Your Thread – July 19

And Saturday’s thread.

~By posting on this blog you agree to be bound by the rules of this blog.

Advertisements

108 thoughts on “Your Thread – July 19

  1. UPDATE: Man’s Body Floating in Canal

    State police are investigating how a man found floating in the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal Friday morning died.
    Lawmen were notified by the Sanitary and Ship Canal police that a man’s body was found in the canal about one-and-a-half miles west of 1st Avenue near Summit, according to Illinois State Police District Chicago Lt. Dave Nanninga.
    State police sent investigators to the scene and the body was recovered from the water, Nanninga said. The Cook County Medical Examiner confirmed the death.
    “Due to the state of the body, we are not able to tell much about what happened,” Nanninga said.
    State Police investigators continue to probe the death. An autopsy is scheduled.

  2. From Ashley’s blog.
    Looks like Steve C was caught driving drunk…in an uninsured car.

    Case Number 2008DT003472 Next Court Date
    File Date 07-16-2008 Next Court Location
    Case Title CITY OF NAPERVILLE -VS- STEVEN J CARCERANO Next Court Time
    Agency Naperville Police Assigned Location
    Legal Status ACTIVE Balance Due Amount N/A*
    This amount may not reflect payment made recently
    Counts Count Number Count Description Count Status Complaint Number
    0001 DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL ACTIVE 000000854165
    0002 OPERATE UNINSURED MOTOR VEHICLE ACTIVE 000000587376
    0003 IMPROPER LANE USAGE-CHANGE LANES UNSAFELY ACTIVE 000000587377

  3. New Poll On Ashley’s Blog:

    Will Sandy from Arizona ( Drew’s ex Internet lover ) donate some of the money to the Savio family and to the find Stacy Fund that the National Enquirer paid her ?

  4. I don’t think anyone ever doubted Sandra was real. It was only Tributelady/Exlaw who got the story wrong. Luckily, Ashley set it all straight.

    This is what you said:

    “The bigger news story today is: Ashley sold her story to THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER”

    Ashley : would you like to tell everyone when your story that you sold to THE NATIONAL EQUIRER is coming out to the news stands? “

    “Perhaps Ashley would like to comment on todays news : she has sold her story to THE NATIONAL EQUIRER…”

    There are more, but each was as WRONG as the last.

    Lesson: Don’t post unless you know the facts. You just come out looking dumb – and your credibility is shot.

  5. Thanks for pointing that out, Facs. Don’t want to leave you sitting here all alone with that revelation.

  6. So the whole Sandra/Sandy thing wasn’t a dream … I posted something about it last night but wasn’t sure I’d really seen it!

  7. Cheena – you need to consult the comments section at Ashley’s blog. Apparently, another girl had an online relationship with drew and spoke to the NE about it.

  8. I just finished reading the comments … there is another one who told Ashley she’d send HER emails to/from Drew but Ashley doesn’t have them yet.

  9. Noway @2:35. Well, that’s an interesting question, because IMO, I think it’s quite insane to put any information about his client’s weapons on a blog when he is in the midst of a legal matter in Court. And I didn’t even hang out my law shingle to figure that one out. So, I guess the question in my mind is, what took him so long to do it?

  10. Rescue, my thought was that the list he provided of guns that LE had included guns that LE did not have …. ooh … big mistake!

    I know I’m not the only one who saw it … 😀 And he may have done it right after he posted it … I only noticed it was gone because I wanted to copy it. 😉

    Drew going out to the bars is looking darn normal compared to his online activities . . . IMO 😀

  11. Noway – a list he provided online that LE doesn’t have? OMG, that would be incredible! I don’t know what, honestly, he was thinking when he did that. Why? Why give the “public” any personal, confidential information that is none of their business? Is he nuts? I can’t believe what you just pointed out!!!!!

  12. Hi everyone…

    That Joel. He quoted the model number on the “transpher” document, pointing out that it didn’t identify a folding model.

    What a chump.

  13. Rescue, I don’t KNOW that any of the weapons on the list were NOT guns LE had … I just wondered WHY Joel would remove the list of guns that LE had … and wondered if he screwed up somehow.

    Someone had asked how many guns LE had taken (there were reports of 9, 10, 11). . .

    I now think it was 11, with 2 being returned to the BBPD, 1 being the (alleged) illegal weapon and 8 of them going to Stephen.

    Interesting to me that the list is gone from SYM. 😉 To me anyway. Boring to others. 😀

  14. I can’t get to my desktop right now … but I may have it there. I’ve checked the laptop and nada.

  15. Do messages really ever disappear from a forum? I mean we delete them from public view … but they are still “there” aren’t they?

  16. Oh, Noway. Nonetheless, the fact that his client is in the middle of a legal matter regarding these guns, posting a list of them online borders on nuts. Taking it down was one of the smartest things he’s done so far.

    Here’s a partial article Danya wrote about the guns:

    By Danya Hooker, dhooker@mysuburbanlife.com

    Drew Peterson’s son will soon receive eight of 11 guns seized from his father’s home Nov. 1.

    Will County Judge Richard Schoenstedt Thursday ordered police to relinquish the weapons, ending a six-month court battle over who should have possession of the firearms.

    State police must now hand over the eight weapons within two weeks. Two of the remaining guns belonged to the Bolingbrook Police Department, according to a department spokesman, and have been returned. While the eleventh gun is now considered evidence in a felony weapons charge against Peterson.

    Hard to keep score sometimes, huh?

  17. So is the folding gun number twelve then? Did the judge allow the transfer of that gun to Stephen? Or because that gun was illegally transferred in the first place to Paula or whoever is that another deal all together?

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

  18. KK- I believe (at least I think I have this right) that the confiscated gun is technically Paula’s, so it would not be part of the inventory that the Judge allowed DP to transfer to his son. Then again, who the heck knows what’s what anymore, there’s so much baloney going on!

  19. I see. Thank you Rescue. I posted a link earlier to the layman’s terms of how to transfer guns in the state of Illinois. It looks like once Drew’s FOID card was revoked so was his ability to transfer that gun. But like you said who knows.

  20. During my reading fest … Joel refers to this gun as the 12th gun.

    This was BEFORE it came out that Paula and Lenny were involved.

    I’ll see if I can find it again.

  21. In the Q & A at SYM, JB answered my query regarding the whereabouts of *Stacy’s* Glock by saying that LE had it.

    So who has it now? Stephen or LE?

  22. See, but that’s the thing. He knows his FOID card was invalid, but he writes out and signs a transfer receipt, leaving a paper trail. Why would he do that?

    If he was giving away guns by transfer, isn’t it obvious he didn’t transfer that also to his son with the rest of them because he knew the gun should have been given up along with the rest of them at the time of the warrant, and he knew if he gave it to his son, he’d put him in legal harm’s way?

    I guess it looks like, at least to me, he didn’t care if Paula and Len got in any trouble over this gun, but I still don’t get why he did it with a written receipt and just didn’t tell them to “bury” it somewhere.

  23. I’m left wondering why he bothered to transfer the gun to someone else at all, instead of turning it in to LE like a good little citizen/ex-cop…

  24. Hi basherette, how are you doing?

    I don’t understand why he would chance bringing attention to himself regarding that gun. I wish someone would explain to me his logic for the “transpher” and receipt to Paula. Why not just remain holding onto it and “hiding” it? I am at a loss.

  25. rescueapet // July 19, 2008 at 5:14 pm

    …but I still don’t get why he did it with a written receipt and just didn’t tell them to “bury” it somewhere.
    *******

    He must suffer from what is commonly called “pecker brain”. In some humans, the brain is not located in the skull, but, rather, is located in the… um, nevermind, I think you can figure the rest out. 🙂

  26. Well, I mean, I know he shouldn’t have been in possession of that wayward gun because of the FOID revocation, but if LE didn’t “know” about it (obviously, that’s what he meant to happen by not turning it over in the first place), why did he do so when he did, and why?

  27. Yes, basherette, I know he is not functioning using the head on his shoulders. That’s obvious, as we have seen of late.

  28. http:// cbs2chicago.com/local/drew.peterson.mother.2.682056.html

    Actually I don’t know which one he calls the 12th weapon.

    This appears to be the one that police took from Lenny and Squiggy (Paula). 😀

    It gives substance to what Ric Mimms had said about a folding gun. (see the video).

    Did Drew leave the house when the search was bieng conducted?

    😀 The questions never end.

  29. Hello, Rescue! Been a bit scarce lately due to all the troll activities lately. I’ve developed an allergy to internet war zones.

    How are you doing? 🙂

  30. Drew was not at the house when the search warrant for the weapons/etc. was served/done. He was giving a statement to LE.

  31. Hey there, Noway! How are you? 🙂

    Looks like we aren’t the only ones who saw the gun list JB posted at SYM, but I’ll be danged if I can find anyone who has a copy of the darn thing! It is a deep regret of mine that I did not have the foresight to copy/save that little gem when I first stumbled upon it, drat my non-prescient hide. 😦

  32. Well, if he wasn’t there when they did their search, that explains why he still had possession of a gun. He probably had it with him at the time and get explain his way out of having it in his possession, I suppose. Except for one thing. Brodsky publicly announced Rim Mims was lying, wasn’t believable, and sold out to the NE about the issue with this gun. So, according to Brodsky, that gun is a figment of all of our imaginations.

    I’m doing fine, thanks Bash.

  33. Hi, Bash.

    If the Glock was one of the weapons turned over to LE then I suppose it is now in the possession of Stephen Peterson.

    Danya, just one more question for you to find out the answer to: Does Stephen Peterson have Stacy’s Glock? And if not, who does?

    Perhaps this is another move that one might say Drew would never do (illegal transfer of a weapon). As pointed out, he could have just tossed it somewhere or, heck, he could have stored it just about anywhere.

    Handy little thing … fitting under a belt like it does.

    😉

  34. Well, let’s see- he supposedly transferred the weapon to Lenny & Squiggy *after* his FOID was revoked, and it was *not* on the list of guns siezed by LE under the search warrant/s.

    So, in a nutshell- seems to me that DiP’s in some deep shitake mushrooms.

  35. Has Joel stated that the handwritten contract is a phony and that Lenny, Squiggy (Paula) and Kris are lying?

    Or are the contract and Drew’s signature valid?

    And who, if anyone, advised him to handle the transfer this way?

  36. Ric Mims told the National Enquirer and Fox News that Peterson had showed him a folding gun that he had hidden from police during a warrant when his other 11 guns were seized.
    On NG’s show, Brodsky called the claim “simply another fabrication of slick Ric Mims. He’s trying to sell another story to the National Enquirer now that he’s run out of money.”

    So, I guess my question is, how did DP come into possession of a gun AFTER the search and seizure, especially one that is, coincidently similar to the one Rim Mims described, and what benefit was it to him to even acknowledge having that gun by transferring it, when he and his lawyer publicly stated there was no such animal????????????????????

  37. If there was no gun to transfer, then why the helter skelter would DP handwrite a gun transfer to Lenny & Squiggy in the first place, and how the helter skelter would LE have yet another DP gun in their possession?

    What am I missing here? Who’s on first? 🙂

  38. Basherette – ding, ding, ding, ding. You win. No gun, no transfer?

    But, wait. There is a gun and there was a “transpher.”

    As soon as I find my lost Secret Decoder Book, I’ll get back to you on this, okay?

  39. Hurm- I wonder if LE has compared the handwritten gun transfer that DiP allegedly wrote with the allegedly bona fide 1997 Will that he wrote and Kathleen allegedly signed ?

  40. We’ll just make it easy, Basherette. Ric Mims imagined the whole thing, there is/was no gun, and Lenny and LaVergne have nothin’ to worry about because there was no transpher. See how easy that is?

  41. Hurm…

    Folding gun = What Ric said DiP showed him after LE had completed their search for firearms/etc. at DiP’s home *AND* what Lenny & Squiggy claim is the same gun that Ric talked about on NG, that DiP transferred *illegally* to them the day after his FOID card was revoked, by handwriting the transfer in front of 3 witnesses: his 13 year old son and Lenny & Squiggy.

    *However*

    Folding gun = JB says the gun DiP illegally transferred to Lenny and Squiggy the day after his FOID card was revoked is *NOT* the same gun that Ric described on NG, but is actually a different gun that was not turned in to LE as it should have been when they produced the search warrant for DiP’s home.

    Ok, well anyway that I look at this, there are some obvious facts about the matter that are incontrovertible:

    1.) DiP had *at least* ONE gun he legally owned *AFTER* LE served the search warrant for ANY & ALL kinds of weaponry at his home.

    2) DiP made the transfer of ownership of the abovementioned gun ILLEGALLY, as his FOID card had already been revoked.

    3) Squiggy (Paula) took possession of the transferred gun ILLEGALLY, as her FOID card contained false and outdated information, thus rendering it VOID at the time of the transfer, as well as afterwards.

    4) Shitake for brains pulled this ILLEGAL transfer of a GUN stunt with his 13 year old son as witness to it.

    Have I got this right now?

  42. DP has known now for quite some time about all of this, but it doesn’t seem to have rattled him or his attorney.

    What may be obvious, though, is, as I mentioned the other day, Paula and Lenny were on LE’s radar the minute they helped him retrieve his car. The next day, LE paid them a visit, and a week later, they were seen coming out of the courthouse on a GJ day.

    No one, up until this point, gave Paula and Lenny a second thought until know. Most were thinking MRobinson was an interesting character to watch to see if he’d get warm and fuzzy with LE. Maybe Paula and Lenny will now be the focus of DP’s search and destroy tactics, heh?

  43. Blue Shark has Broskey’s post from May 14 till June. Does anyone know the approx. date Joel posted the gun list?
    Maybe acandyrose might have something.

  44. It seems to me that this post of Joel’s was not in the Q/A section but was in a general conversation with other bloggers.

  45. Post of the Day:

    basherette // July 19, 2008 at 5:46 pm

    What is this- the Adventures of the Invisible Transferred Gun?

  46. Me either, and there’s also one representing the teens. Whew. That’s four and counting. Plus a PR rep.

  47. Yes, Teiber also from Michigan. He is fresh out od school working for Papa. Stand by for the skinny on him.

  48. http://www.tieberlaw.com/firm.htm

    The Tieber Law Office takes pride in providing attentive, thorough, first-rate legal representation in criminal cases, at trial, on appeal, and in state and federal (habeas corpus) postconviction litigation. The Tieber Law Office was opened in 2002 by F. Martin Tieber, and specializes in criminal defense at the appellate and postconviction stages. Marty Tieber brings to the practice three decades of criminal appellate defense experience, which he acquired as a staff attorney at the State Appellate Defender Office in Michigan, and, from 1978-2002, as director of the Lansing office of the State Appellate Defender, an agency which has earned a national reputation for excellence and leadership in the field. Marty is assisted by his son, Kristoffer Tieber, who recently graduated with honors from Michigan State University College of Law.

  49. HI ALL , been alwhile ……wow , could it be out there on the net from sym of thos post on google to look up ya know….. that is always away to find them cause they stay on google.. or any other searchs.. just a thought..

    —————————————-

    ANYWAYS did anyone watch FOX TODAY at anytime. tonght.. they where talking about the internet. and that LAWYERS ARE POSTING THINGS ON THERE in blogs and or messagboards.. they said that THE PROSICUTION AND DEFENSE will use what is on the internet of what they frind from other lawyer against them in court. and the JUDGEs WILL NOT LIKE THAT THESE lawyers are posting about there cases or of evidence and that the LE”S are WATCHING THIS KINDA STUFF…..

  50. FACE, HI IT was before I think it was before bill oreily . and before hannity’s america , I cann;t think of the lady that was talking about it. HOPE THAAT helps

  51. can anyone help me again, I uploaded a new pic and it is not showing , HOw come can ya help me gatehouse, or anyone , I did change the pic and apparently it did not do it when I posted ….. why did I do something wrong with it.. thank you

  52. I think something was wrong, last night. The last post for Jul 19 was 9:54. I tried to post and nothing showed. Must have had a problem.

  53. grandma210 // July 20, 2008 at 7:40 am

    lugnut,
    Love your new afatar! My very favorite NASCAR driver!
    ———————————————-

    GRANDMA , thanks I like dale jr so I figured I would try a different aviator .. so it worked yeah .
    facsmiley did you find it from fox on what I ws talking about??

  54. “Santa Barbara defense lawyer Steve Balash said the day he met his client Jessica Binkerd, a recent college graduate charged with a fatal drunken driving crash, he asked if she had a MySpace page. When she said yes, he told her to take it down because he figured it might have pictures that cast her in a bad light.

    But she didn’t remove the page. And right before Binkerd was sentenced in January 2007, the attorney said he was “blindsided” by a presentencing report from prosecutors that featured photos posted on MySpace after the crash.

    One showed Binkerd holding a beer bottle. Others had her wearing a shirt advertising tequila and a belt bearing plastic shot glasses.

    Binkerd wasn’t doing anything illegal, but Balash said the photos hurt her anyway. She was given more than five years in prison, though the sentence was later shortened for unrelated reasons.

    “When you take those pictures like that, it’s a hell of an impact,” he said.”

  55. I wonder….When will the GJ wrap things up ?
    Morning fellow bloggers…I am baackkkk..lol…
    got clearance on the BP thing..whew !! Alot to read and catch up on ….Yippee

  56. Oh man….CSF if your reading still…will miss you. You were a great blogger and a pleasure to blog with…:(

  57. I hope your right Rescue…..this case needs some action..it seems like it is moving at the pace of snail ……argh….thanks for warm welcome back. Seems I missed a few good times while I was gone…lol

  58. LOL Grandma2

    That’s the Welsh spelling of “avatar”. No kidding.
    _________

    I sowwy, typo… I hope you know what I meant…

  59. grandma210 // July 20, 2008 at 3:17 pm

    I am bored; no postings … no race to watch.
    ————————————

    GRAndma, I know what ya mean, they race next weekend though.. I felt the same way you did for today…:)

  60. What would you do at this juncture if you were Joel Brodsky, and you had finally started reading up on how what is posted on the Internet *can* hurt a defendent when it come to trial time, and if you, yourself had posted something that you realized was a big boo boo.

    Would you maybe post something like this?

    “Joel A. Brodsky said…
    There have been some attempts by imposters to pretent to be me, so if from now on a post is not from my google account on any google blog, then it is an imposter.”

  61. …if….post is not from my google account on any google blog, then it is an imposter.”

    Hmm. Does that include chat rooms, LOL?

Comments are closed.