Your Thread – October 3

Hi folks,

Another week done and gone. Enjoy the weekend.

~By posting on this blog you agree to be bound by the rules of this blog and by our Terms of Use. If you spot a rule violation, send an e-mail to reportabuse@mysuburbanlife.com.

Advertisements

111 thoughts on “Your Thread – October 3

  1. If I weren’t foreign and had a state senator, I’d be on them.And any of their campaign offices if they’re standing.

    This is where a good REAL investigative jurnalist would do well…find out just what’s up with the bill and why? Political horsetrading?

    I wonder if I understand this correctly: The 9th is the day that if unsigned, will automatically become law, but not in force til next year, unless he sends it back for the time amendment to be made, then it’s sent back to gov for signing.

  2. Thank you guys for interesting things to read from yesterday. We buried a modem today 😦 and offline for 24 hours.

    Thank you for your kind message, Gatehouse. It is a nice crowd, I think. They even take in refugees LOL.

  3. wow i finally found my password grrr .. been looking for it for weeks LOL

    Hi everyone 🙂

    i was thinking yesterday about that hearsay bill, and after speaking to my sister inlaw yesterday she agreed that “we the people” need to step up and push this bloody bill through .. or at least get it to the gov’s desk again .. soo here goes.. you can all yell at me after BUT heck we have to do something ,
    If someone can write out a letter and we can all get the gist of what to say.. we should flood HIS DESK with mail!!! now i have no clue as to where this bill is laying at this very moment.. where ever it is we should flood the persons desk too… emails are great.. but at the end of the day they can click them out know what i mean.. and if they are flooded with phone calls and mail over the desk maybe they might get it done!!!! this is what my sister in law is doing in south carolina because they are placing a garbage dump behind her house.

    They CANT ignore hundreds and hundreds of mail.. and i dont just mean we write ONE letter each.. i am meaning write a letter a day… they will be so sick of it.. it might pressure them to get this done. And we need to call everyday.. takes 5 mins to pick up a phone and call.. influx of calls and letters should move their butts 🙂 everyday we should do this till we see this paper move back to gov’s desk to sign. Then we hone in on him and write furiously till he signs it 🙂

    I might sound crazy but its just been too long.. and i feel helpless.. reguardless of what you may think of me.. im thinking of the children getting them away from drew.. im thinking of stacy and everything she went through.. and i can never forget kathleens unheard cries for help.

    and can you all imagine ALL the mail spewed across the desk of not just the gov but whoever has the bill now? LOL what a sight 🙂

    So i will be writing and calling.. i hope you guys do the same 🙂
    Have a great day .. and you guys are awesome i read here everyday without fail 🙂

    i hope i made sense .. feel free to do what you want to better this ok.

  4. The last I’d read is that Heidi had called his office and was told he had until October 9 to sign or veto.

    HeDidIt gave us this link:
    http://12.43.67.2/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=2718&GAID=9&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=37188&SessionID=51&SpecSess=&Session=&GA=95

    And this is the Gov’s press release page:
    http://www.illinois.gov/news/newsgov.cfm

    While people are out finding stuff about hearsay, can anyone tell us the status of the Grand Jury? Are they still in session and seeing witnesses? Have they convened (if that is the right word)?

  5. It’s not the word I meant to use but my brain isn’t functioning right now.

    🙄

    I meant to use the word that means “they are done listening to testimony and are talking among themselves” … 😉

  6. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-billboard-03-oct03,0,3736739.story

    Billboards attack Will County state’s attorney—but that’s not quite clear to voters
    GOP challenger Judy DeVriendt says Democrat James Glasgow’s handling of cases involving women has been poor
    By Mary Owen | Chicago Tribune reporter
    October 3, 2008

    This sign is designed to attack the record of Will County State’s Atty. James Glasgow for unresolved cases involving women, including Stacy Peterson and Lisa Stebic, said GOP challenger Judy DeVriendt. But to some residents, that message isn’t clear. (Tribune photo by Zbigniew Bzdak / October 2, 2008)

    Two billboards in Will County have folks stumped.

    Each asks: “Have the last 4 years been open season on women in Will County?”

    But the billboards’ real target is Will County State’s Atty. James Glasgow. Erected about three weeks ago along two-lane roads lined with cornfields, the billboards were paid for by the campaign for Judy DeVriendt, the GOP candidate seeking to unseat him in November.

    DeVriendt blames Glasgow, a Democrat, for unresolved cases involving women, including the high-profile missing-person cases of Stacy Peterson and Lisa Stebic, the murder investigation of Kathleen Savio and the fatal shootings of five women at a Lane Bryant store in Tinley Park.

    But her message may have been lost.

    None of two dozen people in Will County interviewed by the Tribune said they understood the billboards, placed on Illinois Highway 53 north of downtown Wilmington, and on South Briggs Street at Manhattan Road in Joliet.

    Many of them suspected it was political—even if they couldn’t make out the small type at the bottom, “Paid for by Friends of Judy DeVriendt.” Some thought they might be about domestic violence.

    “I don’t know what it means,” said Louise Reavis, 39, who works a few miles from the Wilmington sign. “I just thought it was weird.”

    “I didn’t get it at first,” said Mike Beaty, a warehouse operations manager who works across the street from the Joliet sign. “I’m assuming it has something to do with violence. I don’t know if the small print has something to do with it.”

    DeVriendt said she expected drivers to be confused.

    “It’s done to draw attention and make people think,” she said. “What is going on? And what is being done? Why all of a sudden are these cases being swept under the rug?”

    But Chuck Pelkie, a spokesman for Glasgow, said DeVriendt’s tactics are tasteless.

    “The bottom line is this is someone who is trying to use the tragedy of others to score some political points,” he said. “This is disturbing and distasteful.”

    Pelkie countered DeVriendt’s claims that Glasgow’s office does not advocate for women. He points to $1.5 million in federal funding that Glasgow has helped bring to the county to bolster the office’s domestic-violence unit.

    He also said a special grand jury has been convened for about a year looking at the Peterson, Stebic and Savio cases. Law-enforcement officials are actively investigating each case, and Glasgow’s office will issue charges if it determines there is sufficient evidence, Pelkie said.

    “She’s trying to put this on the state’s attorney office. But the reality is that what she’s indicating is that police departments are not doing their job,” he said. “But they are.”

    Despite the political salvo, only a handful of people instantly connected the signs to the high-profile missing wives cases.

    “I thought it might apply to the Peterson and Stebic case,” said Karyn McNamara of Joliet. She didn’t understand the entire message, but she agreed with its gist.

    “For me, going through a divorce and having to go to court for a traffic ticket in the last year, I agree,” she said. “As a woman, it was not a pleasant experience.”

    She said she felt dismissed by the male cops and judges and even felt that the female prosecutor wasn’t getting respect from the male judge.

    “Something like that is a great idea,” said McNamara, who is in her 40s. “You need shock value.”

    Each billboard cost nearly $800, according to DeVriendt’s campaign.

    mowen@tribune.com

    Thought this might be of some interest to those of you who do not live in the area. There are several key players names in this article….a few that need to get something in motion before election time!

  7. thanks noway 🙂 appreiciate the links , its not perfect but its an idea ..

    I have to run .. ill check back later,

  8. I saw the one billboard on the last Stacy fundraiser. I remembering looking up while driving with others behind the motorcycles, I had to read it again. It is a message that made me think, huh? It suddenly hit me as to what type of message was being sent. Although, if you are not aware of the circumstances in will county (also labeled as Kill County), one would not get it.

  9. Looks to like maybe the Republicans are chasing the female vote aggressively at all levels LOL Tasteless. Has she supported the searches? Or anything? I’m suspicious.

  10. I have mixed feelings about being mentioned in Drew’s book. LOL

    Just the previous day, Peterson chatted with 15 women-and one guy by instant messaging.

  11. iknoweverythinglol // October 3, 2008 at 12:40 pm

    I have mixed feelings about being mentioned in Drew’s book. LOL

    Just the previous day, Peterson chatted with 15 women-and one guy by instant messaging.

    ***

    I’m confused – were you actually mentioned in the book?

  12. 1wonderwoman // October 3, 2008 at 11:49 am

    I wonder…Noway, did you mean has the GJ started to deliberate ?
    _____________
    Yes! That’s where my brain was going: deliberate! 🙂

  13. facsmiley // October 3, 2008 at 1:43 pm

    Well the only guy who said he was a guy…

    ****

    LOL! Thank you for that laugh! I needed it today.

  14. Hey, there are a few more planted 5-star reviews up at Amazon.

    If you have a moment, could you please make sure to go there and indicate that these were NOT useful to you (unless for some reason one is – wouldn’t want anyone to lie)?

    The longest one is so clearly solicted…it states that although she already knew the results of the polygraphs that it is amazing to see them reproduced in the book.

    The woman is a little too easily amazed for me to buy it. And claiming that she still believes Drew to be guilty…does NOT fool me.

  15. I’m sorry, but I have a real hard time believing that anyone is sincerely comparing the hack Armstrong to Truman Capote…

  16. Truman Capote? Stop! you’re killing me.

    Can you start a discussion thread underneath the reviews over there the way you can on the UK amazon?

  17. Has anyone done a review on Borders Books and Barnes and Noble website? I am going to try to do this sometime over this weekend.

  18. Bucket, you can add comments to reviews. So far, I’ve been hesitant to comment on other reviews. I don’t want to appear to be too biased or seem to be looking for a fight.

    But if some feels the urge to comment, I certainly wouldn’t discourage it!

  19. Hey everybody.

    Some interesting FYI about Amazon’s latest reviews.

    Terri Patterson – every book of Armstrong’s was given a 5-star rating by this reviewer. Interesting.

    W. Ghuneim and J.H., others who 5-star rated this book never reviewed anything else on Amazon.

    As Facsmiley hasn’t. Facsmiley did so based on her intense interest in this case, as well as what the author uncovered. We all KNOW this author uncovered nothing. He was given pictures from Drew Peterson to publish, maybe never before seen, and a love letter from KP (kiss, kiss, kiss). That’s the only never before seen crap that can be accounted for in this book, besides the obvious deceptive answers to some questions.

    My guess would be that W. Ghuneim follows this case closely too, and we all know which way W. Ghuneim leans. 🙂

  20. Elections are coming up for Will County.

    No arrest, No vote.

    Please if you would like to take part write into the Will County elected officials and let’s get the ball rolling on them handling all these cases of missing and presumed women.

    Thanks!!

  21. Danya,

    Here is some truth for you to look into. The people involved in searching for Stacy not respecting the wishes of Stacy’s own sister Cassandra.

    FuzzyMouser said…
    Hang Drew said…
    FuzzyMouser said…
    How very sweet of you to plan something for these women and not even tell Cassandra about it.

    You are truly caring and thoughtful individuals.

    October 3, 2008 9:57 PM

    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

    Cassandra knows all about the vigil for Stacy. She was called and all of that was gone over with her. Will you be there or will you be out on your own quest in the search for Stacy? Have a good night cupcake.

    October 3, 2008 11:22 PM
    _____________

    I call Bullshit! I just spoke with Cass, she sais she told you NO she did not want the vigil done. She wants something private for the family to remember and honor Stacy!

    October 3, 2008 11:44 PM

  22. Good morning! Happy Weekend!

    Happy OJ Conviction!!!

    Prison in Nevada is a long way from the golf courses of Florida. Will this mean he’ll be a Nevada resident and his pension no longer protected from the victims’ families by Florida? That would be great.

  23. And 13 years to the day since his absurd aquittal. Like I’ve said before, synchronicity can be a b*stard.

  24. Wonder if the judge can put a stipulation, that OJ cannot sign anything, to make money, while he’s in jail. That’s what he did the last time. Unless, all money must go to Goldmans. that would be good.

  25. I don’t think anyone wants to see an arrest until they’re satisfied it’s going to stick. Perhaps the delay is also because there are other related investigations ongoing and it would jeopardize those. I think everyone wants to see the whole mess sorted out properly.

    What is up with that bill?

  26. bucketoftea // October 4, 2008 at 12:41 pm

    I don’t think anyone wants to see an arrest until they’re satisfied it’s going to stick. Perhaps the delay is also because there are other related investigations ongoing and it would jeopardize those. I think everyone wants to see the whole mess sorted out properly.

    What is up with that bill?
    ____________________

    I can see your point of view Bucket I can.

    Here is my take on it,

    This would not just affect the arrest, there has not been enough public awareness in regards to how the case is progressing. We hear about the gun charges ect but never do they hold a press conference in reagards to Kathleen or Stacy.

    I would like to see some public acknowledgment that these two women matter, some public showing that they are at least working on the case and a little info as to how they feel the investigation is going.

    By not ever talking about them it makes Will County look as if they are just working on covering their own tails for the wrong that was done with Kathleen. We as the people who pay their salaries deserve to know it’s not just cover-up going on.

    No Arrest, No Vote to me means …..

    Show us you are doing your job, show us you are not again going to just let a woman’t murder be forgotten.

    Understand?

  27. Absolutely, fuzzy. 🙂 I think it would be wonderful if ISP would release just another “we’re confident, etc” statements. It’s all so very frustrating.

    When people have good reasons to suspect corruption, how can it be fought? Like you’re doing a great job of already….don’t let it just go away.

  28. fuzzymouser – I understand your frustration. I’m right there with you. I, too, agree that at least an update once in a while would be welcomed by all.

    It’s difficult trying to be patient about all of this, knowing what happened the first time with Kathleen. It’s almost as though they were going full-steam in the beginning, and now just fizzled out.

    I wouldn’t be honest if I didn’t say how mortified I was when it was divulged how an important part of the Hearsay Bill got left out; that being the effective date of it becoming law. I mean, how could someone not have given that any thought if they’re so concerned about getting it passed? Whew, that was an eye opener, once again!

    I have no doubt that they have probably collected quite a bit of circumstantial evidence regarding Peterson’s guilt, but, I guess we all have to come to grips with the notion that law enforcement is running the show and they’ll decide when things will happen. Imagine how Kathleen’s and Stacy’s families must be feeling.

    Craig Stebic is another suspect whose circumstances continue to baffle me, and probably a lot of others, for that matter.

    But, getting back to your point about updates, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting to know that the wheels are a’turnin in bringing Drew Peterson to justice.

  29. Thank you both for understanding.

    This would also work for helping Lisa, if we light a fire under their butts and let them know we care and want to know that these cases are being given the the proper care. Stacy and Kathleen are not the only women who deserve justice, Lisa is just one more of many who Will County need to do a better job of helping.

  30. ooohh, fuzzy. have a little smooth stroke. and a little ruffle for you, too, rescue.

    It’s the pits. Yep, gotta stay on their tails. We can hope the Feds are having a good old dig around. 😉

  31. Trying to catch up after being out of town all week. Just read that Lenny’s site and on the last thread Ashlen states the blog is closed for any future comments.

  32. I’ve got a little note I’d like to pass along to Armstrong. Your line is old, your story is unbelievable, and your technique of trying to boost your sales on your website is laughable.

    Buh bye.

  33. LOL, another first time, 5 star reviewer born on Amazon. No home town, never reviewed a book before, but thinks Armie’s book is the best out “so far.”

    Nope, naw, don’t think so. Must be bombing if they have to keep creating 5 star reviews.

    This book shows Drew as a “normal” guy? Wow, seekingtruth, if you think Drew is normal, you must frequent some really dicey places.

    That was good for a big laugh tonight! Normal, heh? Yeah, most men who are married and divorced 3 times, with one of the ex-wives found drowned in a dry tub, and a fourth wife missing and presumed dead, are usually called suspects, but, I guess we all have our opinions.

  34. Interesting how this latest reviewer thought the book “shows Drew as he really is, a normal guy who is getting the rap for something he did not do

    I thought it was supposed to be a “stinging indictment” of Drew Peterson. What a fraud.

  35. Just a desperate attempt to breathe life into a bomb!

    No one wants to read about what can be seen from Joel Brodsky’s window during May, or what pranks Peterson pulled during his lifetime.

    They want to read about the “real” evidence that law enforcement has gathered, hours and hours of over-hears, surveillance, grand jury testimony. What Armie wrote about is information collected from various printed media sources. Boring!

  36. http://www.southtownstar.com/news/1201957,100408bonesfound.article

    October 4, 2008

    Cook County sheriff’s police are awaiting an examination of bones discovered Friday evening in a Palos Township forest preserve.

    Two girls discovered five to eight bones while they were walking through Spears Woods, near 87th Street and LaGrange Road, about 5:30 p.m., according to sheriff’s police spokeswoman Penny Mateck.

    The bones were sent to the medical examiner’s office, with an examination scheduled for today.

  37. Did Drew Peterson tell the truth?
    POLYGRAPH | Biggest answers ‘not deceptive’
    October 4, 2008

    BY LISA DONOVAN Staff Reporter ldonovan@suntimes.com

    The new book Drew Peterson Exposed about the former Bolingbrook police officer and his dead third wife and missing fourth wife is billed as a 300-page news story. And it does have some news.

    Peterson — under a cloud of suspicion after his third wife Kathleen Savio’s mysterious death was finally ruled a homicide and his fourth wife Stacy Peterson vanished nearly a year ago — agreed to take separate polygraph tests to address questions about both cases.

    Author Derek Armstrong says that Drew Peterson “strikes me as a misunderstood man, a good father, a moral enigma, but not a killer.”

    Excerpt: ‘Drew Peterson Exposed’ Polygraph shows Drew Peterson ’86 percent (to) 98 percent likelihood . . . not guilty’

    Drew’s timeline
    In the new book Drew Peterson Exposed, the former Bolingbrook cop for the first time provides his own detailed account of his actions on Oct. 28, 2007 — the day his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared:

    5:30-6 A.M.
    * Comes home from work at Bolingbrook Police Department.
    * Talked to Stacy, who said she was going to visit her grandfather.
    * Went to sleep.
    10-10:30 A.M. (PERHAPS AS LATE AS 11 A.M.)
    * Awakened by children.
    * Stacy gone, kids home.
    NOON-1 P.M.
    * At home with kids.
    1-1:30 PM
    * Children at home (Tom and Kris watching Anthony and Lacy).
    * Goes out to run Sunday errands.
    2 P.M.
    * Calls work (Bolingbrook police). Takes the night off. (Did this because he was retiring in December and had accumulated sick time to use or lose.
    3:15 P.M.
    * Tom, his 14-year-old son, is picked up by friends for a band concert.
    6 P.M.
    * Takes Kris, Anthony and Lacy to McDonald’s. They have dinner and play at the playground at McDonald’s.
    7:30 P.M.
    * Returns home with Kris, Anthony and Lacy.
    8 P.M.
    * Tom gets home from band concert.
    9 P.M.
    * At home, receives call from Stacy that she found someone and is leaving.
    9:15 P.M.
    * Leaves home to go and look for Stacy.
    11-11:30 P.M.
    * Returns home.
    * Gets call from Stacy’s sister, Cassandra Cales while still in the driveway. Tells her Stacy called and said she left with another man and took her passport, money and clothes.
    11:45 P.M.
    * Walks and gets Stacy’s car and drives it home.
    MIDNIGHT
    * Gets home and goes to bed.
    AROUND 2:30 A.M.
    * Gets call from Bolingbrook PD telling him Cassandra Cales is filing a missing-persons report regarding Stacy
    * Vaguely recalls getting another call, maybe from Cassandra’s friend Bruce Zidrach. (Very tired and does not have a clear recollection of this call).

    Lee McCord — described by author Derek Armstrong as an expert polygrapher with 30 years experience — administered the tests and concluded Peterson was truthful when he said he had nothing to do with the death of Savio.

    But in a polygraph focusing on the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, McCord found Peterson “deceptive” in answering three of six questions. The polygrapher asked: “Do you know the whereabouts of your wife Stacy?” Peterson said “no” — a response the tester deemed “deceptive.” Peterson said “yes” to whether he got a call from his wife the night of her disappearance. Again, McCord said that was “deceptive,” and concluded the same to Peterson’s “yes” to whether he last saw his wife at their home before going to bed after an overnight shift at work.

    Author Armstrong, who bills himself as a journalist, author of mystery thrillers and “marketing guru,” examines the results of the polygraph and concludes that Peterson, who has never been charged with a crime in connection with his wives but has been described by authorities as a “suspect” in Stacy Peterson’s disappearance, would not have harmed his wives.

    At one point, he describes Peterson as an enigma — but not a killer.

    He backs that assertion with Peterson’s own hour-by-hour breakdown of how he spent Oct. 28, 2007 — the day Stacy Peterson vanished, leaving behind their two young children. Authorities previously have questioned the timeline Peterson gave them.

  38. Thank you, questions4you and rescue.

    Gosh, if the bones are human, God bless and hold their family close.

    Thank you Lisa Donovan for putting DP’s timeline out there. Wondering how close it is to the version he gave police or has JB had the timeline by discovery.

    What does he mean by Sunday errands? Church? Picking up drycleaning? What?
    It’s totally not specific enough. No mention of Sharon helping with the kids. Pretending he can’t recall lying to Bruce.

    Everybody already knows that he wasn’t at home when Cassandra phoned because the cell phone proves he was somewhere else!

  39. I’ve noted before that Drew’s timeline leaves a vacuum between 1:30pm and 6pm. Pffft.

    And of course why assume that anything the suspect says is the truth? Drew’s timeline is only interesting as something to compare against the evidence.

    Armstrong had a lot of fun comparing Drew’s account of the events against that of various witnesses (via news stories – he didn’t interview any of them) and pointing out the discrepancies as if they meant that the witness accounts were flawed or unreliable.

    What makes Peterson’s word the one to believe? For heaven’s sake, he’s the suspect!

  40. At one point, he describes Peterson as an enigma — but not a killer.

    He backs that assertion with Peterson’s own hour-by-hour breakdown of how he spent Oct. 28, 2007 — the day Stacy Peterson vanished, leaving behind their two young children. Authorities previously have questioned the timeline Peterson gave them.

    ………………………

    Does this woman work for Armstrong? What is she talking about? What hour by hour breakdown?

  41. Drew’s timeline
    In the new book Drew Peterson Exposed, the former Bolingbrook cop for the first time provides his own detailed account of his actions on Oct. 28, 2007 — the day his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared:

    …………………………..

    This is the reporter saying this, what the heck is she talking about? A detailed account of his actions? There is no detail there!!

  42. 9 P.M.
    * At home, receives call from Stacy that she found someone and is leaving.

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

    Good morning everyone!

    So, that “time line” @ 9pm is what – new? Is that what he told LE, cuz it’s been all over the news that he was with Morphey, left him in a coffee shop and went to the Shorewood area (where Rosetti lives, the guy he wanted to plant this on) and called his cell phone with Stacy’s. Did Armie read any of this, since his whole book is based on published medial reports/accounts? WTH?

  43. Rescue, yeah he mentions a lot of reports from other witnesses and even LE statments, but they all pale when confronted with the Glorious Glowing Glamourous TRUTH spoken by Drew Peterson.

    He even spends a whole segment of the book explaining why witness testimony is worthless (because accounts tend to differ so much). Somehow, Drew’s testimony is the exception?

    The book is such a sham. I’m going to get annoyed all over again…

  44. It does appear to be such a sham, especially when they have to get their minions to sign onto Amazon every day or so and give it 5 stars. Come on, they praise this book to the hilt as true, in-depth, worthy of five stars. One has to struggle to keep a straight face when reading that folderal.

    Getting back to the 9pm phone call.

    Per Mark Fuhrman doing a report:
    “The next two most important calls are the call at 8:00 o’clock that Drew Peterson says that he puts in to Stacy’s cell phone, which — I believe that Thomas Morphey is with him at that time, and he probably witnessed that because that would fit in with Drew believing she’s alive and just missing or not at home. And then, of course, the 9:00 o’clock call that evening that Thomas Morphey sees come up on the cell phone that he’s told not to answer.

  45. MIDNIGHT
    * Gets home and goes to bed.
    AROUND 2:30 A.M.
    * Gets call from Bolingbrook PD telling him Cassandra Cales is filing a missing-persons report regarding Stacy
    * Vaguely recalls getting another call, maybe from Cassandra’s friend Bruce Zidrach. (Very tired and does not have a clear recollection of this call).

    ************
    As Mark Fuhrman reported the witness accountings to be:

    “And then at 2:30 in the morning, Cassandra calls Drew Peterson once again. He is not accounting for his time, where he is, and he’s breathing heavy. His timeline is all over the place, and it’s a dream for the investigators.”

  46. Hold on there Rescue. According to Armstrong Fuhrman is a “discredited witness”. Pretty much anyone who has said anything that could possibly implicate Drew is described as such.

    Of course, they are only discredited by…Armstrong, I guess. I certainly haven’t heard LE describe anyone that way.

  47. 9pm: It has been reported in the Chicago Tribune that Drew says Stacy called him to say she was leaving him. Illinois State Police report that the last activity on Stacy’s cell was approximately 9pm that night.

    *****

    Now, I believe I am correct in assuming LE can determine approximately where his phone was when he got that infamous call at 9pm. Also, why would she call his cell phone and not the home phone, where she’d probably expect him to be with their four kids?

    In Armie’s book:
    Peterson said “yes” to whether he got a call from his wife the night of her disappearance. Again, McCord said that was “deceptive…”

  48. Well, I got news for Armie. Mark Fuhrman is NOT a discredit witness. He is NOT a witness at all. He’s reporting on gathered information from actually talking to the people involved (something Armie didn’t do), and reporting on news accounts of the time line from Stacy’s sister, friends/Morphey.

    All Armie has is what Peterson told him.

    DUH

  49. I’d say that the lack of detail in drew’s timeline just proves that he has something to hide. If he can verify all of his whereabouts and activities for the day, why not own them?

    If he shopped, there will be CC receipts, if he went to the arifield, there will be witnesses, etc.

    Of course he can’t really be forthcoming about what he did and when …because.

  50. 11-11:30 P.M.
    * Returns home.
    * Gets call from Stacy’s sister, Cassandra Cales while still in the driveway. Tells her Stacy called and said she left with another man and took her passport, money and clothes.
    11:45 P.M.
    * Walks and gets Stacy’s car and drives it home.

    Since he took the call between 11pm and 11:30pm from Cassandra, his phone was on, it can be pinpointed as to where he was.

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

    11 p.m. – Cales goes to Peterson’s home and does not see either vehicle in the driveway. One of Peterson’s children opens the door and tells Cales that he is home alone with his three siblings and that Stacy and Drew had gotten into a fight. He said Stacy Peterson had left the house and Drew went out to look for her.

    11:15 p.m. – Cales calls Drew Peterson and asks for Stacy. Cales hears shuffling and keys going into the ignition. Peterson tells Cales he’s at home and had been out looking for his wife.

    Oct. 29
    1 a.m. – Cales goes to the Bolingbrook Police Department to file a missing persons report.

    2:30 a.m. – Cales returns to Peterson’s home and sees both cars in the driveway. Cales’ friend calls Drew Peterson and asks him where Stacy is at. Peterson said his wife left him, took money and left her car at Clow International Airport.

    4 a.m. – Cales files a missing persons report with Illinois State Police.

  51. What’s interesting about Armie’s style of writing and reporting is, he doesn’t present both sides and leave it up to the reader to determine what to believe or sort out. He prints what Drew tells him to, and anything that doesn’t coincide with Drew’s time line makes the conflicting witness statements lies and deceit. And, he comes out and point blank says HE doesn’t consider Drew Peterson a killer, or the killer. Armie draws the conclusions. Biased and unbalanced comes to mind.

    Well, Armie, someone killed these two women. Peterson & Company haven’t come up with any credible alternatives to relieving him of being considered a suspect in Stacy’s disappearance and presumed murder, and he sure hasn’t offered any explanation as to why anyone else would have had the motive for killing Kathleen other than him.

    Kathleen’s manner of death has not changed. The findings of bruises, blood loss, lung condition, etc., was there in the first, second and third autopsies. What is different now is that all of the missteps, mistakes, poor investigation and follow up has been brought to light. Sorry, Armie, you can’t explain away everything and call Peterson a non-killer in your mind without offering up some no-nonsense alternatives to what is known.

    Maybe Armie should consider writing another book and redeem himself, because he sure hasn’t given anyone pause for doubt as to who’s responsible for Kathleen’s and Stacy’s death.

  52. Facsmiley, the book is exactaly as you feared it would be.

    I was holding out hope that it might be a surprise and would go in the opposite direction.

    “Of course, they are only discredited by…Armstrong, I guess. I certainly haven’t heard LE describe anyone that way.”

    It’s about time LE made a statement and updated the public as to their investigation. IMO

  53. Absolutely, it is about time LE makes a statement and assures the public that they’re either near a conclusion, or continuing their investigation.

    This isn’t Kathleen all over again, is it?

  54. OT: would someone be kind enough to post how how to make things bold and/or italicezed here if you have a minute. Thank you.

  55. Hiya!

    I think this book indicates that DP will not be going on the stand. Here he’s laid out his version un-cross examined. Don’t you just hate it when an interviewer begins to answer their own questions, putting words in his mouth. If they shut up and wait that beat or two, he might say something original. It drives me nuts.

    Is anyone else curious about the financial arrangements concerning the book? Brodders
    stated that neither Drew nor his lawyers would benefit from the book sales, all royalties belonging to /publisher. Now. Does that make sense? Whatever the details of their agreement, JB and others must be owed money. Could DA have paid their winnings as expenses and consultancy fees, “intellectual” (and I use the term loosely) property copyright? How likely they just shined on that opportunity ? They’ve obviously got outforabuck on the brain, the way they’ve accused evryone else of the same…they seem to spot every opportunity.

  56. facsmiley // October 5, 2008 at 11:48 am

    BY LISA DONOVAN Staff Reporter ldonovan@suntimes.com

    Let’s email her and ask her where exactly she got her ‘facts’.
    ……………………………………………..

    Facs, the last time I saw this bad of reporting concerning the Peterson case I emailed the reporter and his boss and told them what I thought about it.

    It was Hosey and it turned out he was writing a book. I would not be surprised if this is Lisa’s pay to enter the Drew kingdom.

  57. bucketoftea // October 5, 2008 at 1:38 pm

    Is anyone else curious about the financial arrangements concerning the book? Brodders
    stated that neither Drew nor his lawyers would benefit from the book sales, all royalties belonging to /publisher. Now. Does that make sense?
    ****************************

    I want someone to ask him point blank about a trust fund for his children. That is what he told Phelps he wanted when he was shopping the book atound to authors.

  58. http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/10/05/Book_Petersons_polygraph_results_mixed/UPI-15501223226012/#comments

    CHICAGO, Oct. 5 (UPI) — Former police officer Drew Peterson earned mixed results from authorities’ polygraph tests following the death of his third wife in Illinois, a new book says.

    Author Derek Armstrong wrote in his book, “Drew Peterson Exposed,” that the former Bolingbrook, Ill., police officer agreed to take lie detector tests after authorities suspected he was involved in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, the Chicago Sun-Times reported Sunday.

    But Armstrong wrote that when asked questions about the October 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, Peterson was deemed “deceptive” on certain questions.

    Peterson has maintained he was not involved in Savio’s death or in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson.

    Armstrong said polygraph expert Lee McCord found Peterson to have been “deceptive” on three questions, including saying “no” when asked if he knows his wife’s current whereabouts.

    The Sun-Times said despite the results, Armstrong says in his book that he is convinced Peterson would not have purposefully brought harm to either woman

    **************
    ? AUTHORITIES?

  59. facsmiley // October 5, 2008 at 3:00 pm

    bucketoftea // October 5, 2008 at 1:38 pm

    Is anyone else curious about the financial arrangements concerning the book? Brodders
    stated that neither Drew nor his lawyers would benefit from the book sales, all royalties belonging to /publisher. Now. Does that make sense?
    ****************************

    I want someone to ask him point blank about a trust fund for his children. That is what he told Phelps he wanted when he was shopping the book atound to authors.

    One way it could have been done is Drew was paid for the interviews, or the pay for the interviews is based on the take for the book.

    I am not sure the term roayalties applies in the case where the author owns the publishing company. Brodsky was worming when he made that statement that they were not getting any money so I am sure they were paid.

  60. sorry forgot to put a divider, here is what i said.

    One way it could have been done is Drew was paid for the interviews, or the pay for the interviews is based on the take for the book.

    I am not sure the term roayalties applies in the case where the author owns the publishing company. Brodsky was worming when he made that statement that they were not getting any money so I am sure they were paid.

  61. http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/1203480,CST-NWS-peterson05.article

    86 [to] 98 percent likelihood . . . not guilty’

    October 5, 2008

    BY DAN ROZEK Staff Reporter/drozek@suntimes.com
    Drew Peterson says he hasn’t read the new book about him yet. He’s waiting for free copies he’s been promised. But he thinks other people should read it.

    In Drew Peterson Exposed, author Derek Armstrong relies heavily on lie-detector tests and concludes Peterson probably wasn’t involved in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

    The tests also indicated Drew Peterson didn’t play a role in the 2004 drowning death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, Armstrong argues.

    In an interview, Peterson said those results prove what he’s been saying since Stacy Peterson vanished last Oct. 2.

    “I’ve been telling the truth all along,” Peterson said. “Why would I take [the tests] if I was gonna lie?”

    Peterson cooperated with Armstrong to provide what he called an “objective” account of Savio’s death and Stacy’s disappearance.

    “I said, ‘Let’s get this story out there from an objective point of view,’ ” said Peterson, who said he has no financial stake in the book.

    Citing the polygraph tests, Armstrong concluded: “There is between an 86 percent and 98 percent likelihood Drew Peterson is not guilty.”

    Still, Armstrong wrote, Peterson provided seemingly “deceptive” answers to three questions, including one in which he denied knowing where Stacy is.

    Peterson said he answered all the questions truthfully — and is surprised several answers were deemed questionable.

    “I can’t even speculate on it. I don’t know why,” Peterson said. “I have my suspicions where Stacy is. Maybe that has something to do with it,” he said.

    The new book doesn’t sit well with relatives of Savio or Stacy Peterson, who note the polygraph tests aren’t admissible in court.

    “It’s meaningless,” said Pam Bosco, a spokeswoman for Stacy Peterson’s family. “We’re not changing our view of what his involvement was with Stacy and Kathleen.”

    Armstrong apparently views the 54-year-old Peterson differently, at one point calling him “a good father, a moral enigma, but not a killer.”

    To which Peterson said: “Thank you, I’ll take that description.”

  62. Peterson cooperated with Armstrong to provide what he called an “objective” account of Savio’s death and Stacy’s disappearance.

    I said, ‘Let’s get this story out there from an objective point of view

    Objective? OBJECTIVE? This is a quote from the SUSPECT.

    Can’t breath. Give me a moment. Just a moment…

  63. So where is the Drew Peterson indictment the lynch mob here said would be returned so long ago?

    I’d like to see the case solved no matter where the truth will fall. Did she leave on her own?

    Is she on the lam somewhere? Was she murdered? Where is her body and who did it?

    The fingerpointing here at Drew Peterson is meaningless…

    You clowns need a life!

  64. Both, I guess.

    If he’s so curious and such a great PI why doesn’t he find out his own answers?

    The world it waiting…

  65. crimefile // October 5, 2008 at 11:33 pm

    So where is the Drew Peterson indictment the lynch mob here said would be returned so long ago?

    I’d like to see the case solved no matter where the truth will fall. Did she leave on her own?

    Is she on the lam somewhere? Was she murdered? Where is her body and who did it?

    The fingerpointing here at Drew Peterson is meaningless…

    You clowns need a life!

    ________________

    Crimefile, I agree with you on what I hope to be the meat of your statement.

    I am a firm believer that Lynch Mob mentality aids in a suspects defense.

    I also believe that you have as much right in your opinion as does anyone else who thinks he’s a 2 time murderer.

    All we can hope is that LE is doing their job to the best of their ability, looking at ALL possiblities so as in order to rule out the fact that they did not consider/investigate rule out any other possible suspect, and hopefully, it won’t take 13 years like it has for that guy, who killed his ex wife and her friend and it was as obvious as the mole on Marilyn Monroe’s face.

    That beins said, it’s very easy to think he is guilty, but there are somethings that make a person go hmmmm? IMO.

  66. http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1008/1008fatalvows.htm

    Fatal Vows
    The Tragic Wives of Sergeant Drew Peterson
    By Joseph Hosey
    Phoenix Books
    HC, 320 pgs. US$25.95
    ISBN: 1-5977-7606-8

    Searching for Stacy

    By Steven Martinovich
    web posted October 6, 2008

    In October 2007, the curious case of Stacy Peterson came to international attention. Peterson was young, pretty and missing, the type that the media lately seems attracted to. According to her husband, the older and retired police sergeant Drew Peterson, Stacy – his fourth wife – had abandoned her children and run off with another man for parts unknown. Searchers combed Bolingbrook, the Chicago suburb the Petersons called home, to no avail. Though her husband seemed entranced by the media attention, the story seemed destined to eventually die off.

    As Joseph Hosey relates in Fatal Vows: The Tragic Wives of Sergeant Drew Peterson a twist in the story revived it. Long suspicious of Drew Peterson, authorities decided to re-open the investigation into the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. In February of this year, a second autopsy was held on her body with the new finding that her death was ruled a homicide. It seemed that half of Drew Peterson’s wives had ended up either dead or missing.

    Hosey is well placed to write this still to be completed story. A reporter for the Herald News, which covers the suburban Chicago beat, Hosey reported extensively on the Peterson case and covered the inquest into Savio’s death. He was granted access to many of the major figures in the case and even interviewed Drew Peterson several times. Marshalling all of this together, Josey paints a very disturbing picture of the man who has thrust himself into the public eye.

    Drew Peterson has had by most accounts an unusual life. He has found himself in and out of trouble with the law repeatedly, despite being a police officer, and yet has somehow managed to mostly evade any serious repercussions for his behavior. He fancies himself a ladies’ man; he cheated on nearly all of his wives and entertained Stacy in the same house he shared with Savio without her knowledge, and even with his current infamy has attracted the attention of women. He is simultaneously respected for his work with a narcotics squad but disliked by superiors for actions which risked discrediting him and the police force.

    Stacy Peterson’s life was, unfortunately, more usual and tragic, reports Hosey. Her mother left at an early age – evidence, said Drew Peterson, of his wife’s proclivity to flee her family – and Stacy seemed on the road to a lifetime of poverty and unhappiness. Her marriage to the much older and apparently stable Drew Peterson must have seemed a miracle until the reality slowly dawned on her that her husband was a controlling personality who seemed to treat a wife more like an accessory than a human being.

    Hosey interviews a wide range of people, mostly unsympathetic to Drew Peterson. His next door neighbor clearly believes he is guilty and has mounted a campaign to keep the pressure on him. A psychologist explains Peterson’s bizarre behavior after his wife’s disappearance proves his guilt. Stacy Peterson’s family relates the times she feared for her life, telling them that if something happened to suspect her husband. Hosey even interviews the Bolingbrook police chief who mounts an effective defense as to why his department was not at fault for the botched Savio and Peterson investigations.

    While Hosey tries to be as balanced as possible, Fatal Vows makes it quite clear that he believes Drew Peterson’s claims to be as ridiculous as the public does. That’s not a flaw, however, as he has clearly embarked on a quest for justice in the death of Savio and the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, and justice demands an active opinion. The mysteries surrounding these two women may never be solved but Hosey should be thanked for giving voice to the voiceless and inspire others to try and find the truth.

    Steven Martinovich is a freelance writer in Sudbury, Ontario, Canada.

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    Well! This was refreshing to see, and it comes from Canada!

  67. I like the phrase “justice demands an active opinion”…not quite sure what it means but bears thinking about.

  68. I’ve just read a reference to DP paying Michael Robinson’s college fees. Anyone know anything about that? aww…Drew, looks like your still-faithful friend has financial motivation, too. Bummer. It’s not about what a jokester fun guy you are, after all. 😦

Comments are closed.