Basherette, I read the PDF of the will and it made me wonder if maybe Kathleen already had a burial plot (perhaps part of a prepurchased family plot) so only Drew needed to specify that he wanted to be placed with her.

    I don’t really find it all that strange an addendum.
    ________________________

    If she did, then why wasn’t it mentioned? The will would have made a little more sense if it had said :

    I, Kathleen, have purchased, and want to be buried in, plot blah blah blah, located at the blah blah blah cemetery.

    But it didn’t. That DiP’s preferences were plainly stated and there was no mention of who would be the children’s guardians in the event of both Kathleen’s and DiP’s deaths, leave me with the distinct belief that the will is a forgery.

  9. Well, again, in my opinion, if the Will was reconstructed and forged, then either he would have had to get the witnesses to sign a Will of a “dead” person, or he went ahead and created his version of the Will, forged the signatures of both KS and the original witnesses, and presented it to the Probate Court.

    At the time, assuming the two witnesses were not called in to validate their signatures as witnesses, the Will went through probate.

    But, now that the whole matter of KS has been resurrected, you can bet your bippy the GJ wanted to hear from Alex Morelli and the other witness whether or not those are, in fact, THEIR signatures.

  10. After all the hours that have been and are still being spent by LE working on this case, JB’s assertion that this will become a “cold case” is nothing but a flagrant attempt to demoralize the troopers.

    ISP and FBI aren’t gonna fall for that crapola.

    It’s nothing but wishfull thinking on JB’s and DiP’s part. And when this case goes to trial, and it will, and Drew is convicted of the murders, and he will be, then I will finally allow myself to celebrate justice by pointing my finger in their general direction and laughing my arse off.

    Until then, of course, I will remain stoic, resolved and determined that justice will prevail.

  11. Bash – I see it that way as well. He wanted to be flippant and dismissive in an attempt to demoralize, but didn’t realize what a strange comment that is to make, since it implies that he has some sort of knowledge about Stacy’s disappearance – otherwise how could he be so sure she doesn’t pop up again in Peoria..or Timbucktoo and, voila, case solved?

    I guess I’m just trying to say that his attempt to demoralize backfires since it only serves to make him look kind of…stupid.

  12. rescueapet, on April 28th, 2008 at 4:58 pm Said:
    Well, again, in my opinion, if the Will was reconstructed and forged, then either he would have had to get the witnesses to sign a Will of a “dead” person, or he went ahead and created his version of the Will, forged the signatures of both KS and the original witnesses, and presented it to the Probate Court.

    At the time, assuming the two witnesses were not called in to validate their signatures as witnesses, the Will went through probate.

    But, now that the whole matter of KS has been resurrected, you can bet your bippy the GJ wanted to hear from Alex Morelli and the other witness whether or not those are, in fact, THEIR signatures.
    _______________________________

    Another option would be that only the first page of the will is a forgery.

    LE had the will entered into evidence on Dec. 19th, so the FBI & ISP have had alot of time to check it out, and then some.

    The two witnesses who signed have both already testified before the GJ about the will.

    Hee Hee- never thought I’d run into someone else who says “you better bet your sweet bippy”- good to know Laugh In is still remembered fondly by others as well! Hurm- think I’m giving away my age a wee bit…

  13. facsmiley, on April 28th, 2008 at 5:05 pm Said:

    I guess I’m just trying to say that his attempt to demoralize backfires since it only serves to make him look kind of…stupid.
    _____________________

    That’s one of JB’s not-so-secret talents.

  14. LOL, yes, Bash, bet your bippy is right!

    When we were witnesses to a Will, believe it or not, they were then stapled together within a Will cover, to to speak. The pages of the Will were placed on the cover, then a small portion of the top was folded over the top of the Will, again stapled. Once stapled, NO ONE was to take that Will apart. A certain giveaway that was done would be mis-aligned staple holes.

    But, in the case of the KS/DP Will, being only two pages, I presume he could have changed the first page as he wished, but, being it was many years later, he’d have to find exactly the same kind of paper, wouldn’t he?

  15. The will was written on a standard yellow lined notepad. Not that hard at all to find more paper just like it. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if DiP just swiped one or two from where he used to work.

  16. I witnessed gazillions of Wills, and each and every one of them was notarized.

    No one was to leave the room until the person signed the Will, and each witness signed.

    In the KS/DP Will matter, that was not done at a law firm under scrutiny. Assuming they did that Will on the fly prior to a vacation, they had ample time to re-do their Wills under the direction of a competent attorney, especially since Drew had one as an uncle, who later because the executor. Just all doesn’t fit into place at all.

  17. basherette, on April 28th, 2008 at 5:22 pm Said:
    The will was written on a standard yellow lined notepad. Not that hard at all to find more paper just like it. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if DiP just swiped one or two from where he used to work.

    ________

    Had to laugh at this. My dad was a lawyer. His house was FILLED with yellow legal pads. My brother joked that it was our inheritence.

    And the will … wasn’t it notarized by Drew?

  18. bolingbrook60440, on April 28th, 2008 at 6:05 pm Said:
    six months, no arrest, no vicitim, no murder, no case

    ___________________________

    6 months:

    1 Very Worried, Publicly Named Suspect
    1 Very Active Grand Jury
    1 Confirmed Homicide
    1 Estate Turned Over to Savio Relatives

  19. I think that was one of the issues. It was his will and he notarized it. Which I think is a no-no. Some states allow it … or do now.

  20. I read that the GJ is scheduled to run until July … with extensions up until November.

    And yes, no arrest. But do they usually arrest a suspect during the middle of a grand jury investigation or do they wait until the grand jury investigation is complete?

  21. No, the will wasn’t notarized by anyone. The paperwork that DiP needed in order to buy another house (one for Stacy and him) while still married to Kathleen is the paperwork that he notarized.

    Illegal as allgitout.

    Yet another crime to add to the growing list.

    LE ain’t just whistling “Dixie”- they want to nail him with as many of the crimes he committed as possible.

  22. Case law varies, as do the guidelines.

    LE usually waits until the GJ investigation is completed before making an arrest, but they can and do make arrests before then, especially if it is highly likely that the suspect is gonna make a run for the border.

  23. But the will was determined to be legal … back then I mean, when Drew found it, wasn’t it?

    If it hadn’t been notarized, how could that be?

    Do handwritten wills need to be notarized. I’m talking Illinois … since all states are different. And I guess Illinois in 1997.

  24. Yes, it was determined by the judge residing over the case to be “legal”.

    No idea why.

    Yet another reason why I am happy the FBI is involved.

    DiP’s crimes more than likely exposed other ones- including corruption at much higher levels.

    Gonna be a whole lotta charges in Bolingbrook, and heads are gonna roll.

  25. The grand jury investigation was only scheduled for about 4 months, originally. I, also, had heard it might go into November… I think that’s great.

    This case is going to take a very long time before it’s over.

    I think having it go so much longer says a lot for what they might be finding.

    IMO

  26. Handwritten (holographic) wills must be witnessed- but do NOT necessarily need to be notarized, depending on what state you live in.

  27. Scratch “handwritten wills” and just make that “wills” … I was going to ask a different question and then changed my post but left “handwritten” in …

  28. Noway – I think the original probate of the Will is a whole ‘nuther ballgame. I never witnessed a Will that wasn’t notarized, and it’s a well known fact you can’t notarize your own signature, or a document in which you are an interested party.

    *************

    As to the length of time that’s passed, what detriment is there to collecting evidence before charging DP for a crime? Better to have their ducks in a row. Doesn’t give me pause to think he’s going to get away with anything just because he’s not been charged yet. With all of the media trotting going on, I think LE is sopping it all up to pile it on.

  29. Thanks, basherette. Are you in the legal profession? You are a great source of information!

    So … the real question about the will is whether Kathleen’s signature is really her signature.

    The paperwork to buy the house … Kathleen’s signature on that … is it generally believed that is her signature or is that also questionable?

  30. I hope this case is a heads-up to people everywhere … if your sister, friend, aunt whoever says they fear for their life and that their husband/boyfriend/significant other is going to kill them someday —

    Drag them out of the house at the first moment you can.

  31. Nah, just a curious old Jewish lady.

    Regarding the 2nd home paperwork, YES, that signature is also being disputed by the Savio family.

    A handwriting expert the Savio family paid to compare various signatures of Kathleen’s was unable to determine whether the signature on the house paperwork was her’s or not.

    Hopefully with the resources the FBI has, that question will be answered eventually.

  32. Eee Gads, 2 feet of snow? Sorry about that.

    I was just going to say, without knowing half of what went on during that first probate, that was a train wreck, to say the least. Not the finest moment for the Will County Probate Court.

    It is just amazing to me how things just fell into line or place when it came to DP. He said jump, and the response was always “how high.” Mind boggling.

  33. Thanks for sharing your theory. It’s interesting and I share a lot of it.

    If you want to debate some about it, I’d ask you to think about a few things that don’t stack up well against the theory of a voluntary disappearance.

    1. Stacy often asked Drew for a divorce in the months preceding her disappearance. Why do you think would she do that if she had plans to go into hiding?

    2. She had sought out and met with a lawyer with her questions about divorce shortly before going missing. Why?

    3. Stacy had inquired about a house to rent where she and the kids could live together, but the house was already rented. How does that fit in with her wanting to leave her family responsibilities?

    4. She had given Drew an ultimatum to be out of the house by 10/31 and boxes of his belonging were stacked in the garage in preparation for his leaving.

    5. If she always looked happy in the family photos doesn’t that go against a theory of her wanting to leave him as well as feeling that she was in danger? If were are going to interpret her photo smiles as meaning that she was happy…then why isn’t she still with him? Or are you saying she could look happy simply becasue seh was jazzed about her decision to run off? To me it doesn’t seem relevant to anything – either way really. Just that she smiled for the camera. You know what I mean?

    Obviously, you’d need to accept the word of various family and friend sources as credible in order to debate the first four points. If you don’t believe these to be true, then I understand that as well.

    What do you think?

  34. Yes, the 2+ feet of snow was a surprise- and we got it all in less than 24 hours. It was quite the blizzard- so much so that Alaskans are worried about another Ice Age, and not so much about global warming.

    As far as the Savio-Peterson Probate Court hearings goes, I bet alot of people are going to be getting called out of retirement to do some ‘splainin’ to LE/FBI.

    That’s why I think the GJ is taking so long- not for LACK of evidence, but because there’s so MUCH evidence to sort out. Look how many people they’ve got working on this! It isn’t just a “simple” disappearance/murder investigation anymore. Never was.

  35. My take and theory on this case, not that it means anything.

    Just to clear up a couple of things. Lavanda you said Cass went to the Bolingbrook PD first. I believe they said she went to the Downers Grove PD first, then to Bolingbrook, then onto the ISP. The timing is a bit off. If she was at the Bolingbrook PD at 2:00am and didnt end up at the ISP until 4:00am, that is a LONG time, considering the ISP is just miles away.

    I have always had a problem with her statement about Stacy fearing for her life, but waiting until Sunday evening to do anything. If she was in constant contact with Stacy from Friday on, then not talking to her at all on Sunday and not reporting anything until late evening…something is right there. And she claims she was at Pam’s house, and I know Pam has sense, so it’s hard to argue she is young and didnt know what to do.

    I looked at the slideshow of pictures, and not in a single one did Stacy look unhappy, sad, scared, abused etc. And their were many pictures. You can’t hide sad eyes, and she didnt have them.

    I suspect Drew was a huge source of pride for the Cales family. He provided for them in way’s they have never expierenced before.

    My theory is Drew starting talking about his retirement, and Stacy went into a panic mode. Again, she was young, and I’m sure she never though that through…that he would retire, and want to spend more time with her and the kids.

    I don’t think they figured into her future plans. We know she had access to the computer. We know for a fact, which I might add, we know very little for fact information, that she was talking with Scott R, and doing racy text messages. It would not be hard for me to believe that Scott wasn’t the only person she was doing this with.

    She wanted out, but after thinking it through realized that by divorcing Drew she wouldnt have the lifestyle she and her family enjoyed up to this point. Of course he would have to pay child support and possibly maintence for awhile, but I can guarentee you the vacations, plastic surgery, being a stay at home mom, all the stuff would come to an end.

    I believe she and Cass hatch the plan that she would “disappear” and Drew would be arrested immed., She would then come out of hiding saying things to the like of “I had to leave, I was in fear for my life” stuff like that.

    I don’t think they thought it through enough. I think they thought he would be arrested, tried for Kathleen murder, and Stacy would then have access to everything they jointly held, including the kids and the money.

    They never imagined that Drew wouldnt be arrested right away. They never imagined that Stacy herself would be talked about in regards to Kathleen’s murder.

    We have to remember also, that when and if, this goes to a trial, many of these players will have to take the stand as witnesses. I can almost guarentee you that when and if it happens, Brodsky will be second chair, and the big dogs will be called in. Most of these so called witnesses will be eaten alive on the stand by a decent defense attorney.

    This is not an open and shut case.

    And another question maybe some of you can answer. It seems like Stacy enjoyed pictures, and picture taking. Is there any pictures of her and her so-called best friend Sharon?

  36. If Cass and Stacy hatched this elaborate plan, do you think they’d be able to fool ISP and FBI this long?

    Are the others (Sharon, Roy, the pastor, Scott, Bruce) involved too or just along for the ride … unsuspecting fools.

    That’s an awful lot of people in a conspiracy fooling the FBI and ISP.

    And why would the ISP make the statement that Stacy did not leave on her own that day?

  37. I believe the lawyer they hired was Andrew Abood (?) from Michigan.

    Good question about Sharon and Stacy … but I never really thought of them as best friends hang around together … maybe Sharon was the one taking the pictures.

  38. Noway – probably, things just snowballed so badly and went so whacko, things that DP never thought possible, it’s a crime still playing out, so to speak. How could he ever have foreseen all of this KS stuff being resurrected, or the public taking such an interest in DP’s life, throwing him into the spotlight as it has.

  39. I wonder why no one has come forward to appear on tv with DP when he does interviews, saying what a stand-up guy he is, and what a wonderful family man and father he was.

    No one to show pictures of them together, you know, as friends.

  40. I have some problems with the theory that Stacy left on her own.

    Leaves house with bikini, purse, passport, money. I think that’s all that’s been reported.

    No clothes. Wouldn’t it raise red flag if you fly out the country (or anywhere) and have no luggage? If you are simply leaving your husband, who doesn’t pack something besides a bikini?

    Granted, maybe the man she left with had luggage.

    Now, as to why there is no missing man … maybe they’ve flown to wherever he is from. So now he’s home with his love Stacy …

    The call at 9 p.m. to Drew. Who calls their husband to say they’re leaving and lets them know where the car is (or tells them the car is in Bolingbrook and they’ll just have to find it).

    Why did Drew let police search his car and not Stacy’s? If she has left him for another man, wouldn’t her car, which she was in before she left with said other man, be a source of possible clues as to where she went?

    Why did he let them search parts of the house but stop them from searching others (initially). Later, he let them search the rest (or maybe they had warrant to do so …). Was his issue really that his rights were being violated.

    If you wife left you, wouldn’t you let the police search and maybe find some clues?

    Now maybe there was something totally unrelated to Stacy’s disappearance that he didn’t want the police to know about.

    Tangled web is putting it mildly (BB’s comment from earlier).

  41. I’ve looked at this from both sides. Initially, I would not have been surprised if Stacy had reappeared. She stated to friends and family she wanted out of the marriage … but to have no contact for this long? I didn’t buy it, and so I looked in the other direction.

    There is an awful lot of circumstantial evidence and/or hearsay going in the other direction. Something has happened to Stacy.

    I also wondered about other suspects, but law enforcement has ruled them all out.

    Drew is the only suspect. Why?

    Is it because there is enough circumstantial evidence against him (that is, no body)?

    Or do the authorities have “tunnel vision” when it comes to Drew as a suspect? I believe it was either Craig Stebic or his lawyer who said that the police have tunnel vision when it comes to Craig as a suspect.

  42. bolingbrook60440, on April 28th, 2008 at 6:05 pm Said:
    six months, no arrest, no vicitim, no murder, no case

    ______________________________________________

    You need to recheck your statements, because there is no victim, there can be a case, proven, and even deliberated on. So don’t believe that just because there isn’t a “body” to go with your case, there is a case that can be brought to court and tried.

  43. Oh, there’s a victim all right- actually, make that at least 2- but one of the victim’s body has not yet been found.

    Just cause a body ain’t been found yet, don’t mean there’s no victim, no murder, no case.

    Duh.

  44. When he emphasized his remark, a few times that I heard of, he said Stacy was where she wants to be, and he knows she’s alive.

    I thought about her possibly being alive, but not leaving of her own free will. I could see the possibility that she was taken from her home, set up by DP, and stashed somewhere. Not necessarily killed, but stashed. What’s to say he didn’t try to get rid of her for a while and scare her, especially if she was threatening to leave him and expose him for KS’s death? Could he have done that initially? I could believe that from what I’ve learned of him over the past months, or even seeing him in the very beginning with his empty eyes and shell of a man. There could have always been the possibility that he carried out a living Stacy and not necessarily a dead one. It would be easier to live with that idea. Death is final. Her being alive is stashed somewhere is, at least, a reason to hope.

    But, I think I’ve seen it mentioned in the press that the cadaver dogs had a “hit” when they were in their house, so that would rule that out.

    That dog issue, by the way, does put into play the fact that DP did have a dead body in his house at some point, and that’s why he’s being focused on as a suspect in a homicide. So, that is one issue that makes it awful hard to keep from thinking he’s responsible for Stacy’s disappearance and possible murder.

  45. In the master bedroom and the SUV, the cadaver dogs had “hits”.

    I doubt they were for one of the kids’ deceased gerbils or favorite goldfish.

    That, in addition to all the other evidence, is why I believe Stacy was murdered.

  46. I have to agree with basherette, that I do believe that Stacy was murdered. The dogs did get a hit in the house. The biggest point that I am feeding off of is that the ISP, states that she did not leave her home on her own accord.

  47. Yeah, that is precisely why he would have been named the prime suspect in a homicide. I mean, geesh, they go into a house with specially trained cadaver dogs, get a hit, and the rest is “history,” so to speak. All the name calling in the world he engages in isn’t going to make that relevant detail disappear. I don’t care what anyone says.

    I also don’t think that DP has offered an explanation yet as to why former wives, relationships, friends, lovers, family, acquaintances and whoever else is left haven’t provided any support in the media as to why he couldn’t have done what he’s being suspected of. I mean, no one seems to want to admit that he’s the great guy he says he is/was.

    I’m not talking about the Steve guy who helped him find his dead ex-wife. I’m talking about the people he surrounded himself with in a lifetime that just can’t bring themselves to stand up for him when he needs them the most.

  48. rescueapet, on April 28th, 2008 at 8:00 pm Said:
    I wonder why no one has come forward to appear on tv with DP when he does interviews, saying what a stand-up guy he is, and what a wonderful family man and father he was.

    No one to show pictures of them together, you know, as friends.

    ______

    Have you seen the bashing that goes on when anyone says, he’s innocent until proven guility, let alone coming out to support him? He isn’t the victim here, so if he were to have supporters out there, how much validity would be given to them anyway?

  49. In my opinion, he is not the victim of anything. He created his own media frenzy. He had every opportunity to portray himself as a loving family man, dedicated father, and good friend. Instead, he started off by chewing up his missing wife and spitting her out. That was his first mistake.

    Secondly, of all the people there is in his life that can help him somehow, by either being the ONE that can come out and say they were with him during relevant times, or that he is such an upstanding, all around good guy, he could never have done the things he’s being accused of.

    Oh, and as far as have I seen the bashing that goes on when anyone says he’s innocent until proven guilty, let alone coming out to support him, that comment defies logic. I have not seen ANYONE support him to justify that remark. I have only seen the antics of he and his lawyer against EVEYONE that doesn’t support him.

    I cannot have a discussion about a bashed supporter because I don’t know of a based supporter, is what I’m trying to say. Where are they and who are they?

  50. Drew had made his own bed.

    How can family support him? There is no way his own mother can support him openly without implying that her stepson, Tom Morphey, is lying.

    What a rift Drew’s actions have caused.

    Tom Morphey’s family has testified before the GJ. They have all stepped forward and supported Tom.

    It’s hard to believe that Tom is lying about moving the container AND

    A neighbor is lying about seeing two men move a blue container AND

    Kathleen lied about fearing for her life AND about Drew coming into her home without permission AND holding a knife to her throat AND

    The pastor is lying about what Stacy said about Drew killing Kathleen AND

    Ric Mims is lying about everything AND

    Sharon is lying about Stacy having packed Drew’s stuff into boxes …

    All Drew’s statements are about somebody else lying or having mental problems or other flaws in that person.

    Where are his statements that show where he was and what he did.

    Yes, yes … innocent until proven guilty. But if this is really causing his children to be traumatized (and now who knows … because now they are bored with it, not traumatized) WHY wouldn’t you say here … talk to my boys …. they were home with me. We watched cartoons … we ate lunch … they went to Sharon’s … I did ____ during a 15 minute errand.

    Innocent people don’t mind telling what they did.

    Now, it is possible that he is innocent of Stacy’s disappearance, and guilty of some other crime, and that is what he is hiding.

    The only people that I have seen support Drew are:

    Steve Carcerano … Hmm … did Drew really pay off his gambling debts? If someone did that for me, I’d support him too. And Steve has been quiet lately. Maybe asked by ISP to keep quiet. Maybe asked by his wife to keep quiet. Who knows.

    Dr. Dan … His support was more related to how Drew is raising the children and how they are getting through this horrible situation. I suppose that since they haven’t turned to drugs and alcohol, a drug and alcohol counselor would say they are doing well.

    Joel Brodsky … Well heck. Drew is paying him to be his lawyer. It certainly wouldn’t help the case for him to say anything negative about Drew.

    I really don’t know of anyone else who has known Drew and supports him. I don’t count “Ashley” who wants to date him or the “family” who met him on vacation and posted a positive comment on FSP.

  51. As far as the hits in the bedroom.

    It is reported that the bedroom furniture was the same as what Drew had in the house he shared with Kathleen.

    I don’t know how long the “scent of death” would stay … but it could have been from Kathleen and that’s why it disappeared.

    And I apologize for that previous post … WAY too long. If mods want to delete, I can put it into smaller posts!

  52. ************************************************
    Have you seen the bashing that goes on when anyone says, he’s innocent until proven guility, let alone coming out to support him? He isn’t the victim here, so if he were to have supporters out there, how much validity would be given to them anyway?
    ************************************************
    IMO, that is not true. He is paying a public relations agency to bolster his image and show him in a different light, a family man. Wouldn’t it make sense, if he’s doing this by displaying himself on national tv with this hot, new idea, to bring along true supporters? If there are people that support him that are being “bashed,” as has been said, it’s maybe on a forum here and there, but I’ve not seen anyone pro-DP bashed on national tv, because no one has supported him. Other than his children, who were a captive audience in the filming of his staged good life, I did not see one pro-DP supporter with him. Not one family member, not one friend, not one supporter. Certainly, since he was paying for the display, he could have found someone to help his image.

    Now, you want to talk about public display of bashing, one only has to look at DP and his attorney whenever they’re on tv. His wife, his former wife, his former fiance, his stepbrother, his neighbor, his wife’s family, his wife’s friends, his/her pastor have all been a search and destroy object of him and his attorney. That can not be disputed, not here, not anywhere.

    In order to defend a comment that supporters get bashed, I would need to see who, exactly, we’re talking about before I can agree to that kind of a statement.

  53. peanut76, on April 28th, 2008 at 10:03 pm Said:
    bolingbrook60440, on April 28th, 2008 at 6:05 pm Said:
    six months, no arrest, no vicitim, no murder, no case

    ______________________________________________

    You need to recheck your statements, because there is no victim, there can be a case, proven, and even deliberated on. So don’t believe that just because there isn’t a “body” to go with your case, there is a case that can be brought to court and tried.

    basherette, on April 28th, 2008 at 10:46 pm Said:
    Oh, there’s a victim all right- actually, make that at least 2- but one of the victim’s body has not yet been found.

    Just cause a body ain’t been found yet, don’t mean there’s no victim, no murder, no case.

    Duh.

    _____________________________________

    then arrest the sob, but le CANT, can they? you cant lump this dissapearance into others becasue each case is different. if they cops are so sure, why not make a move, bring him in.
    no, instead let that ego maniac next door rub the kids nose in the fact that ther father murdered both mothers, pound it in their heads that stacy did do anything about savio’s murder left the two older boys with out a mom and now the two youngest are being bombarded every day they leave the house with that ghoulish shrine to a saint that never was or will be.

  54. Rescueapet, I agree with your assessment. I think Joel Brodsky will one day realize that bashing all witnesses that make claims against Drew was a bad idea. I cannot see that a jury would ever go along with that philosophy. Both Drew and Mr. Brodsky have talked about very personal topics regarding Stacy, her body, hormones, and what they refer to as ‘repairs’.

    It is quite apparent to me that Tom Morphey and the neighbor who witnessed a container being loaded into Drew’s Denali will be the key witnesses if this goes to trial. Also, I think the testimony of Pastor Schori will be key in the case of Kathleen Savio.

    There have been times that I was ansy for the investigation to conclude. But now I realize it is vital to complete every aspect of the investigation. I trust that the ISP and FBI will know when to act.

  55. I’m not going to try to second guess why DP has not been arrested and continues to be the only suspect.

    My guess is that they are waiting for the “hearsay” law to be passed in the House and be signed by the Governor.

    Sharon’s actions have disturbed many people. I don’t like the play by play on where Drew is and while I thought having the flowers somewhere the children could see them, I didn’t know they’d be placed with the sign.

    I don’t see that as a shrine. I see it as a memorial … they would put them on Stacy’s grave if she were given a proper burial. I think an act of kindness of one person has just snowballed and taken on a different life.

    I for one, am tired of people doing things and waiting for Drew’s reaction.

  56. Knowing what I “know” now … about Stacy covering up Kathleen’s murder by Drew, I have a theory on the “repairs” she has had.

    Maybe she didn’t like the person she’d been and wanted to change herself on the outside as well as the inside.

    I am curious as to when she adopted Kathleen’s children. Does anyone know?

    I don’t know how anyone could cover up a murder and adopt the victim’s children. I am interested in hearing all of the pastor’s testimony.

  57. To me the hearsay law would only help with Kathleens case.
    Morphey can speak for himself unless he is also missing.
    so the only hearsay would be what stacy told the pastor. surely they aren’t going to even try and use cass’s statements. but who knows to me it seems like LE is grapsing to even bring an indictment.
    maybe they are having to cover up their butts over kathleens death, before they can arrest drew.

    also was it the same corner that did the 1st and 2nd autospy?
    I heard it was and how can the same person have 2 different results. hopefully it was not the same person.

  58. Yes, the hearsay law would allow the pastor’s testimony as to what Stacy told him.

    My understanding of the autopsies were that the second was done Michael Baden at the request of the Savio family and the third by Michael Blum at the request of the state. In this article, it says he is an independent pathologist.

    The first was by James Glasgow, I believe.

    This link talks about the Blum autopsy results and mentions Baden.
    http://www.rrstar.com/homepage/x1907842711

  59. Thanks noway glad it was different people doing the autopsys.

    wonder why they won’t release the 2nd autospy? or is that normal until after a trial?

  60. also my understanding that in order to use the hearsay law against drew concerning kathleen they would first have to prove that drew is responsibile for harming stacy or making her disappear.

  61. I don’t know what you mean about releasing the second autopsy. Dr. Baden did come forward with his findings.

    Do you mean release to the public?

    It was done on behalf of the family, so maybe they get to say what is done with it. I don’t know.

    I’d say it hasn’t been released to Joel Brodsky because his client has not been charged with anything. Unless I’m wrong and he’s been arrested?

  62. Yes, about the hearsay law. They have to determine that the person charged (e.g., Drew) contributed to or was responsible for the witness (e.g., Stacy) not being able to testify in person.

    The evidence to prove this can be circumstantial … but I’m guessing there are limitations there too.

  63. From what little I have read about the proposed amendment to the Code, it only addresses hearsay comments made by a witness the defendant, for example, bribed, threatened or killed to prevent testimony The prosecutors would have to convince the judge of this in order to allow the statements the witness made to others to be heard in court.

    Seems to me they would have to have some pretty convincing evidence in order to sway a judge to allow such testimony. Judge’s are always mindful of having their decisions overturned on appeal.

  64. Baden’s was a private autopsy for the Savio family. The official second autopsy was performed by Dr. Larry Blum. This is an excerpt from the press release:

    Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow announced today that his office
    has received the final report on the autopsy performed on the remains of Kathleen S.
    Savio on Nov. 13, 2007.

    Dr. Larry W. Blum, the forensic pathologist who performed the autopsy, concludes in his
    report that the actual cause of Kathleen Savio’s death was drowning and that the legal
    manner of death was homicide. Dr. Blum’s report was delivered to the Will County
    Coroner’s Office on Thursday, Feb. 21, 2008 and immediately forwarded to the Will
    County State’s Attorney’s Office and the Illinois State Police.

    “Dr. Blum’s forensic report renders his expert opinion that this is a homicide,” State’s
    Attorney Glasgow said. “We have been investigating this as a murder since reopening the
    case in November of last year. We now have a scientific basis to formally and publicly
    classify it as such.”

    The complete autopsy report is a component of the investigation into the March 1, 2004
    death of Kathleen Savio and will not be released. However, the Will County State’s
    Attorney’s Office and the Illinois State Police are releasing the following quote from the
    conclusion in Dr. Blum’s report:

    “It is my opinion based on my education, training, experience and personal observations,
    and to a reasonable degree of medical and scientific certainty, compelling evidence exists
    to support the conclusions that the cause of death of Kathleen S. Savio was drowning and
    further, that the manner of death was homicide.”

  65. My guess would be that the physical markings, bruises and cut or cuts were the same, but maybe the second official autopsy also has a homicide conclusion based on evidence or statements that were omitted originally, or have now come to light that weren’t available at the time. Who knows. It was the way it was presented to the Coroner’s panel that made a determination of accident, right?

    My guess would also be that by releasing the official autopsy report, it gives the Peterson team time to dissect and criticize it, something that LE doesn’t want played up in the public’s eyes. Just a strategy, I suppose.

  66. Without an arrest, there is no reason for them to release the autopsy results to the public or to JB.

    The first autopsy has already been criticized as beeing half-assed. I’m not sure that this one could be criticized all that much since it was based on what was done the first time.

  67. Yes, that’s true. Much of what, I assume, what observed during the second autopsy was based on the original pictures taken. So, there’s not disputing that. It is what it is.

    Also, as far as Peterson not being charged with anything yet, it is absolutely reasonable that LE wouldn’t release anything to the public for now. Therefore, the Peterson team has “no dog in the fight.”

    Once he’s charged, and once he’s brought to trial, the prosecution is also obligated to present exculpating evidence as well, so the evidence gathering can work both ways. Whichever is more compelling, IMO, will be what wins the day.

  68. I had to laugh at Joel Brodsky complaining that the results of the autopsy had not yet been released to them. He tried to make it sound (to the general public) that ISP was doing something shady.

    I wish the reporter had said “Well, now isn’t that normal since your client has not yet been charged?” … I think Greta may have but am not sure.

    BBL
    Have a great afternoon everyone!

  69. thanks for the info all.
    ok so glasow is the State’s attorney who did the first autospy?? I’m not finding any name.

  70. Okay … I’m wrong about the name.

    Found another name … Patrick O’Neil, Will County coroner. Don’t know if this is the corner now and/or then.

  71. I don’t know that he got the autopsy wrong. I think there were limitations on how the coroner could report the findings.

    It doesn’t make sense to me, but that’s the way it was back then.

    I’m going to try to find the exact wording from “official sources” …

    Computer is running so slow I don’t think I can look while this is forum is open.

  72. Quote from http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-drew-peterson_28mar28,0,6826340.story

    Dr. Larry W. Blum is the forensic pathologist who performed the Nov. 13 autopsy. In his report, he determined that “compelling evidence exists to support the conclusions that the cause of death . . . was drowning and further, that the manner of death was homicide.”

    I think in the original autopsy, they were not able to indicate “manner of death” so while the cause of death remains the same (drowning), the manner of death now elaborates on that: Drowning by homicide.

    It’s because of the change in the law that the autopsy results appear “different.” IMO

  73. noway406, on April 29th, 2008 at 10:52 am Said:
    Knowing what I “know” now … about Stacy covering up Kathleen’s murder by Drew, I have a theory on the “repairs” she has had.

    Maybe she didn’t like the person she’d been and wanted to change herself on the outside as well as the inside.

    I don’t know how anyone could cover up a murder and adopt the victim’s children. I am interested in hearing all of the pastor’s testimony.

    ______________________________________
    its called being “PSYCOTIC”. as for the pastors statement, what more do you need?

  74. BB, I believe the pastor’s statement that Stacy knew of Kathleen’s murder and knew of it soon after it happened.

    He just said that he didn’t want to reveal all that he’d told the GJ.

    That’s why I am interested in hearing what else was said. What he did reveal was damaging enough.

  75. Any news on the boys suponea? Will they be going in front of GJ. I thought the 29th was the day of that decision.

Comments are closed.