Your Thread – December 15

Looks like the last thread is starting to fill up so here’s a new one.

~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.~

Advertisements

156 thoughts on “Your Thread – December 15

  1. Not lookin very good, is it,givarat? lol how’s that for swift and rapier-like analysis?

    I keep thinking about the fedreal agent on the tv news who struggled to keep a straight face about the crooked state of Illinois.

  2. Sorry – I was posting on the wrong thread…

    Givarat, AFAIK, Raghuveer Nayak is one of Brodsky’s commercial clients from his pre-Drew defense days.

    Too bad, Noway. It was much funnier when the error was intact. I’ll just take comfort in the knowledge that it was probably emailed out to many many people in its original ridiculous form!

  3. I did a little poking around on author’s forums and the consensus is that Kunati (Armstrong’s publishing company) is not a happy place at present. No wonder he’s grasping at straws in those press releases:

    “I also heard back from 8 of their authors now. A couple saw my messages here and emailed me. None is happy…The authors I spoke to had horror stories like review copies not going out on time (or ever), bullying from the publisher in their group emails, too many broken promises, royalty checks that are months late, too much promotion of the publisher’s books and other stuff. This is just the stuff they’ve told me. One told me he knows of at least 20 unhappy authors at Kunati. “

  4. “I’ve had now four authors contact me anonymously, all with the same stories of ARCs not going out, verbal and written abuse by Derek for any author asking questions about why their books aren’t being marketed and why he’s spending more time marketing his own book.

    There are concerns about royalties, and he refuses to send out royalty statements that would put those questions to rest…

    …I’ve seen emails where he verbally abuses the author, accusing them of not promoting their books, and threatening to take their titles out of print. Sure, if a book isn’t selling, OP is a viable option, but I’m shocked that any publisher would talk to their authors in this demeaning manner. If an author asks questions, Derek either ignores them, or he sends a very nasty message.

    The authors I heard from today said that he’s not talking to any of his authors right now. It’s all so sad. These guys were lauded by PW and named Foreword Publisher of the Year. From what I’ve seen, it’s an illusion…”

  5. He’s “outgrown” publishing, I think, what with all the crime reporting and tv appearances and new exclusive interviews……he may be contemplating a career in television, like Brodsky.

  6. “And so another publisher starts to tank. Unless they’re all lying, which while possible seems a little unlikely in this case. It’s really sad”

    “Sad to say, they’re not lying. I’ve seen the emails from Derek. They’re…horrible…shocking.”

  7. I guess this really would explain why a marketer/publisher would panic and resort to publishing a murder suspect’s memoirs.

    The whole publishing venture was a marketing experiment that failed. Apparantly his authors are being thrown under the bus while he scrambles to pump money back into the company however he can.

  8. I guess the ‘takeaway’ I got from the blog posts is that if I were an author at Kunati, I would hope that my publisher would be concentrating on the job of promoting my book, not living out his childhood fantasy of being a PI or crime journalist, appearing on TV shows as a self-described expert on a current high profile missing person’s case, etc. I can see why they would be concerned.

  9. Gatehouse – for a moment, I saw an “edit” option next to everyone’s nic, date and time. Now it’s gone. Is there a change going to happen? Why did I see that and now it’s disappeared.

    (I did see it, I did).

    Thanks……

  10. Joel will be a guest on the Justice Interrupted radio show tomorrow night:

    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/justiceinterrupted

    Date / Time: 12/16/2008 10:00 PM
    Category: Life
    Call-in Number: (914) 338-0663

    Join Author and Police Office Stacy Dittrich, Author and Attorney Robin Sax, Author and Advocate Susan Murphy Milano and they discuss the latest crimes in the news. This weeks Guests Author and Victims Rights Expert Andy Kahn, Joel Brodsky (Drew Peterson’s attorney) and Susan Waller.

  11. facsmiley // December 15, 2008 at 11:20 am

    I did a little poking around on author’s forums and the consensus is that Kunati (Armstrong’s publishing company) is not a happy place at present. No wonder he’s grasping at straws in those press releases:

    “I also heard back from 8 of their authors now. A couple saw my messages here and emailed me. None is happy…The authors I spoke to had horror stories like review copies not going out on time (or ever), bullying from the publisher in their group emails, too many broken promises, royalty checks that are months late, too much promotion of the publisher’s books and other stuff. This is just the stuff they’ve told me. One told me he knows of at least 20 unhappy authors at Kunati.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Without wanting to sound too sanctimonious, is it a surprise the type of pople that gravitate towards Drew Petersons defense and arrange publicity for him ?? publicity ???

  12. Rescue, for your sake, I hope the Edit button really existed, if only for a minute.

    The day I start hallucinating and seeing Edit buttons is the day I know I’ve been blogging way too much. 😉

  13. Yeah, but I even copied the line to show you guys, got busy with something else, and, of course, what I saved got overwritten with something else. (By now, I hear you guys saying, yeah, sure.)

    Um, I think I’m getting deeper and deeper in my little fantasy here, so I’ll just wait until I have another hallucination before I go any further.

  14. More feedback on Derek Armstrong’s publishing house:

    I was skeptical of Kunati initially, because the owner really didn’t have any commercial publishing experience. But I put my skepticism on hold because Kunati seemed to be making the right moves, with a prestigious distributor, industry reviews and marketing, and handsomely-designed books. Still, there were things that made me uneasy–the owner publishing so many of his own books, the poor quality of some of the Kunati books I received for review. So I have to say I’m not totally shocked to hear that there are problems now…

    …I’ve seen a number of publishers whose sole purpose was to write and promote their own books, but the way the industry is run, it’s hard for the self published author to get very far. They needed other authors – a lineup – to create the illusion of being a legitimate publisher in the eyes of the industry. What happens in these scenarios is the publisher has a stack of authors who recieve the bare minimum in production and marketing attention because the lion’s share goes to the real target; the publisher’s own book. It’s window dressing at its finest.

  15. This article says:

    “DNA test results from the child’s remains should be available in two weeks. ”

    Source: http://www.myfoxorlando.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=8082195&version=2&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=1.1.1

    I would have thought that they would have had the official answer by now since they were certainly pushing this DNA test to the top priority of the stack.

    They are still out there searching the scene and don’t seem to be leaving any stones unturned. I know the defense team wants to get out there as well but I personally don’t think they should be able to until the police gather whatever evidence they discover. I think it is a conflict of interest to have the defense team there before the police have finished their work because the defense team could potentially hide something they find that could indicate their client’s guilt. I think this is why it is not always good to charge someone with a crime before finding the body. I don’t recall ever hearing about the police finding a body after charges were placed – except in cases where the person led the police to the body.

    I do hope for Cindy and George’s sake that the State doesn’t delay the processing of the DNA to coincide with the end of their search of the area just to make sure that the defense team has no standing in court to request being at the scene.

  16. FYI – There will be a emergency hearing at 2pm (EST) that will be available on local6.com regarding Casey’s team asking about a second autopsy and access to photos and other reports of the crime scene.

  17. I hope someone can tell us later if any of this takes place…

    ROBINSON MICHAEL 12 16 8 404 930 08CF000098 0 DOMESTIC BTRY/PHYSICAL 2 Pretrial
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 12 16 8 404 930 08CF000098 0 INTIMIDATION/PHYSICAL 1 Pretrial
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 12 16 8 404 930 08CF000098 0 BATTERY/CAUSE BODILY 3 Pretrial
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 12 17 8 900 04F 000340 Hearing

  18. I’m watching the Blago impeachment proceedings on CNN. Gosh, the Illinois house is a lot better behaved today than when they were voting on the Hearsay bill amendment.

    No one has told them Shhhhhhhhh once yet!

  19. Huh, now defense prosecutors are sending out press releases? You’ll all be pleased to know that Joel is available for interviews! 😉

    http://www.prnewschannel.com/absolutenm/templates/?a=1059&z=4

    State’s Attorney Takes Another Shot at Gun Charges Against Drew Peterson

    Still fresh from a courtroom victory, Drew Peterson’s attorney says the State’s Attorney has appealed the dismissal of gun charges.
    thepublicityagency.com – December 16, 2008

    (PRNewsChannel) / Chicago, Ill. / Drew Peterson, the former law enforcement officer accused in the disappearance of his fourth wife Stacy and implicated in the death of his third wife may once again face gun charges that, if convicted, could land him in jail.

    The Will County State’s Attorney Office appealed the dismissal of gun charges against Peterson, according to court records.

    “We are confident that the dismissal will be upheld and the appeal dismissed, but should prosecutors win their appeal, we’re equally confident that prosecutors will lose the case at trial,” says Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s lead criminal defense attorney. “No police officer has even been charged with such a crime. This is a vindictive, selective prosecution.”

    Brodsky claims that under the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (LEOSA), Peterson should not be facing this or any other gun charges.

    The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act is a United States federal law enacted in 2004 that allows two classes of persons, the “qualified law enforcement officer” and the “qualified retired law enforcement officer,” to carry a concealed firearm in any jurisdiction in the United States, regardless of any state or local law to the contrary, with certain exceptions.

    Last month, a Will County judge dismissed all felony gun charges against former Bolingbrook Police Sgt. Drew Peterson after the prosecution refused to comply with the judge’s order to give the defense internal documents leading up to the charges against Peterson.

    Peterson was arrested in May for allegedly possessing a modified assault rifle with a barrel of less than 16 inches. Authorities had seized the rifle while investigating disappearance of Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy, who vanished Oct. 28, 2007.

    But Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, had questioned the timeline of how the gun case unfolded and demanded the prosecution hand over records. When they refused, Judge Richard Schoenstedt said he had no choice but to dismiss the case.

    Peterson has not been charged with any crime relating to the disappearance of his wife Stacy or the death of his ex-wife Kathleen Savio whose death has been reclassified as a homicide.

  20. Facs – Very interesting. Why is the defense putting out the publicity on this one. Seems to me that with so many people whose attention has been divereted to the Caylee Anthony disappearance that they’d be happy to be flying under the radar right now.

  21. Facs – I wonder why I can watch this stuff on CNN but don’t see it on the audio/video section from the Illinois State Government link.

  22. TAI – I wondered as well why the release is coming from Joel B. Is he so sure that the appeal will be denied, that he wants to put it out in the public eye to demoralize the prosecution?

    It doesn’t seem like the kind of thing the defense would want to advertise…

  23. This Rep. Black guy who is complaining about meeting each day at 10am and not being prepared for a few days of being there. Did the guy think that they could get everything together and impeach the guy in one day?

    Is this the same guy that spoke out about the Hearsay bill when they were approving the amendatory veto??

  24. Our state is going to be a laughing stock after hearing the committee chairperson say that they will do the meeting tomorrow at 11am due to Rep. Black’s concerns about his underwear!

    That soundbyte will surely be on the news tonight.

  25. Sad truth that some cases go on for a long, long time even when a potential suspect is identified:

    ***

    Excerpt from article: Suspect to be named in ’81 Adam Walsh slaying

    “Walsh has long believed Toole killed Adam. Toole died in a prison in 1996, while he was serving a life sentence on unrelated charges.

    Toole’s confessions in the Walsh case were questioned by police, because Toole confessed to other murders that police knew he did not commit.

    Although the details of his story changed, Toole did lead police to the Sears store and pointed out the spot where Adam was last seen. He also led police to the canal where the boy’s head was found.

    But investigators could not find Adam’s body where Toole said he left it.

    A bloody piece of carpet removed from Toole’s car was lost by police many years ago — before DNA testing became available.”

    ***
    Full Story: http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/12/16/walsh.case.closed/index.html

  26. This is why JB didn’t favour reporting restrictions……no free advertising. It is not news, is it? They said they would appeal.

  27. I love what the judge just said in the Anthony hearing. He told Baez that he cannot help him interfere with a murder investigation by letting him at the scene before the law enforcement has completed their full review of the site. Baez’s motions were denied again.

  28. TAI – Well that’s a feel good holiday story. 😦

    I don’t think it’s this country. I think idiots and a-holes exist worldwide.

  29. What it is with Brodsky? Things quiet down for him and his suspect client, giving his client some “peace and quiet,” and he’s stirring it up again. No one involved with this case should be blamed anymore for anything. This is the most media hungry defense attorney of all time, and if his client dares to open his pathetic mouth about how the media labels him as sinister, I’m going to throw my shoes at both their faces.

    What in the world are they doing by reminding anyone and everyone that Drew Peterson is still looking for his moment of fame, along with his attorney? What a pathetic bunch. Throwing my shoes at Armstrong too.

  30. LOL, “what it is?” I should leave it that way, because it’s as silly sounding as Brodsky, but I did mean “what is it.”

    Where’s my edit button?

  31. Facs – Noway – ah, ha. There it is – the edit option! I’m seeing it again!!!!!!!!!

    rescueapet // December 16, 2008 at 1:57 pm (edit)

    This too;

    Notify me of followup comments via email

  32. Brodsky claims that under the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (LEOSA), Peterson should not be facing this or any other gun charges.

    The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act is a United States federal law enacted in 2004 that allows two classes of persons, the “qualified law enforcement officer” and the “qualified retired law enforcement officer,” to carry a concealed firearm in any jurisdiction in the United States, regardless of any state or local law to the contrary, with certain exceptions.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Where does it say a retired police officer is allowed to carry an illegal weapon ??

    Isn’t the emphasis on “illegal” or the fact the firearm was illegally shortened that landed Drew in Court , rather than the fact he is allowed to carry a concealed weapon anywhere in the USA ??

    Another snow job from Brodsky, but then again it is winter after all !

  33. JAH -to me that’s always where it looks as if his defense won’t work. A ‘concealed’ weapon is a far cry from an ‘illegally altered’ weapon.

  34. If I recall correctly their argument is that LEOSA allows them to carry any firearm that isn’t listed as an exclusion in its wording:

    ***

    “‘‘(e) As used in this section, the term ‘firearm’ does not include—
    ‘‘(1) any machinegun (as defined in section 5845 of the National Firearms Act);
    ‘‘(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title); and
    ‘‘(3) any destructive device (as defined in section 921 of this title).’’.”

    ***

    Source: http://www.napo.org/HR218.pdf

    ***

    This is the problem with vague or incomplete laws. It does not state anywhere in this law that the firearm should or or is not required to meet the laws of the state the person resides.

    That is why this case will be one of interpreting the law. Many will say the law was not intended to allow people to carry weapons that are considered illegal in their state – it was really written to allow law enforcement officers (current and retired ones) to carry a concealed weapon even if their state didn’t allow it.

  35. I think that writing laws is as complicated as it seems to be for me to get my teens to understand what I want from them. You have to get down to full specifics with tons of details or they say something like “Oh, I didn’t realize you mean to pick things up before dusting that end table.” Common sense doesn’t seem to apply in either case.

  36. An illegal weapon is an illegal weapon and an illegally altered weapon is an illegally altered weapon.

    A Police Officer/retired Police Officer owning or carrying an illegal/illegally altered weapon doesn’t make it a legal weapon because he is a Police Officer.

    Let’s not start falling for Brodsky speak !!

  37. BTW a concealed weapon is not the same as an illegal weapon.

    An illegal weapon is an illegal weapon, no matter what State in the USA you’re in.

  38. Some info on individual State laws carrying a conceled weapon.

    Once again laws concerning a concealed weapon is not the same as an illegal weapon.

    An illegal weapon is an illegal weapon, no matter where you are.

    As of July 2008, two states (Wisconsin and Illinois and Washington D.C. have no provision for legal concealed-carry. There are currently movements in both of these states to pass concealed-carry laws. Legislation was passed in 2004 and again in 2005 in Wisconsin, but was vetoed by the governor. Conceal and carry bills are introduced every year in Illinois, but usually fail to make it out of committee. Governor Rod Blagojevich (!!) has vowed to veto any such legislation that makes it to his desk. On March 11, 2008, nearly 2,500 Illinois gun owners marched on the capitol in Springfield, as part of IGOLD (Illinois Gun Owners Lobby Day) and demanded a conceal and carry provision and also called for an end to more gun control. On March 23, 2006, the legislature of the state of Kansas (which was formerly no-issue) overrode Governor Kathleen Sebelius’s veto and enacted a concealed-carry law that became effective July 1, 2006. The District of Columbia is “no-issue” in accordance with its prior blanket ban on most firearms, including a total ban on ownership and possession of handguns and a requirement that long guns be kept locked or disassembled. The ban on handgun ownership and the requirement for keeping long guns locked and disassembled was overturned in the Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller, but the decision, even though it struck down a ban on carry of concealable weapons, will likely not soon result in the restoration of the right to carry firearms outside the home.

  39. ‘‘(2) any firearm silencer (as defined in section 921 of this title)…”

    I’ve seen his “flash suppressor” described as a silencer. (?)

  40. FYI – I didn’t say I was falling for this language – I’m just pointing out that was the argument they are making.

  41. “We are confident that the dismissal will be upheld and the appeal dismissed, but should prosecutors win their appeal, we’re equally confident that prosecutors will lose the case at trial,” says Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s lead criminal defense attorney. “No police officer has even been charged with such a crime. This is a vindictive, selective prosecution.”

    Brodsky claims that under the Law Enforcement Officer Safety Act (LEOSA), Peterson should not be facing this or any other gun charges.

    So according to Brodsky it is vindictive/selective prosecution to charge a police officer/retired police officer with carrying/possessing an illegal or illegally altered gun.

  42. Actually, I did come across a case where an ex-police officer was convicted of not only carrying but discharging an illegally altered weapon.

    However, he ended up with only a 30-day sentence and probation (he was firing the gun on his own property).

    I’ll try to scrounge it up again if anyone’s interested.

  43. Oke, I’m looking at other cases where Police Officers have been charged with posession of illegal guns, which according to Brodsky has never happened before.

    Canadian Police don’t think it is such a good idea either:

    Toronto Cop Charged After Illegal Gun Barrel Allegedly Imported
    Thursday July 24, 2008
    CityNews.ca Staff
    A Toronto cop has been arrested and charged after an illegal gun barrel was allegedly brought into Canada.

    The suspect, a seven year veteran of the force, allegedly purchased the device online.

    But the package never made it, thanks to a Canadian border guard who allegedly intercepted the item. The barrel is classified as a prohibited device under the Criminal Code of Canada.

    Constable Alan McCullough, 39, has been charged with:
    1) Importing a Prohibited Device,
    2) Smuggling Prohibited Goods,
    3) Careless Storage of a Firearm.

  44. The Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act is a United States federal law enacted in 2004 that allows two classes of persons, the “qualified law enforcement officer” and the “qualified retired law enforcement officer,” to carry a concealed firearm in any jurisdiction in the United States, regardless of any state or local law to the contrary, with certain exceptions.

    Key word here Brodsky. Concealed firearm not illegally altered firearm.

  45. bucketoftea // December 16, 2008 at 5:19 pm

    you’re a little bit redhot today, TAI! thanks

    ***

    At first I wasn’t sure if this was a compliment or not! But after seeing the “thanks” I think it was.

  46. thinkaboutit2 // December 16, 2008 at 5:04 pm

    FYI – I didn’t say I was falling for this language – I’m just pointing out that was the argument they are making.

    ++++++++++++++++++++

    And I didn’t mean you personally falling for Brodsky speak.

    It was meant in general terms – (like the whole world !)

  47. Here is what I don’t understand about the appeal. Say it’s granted. Then Brodsky says that their defense will be vindictive prosecution (again). Then the defense asks for discovery materials. Then the judge says ‘Turn them over”.

    Then aren’t we back where we started?

  48. JAH – Like I said – sometimes I’m slow. I realized you were speaking in general terms but thought you may have included me in that group.

    Facs – I think the appeal is just for the judge’s ruling that the prosecution has to turn all of the documents over.

    Two things could happen:

    1) The appeal judge may say that the first judge was right requiring that. The prosecution can then appeal to an even higher court (I think).

    2) The appeal judge may say that the first judge was wrong requiring that. This will be sent back down to the original judge who will then have to change his order.

    I’m not certain of this but think that is how appeals work.

  49. I forgot all about Joel being on Justice interrupted and only caught the last few minutes.

    I heard him say that he did the press release about the appeal because they knew word was going to get out and they wanted to put it out there that they aren’t discouraged and don’t think it will go anywhere. Sort of a preemptive strike?

    He also said that they don’t have a contract with Derek Armstrong for a second book and repeated what he has said before about neither he nor Drew making any money from it.

  50. I myself think that the judges ruling to turn over ALL evidence was just to vague for the prosecution to go with. They will probably try to limit/seperate which evidence has to do with which case so there isn’t a constant uphill fight or catch 22 in what evidence is relevant to which case. A very smart move if you ask me. This way Joel can’t call foul on not turning over evidence and say the judge told you to so do it or let my client walk. IMO

  51. December 17, 2008

    By JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com
    Drew Peterson strode out of court a free man a couple months ago when a judge dropped the felony gun charge he faced — but he’s not in the clear yet.

    Prosecutors on Friday filed an appeal to Judge Richard Schoenstedt’s order to dismiss the weapons case.

    » Click to enlarge image

    Drew Peterson (left) and Kathleen Savio

    “We indicated right from the start that we planned to appeal this decision,” said Charles B. Pelkie, the spokesman for the Will County State’s Attorney’s Office. “We fully expect to win on appeal.”

    Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, was not convinced.

    “They would be smart to leave him alone,” Brodsky said.

    Gun case

    Peterson — the sole suspect in his much-younger fourth wife’s October 2007 disappearance and the subject of public scrutiny for the unsolved March 2004 homicide of his third wife — was arrested in May on a charge of unlawful use of a weapon for owning a Colt AR-15 assault rifle with a barrel shorter than the state-mandated 16 inches.
    In November, Schoenstedt ordered the state’s attorney’s office to surrender internal documents to Peterson’s defense team so they could prepare to prove Peterson was the victim of a vindictive prosecution.

    Assistant State’s Attorney John Connor refused to comply with the order, and Schoenstedt dropped the charges.

    The authorities have retained custody of the seized assault weapon, a rifle Peterson said he carried while a part of the Bolingbrook’s SWAT team but never fired on the job.

    “In the line of duty? No,” Peterson said of discharging the assault weapon. “Just training.”

    No evidence?

    After Schoenstedt kicked out the gun case in November, Pelkie did correctly predict the case would be appealed. Nearly a month before this, State’s Attorney James Glasgow himself said he expected to conclude either the probe into the disappearance of Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, or the slaying of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.
    “I fully expect there to be a resolution in at least one of these investigations in the near future,” Glasgow said in a written statement.

    This has yet to happen, and again, Brodsky was skeptical.

    “I still don’t see any evidence of any wrongdoing by Drew,” Brodsky said when asked about Glasgow’s statement. “I still don’t think there will be any charges.”

    * * * *
    Good morning!

  52. Bucket,

    Good Morning! Just got done shoveling bottom of driveway. Wish we know when the court date was? May indicate when a resolution in one of these cases will take place.

    “They would be smart to leave him alone,” Brodsky said.

    Is the above a threat by Brodsky?

  53. Good morning everyone.

    I think Brodsky should take his own advice: “that would be smart to leave him alone.”

    Engaged, heh? Brodsky happened to forget to put that in the press release. I’m listening to Fox News now, and she’s 23 years old. She’s met his children.

  54. Drew Peterson was asked about the engagement, and his answer was “Oh my God, I can’t believe this news is out there. There’s no way I’m talking unless my publicist or Joel says it’s okay.” Joel has no comment. He’s “not commenting on his personal life.”

    She lives in Bolingbrook, within 15 minutes.

    Apparently Peterson is upset that the news people are reporting on this. He’s concerned because of how they’ve ruined things for him before.

  55. LOL … he must have met her sneaking out the back of his house. Maybe he was lurking in her yard when their eyes met …

  56. Yeah, apple, it’s all sad. He’s not even worth us wasting our breath over.

    If the news people are reporting correctly and Peterson is truly upset the news is out, it sounds as though he may be concerned that this young woman’s family isn’t aware of any of this. Woo boy, I hope they don’t take it well.

  57. And to think, all of a sudden Joel doesn’t want to talk about his client’s personal life.

    Fox is going to have more coverage shortly. Earlier, one of the reporters said she got a couple of voice mails from Kathleen’s sister asking if this rumor was true. Apparently, Bosco commented also. Everyone is flabergasted. I’ll let you know what the next segment reports.

  58. Publicist: Drew Peterson engaged
    December 17, 2008 at 8:54 AM | Comments (0)

    Drew Peterson’s publicist says the former police sergeant suspected in the disappearance of his wife is engaged to be married again.

    Glenn Selig says Peterson proposed within the last week after dating the woman for about four months. He says the woman is 23.

    That’s the same age Stacy Peterson was when she disappeared in October 2007. Selig wouldn’t provide any details about the woman and Peterson wouldn’t comment.

    The engagement was first reported in a news release Wednesday morning by Derek Armstrong, the author of a book about Peterson.

    Peterson claims Stacy Peterson left him for another man.

    ***

    Source: http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2008/12/drew-peterson-reported-engaged.html

  59. There’s a defense attorney on now, and she’s reporting they have information that the GJ is continuing to meet, and that Peterson’s attorney has to know that an indictment is coming down, probably around the first of the year, probably regarding Savio. She said that Peterson is ruining his image, and so is his attorney, and that is the talk of others saying that.

    She said he’s not doing anything legally that is wrong, but since he’s still married, he has to prove that Stacy abandoned him, which he’s not going to be able to prove.

    She gave the impression that other attorneys don’t think too highly of how Peterson’s attorney is handling his image problem. She said they’re both responsible for making a bad impression on his future jury pool.

  60. rescueapet // December 17, 2008 at 9:15 am

    Drew Peterson was asked about the engagement, and his answer was “Oh my God, I can’t believe this news is out there. There’s no way I’m talking unless my publicist or Joel says it’s okay.”

    ***

    OK – So is this confirmation from his publicist or did his publicist put the news out there?

  61. I have seen her and with him. If it were my daughter, family member, friend ect…I would be sickened. Maybe she is in it for the money in the end. JMO

  62. think – if Armstrong is claiming to have made the initial announcement, you can rest assured that Peterson and Brodsky WANTED this news out there. Armstrong has an uncanny knack for exclusive press releases that he claims are from his “inside” source.

    Yeah, his “inside” source is Peterson and Brodsky.

    First it was the mock trial, then the news of the meeting with a divorce attorney, and now the engagement. Armstrong seems to be their patsy in getting the news out on their behalf.

  63. Drew Peterson engaged to 23-year-old woman

    December 17, 2008

    BY JOE HOSEY Joliet Herald News

    Looks like it’s bride number 5 for Drew Peterson.

    “Yeah, he proposed and she accepted,” Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, said of his client’s impending nuptials.

    But Brodsky added, “I guess he’s got to get divorced.” Peterson’s current wife, Stacy, has been missing since last year.

    Peterson said he does not believe his marital status should prevent him from becoming engaged. “I was married to Kathleen when I was engaged to Stacy,” he said.

    Kathleen — Kathleen Savio, wife number 3 — was the victim of an unsolved March 2004 homicide. Stacy — wife number 4 — vanished in October 2007. State police say she is the victim of a potential homicide and have named Drew Peterson their sole suspect.

    Peterson’s publicist, Glenn Selig, said Drew’s betrothed is a 23-year-old woman from the Bolingbrook area, making her even younger than Stacy, who would be 24.

    A sleepy Peterson on Wednesday morning seemed perturbed that news of his engagement had leaked.

    “I can’t believe this is happening,” he said. “How the f— did this get out?”

    Peterson said he wants to keep details of his new love under wraps.

    “Last time I had a relationship, you guys screwed it all up,” he said of 22-year-old tanning salon worker Kim Matuska. “The police had her, the grand jury had her. I’m not putting her through all that.

  64. Though Peterson is still married to fourth wife Stacy, who was 23 when she disappeared last year, he has found a new 23-year-old fiancée, he told “Drew Peterson Exposed” author Derek Armstrong Tuesday.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,468348,00.html

    This just made me laugh. He has found a new 23-year-old fiancée … should we be looking for the old fiancée then?

  65. So, what happens if this 23 year old gets her head turned by a hot looking 24 year old guy? Does he off his new love, or take it in stride?

    Is she going to help on grandparents’ day when he’s watching is little granddaughter to be? She’ll enjoy that.

    Or, maybe he’s planning a new little Peterson himself. He seems to be obsessed with reproducing.

    What a mess.

  66. The kids have met her,” said Armstrong. “They like her and they know about this engagement.”

    Can the same be said about her family?

  67. “They like her and know about his engagement.” Funny, the little people and the teens are confiding in Armstrong now how they feel about yet another woman in their father’s life, or is it that the creep of a father is running the show and he’s the one that says what they like and don’t like?

    Isn’t it strange to anyone that Peterson is acting like this news is all leaked and he’s amazed by it, but, yet, Armstrong is able to say that his children are aware he’s engaged and they like his new wife-to-be?

    Wouldn’t the kids be the “last” ones you’d tell if you want to keep something quiet?

    Something smells fishy here.

  68. Fox is reporting that the 23 year old formed a tight bond/relationship with Armstrong when he began writing the book, and she’s the one that has been giving him information.

    I’m just the messenger……

  69. Wouldn’t the kids be the “last” ones you’d tell if you want to keep something quiet?

    😀 … it would be in my house!

    Okay, Rescue … now I really have to question this girl’s judgement.

    Engaged to Drew and formed a tight bond/relationship with Derek Armstrong.

    🙄

  70. rescueapet // December 17, 2008 at 9:53 am

    Fox is reporting that the 23 year old formed a tight bond/relationship with Armstrong when he began writing the book, and she’s the one that has been giving him information.

    I’m just the messenger……

    ***

    That is really weird then. Sure seems like someone is blabbing to Armstrong. If that “young girl” (as Drew calls her according to Fox Chicago) is talking to Armstrong then Drew needs to be careful about her.

    I mean – everyone knows that Armstrong is one of those people that cannot keep a secret even if his life depended on it. So anything he is told by Drew’s team is abso-freaking-lutely something they WANT publicized.

  71. Just my opinion but I think that this is all about Casey Anthony getting too much attention. He is wanting some more free trips!!! He is such an idiot. If anyone is such a stupid idiot to hook up with him then they deserve what they get. There is no way that any respectable girl would want to be with that baggy eyed, shriveled up nut job.

  72. Correction – I think I may have misread the Fox Chicago story where I thought it said that Drew called the person “a young girl”. After re-reading it I think it was Joel that may have called her that but I’m not positive.

  73. Maybe your governor was taking all the publicity and Drew couldn’t stand it.

    Like Think, I think this was a deliberate leak.

    I am surprised that she hasn’t released her name. I thought she would be proud to be engaged to Drew. It makes me wonder whether this relationship will last.

    Okay, I’m done being snarky for now. 😀

  74. Unfortunately as we have all seen he loves all of the attention and he has not been getting any lately. No one really wants him on their news programs which means not free limo and plane trips. He really believes that he is a celebrity and he is seeing that everyone has lost interest. When it gets quiet he always has to try to get back the attention.

  75. Snarky! I just love that word!

    Please don’t remind me of my wonderful governor!! Funny thing is that both he and Drew seem to have a similar trait in being able to somehow just gloss over what other people think of them.

    I mean – Blago had an all-time low approval rating in the single digits yet he was still talking about running for a third term. He now actually goes to the office to work and is writing and signing bills like nothing is wrong.

    Can someone say narcissist??

  76. “Last time I had a relationship, you guys screwed it all up,” he said of 22-year-old tanning salon worker Kim Matuska. “The police had her, the grand jury had her. I’m not putting her through all that.
    **************************

    Although at the time, there were great pains taken to try to convince the public that there was no relationship and the Drew was just being a nice helpful guy. Oh well, I guess that’s how you play the game.

    Good morning!

  77. Weird that last night Joel talked about Armstrong as if he didn’t really factor into things anymore. It was nothing he said but more his tone. He was asked about the possibility of another book with Armstrong and he said, “Armstrong? He wrote a book and made some money” or something like that. Obviously, there’s still a connection.

    It certainly would be entertaining if she were to turn out to be a “spy”.

    http://www.prnewschannel.com/absolutenm/templates/?a=1071&z=4

    Drew Peterson Spokesperson Releases Statement on Peterson Engagement
    thepublicityagency.com – December 17, 2008

    (PRNewsChannel) / Chicago, Ill. and Tampa, Fla. /
    The following statement is from Drew Peterson’s spokesperson Glenn Selig on a report of Peterson’s engagement to a 23 year old woman.

    “We can confirm that Drew Peterson recently became engaged to a 23 year old woman, as reported this morning by Derek Armstrong, author of Drew Peterson Exposed.”

    “Mr. Peterson is not doing any interviews.”

  78. Oh, how could I have left out this important addendum?!!

    “Editor’s note: Joel Brodsky is available for interviews.”

  79. Now the only thing confusing me is why Armstrong has not issued his own press release nor updated any of his many web sites with the story of the engagement.

    If he’s the one with the inside info, why is it that the Sun-times, Tribune and Fox have all scooped him?

  80. ABC News
    Peterson Plans to Wed Mystery Bride, 23
    Peterson Remains a Suspect in the Disappearance of His Fourth Wife, Stacy
    By EMILY FRIEDMAN

    Dec. 17, 2008 —

    Drew Peterson, the former Chicago police sergeant who is a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, and the homicide of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, is engaged again.

    Drew Peterson, 54, recently proposed to his 23-year-old girlfriend of four months, his publicist confirmed to ABCNews.com, but he will not reveal her identity in an attempt to shield her from the media.

    “Yes, Peterson is engaged,” said Glenn Selig, Drew Peterson’s publicist, who added the proposal occurred “in the past few days. But we’re not saying to who. He’s entitled to his privacy and so is she.”

    Drew Peterson garnered media attention after his wife, Stacy Peterson, 24, went missing Oct. 28, 2007. He was widely criticized for his blase attitude toward his wife’s disappearance, even alleging to the press that his wife’s PMS had led her to run off with another man.

    The case remains open and is under investigation by the Illinois State Police and the Will County State’s Attorney Office. A statement released by James Glasgow, Will County state’s attorney, said, “I fully expect there to be a resolution in at least one of these investigations in the near future.”

    Drew Peterson told ABC News in an interview last year that the search for Stacy Peterson was a “waste of time.”

    On the anniversary of Stacy Peterson’s disappearance, Drew Peterson told ABC’s “Good Morning America” that he hopes she one day turns up.

    “I hope someday she pops her head up and shows herself,” he said.

    Drew Peterson’s legal troubles grew when the body of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, was exhumed and he was named a suspect in her 2004 death, which had initially been ruled an accident. Authorities now believe Savio’s mysterious bathtub drowning was a homicide.

    But because Drew Peterson is still legally married to Stacy Peterson, a divorce will be necessary before he can set a date to walk down the aisle with his mystery bride.

    “He’s legally married still,” said Selig, “so I guess in order to get remarried he’ll need to get a divorce first.”

    According to the Chicago Tribune, Drew Peterson met with a high-profile divorce attorney to look into how to get granted a divorce on the basis of abandonment.
    Who Is Drew Peterson’s Bride-to-Be?

    With the identity of Drew Peterson’s fiancee being kept tightly under wraps, few details have emerged about the woman who was apparently one of six women the former cop had reportedly dated since Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.

    Derek Armstrong, author of “Drew Peterson Exposed” and a reporter who has followed the Peterson case for more than a year, first broke the news of Peterson’s engagement.

    According to Armstrong, Drew Peterson’s future bride was a former fan of his who first introduced herself to him through handwritten letters.

    “I asked him if she was one of his fans,” said Armstrong, “and he said ‘yes.’ He’s definitely been getting a lot of fan mail.”

    Armstrong said that Drew Peterson described his fiancee as “very attractive” and “svelte.” At 23 years old, she is one year younger than Stacy Peterson, who would be 24.

    When asked by Armstrong about the vast age different, Drew Peterson laughed and said, “I don’t care, not my problem.”

    The fiancee lives about 15 minutes from his home in Bolingbrook, Ill., according to Armstrong, and Drew Peterson has introduced her to his two children.

    The couple has not yet moved in together, said Armstrong. While the specifics of the proposal were not disclosed by Drew Peterson or his lawyer, Armstrong confirmed that a ring was involved.

    Peterson Shocked at Engagement Leak

    While Armstrong described Drew Peterson as someone who has “come to enjoy the media attention” after his wife’s disappearance, the former cop claimed otherwise in an interview this morning with the Chicago Sun-Times.

    “I can’t believe this is happening,” Drew Peterson told the paper. “How the f– did this get out?”

    “Last time I had a relationship, you guys screwed it all up,” he said.

    Drew Peterson is frustrated, said Armstrong, by the media attention but also seems to enjoy it.

    “He’s definitely frustrated he can’t sell the house and he can’t get married and the media is watching him,” said Armstrong. “He does think that if the name of his fiancee was disclosed it would break up the relationship.”

    “But he really doesn’t care what people think of him, that’s the truth,” said Armstrong. “He likes to be the center of attention, for sure.”

    Armstrong said that he asked Drew Peterson about his feelings for his wife, Stacy Peterson, whom after her disappearance he maintained he was still in love with.

    “I asked him, ‘what about Stacy? Last time we talked you said you’re still in love with her,'” said Armstrong.

    “[Drew Peterson] responded that ‘it’s hard to still be in love with her after everything she’s done,'” he said.

    “He’s holding on to his belief that she left him.”

    Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures

  81. “I hope someday she pops her head up and shows herself,”

    This phrase always gives me a particularly macabre visual….*shudders*

  82. In the abc news report, Armstrong “seems” to know a lot of information, but, on the other hand, this makes it sound as though he got it all by interviewing Peterson. Yet, on Fox, they said something to the effect that this woman is a personal source of his. What a circus. Too many rumors, too much information.

    I agree with gurlygirl, if she’s stupid enough to hook up with him, she deserves a miserable life.

    BTW, the abc news report says he introduced her to his “two” children. Lest he not forget, he’s got “six” children, four of whom are minors.

  83. Hmmm – So this article shows that Drew spoke with Armstrong and then wonders how it got leaked??!! I was thinking maybe someone else told Armstrong.

  84. Maybe Armie has come to realize that not having actual press credentials is proving to be an obstacle to his self-assigned role a a journalist.

    And perhaps he’s found that selling info is more lucrative.

  85. gurlygirl said….

    There is no way that any respectable girl would want to be with that baggy eyed, shriveled up nut job.

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

    Boy, that just says it all! Perfect.

  86. Maybe the ‘interview’ with Drew was kind of like the ‘interview’ with Pastor Schori – an off-the-record conversation that ended up being on-the-record.

    But I still can’t imagine why Drew would share any confidential information with that man…

    It is puzzling.

  87. “The engagement was first reported in a news release Wednesday morning by Derek Armstrong, the author of a book about Peterson.”

    Where is this news release? It didn’t come from Glenn’s agency. Why?

  88. Well, there’s all kinds of conflicting reports coming from the circus of stars. It’s being reported that the children know about the engagement and “like” her. Yet, abc news reports Armstrong saying she’s met with the “two” children. Two little people know what engagement means?

    The fiancee lives about 15 minutes from his home in Bolingbrook, Ill., according to Armstrong, and Drew Peterson has introduced her to his two children.

  89. This appears to be the actual press release Armstrong passed around. I found this on Greta’s OTR blog. He didn’t go through the Selig Agency, it appears, but sent out his own press release.

    He says in this article that Peterson spoke to him exclusively, yet, Peterson claims he’s outraged that this information is out in the open.

    This PR speaks of his “four children.” Yet, he’s quoted, as I said above, saying his “two” children were introduced to her.

    Sounds like the clowns didn’t have a board meeting before they came out with this latest pos.

    Huh?

    From:
    To: Howard, Cory
    Sent: Wed Dec 17 08:44:23 2008
    Subject: RELEASE—Drew Peterson Engaged to 23-Year Old

    Drew Peterson, Suspected in Disappearance of Wife, Engaged to 23-Year Old
    Peterson confirms he will file for divorce from missing wife and marry fiancé.
    Correspondent Derek Armstrong

    Drew Peterson confirmed he proposed to a much younger woman today, even as his wife is missing and he’s under scrutiny in the death of his third wife.
    The engagement continues his pattern of courting women less than half his age and proposing while still married.
    Peterson confirmed that the woman has accepted, despite the fact he’s a suspect in the death of his third wife Kathleen Savio and implicated in the disappearance of his fourth wife Stacy—to whom he is still married.
    “Yes, we’ve been dating four months,” he said. Peterson also admitted to rumors that he has dated various women in the last few months since Stacy disappeared October 28, 2007. That remains an open case and under investigation by the Illinois State Police and the Will County State’s Attorney Office.
    Speaking exclusively to this reporter, Peterson described his fiancé as beautiful, but refused to disclose her identity. “The media will do its best to break us up and confront her if they know her name,” he said in an interview today.
    When asked how his four children felt about his new fiancé, Peterson answered, “Both the kids and I need a woman in our lives.” When asked how the family of his fiancé felt, he replied “No comment.”
    No date has been set for a marriage, according to Peterson.
    Still technically married, Peterson says he will file for a divorce on the basis of “abandonment,” a move that angers Stacy’s family and many people following the case.
    This reporter pursued the possibility of a new romantic fling after breaking the story of Peterson’s intention to divorce. The divorce story evolved out of an interview with Peterson for the book Drew Peterson Exposed.
    In the interview, as reported in the book Drew Peterson Exposed, Peterson said, “I like the girls. I like my beer. I like to party. I like to be the clown. And I will get married again.”
    A source indicated Peterson proposed to his new romantic interest, later confirmed by Peterson himself and by his publicist Glenn Selig.
    When he proposed to Stacy, Peterson was still married to Kathleen Savio. Stacy was also half his age and-at 17-underage. Kathleen Savio was found dead not long afterwards.
    When Peterson proposed to Savio, he was still married to Victoria Connolly. Victoria is still very much alive, although in media interviews she did complain of a “controlling Drew.”
    When how he thought the media and public would take the news Peterson said, “Who cares? This is my life. I’m entitled to be happy.”
    About Derek Armstrong: Derek Armstrong, journalist and author, continues to break news on Drew Peterson, including news of his divorce, the dismissal of the gun charges, and recently an exclusive interview with a witness against Drew Peterson — Pastor Neil Schori — who is afraid of what Drew Peterson might do to his family if testifies in a future trial. Armstrong wrote the popular book Drew Peterson Exposed from Kunati Books

  90. If Peterson is as crazy as I think he is, he’ll do anything he can to marry this woman, assuming it’s true she’s interested in being the next Mrs. Peterson.

    It’s no secret he’s very fond of being married to young, attractive women. That being said, he’s got more to gain by Stacy’s body being found now, because, short of that, he’s going to have a hell of a time convincing a judge that she abandoned him, with no substantial proof. He is a suspect in her disappearance, yet, he’s not been charged. However, what will he offer as “proof” that she absolutely abandoned him, when there’s no trail of her in the world or evidence she’s alive? If he had proof positive, he would have sent the law after her to prove his innocence. What judge would allow him to take all the marital assets and declare him free to divorce with the muck hanging over his head? If he decides to have her declared dead, he needs her remains.

    If her remains are found, he can kick into Phase II – find someone else to pin the murder on.

    I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if he figures out a way to have her body discovered now.

  91. Interesting idea Rescue. From what DP has told Lenny, he seemed to think that the remains would be found one day. Remember he hoped to be arrested and acquitted before they were found?

    Now he’ll just find a way to make sure they are….

    *more shudders*

  92. If Peterson wants to marry as quickly as possible and snatch up the marital assets, he’ll have to overcome the hurdle of abandonment. If he discovers he can’t overcome that hurdle by legal standards, then he’s stuck.

    If he then starts a new rumor that he’s “afraid Stacy may have met with harm by another’s hand,” I wonder how long, in Illinois, she has to be missing in order to be declared legally dead?

    He’s got some serious issues to overcome in order to get married. Unless, he’s content with being “engaged,” and having a GPS sown into the bras of his new girlfriend, in order to keep track of her.

  93. Facs – that photo still gives me the creeps. Always has – always will. And to think that he pointed this out and told the story about how it represents him and Stacy while making that little video to improve his image just makes me shake my head in disbelief.

  94. thinkaboutit2 // December 17, 2008 at 12:53 pm

    Hmmm – Fox Chicago just said that Armstrong said he and Drew had formed a tight relationship and that Derek was the first person that found out about the engagement because Drew told him.

    So maybe someone misunderstood something about that to mean that Drew’s girlfriend had a close bond with Armstrong.

    ********

    Think – it could very well be that I misunderstood what I heard, or thought I heard, LOL. There’s so many rumor and stories swirling, it’s hard to know what I heard anymore.

    Although, it’s strange that Armstrong says he and Drew formed a tight relationship, since Drew hung up the phone on him when he was talking to him during a recent interview about his seeing a divorce attorney.

    The relationship Peterson/Brodsky/Selig/Armstrong have is far reaching beyond bazaar.

    Thanks for clearing this up.

  95. So any confirmation yet that this future ex-wife #5 is the same young female vistor who was named at HangDrew’s a couple months back?

  96. When asked how his four children felt about his new fiancé, Peterson answered, “Both the kids and I need a woman in our lives.” When asked how the family of his fiancé felt, he replied “No comment.”

    I would guess they are less than a little enthusiastic. Heck, he’s probably older than her parents.

  97. I just saw a newsflash on CLTV’s website that the court has refused to hear the case to challenge Blago’s fitness. The impeachment hearings are still going on though.

  98. when I heard this I was like oh my gosh what a dufus he is , I bet it is that gal that was on hang drew site lol… could it be . I want him arrested asap don’t ya when would that happen

  99. Hi Lug, and FYI all there’s a new thread if we want to move over.

    This page has been loading sloooooooowly for me.

    (nothing like seeing your typos and watching helplessly as they take 30 seconds to submit)

Comments are closed.