Your Thread – November 12

Sorry we missed yesterday’s thread! Just another busy day. We’ll give you an update on today’s court hearing if there’s anything newsworthy.

~By posting on this blog you agree to be bound by the rules of this blog. If you spot a rule violation, send an e-mail to petersonstory@gmail.com.~

About these ads

170 thoughts on “Your Thread – November 12

  1. Good morning everyone!

    facsmiley // November 12, 2008 at 2:11 am

    What a weird incestuous world:

    Designed for Authors and Publishers, Press Release Distribution Company Offers New Service

    For established authors, publishers and even for newcomers, press release distribution company offers options to get noticed.
    prnewschannel.com – November 11, 2008

    (PRNewsChannel) / Tampa, Fla. / The press release distribution company PRNewsChannel announced an affordable service that enables book publishers and authors to boost traditional media exposure and online visibility.

    “Authors and publishers need a press release distribution company that can help them expand their outreach,” says Glenn Selig, founder of PRNewsChannel.com (http://www.prnewschannel.com). “Nowadays you need to reach reporters and at the same boost rankings and increase links online and that’s what PRNewsChannel is all about.”

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

    Thanks, facs. This would explain the

  2. oops. This would explain the faux punch-and-judy leaks. Will Derek continue to sound a bit like a voice of reason because he’ll acknowledge DP’s sociopathy but stay stuck this side of murder, and Derek and Selig shuffle their roladex cards/merge their mailing lists?

  3. Hopefully all goes well with House today signing amended hearsay bill.

    Can’t recall why Peterson is in court today. must be another pre-trial on gun charge. Jury selection is supposed to start on 12/8.

  4. I’d be surprised to see the law sorted out today. It’s probably in a queue, but it can’t be much longer….

  5. I’ve just enjoyed reading this again….it’s seems like ages, but notreally very long ago, when Lenny and Drew were still ‘friends’. Note the lie thoroughly exposed, note again how thoroughly Lenny did a job on him. :-)

    July 16, 2008

    BY JOE HOSEY Herald News

    Friends of Drew Peterson say he gave them a secret folding gun that he said the Illinois State Police missed when they searched his home three days after his wife was reported missing.

    Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, has denied there was such a gun. Brodsky mocked Ric Mims, a former friend of Peterson’s, in March on CNN’s “Nancy Grace” show after Mims said that Peterson showed him the gun, saying, “Hey [the police] didn’t find this one.” Mims said Peterson was “chuckling” when he showed him the gun.

    On the 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,” Brodsky added.

    But other friends of Peterson, Len Wawczak and his wife, Paula Stark, of Bolingbrook, say that Peterson signed the folding gun — a North American Arms .22-caliber revolver — over to Paula Stark the day after the State Police pulled Peterson’s firearm owner’s identification card in February.

    “It was the same gun Ric Mims identified,” Stark said.

    Stark has a handwritten contract for the “Transpher [sic] of 1 North American Arms Corp. S.S. .22 cal revolver” from Drew Peterson to Paula Stark dated Feb. 28, right after he returned from New York City, where he appeared on the “Today” show. Stark and Wawczak watched Peterson’s children while he was in New York.

    Wawczak said Peterson wrote out the transfer for Stark while sitting at the desk in his home office.

    “It was written before me, her, Drew and Kris,” Peterson’s teenage son, Wawczak said.

    Stark and Wawczak said they took the gun home. Less than a month later, State Police took the gun when they came to their home to seize Stark’s Ruger .357 Magnum revolver after her FOID card was suspended because it listed an inaccurate date of birth and outdated address. The State Police also found the .22, which folds into its own handle, and pegged it as Peterson’s, Wawczak said.

    It was “basically just a way for the State Police to break our balls because we’re friends with Drew,” Wawczak said.

    Peterson said he had done nothing wrong, as he simply “signed [the gun] over to them after they took my gun card away.”

    The State Police have named Peterson a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, and have classified the case a “potential homicide.”

    Sun-Times News Group

  6. Sorry to inflict you with my wanderings, but I’m dying to know what DP was doing at the truckstop 13 days before Stacy disappeared, menacing a hazmat driver. Seems to me that someone could have a little gem of a distribution operation between Clow-the-airport-with -no-record-keeping-to-speak-of, and the truckstop. Somebody living near one and frequently visiting the other could be busy. Just a wandering thought….

  7. Rut roh, Peterson and Brodsky better fire up the media machine again, cuz their losing ratings!!!

    Originally posted: November 11, 2008
    Drew Peterson vs. a ‘Court’ date: Which was more interesting?

    Chicago viewers in the advertiser-coveted 25-54 demographic seemed to prefer conflict-resolution over just conflict Monday afternoon.

    While WBBM-Ch. 2 had embattled Drew Peterson talking about being unlucky in love on “Dr. Phil,” WCIU-Ch. 26′s “The People’s Court” fared better among viewers between the ages of 25 and 54, according to live overnight data from Nielsen Media Research.

    “Court” had a 1.1 rating and 6 percent of the viewing audience in that demo, compared to a 0.6 rating and 3 share for “Phil.” Among women in that target audience, “Court” scored a 1.4/7 and “Phil” had a 0.8/4.

    Both shows recorded a 6 percent share of households viewing TV, with “Dr. Phil” enjoying a slight edge in rating at 2.5 to 2.2. For the hour, each trailed both WLS-Ch. 7 and WMAQ-Ch. 5.

  8. Or…you can argue it…but you can’t argue against the fact that it is. Well, you could…but you’d lose.

    Never mind.

  9. PETERSON DREW W 11 12 8 405 130 08CF001169 0 RIFLE <16”/SHOTGUN 1 Status
    PETERSON DREW W 11 12 8 405 130 08CF001169 0 RIFLE <16”/SHOTGUN 2 Status

  10. bucketoftea // November 12, 2008 at 9:32 am

    Sorry to inflict you with my wanderings, but I’m dying to know what DP was doing at the truckstop 13 days before Stacy disappeared, menacing a hazmat driver. Seems to me that someone could have a little gem of a distribution operation between Clow-the-airport-with -no-record-keeping-to-speak-of, and the truckstop. Somebody living near one and frequently visiting the other could be busy. Just a wandering thought….

    Intresting. Very intresting angle.

    But I don’t think you can move much with his little kite with a fan ultralight. And I think that truckstop in Bolingbrook is watched pretty heavy by LE. There have been countless busts there.

    I thought the sighting of him and some guy there in a dark pickup was debunked?

  11. whatsinthemirror:
    I thought the sighting of him and some guy there in a dark pickup was debunked?

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

    I believe what was debunked was the meeting with two truckers. The story was that Peterson gave them something to haul away with them at the time of Stacy’s disappearance.

    However, there is a third trucker incident, which occurred before Stacy disappeared, which may or may not have any relevance to Stacy’s disappearance:

    Allan is the trucker – not one of the two Illinois Police disclosed claimed they were asked by Drew Peterson to carry a package – but another trucker who contacted me when I was in Bolingbrook to say he had an incident happen at the same “55″ truck stop 13 days before Stacy Peterson disappeared and that he was 100 percent certain it was with Drew.

    So concerned that day was this seasoned hazmat trucker, he called 9-1-1 (a call the Bolingbrook PD confirmed to Fox took place) and the FBI. Allan even noted it in his trucker log that two men flashing badges had blocked the exit to the truck stop and he believed he and his hazardous materials load were being threatened.

    Some of you have asked why is this relevant if it took place BEFORE Stacy disappeared. Well first, Allan Scott thought it significant enough to report it to the authorities that day. He noted it in his log. He escaped to what the log refers to as a “safe haven”. When he saw Drew’s photo in the media AFTER Stacy’s disappearance, he was certain something about the interaction he had with the man blocking his exit – a man he still believes 100% was Drew -was not right.

  12. Qhorses – I’m not really sure. I Googled it and I think it’s a meeting where the accused has a chance to change their plea if they want.

  13. what,

    I wasn’t suggesting he was flying anything, just maybe taking delivery and then providing safe conduct.

  14. A status hearing is not a formal one, but where the attorneys go over things related to the case, maybe exchange issues and try and resolve them beforehand.

  15. Whatsinthemirror – Me thinks you throw stuff out at us to see what kind of an answer we’ll come up with, sometimes things that we never said in the first place.

    But, how are we doing so far, heh?

  16. Bucket – in a different area of law that I worked in (not criminal), whenever a status hearing came up on the Court Docket, the attorneys were the only ones that attended them. Sweet, short and simple. But this criminal case – who knows?

  17. q – I think discovery is introduced during pre-trial hearings; status is more along the lines to see if everything is moving along as it should be.

    “Status Hearing – A hearing in which the court identifies what issues are contested, what discovery needs to be completed and what future hearings are needed.”

  18. This just in kids! Breaking News! Hang onto your hats! Alert Nat Silver!

    Derek has updated the results for his poll on his books’ site:


    89% Polled Believe Drew Peterson Murdered Two Wives

    Wednesday, November 12, 2008 at 02:13PM

    In a poll of 292 respondents on this site, 261 (89%) believe Drew Peterson killed both Kathleen Savio and Stacy Peterson, while 5% indicated he murdered one wife and 9% (26 people) indicated “none.”

    :-|

  19. Aw, man, and here I thought we were the only ones that were rushing to judgment and convicting him before he’s had a chance to complete trying his case in the public.

    I hate when that happens, don’t you?

  20. Hearsay bill update:

    http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=2718&GAID=9&DocTypeID=SB&LegId=37188&SessionID=51&GA=95

    Bill Status of SB2718 95th General Assembly
    Short Description: CRIMINAL LAW-TECH

    Senate Sponsors
    Sen. A. J. Wilhelmi – James A. DeLeo

    House Sponsors
    (Rep. Careen M Gordon – Dennis M. Reboletti – Jim Durkin)

    Last Action

    Date: 11/12/2008
    Chamber: Senate
    Action: Accept Amendatory Veto – Senate Passed 055-000-000

    So it passed the senate today, but now has to go to the house on the 19th.

  21. Wow, look how much happened to it today. I haven’t even emptied all my wastebaskets yet!

    11/12/2008 Senate Amendatory Veto Motion – Motion Filed Accept Amendatory Veto Sen. A. J. Wilhelmi

    11/12/2008 Senate Amendatory Veto Motion – Motion Referred to Rules

    11/12/2008 Senate Amendatory Veto Motion – Approved for Consideration Rules

    11/12/2008 Senate 3/5 Vote Required

    11/12/2008 Senate Accept Amendatory Veto – Senate Passed 055-000-000

  22. Hope they keep the Hearsay bill moving along.
    Why so long to get to the house? Can’t they do more than one thing at a time?

  23. This link courtesy of Mommyof1 at the whereisstacy forum:

    http://blogs.dailyherald.com/node/931

    …Official business
    The Senate did do something Wednesday, aside from cancel Friday’s session day.
    On a 55-0 vote the Senate approved a new law that would allow hearsay statements to be admitted into murder trials in situations where the person was murdered to prevent the person from testifying.

    In theory it means if your neighbor tells you, “I saw him do it and he threatened to kill me too,” and then your neighbor is murdered to keep him or her quiet, you could testify as to what you were told.

    There’d be court proceedings to establish that the statement carries credibility before it’d be admissible.

    The law now goes to the House for consideration next week. If approved there, it would take effect immediately. Lawmakers passed this law earlier this year but the governor altered it to delay the effective date until next summer. Wednesday’s vote supported restoring the immediate effective date.

    The law has been dubbed the “Drew Peterson law” and supposedly could help the potential prosecution of the former police officer whose wife has gone missing. Peterson has maintained his innocence. Sponsoring state Sen. A.J. Wilhelmi of Joliet wouldn’t specify how exactly the law would help in that case and acknowledged there could be problems in applying a new law to old cases…

  24. Peterson questions gun case timing
    November 12, 2008 at 5:25 PM | Comments (0)

    Authorities used “vindictive and selective” prosecution in their gun case against former Bolingbrook Police Sgt. Drew Peterson, his legal team argued in Will County Court today.

    Peterson, 54, faces felony gun charges for allegedly possessing a modified assault rifle with a barrel of less than 16 inches in violation of state law. Authorities seized the rifle, along with other weapons, after search warrants were executed last November as part of the investigation into the Oct. 28, 2007 disappearance of Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy.

    But Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, questioned the timeline of how the gun case unfolded. In February, police revoked Peterson’s firearm owner identification card after a judge ruled that his firearms should be returned to Peterson granted that he had a valid FOID card.

    And then in May, authorities arrested Peterson for owning the rifle on the eve of learning from the judge whether the guns could be turned over to his son, Stephen, an Oak Brook police officer.

    Brodsky is requesting that prosecutors turn over documents leading up to the charges against his client.

    “This timeline proves with more than sufficient evidence that the reason to do this is to punish Mr. Drew Peterson for exercising his Constitutional rights,” Brodsky said.

    Peterson, who maintains his wife ran off, has said that he used the rifle as a SWAT team member for the Bolingbrook police department.

    Will County Assistant State’s Atty. Dede Osterberger argued against giving the defense “privileged information.”

    “We strongly argue against this case, judge, because we think that the defense is engaging in a fishing expedition,” she said.

    Judge Richard Schoenstedt, who was battling a cold and losing his voice, said he would defer his ruling until the next scheduled hearing on Nov. 20.

    –Erika Slife, Chicago Breaking News Center

  25. “We strongly argue against this case, judge, because we think that the defense is engaging in a fishing expedition,”

    I see no reason the defense shouldn’t have any documents pertaining to the gun charges, but if I remember correctly they were asking for all kinds of evidence, including the taped overhears which should have nothing to do with the weapons charges.

    And I guess that would be fishing.

  26. I’ll just say again that Joel is turning into the boy who cried “vindictive prosecution”. He’s been waving that flag for the last eleven months.

    Apparently, all accountability on Drew’ spart should be suspended due to his being unpopular. Sorry, but if you do the crime, you still need to do the time, even if people hate you.

    Please refer to O.J.’s recent conviction for kidnapping, armed robbery and assault with a deadly weapon for proof of that.

  27. Vindictive prosecution, wanting all of the prosecution’s gathered evidence whether it applies or not, sinister media, unfair accusations, victim of an abusive ex-wife, a male-attention craving wife, ex-wife, ex-fiance that make false accusations of threatening behavior. When does it ever end for Drew Peterson?

  28. Since pasting from other boards seems to be OK now, this is Ex-law’s post from SYM today about her experience of attending Drew’s weapons charge status hearing:

    I have a message from Joel : Hes offering Sharons husband Bob a free divorce after she took Lenny and Paula in…That came directly from Joel when we were in court this afternoon. It was an interesting afternoon. When the discussion went to chambers Joel asked me to keep Drew away from reporters. So we spoke for and hour and a half today. Court was out at 4 today. The State does not want to release the documents that they have in the decision making process. Joel wants them to further prove that they are doing this to be vindictive, singling Drew out, when there are other officers in Bolingbrook PD with barrels on their guns the very same way. Joel provided a time-line stating that once the State found out that Drew’s guns were going to be given back, then they without reason revoked his FOID card and no one including that judge knew they were going to do that. Plus the fact that at first they were NOT going to charge him with anything. Proving once again this is a witch hunt.The judge will rule on that next Thursday, as he was under the weather today. There were several reporters in court today who all greeted Drew in friendly greetings asking how he and the kids are. I did meet a lady from the Tribune who Drew flirted with and chatted with for awhile. I did talk to her in general, but did not offer who I am. As always I left thru another exit so I would not be approached or questioned. The kids are doing really great. Lacey is something to be cherished, she and her antics are something to make anyone smile. The neighbors offered to take her and Anthony out trick or treating. At first Anthony decided he wanted to hand out candy with Kris, but later joined the group. Drew thought the radio station joke was funny and he even called in to talk on the air, so much for Sharon’s comments on that, because she got it wrong as always. Drew will have his family over Thanksgiving.There are things in motion as far as a divorce and once he gets thru this he will move away. Sharon & Stacey were NOT close, the Garden has been parred down somewhat since the vigil. Sharon has constantly complained about her husband and lack of a decent love life, never considering what she looks and acts like. The day that Drew and Joel flew to New York it was her husband Bob that drove Joel to the airport ! He did not even know it until they got to the airport and Drew walked up to the limo. Drew said that Bob has always has been friendly to him and says its not easy being married to Sharon. And as far as Roy goes, Stacey always made fun of him and did not care for him one bit. Yealton was the one that started the fire that killed her sister, he was playing with matches. Cassandras back and forth with women is a known fact and something that caused family problems over it. We did discuss Eric in length and its sad because Drew has reached out to him on many occasions, with no response. Stephens daughter will arrive in February and Drew is excited over a grandchild and another girl to spoil. Meanwhile its just another day in court for him waiting for the outcome. We will see how long Sharon is willing to house Lenny and Paula, ought to be very interesting…

  29. Oh, I see. This gossip is what Drew shared while biding his time, waiting for Joel. My first impression is that he must be very afraid of Sharon and the Cales family to smear them in that way.

    It’s interesting.

  30. Yeah, the suspect is going to be moving away, alright. He’s going to be living in a one-room suite, and all his BFF’s can write him every day.

    Shoot, he must be so scared and desperate, he’s got a mopey dopey spreading rumors and innuendos. She must have missed his last tv appearance, and how pathetic and guilty he looked.

    Oh, well, not to fret. We’ll see who rules the day. You know what they say: prisons are full of “innocent” people.

  31. I hope exlaw knows that once Drew doesn’t need her shoulder to lean on, she’ll be nothing to him. He has a long history of using and discarding people.

    Someone needs to change her motto to:

    IN THE END IS MY BEING FORGOTTEN

  32. LOL, that Drew “flirted” with a Tribune reporter must have her in a tailspin. Looks like ex is the only one he doesn’t flirt with. Moving away and all, flirting with others. Must be lonely at the bottom of Drew’s discard pile.

  33. Bettcha Drew doesn’t flirt with Joe H.

    Lawyers say Peterson felony charge ‘unfair’

    November 12, 2008
    By JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com
    The cops are picking on Drew Peterson, his lawyers say, and are so intent on meting out punishment that they unfairly pinned a felony on him.

    Peterson’s attorneys argued on Wednesday that the state should fork over internal documents outlining how they decided to bring a felony gun charge against Peterson in May.

    To prove the vindictive and selective prosecution of Peterson, one of his two defense lawyers, Joel Brodsky, laid out a timeline of events beginning with the state police seizing firearms from Peterson’s house four days after his young wife, Stacy, vanished and culminating with Peterson’s May arrest.

    Brodsky’s timeline showed that at one point during the ongoing court battle Peterson waged to reclaim his guns, Judge Richard Schoenstedt ordered they be returned. But the very next day, the state police revoked Peterson’s firearm owner’s identification card, effectively blocking the judge’s order.

    The gun charge stems from Peterson possessing an assault rifle with a barrel allegedly shorter than the state-mandated 16 inches. Peterson maintains he carried the weapon as part of his duties with the Bolingbrook Police Department’s SWAT team and with the knowledge and permission of his superiors.

    Peterson’s other attorney, Andrew Abood, claimed a statement made by the spokesman for the state’s attorney’s office showed the vindictive nature of the case.

    Following Peterson’s arrest — which occurred the day before Schoenstedt allowed Peterson’s son, Stephen Peterson, to take possession of eight of his father’s confiscated firearms — Pelkie said, “An illegal weapon might be put back on the street and we can’t let that happen.”

    “Because Mr. Peterson asserted his constitutional right, we decided to charge (the gun case),” Abood said in his interpretation of Pelkie’s statement.

    Brodsky and Abood also said the case was selective because the indictment against Peterson accuses his son Stephen of possessing the assault rifle but does not charge him with anything.

    If Peterson’s defense team succeeds in convincing Schoenstedt to order the release of the documents, a jury would have to acquit Peterson if they decide the prosecution was vindictive or selective.

    Besides the gun charge they brought against Peterson, state police have named him a suspect in the October disappearance of fourth wife Stacy Peterson. The state police also are investigating the March 2004 homicide of Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio. At the time of her death, the state police found no indication of foul play but got another crack at it after Stacy disappeared.

    Assistant State’s Attorney Dede Osterberger called Brodsky and Abood’s case a “fishing expedition.”

  34. Pelkie said, “An illegal weapon might be put back on the street and we can’t let that happen.”

    Of course, I can’t know what a jury might decide, but this always seemed like a very defensible move.

    Once they knew the gun was illegal, how could they allow that weapon to be released…and how could they keep it from being released without pressing charges?

  35. In all honestly, whether Drew is convicted or not regarding the gun charges, that’s the least of his worries. But, putting that aside, that’s a valid point, Facsmiley. Since they knew he was going to get that gun back, they had to move on it. Now the lawyers will get their chance to argue their sides and the jury will figure it all out. Not exlaw. Not Joel. Not anyone but his jury. People who don’t blog about the victim’s personal life and that of her family and friends. Not a love lorn groupie who spews bunk on a blog to satisfy her own agenda.

  36. Yep, a jury of people who aren’t exuding the funk of desperation.

    I think that’s guaranteed by the constitution, isn’t it? I gotta look that up…

  37. So, am I understanding this right? The defense is not saying the gun length was legal, but they’re now saying that Peterson was charged with this felony merely because law enforcement is picking on him? And they need the mounds of proof from them to make their case, because they can’t prove it on their own?

  38. That’s what I’m confused about as well? Are they looking for a bunch of emails that say “Let’s get him!”?

    Exactly what documents do they want?

  39. Or, did they sit around a big table and scribble notes on a yellow legal pad, outlining ideas on how to annoy the heck out of Peterson, ideas on ways to charge him for owning an illegal weapon?

  40. Did anyone see the news that the PR agent the Anthony family hired quit representing them because of their “erratic” behavior?

    Hmmm.

  41. When Armstrong “leaked” his information about the defense’s stance on the weapons charge, he said:

    “Based on the juror questionnaires, Armstrong expects Drew Peterson to testify at the actual trial to take place Dec. 5. Jurors commented that his testimony was “convincing” or “compelling.”’

    After seeing him on Dr. Phil this past week, I think that’s a great idea, because he comes across as arrogant, obnoxious, evades questions he doesn’t like to answer, and guilty.

    Works for me.

  42. Even if Drew does get convicted of the gun charges I doubt he will do much time. I did come across a case where an ex-cop was charged with owning (and discharging) an illegally altered weapon. It wasn’t even registered to him. He was convicted and ended up doing something like 30 days.

    The weapons charge obviously isn’t the issue at the heart of this man’s crimes. But if it distracts his legal team and has him sweating and seeking the support of the fan club…that’s pretty good too. The defense has certainly gone off on some wild tangents. I’m pleased to see the prosecution in action as well.

  43. Hours and hours of surveillance. Phone pings.

    Dozens and dozens of Drewpie statements that he contradicts over and over.

    Weapons trial? Cookies and milk compared to what’s coming.

    A Will that was discovered by the ex-husband of a murder victim, that was overly generous to the ex.

    That’s what should worry Drew Peterson and his groupie.

  44. WHYwas his FOID revoked?

    1. Unreported discharge of a firearm at the officer’s home.

    2.reporter: could your guns be a hazard to LE if they come back to arrest you?
    drew: Sure, it’s a possibility.

    3. there may well be more of this kind of threat to LE on the overhears , eg suicide by cop.

    All of that sounds pretty valid to me, Joel.

  45. November 13, 2008

    BY DAVE MCKINNEY Sun-Times Springfield bureau chief
    SPRINGFIELD — The state Senate unanimously voted Wednesday to give Will County prosecutors a powerful new tool to probe the murder of one of Drew Peterson’s wives and the disappearance of another.

    The Senate OKd legislation to allow as evidence hearsay statements from murdered witnesses.

    The legislation, which would take effect immediately if approved next week by the House, might apply to missing Bolingbrook mother Stacy Peterson, the wife of retired Bolingbrook Police Sgt. Drew Peterson. State Police say he is a suspect in her “potential homicide.” A minister has said that Stacy Peterson told him that Drew Peterson killed a previous wife, Kathleen Savio.

    The law might also come into play in the Savio case. She sent a letter to a prosecutor that said, Peterson “knows how to manipulate the system, and his next step is to take my children away. Or kill me instead.”

    Contributing: Joe Hosey and Dan Rozek

  46. Rescueapet

    Did anyone see the news that the PR agent the Anthony family hired quit representing them because of their “erratic” behavior?

    Hmmm.
    * ** * * * * * * * *

    Casey’s attorneys have produced emails between NBC and the spokesman showing he invoiced NBC 6.5k, without the Anthony’s knowledge. They sacked him.

  47. If Peterson’s defense team succeeds in convincing Schoenstedt to order the release of the documents, a jury would have to acquit Peterson if they decide the prosecution was vindictive or selective.

    *********
    Good morning, everyone, and good afternoon, Bucket.

    If the prosecution was vindictive or selective in charging Drew Peterson with this crime of possessing an illegal weapon, what would they call law enforcement’s actions in the investigation of Peterson’s third wife?

    It is so obvious that he got a pass when the crime scene was processed and the later death investigation was held, I can’t help but see the irony here in them using just this defense in this case. If a jury can acquit him using this line of defense as their basis, what in heaven’s name will they do if the prosecution uncovered and presents evidence that selective practices in Peterson’s favor were used in Kathleen’s death investigation?

  48. Good morning…..Happy GJ day.
    I wonder…what will today bring ? Is today the day ? I wonder…once the house passes the hearsay bill, does it have to go back to the governor for him to sign again before it becomes law ?

  49. Bucket, add this to the reasons the FOID was revoked:

    MIMS: About the time he asked me to be a hostage if the police came in, and then about when he showed me the gun and was chuckling and then when he wrote all the checks to Steve. You know, just — those weren’t actions of somebody that was innocent.

    CASAREZ: OK. He asked you to be a hostage?

    MIMS: Yes.

    CASAREZ: Explain that.

    MIMS: We were sitting on the couch and he was — this was Wednesday, December 31. This was right after the press and everybody left. We were sitting on the couch. And he was worried that the police were going to come in and make him go do what he called a “72-hour sweat time.” At that point, he says, I don’t want the children going to the Cales family, so I’m going to have to hold you hostage here until my son gets here, Steve, to pick up the kids. And I just looked at him like he was crazy and I says, That’s not going to work.

  50. Hi Wonder. From what I’ve read, if it passes the House, it’s effective immediately. Haven’t seen anything that indicates it has to go back to the Gov.

  51. So Selig was doing Casy’s PR, but was he doing PR for the Anthony family as well? Is this Glenn who was sacked or someone else?

  52. Now, I wonder. If the defense held a mock trial, wherein they chose their defense as vindictive prosecution (wonder where they pulled that out of), what did they use for the “evidence” in the mock trial? Doesn’t seem reasonable that they now want unrelated information to prove their case, so, it sure does look like a fishing expedition. Maybe they’re case was weak, at best, and they want the prosecution to make it work by trying to bs their way through the muck.

  53. Thanks Rescue, that is how I thought I read it, but wasn’t sure if it was hopeful thinking on my part.

    I wonder…….How much longer is the GJ
    going to go ??

  54. I know this might be taken the wrong way, but, as much as I can sympathize with the Anthonys about their losses, both little Caylee and their daughter being the murderer, I don’t put much trust in anything they say.
    A
    fter hearing all that Casey’s parents have said to investigators, including how they smelled death in the car, they continue to say their granddaughter is alive and was stolen by someone. They’re in denial, and they’re spreading unnecessary untruths.

    I think the Anthonys want to blame everyone and anyone but their daughter for this horrible mess.

  55. It is a mess, rescue, and if Casey’s parents weren’t nuts before, this is doing it for them. Prosecutors are still hoping to shut them up.

  56. I’m not going to pst the whole thing, just this bit re DP.

    …Selig and his firm, The Publicity Agency, represent Drew Peterson, the former police sergeant accused in the disappearance of his fourth wife and implicated in the death of his third wife. Selig was called in after suspicion swirled around Peterson because of the odd behavior and antics that lead many to conclude that Peterson was guilty. Selig has been working with Peterson and his lawyers for more than a year to help change public opinion.

    “Bad behavior is bad behavior and once the public forms an impression, it’s extremely difficult to undo,” says Selig. Since Selig became involved in the case, the public has been presented with additional images of Peterson: one of family man and decorated police officer. Peterson may still be quirky and odd, but the public now knows more about his redeeming qualities that may now make some in the public question what they came to believe about him, Selig says. Selig chose to introduce those sides of Drew Peterson with high-profile interviews on NBC’s ‘Today’ show and most recently ‘Dr. Phil.’

    *-*-*-*-*-
    …and it’s working really well! not

  57. “A publicist needs to think these things through,” says Selig. “While it’s important to get publicity for your client somewhere along the way common sense needs to prevail.”

    Selig comes to publicity after two decades of covering news, which makes him and his firm, The Publicity Agency, a unique find in the world of publicity. In most cases, publicists come from entertainment or PR backgrounds. Another publicist at his agency has similar news credentials.

    * * * * * * * * * * * *
    lol, yes, public relations is the usual background for publicity work.

  58. Yes, it is not working. Selig is delusional if he thinks people assume because he’s got “another” side, he must not be capable of doing what he’s accused of.

    What does he care? He gets him on the tv shows and in the news, so he’s doing his job. He’s not his lawyer or his psychiatrist, so he’s doing whatever it is he’s supposed to do. Changing Peterson’s image isn’t something that he has accomplished, that’s for sure.

  59. If consumers and other businesses don’t know about you and your company they can’t find you,” says Selig, dubbed the public relations “guru” by CNN’s Nancy Grace.

    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    LOL remember that moment well…she called him guru because she couldn’t think of another word. It was not praise, but it was still funny to see Selig smile, flattered, and thinking how he can quote her. LOL

  60. bucketoftea // November 13, 2008 at 12:16 pm

    I love it when people write about themselves in third person.
    ******************

    Armstrong does it a lot as well. It’s the mark of the self-marketed and the inflated ego.

  61. There are big things ahead for Facsmiley. I can see Facsmiley raking up some leaves today, maybe dragging the garbage can back from the curb, since the garbage men have emptied Facsmiley’s garbage.

  62. Padilla, was sure that she was in there. We will see if it is her. Gosh, I sure hope so. This baby needs to be laid to rest properly. Just is so hear breaking, no matter who it is, should the bones be human.

  63. Wow – speaking of self-marketing, yet another sock-puppet site where Derek Armstrong can praise himself and give his own books rave reviews.

    Honestly, how does the man sleep at night?

    http://www.filmsandbooks.com/

    Registrant:
    Kunati Inc.
    ATTN: FILMSANDBOOKS.COM
    c/o Network Solutions
    P.O. Box 447
    Herndon, VA 20172-0447

    Registrant Search: “Kunati Inc.” owns about 21 other domains
    Registrar History: 1 registrar
    NS History: 10 changes on 6 unique name servers over 5 years.
    IP History: 4 changes on 3 unique name servers over 2 years.
    Whois History: 4 records have been archived since 2007-08-07.

  64. BTW, Derek’s actual self-review is oddly missing from that site, but the bit showing up in my Google alert made me laugh out loud.

    “Drew Peterson Exposed” — MUST Read!
    Films and Books Magazine – Largo,FL,USA

    … and a thoroughly engaging narrative with some despicable characters, a grim crime and a truly bizarre homicide. I highly recommend Drew Peterson Exposed.”

    I wish it was still there just so I could see who the ‘author’ of the review was. Eric Darmstrong?

  65. Your welcome , Facs! I know this child has been in my heart and prayers every day, as I am sure she has to all of you.

  66. Thanks, Rescue. A little premature, but it sure looks to be pointing in the direction of possibly being Caylee.

  67. “vindictive and selective prosecution”

    That must sound like a pretty good line of Defense to a Sociopath considering they think everybody is always doing things for no other reason than being “vindictive”

  68. apple – it looks like they’ve pulled away from that being anything significant. I don’t know if that’s good or bad. How do you hope that they find a dead child? No one knows what to hope for in this strange case anymore. Maybe hope that her mother has a moment of kindness in her heart and tells someone what she did with her baby, but that’s about it.

  69. 2manymysteries, just like he really doesn’t see how nuts he sounds when he tells us that every woman he’s been involved with has the same ‘issues’.

  70. Yes, I agree rescue. I hate to say it, they should hold her face to the cement until she tells where Caylee is. It just is sickening. I guess sick minds will never be understand from those who are normal.

  71. BTW – Didn’t Joel publicly state he “knew” Paula and Lenny were “snitches” as soon as the issue of the folding gun arose ?

    I just see above the folding gun was transfered in Febr 08 and the next month the folding gun was confiscated, so according to Joel himself he knew as early as February or March Lenny and Paula were “snitches” yet NEVER said anything to Drew.

    He just let Drew bury himself and get on tape for another four months !!

    What type of Defense would that be called ??

    LMAO !!

  72. I don’t really think he “knew” anything of the kind at the time. Sounds like the usual after-the-event analysis. JB and Drew looked back and then looked for signs. Feh

  73. You must admit that Peterson and Brodsky have the weirdest client/attorney relationship ever imagined. I don’t think it’s usually common practice for an attorney to become a bff with their client. I was also reminded today by reading that there’s something said on one of the Lenny & Paula tapes that might not have been smart to come out of Brodsky’s mouth.

    After all, if he’s unwise enough to let a self-proclaimed Drewpie groupie repeat messages from him through her (check it out up screen), he can’t be the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree.

  74. Yeah, but the point is Joel PUBLICLY STATED he “knew”, yet as a Defense lawyer, supposedly defending Drew and looking out for his interest, never mentioned it to his client (!!)

    So by his own admission Joel was in fact working against his own client, that’s why I’m asking what type of Defense that is called .

    LMAO !!!

  75. I think when Joel asked Lenny to ‘do something’ to Joe Hosey it was caught on tape.

    What is that…conspiracy? I’d love to see Brodsky charged with it. But it would bea shame for Joel to have to step down as Drew’s lawyer at this point. I think his unprofessionalism and fame-whoreish tendencies make him a perfect match for Drew.

  76. Maybe Joel’s just setting up his bff’s appeal… From just today’s thread he could cite Inadequate Legal Counsel. hehehehe

  77. Yes, they are a good match.

    Brodsky says:

    “Oh yeah I ” knew ” Lenny and Paula were snitches”

    Drew says:

    “Oh yeah, I was at the Canal looking for Stacy and the car”

  78. facsmiley // November 13, 2008 at 3:17 pm

    …But it would bea shame for Joel to have to step down as Drew’s lawyer at this point. I think his unprofessionalism and fame-whoreish tendencies make him a perfect match for Drew.
    *********************************
    I think you’re right – they’re a great match. However, you might want to think about apologizing to Paris Hilton and other fame-whores who are not multiple murderers.

  79. I was just re-reading some stuff today and does anyone else see a parallel between Drew’s description of Kathleen and the way he is now painting Sharon?

    It really seem that anyone who fights Drew, anyone who doesn’t back down and shrink under his bullying gets labelled “unbalanced”.

    Why is it that every woman in contact with Drew Peterson eventually becomes overwhelmed with emotional issues, hormonal imbalances, or anger? It seems pretty clear to me that the problem isn’t with all of these wome…but with Drew.

  80. He really doesn’t like women who are smarter than he is. That’s one reason why he likes young ones…before they find out how smart they are.

    Someone suggested he be arrested by a female detective. I’d like to see him guarded in prison by women who can’t be doing with his carp.

  81. facsmiley // November 13, 2008 at 3:32 pm

    I was just re-reading some stuff today and does anyone else see a parallel between Drew’s description of Kathleen and the way he is now painting Sharon?
    *******************
    Again, Facs, I think you’re right. In re-reading and re-thinking, I can’t recall him describing any woman in a positive way (more specifically, in a way that the woman who was being described might think of as positive). How about any of you? Condescension is about the most positive spin I can recall from DP regarding any woman…

  82. According to Drew, all the women and female acqaintences in his past have also been latent strippers and hookers.

    He is most likely saving someone right now from wanting to become another stripper………

  83. That’s all he’s interested in with a woman. Airbiker (DP’s online dating nic) says he’s easy to please …all you have to do is keep him happy in bed. Women he thinks are attractive can offer something, the rest are probably invisible.

  84. I’ve been reading what you guys have said about his disdain for women, and I just want to remind you that his own mother was a victim of his big mouth, when he called her senile just because she was called as a witness before the GJ.

    He can’t escape from the fact that numerous love interests of his life, at different phases of his life, pinpointed his thrill seeking desire to wipe them off the face of the earth if they got out of line.

  85. You gotta love this stuff. It’s priceless. From approximately three weeks after Stacy disappeared. Wonder what his excuse is now for seeking out the media on a regular basis.

    Attorneys, as a rule, do not like targets of criminal investigations to give interviews at all. Peterson, however, has said that he has been speaking to NBC News, in part, to get the media to stop camping outside of his home. But he does so at his own peril.

    If he is charged, his public statements about the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, Savio’s death and his rocky relationship with both women could be used to impeach his credibility if he were to testify differently at a trial.

  86. I believe Brodsky started with the assumption that Drew is guilty.

    He began by saying this was his especial tactic, white noise, and cited two cases where it worked. OJ and Robert Blake (!). Trouble is it’s all BLACK NOISE and it’s coming out of his own mouth live on national television. Again and again….and again, and again. I fail to see how phoning radio stations for a laugh is “reactive”, as they put it.

  87. I’ve been wanting to make a comment for the longest time whenever I see this:

    Peterson contends Stacy left him for another man.

    She wasn’t with a “man” to begin with.

  88. You’re right. Real men feel they need to or have a right to corner their tiny wives and get in their face. I don’t think he ‘needed’ to hit Stacy very often.

  89. Sorry if this is somewhere already, but I don’t think so…b Roberts Reporting
    WBBM Newsradio 780

    (WBBM) – Attorneys for former Bolingbrook Police Sgt. Drew Peterson argued before a Will County judge Wednesday that Peterson was the victim of “selective and vindictive” prosecution on a gun charge.

    Peterson is expected to go to trial early next month on charges that he possessed a sawed-off shotgun while working for the Bolingbrook Police Department. His defense team is hoping that a ruling in their favor will prompt jurors to dismiss the charge.

    Attorney Joel Brodsky argued before Will County Judge Richard Schoenstedt that the only reason Peterson was charged was because of two rulings by Schoenstedt.

    The judge ruled Feb. 27 that Illinois State Police should return guns that were seized during searches of his home following the disappearance last year of his fourth wife, Stacy. Illinois State Police revoked Peterson’s Firearm Owners Identification Card the same day.

    The gun charge was filed May 21, one day before Schoenstedt ruled that the guns should be turned over to Peterson’s son Stephen, who is an Oak Brook police officer.

    Asked outside of court if he considers the timing proof that the charges are vindictive in nature, Brodsky said, “I think it’s very obvious. The time line is inescapable.”

    Brodsky argued that Peterson did not seek the return of the gun in question, an AR-15 with a gun barrel of slightly more than 15 inches in length, but prosecutors argued that the wording of Schoenstedt’s order also covered “any other guns lawfully possessed by Drew Peterson at the time of their seizure by the state.”

    Peterson has contended that the AR-15 was used only for SWAT activities and was the property of the Bolingbrook Police Department.

    Brodsky said he considered the prosecution selective because no attempt has been made to arrest Stephen Peterson, and because other Bolingbrook officers possess shotguns with barrels that fail to meet state minimums and have not been prosecuted.

    Schoenstedt indicated that he intended to rule on the motion at a 1:30 p.m. hearing Nov. 20. Technically, the ruling itself would not terminate the case, but Brodsky said it would give him access to charging documents and other files not available to him now, and could be used as evidence to convince a jury to reject the charges.

    “It’s a trump card,” Brodsky said. “If the jury finds that the state brought this for selective or vindictive purposes, then no matter what the other evidence is, they have to acquit.”

    Will County State’s Attorney’s spokesman Charles Pelkie called the motion a “fishing expedition” that would provide Peterson’s defense team access to files that they otherwise would not be entitled to see.

    Pelkie reiterated State’s Attorney James Glasgow’s assertion that “resolution” of one of the cases in hich Peterson is considered a suspect would occur soon.

    He refused to say if that belief is tied to legislation approved unanimously Wednesday by the Illinois Senate that would allow greater use of hearsay evidence at trial. The measure is expected to pass the Illinois House later this month.

    Peterson said the prospect of the bill becoming law is not keeping him awake at night.

    “Not really,” he said. “It’s resolution. Maybe there’s no evidence so they’re not going to charge.”

    Peterson is considered a suspect in the death of his third wife Kathleen Savio, who was found dead in a bathtub in her Bolingbrook home in 2004, as well as in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, who was last seen Oct. 29, 2007.

  90. I just can’t get over the irony of a murder suspect with a publicist.

    Does anyone else find that odd ??

    Glenn Selig wants Drew portrayed as a respected murder suspect, a murder suspect with integrity, a considerate murder suspect, a loving murder suspect, a harmless murder suspect, a devoted murder suspect, a murder suspect with credibility, a reliable murder suspect, an astute murder suspect, a benevolent murder suspect, a nubile murder suspect, a compassionate murder suspect, a stylish murder suspect, a balanced murder suspect, an altruistic murder suspect, a sincere murder suspect etc etc.,

    The list of sublime character traits can go on and on but it doesn’t matter how you dress him up, at the end of the day he’s still A MURDER SUSPECT !

  91. Thanks, Bucket. Good article.

    2many – LOL, it does appear that you are absolutely right. A respectable, devoted, loving murder suspect, to say the least.

    Not working.

  92. Plesae, 2many… Don’t diminish the man. He’s no run of the mill murder suspect, he’s a MULTIPLE Murder Suspect!

  93. I wonder if the prosecution have Ric Mimms (spelling?) lined up to testify at the gun trial. It would be so easy to show that he was untrustworthy with firearms, so could’t be trusted even via Stephen to ensure the gun did not hit the streets.

  94. I’m already laughing at the idea of a murder suspect with a publicist.

    That alone is so bizarre……

    I know Drew considers himself to be a bit of a jokester, but hey he really is …….

  95. WBBM report, above.
    Brodsky said he considered the prosecution selective because no attempt has been made to arrest Stephen Peterson
    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    He never took posession of it, did he? Police kept it.

  96. Perhaps it had to come. Trials can be all about the jury consultants, professional witnesses…this seems the logical extreme end of an example of add-ons and peripheral issues that maybe influenced one way or another.

  97. bucketoftea // November 13, 2008 at 5:27 pm

    WBBM report, above.
    Brodsky said he considered the prosecution selective because no attempt has been made to arrest Stephen Peterson
    * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    He never took posession of it, did he? Police kept it.

    **

    Not sure about where they got the gun from. For some reason I had thought that they only found some guns at his house and that they got others from elsewhere but they never said where or how they got them (aside from the folding gun).

    My question is – Isn’t it weird when your lawyer complains that your child isn’t charged with something as your defense? What if they go and charge him now to make it even? I wonder what Drew said to people when he pulled them over for speeding and their response was “But the other guy was speeding too!”

  98. November 13, 2008 Chicagoist
    “Drew Peterson Law” OK’d By State Senate

    2008_11_13_drew.jpgThe Illinois State Senate yesterday unanimously approved legislation that would allow the dead to testify (in addition to voting) from beyond the grave. This piece of legislation appears to help Will County prosecutors in their case against Drew Peterson, who is suspected of killing two of his wives, by admitting hearsay statements as evidence in murder trials. That means if I tell you, “I saw Chicagoist Editor-in-Chief Marcus Gilmer kill Anderson Cooper,” and I turn up dead the next day, my statement to you can be used as evidence against Marcus for the death of Cooper and myself. [Ed's note - I would never dream of ruffling a hair on Anderson's head. Hunter, on the other hand, took the last donut in the Chicagoist breakroom this morning. - M.G.]

    So, how does this affect the Peterson case? Well, a minister says Stacy told him Drew killed his previous wife, Kathleen. If the House passes this legislation next week, the minister’s statement can be used against Drew. Although, how it will be used in the Peterson case is unclear. Hearsay statements can only be accepted if the source is deemed credible, and convictions cannot be made solely on these statements. So yes, we did learn something from the Salem Witch Hunts.

    Although, this latest move by the senate begs the question, which is scarier: Drew Peterson or our state government trying to pass a law that’s arguably aimed at one person?

  99. Oke I just want to comment on this statement:

    “Joel wants them to further prove that they are doing this to be vindictive, singling Drew out, when there are other officers in Bolingbrook PD with barrels on their guns the very same way. Joel provided a time-line stating that once the State found out that Drew’s guns were going to be given back, then they without reason revoked his FOID card and no one including that judge knew they were going to do that. Plus the fact that at first they were NOT going to charge him with anything. Proving once again this is a witch hunt.”

    I don’t understand what is being said here.

    BBPD is vindictively singling out Drew because other BBPD Officers have illegally shortened barrels on their guns also ?

    Oke I hope Brodsky can come up with the list of names of these Police Officers, just like Chief McGury asked him to do at the time Joel accused BBPD “everybody” in their Police Department was illegally using BBPD computers to check info on their family and friends.

    Police Chief McGury asked Brodsky for a list of names of these supposed offenders and Brodsky reply was: “that is not my job”

    LMAO again !!

    Oke next Brodsky says the Judge didn’t even know Drews FOID card was going to be revoked and initially Drew was not going to be charged with anything.

    Since when does Joel Brodsky know what the Judge knows or if Drew is going to be charged with anything or not.

    Did the Judge tell him that or if not WHO told him that or is that another one of those rabbits he pulls out of his backside…….

  100. ……Hearsay statements can only beaccepted if thesource is deemed credible, and convictions cannot be made solely on these statements.

    * * * * * *
    Sounds fair to me!

    It’s not just about DP, stupid. He’s a monster, but there are thousands and thousands. People who have escaped justice by intimidation or murder. In his dreams. who wrote that carp?

  101. Yes, I wondered as well how Joel knew what the Judge was or wasn’t aware of in regards to the FOID card or whether or not Drew was going to be charged.

  102. “Joel wants them to further prove that they are doing this to be vindictive, singling Drew out”

    Joel in Court:

    “Your Honor, I want BBPD prove they are vindictively singling out my client”

    The Judge:

    “Sorry Joel, YOU are the one to prove they are vindictively singling out your client”

    Joel:

    “That’s not my job”

    LMAO !!

  103. Hi everyone: I feel so flummoxed over what I have read above. First of all, who is ‘ex-law’? Does that person have a name? Is it also true Sharon, has taken in Lenny and Paula? Yikes.

    I’m so glad the ‘Hearsay bill’ will be passed. If Drew were to get off on the Gun charges, then I hope before he leaves the Jury Room, they throw cuffs on him for the Muder of Kathleen Savio. How I would love to see that smirk of his
    wiped off his face in astonishment! Part of me does feel the Gun Charge might be considered
    vindictive. It there really are other officers on the BBPD using gun’s like Drew’s then the defense may have a case. But, if Joel cannot really come up with anyone to vouch for that..then Drew just may do time for that charge. I hope so anyway. I also think there is some merit to the argument of: “Not wanting that Gun to end up on the street”.

    If it is true that Drew is having Thanksgiving at his home this year,..you can bet he has a hottie he wants to show off. What a cunning monster this guy is, and what a stupid woman to get mixed up with sociopath like him. Hopefully,
    things will start to speed up, and Mr. Smooth will be locked up for good.

    Drew is not through hurting people. If he were to get married again, I just know he wants to make sure his kids do not get to see anyone from the Savio Family or the Cales Family if he can help it. That would give him satisfaction even if he did go to jail. He still needs to be in
    control, out of jail or in jail.

    For the prsecution. jp

  104. I haven’t seen any post on whether there is a search that volunteers could participate in … last week there was a search but it was areas that were determined to be too dangerous for volunteers.

    I know Fuzz usually lets us know, but if anyone knows anything, please post …

Comments are closed.