The Peterson Grand Jury: Weighing the Witness Testimony

barrel-scale3MORPHEY’S GRAND JURY WORTHINESS

Comments have come up recently about Grand Jury appearances, after Tom Morphey went public with his knowledge of the events leading up to and after the disappearance of Stacy Peterson.  Mr. Morphey has stated that he has not given testimony before the Grand Jury.  Drew Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, has offered the reason for this, based on his own interpretation.  He has determined, in his ultimate wisdom, that Mr.  Morphey is not credible, and that he “has a documented history of severe mental illness, drug and alcohol addiction.”

While Brodsky may say he’s relying on information provided to him, he seems to be the only one in the public that has specifically mentioned multiple suicide attempts by Mr. Morphey.  When doing an appearance at one time on Fox’s OntheRecord, Brodsky said that Thomas Morphey had attempted suicide “many” times in the past, and was not reliable. While he was on TV saying that, Greta got an email from Thomas Morphey’s sister, who said that was a blatant lie. He had “never tried suicide before.”  We have not found any references to Mr. Morphey’s “many” suicide attempts in the media, other than coming from Brodsky himself.  Wouldn’t it just be wiser, sound more reasonable, to say if and when Mr. Morphey does testify at a potential trial, Brodsky will submit evidence that disputes these implications?  No, instead, a man’s mental stability, references to medication he has been prescribed, and name calling is the rule of the day.  “Fantasy.”  “Delusional.”

CONFIDENTIAL MEDICAL RECORDS

Funny guy, that Brodsky is, since we are all covered under the HIPAA Privacy Rule, which “provides federal protections for personal health information held by covered entities, and gives patients an array of rights with respect to that information.”  In other words, unless one specifically gives another a Medical Authorization to freely obtain one’s medical records, they are private. Confidential.  We here assume Mr. Morphey did not give Brodsky a Medical Authorization to legally obtain his medical records, so we must assume Brodsky is full of himself and is merely making up the accusations of Mr. Morphey’s multiple suicide attempts to deflect attention from his  crime-suspect client. What is the word that comes to mind, the one  defense lawyers hate?  Oh, yeah, “hearsay.”  Brodsky must be relying on “hearsay” to make those bold statements repeatedly about Mr. Morphey’s “many suicide attempts”.  Unless Brodsky comes out with proof and can verify he has legally obtained authentic medical records relating to Mr. Morphey, we can just assume it’s all smoke and mirrors, once again. 

Health Information Privacy

GRAND JURY PROCEDURES

A couple of questions and/or comments have come up about witnesses and their appearance before the  Peterson Grand Jury.   In summary, one of the functions of a grand jury is to determine whether a person should be charged or prosecuted for a criminal act.  The prosecutor generally arranges to have witnesses available to appear before the grand jury, and, “ordinarily, only witnesses for the State will be called to testify.  In this way, proceedings before the grand jury differ from a trial of a case.  However, the grand jury itself has the right to subpoena and question any person against whom the Prosecutor is seeking a Bill of Indictment, or any other person, and to obtain and examine any documents or transcripts relevant to the matter being presented by the Prosecutor…The grand jury is the sole judge of the sufficiency of the evidence required to indict.

If the grand jury by its vote refuses to hold the defendant for trial, the Prosecutor may prepare a written memorandum to such effect, entitled, ‘No Bill’.”

A Handbook for Grand Jurors in Illinois

The jury has heard and, hopefully, uncovered more information with each witness. Time will tell what the truth is. If that means an indictment and a future trial, at least we will no longer  be subjected to “fantasies” and “delusional” comments about any witness that is a part of Drew Peterson’s crimes.

~By commenting 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

159 thoughts on “The Peterson Grand Jury: Weighing the Witness Testimony

  1. I wonder if Mr. Brodsky did something wrong to get this information????

    Savio’s attorney is not concerned with Brodsky’s appeal to Supreme Court…

    Martin Glink, one of the attorneys representing the Kathleeen Savio’s family, did not consider Brodsky’s appeal to the Supreme Court to be much of a threat to his case.

    “I would doubt very much the Supreme Court would find this novel enough to hear,” Glink said.

    “I don’t think it raises any conflict among the judicial circuits,” he said. “I think what the appellate court did and what Judge Goodman did was correct.”

    http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/1472436,Peterson-tries-to-regain-control_jo031109.article

  2. If i remember correctly, JB also made a suicide threat, does that mean he also has severe mental illness? I’m looking for the article. It was something about channing himself to his desk and threatening to shoot himself.

  3. Well hmmm Joel Brodksy held a gun at his head and threatened to blow his own head off in front of his wife and daughters.

    The SWAT team had to come to his house to sort out this mess.

    You know the saying – people in glass houses ……..

  4. BTW Is Joel Brodsky bound by some sort of code of conduct or can he just say and do whatever he wants ?

  5. http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/bolingbrooksun/news/1472436,Peterson-tries-to-regain-control_jo031109.article

    Martin Glink, one of the attorneys representing the Kathleeen Savio’s family, did not consider Brodsky’s appeal to the Supreme Court to be much of a threat to his case.

    “I would doubt very much the Supreme Court would find this novel enough to hear,” Glink said.

    “I don’t think it raises any conflict among the judicial circuits,” he said. “I think what the appellate court did and what Judge Goodman did was correct.”

    Isn’t it nice to hear another atty pooh-poohing Brodksy?

  6. Whitesoxfan said:

    I wonder if Mr. Brodsky did something wrong to get this information????

    * * * *
    If you rule out taking DP on, stealing from his ex-law partner’s dead client, using DP’s children, sliming victims and witnesses, exploiting all, nah. He did nothing extra wrong to get this or any other of his information….it all comes from the disgraced ex-cop’s lying mouth. The suspect is the only “source” of anything they have, eg ‘rumours’ of impropriety between Stacy and Pastor Neil Schori.

    Why would Bratsky tell us the new PI is female? Just curious. Did he tell us the others were male? I wonder if their new female PI is someone who is ex-lawenforcement? That would be handy.

  7. What am I talking about? They already ‘have’ a PI who is sometimes female.

    Nothing lately, I’m happy to note, has yet ruled out my favourite reason for the delayed arrest….concurrent investigations incomplete, and/or a Federal Grand Jury. 😉

  8. Is Steve Carcerano talking? Is Michael Robinson feeling the heat? With the bit more we have of Tom’s story, it may be showing them that DP will not be able to protect them.

  9. Happy Thursday to You All,

    Bucket,
    With Carcerano being tied in with “reality fight” project, I still think he is on the suspects side.

    Mike Robinson on the other hand, may be a different story. With his trial on going, I’m wondering….

  10. Hey Whitey!

    What made me wonder about old Steve C. is who did he tell about buying the photographs from Tom Morphey’s ex?

  11. OK – So am I the only one here that is totally curious to know why Susan Murphy Milano wanted a private email from the admins here?? Dang – Curiosity killed the cat and I’m feeling like the cat!

  12. Well, no matter how you cut it, Charles Pelkie, the SA spokesman says: “The only thing I can say is these investigations are moving ahead full steam,” he said, “and we expect to bring one to conclusion.”

    Eighteen months. Soon. Conclusion.

  13. Grand Jury had its first meeting on 7th or 8th of November so I think they must finish till April 8th. Seems to me very soon 🙂

  14. Thought I’d bring this comment over from the last thread in case anyone would like to discuss. It’s interesting:

    princessmatilda Says:

    March 12, 2009 at 10:48 am e
    re to facs # 8…
    i have a friend on the bolingbrook police (he can’t stand drew, btw) who says LE is waiting to make an arrest until they have an airtight case. they do not want any chance of him being able to slip off on a technicality or loophole and then not be able to get him later because of double jeopardy. they know he is guilty, and it is killing them to not take him into custody, but they want the case to be strong enough against him that he cannot slither out. his (my friend’s) biggest comment on drew is this..”he a POS who is addicted to the attention. negative, positive, it doesn’t matter. it’s all about the attention. the worst thing anyone could do to drew is to treat him like any other person. the less special he is treated, the more he will go out of his way to get the attention, good or bad, and that is going to be his downfall.”

  15. I believe it can be extended up to 36 months. But I don’t think so either.

    No special grand jury term so extended shall exceed thirty-six months, except as provided in subsection (e) of section 3333 of this chapter.

  16. Yes, His downfall will be his need to brag to others…Give him enough rope, he will hang himself. I do believe that is true, big mouthed POS. Along with the rope, someone should send him some booze so he can ramble about it and then not remember the next day!!! hehehehe 😉

  17. A full 18-month term for the grand jury would end on May 8th. That sheds some light on Joe Hosey’s comment about 7 weeks. And, don’t forget that Cass estimated that it would all come to a head before summer. Let’s hope they’re right on target.

  18. Wonder – JMHO – airtight to me means that whatever the prosecution is anticipating the defense will try and throw back at them when answering to the charges and the evidence they’ve collected, they’ve got a strategy that he shouldn’t be able to wiggle out of. They’re not fortune tellers, so they can only presume to know what the response of the defense will be in a trial.

    As to the jurors in a potential trial? Hasn’t Putzhead and Boobguy pretty much insulted just about everyone that moves in the real world? People have alcohol problems, mental health issues, money issues, legal issues, family issues. Hell, there’s no one left to be Boobguy’s perfect juror. He’s been critical of just about most everyone.

  19. You’re right, Rescue, old Brodsky has alienated just about every potential juror with his and Drew’s public bashing. What I find interesting is the fact that they haven’t seemed to attack with quite the same fervor the potential witnesses that we’d expect to see if he’s charged with Kathleen’s murder. So far, I haven’t heard them say much about the Pontarelli’s or Steve’s former girlfriend, Jennifer, who showed up at the grand jury all lawyered up with a criminal defense attorney. They’ve taken some cheap shots at Pastor Schori, but how much damage can they do with that sweet guy? They’ve unloaded on the Savio family members for being a gold digging/money grubbing dysfunctional family, but they seem to have survived the assaults quite nicely. Could it be that Drew and Brodsky are more worried about Kathleen’s murder jumping up to bite him in the ass than they are about charges on Stacy?

  20. rescueapet Says:

    March 12, 2009 at 8:54 am
    TAI – Good things come to those who wait.

    ***

    I’m starting to think that in this day better things come to those that don’t! 🙂

    I’ll try to be patient…

  21. They are very careful about attacking someone that hasn’t fired the first shot. Mary Pontarelli, Jennifer (Steve’s ex-gf), even Mike Robinson. None have said anything against Putzhead publicly. Nor has a word been said by the defense about the “neighbor” who also saw the event we call “loading the blue barrel into Putzhead’s SUV.

    Just goes to show you – Boobguy hasn’t got a scrap of paper to show anyone a single doubt that would give his client some credibility. But, I realize that would come at a trial, except, why is Boobsky throwing out every cruel, disparaging insult he can against people who aren’t sympathetic to Putzhead. Most of the US falls into that category.

  22. If we take under consideration that Drew’s real legal advisor is his uncle, James R Carroll, with all his connections with the Apellate and Supreme Court, politicians and other people in authority, I think ISP must be really well-prepared for the trial. For some of the lawyers the truth and moral issues is something marginal. So if a member of their family or a person paying them well is in trouble, they may make perfect use of all the precedences and mistakes. BTW, it is in the interest of Carroll to continue to help Drew if he started that a few years ago in depriving Drew’s children the money they inherited after Kathleen’s death.

  23. Someone on another board brought up a very good point. While it’s true Tom M has not been brought before the grand Jury, his friend Walter has been.

    It’s obvious that investigators believe Tom’s story has credibility. The fact that he was given immunity and told to go into hiding, that a search warrant was issued to look for evidence relating to his story, that Walter was brought before the Grand Jury all prove that.

    There is a reason why Tom has not been called, and it has everything to do with the authorities believing what he has to say.

  24. You bet, Cyrhla. It sucks to be Uncle Carroll. He’s most probably got his own attorney/s, and must be very worried.

  25. Think you guys are right about Uncle Carroll, Cyrhla & Bucket.

    Amazing how helping a multiple murderer steal from his own children the money they’re due as a result of him murdering their mother can turn into a negative, isn’t it?

  26. Joe Hosey touched a little on that yesterday. He mentioned it could be that they don’t want Morphey’s Grand Jury testimony to be part of the discovery the defense would get.

    Not every witness is called before the GJ. The GJ is a tool, not a trial. Tom Morphey, or Lenny and Paula, for that matter, can certainly be important witnesses in DP’s criminal trial, whether or not they appeared before the GJ, especially since it’s the trial jury that renders the verdict, not the GJ.

  27. that is correct Rescue, the GJ only needs enough to indict so they won’t put all their witnesses out there so the defense will get a heads up. So they must have a strong enough case if they didn’t use Tom or Lenny and Paula.

  28. I think this is worth copying from http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/1470751,CST-NWS-drew11.article

    “The tightlipped law has kept a lid on a neighbor’s report of Drew Peterson allegedly loading a large barrel into the back of his Denali soon after his wife vanished, but the former cop’s brother says he didn’t lend a hand. “I don’t know anything about it,” said Paul Peterson, the brother of recently retired police Sgt. Drew Peterson, when asked about reports of

    — a neighbor telling police that Drew and another man hauled a mysterious blue barrel from his residence to his Denali.

    Drew Peterson was allegedly seen loading a large barrel into the back of his Denali not long after his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, went missing. A police source said the barrel was “big enough to put someone in.

    Pressed about the barrel and whether he helped his brother carry it, Paul Peterson said, “No, no,” and retreated to the Pheasant Chase Court home of Drew and missing wife Stacy Peterson.”

    – November 24, 2007
    http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/665092,4_1_JO24_PETERSON_S1.article

  29. cyrhla – yes, in the early hours/days of Stacy’s disappearance, it was reported, as you have quoted, that a neighbor saw Peterson and another man carrying a barrel out of the house. Of course, it was later revealed that the second man was Tom Morphey. BUT, the fact remains, and it has not been discounted or disputed, that there IS someone, on record, seeing this event.

    Who it is? Who knows. But I’ve seen other articles that report Sharon, the next-door neighbor, was asked by LE about a blue barrel. That would make me think she’s not the one, since they asked her about it, rather than her volunteering the information. I think Morphey’s information came out two days later, didn’t it? Did another neighbor tell them about seeing something by DP and another man being carried out, which they then questioned Sharon about to see if she, too, saw something?

  30. BTW, what is the purpose of stupid remarks like this? “Brodsky flatly predicted that Morphey won’t ever see the inside of a courtroom because prosecutors won’t risk calling him as a witness.”

    How the hell does he know? If he HAD to predict Morphey’s worthiness, why not just say “Any testimony by Mr. Morphey against our client will be addressed at the appropriate time, and we are confident that our client will prevail.”

    No, instead, he goes on tv spewing and personally attacking Morphey’s mental health issues, and doesn’t pull one credible word out of his ass that shows they have anything other than hot air which happens to come out of both their orifices.

  31. One of you mentioned yesterday the neighbor (John Tomaskovic) living at 67 Phaesant Chase Ct home, next to Drew, who sold his house last year. We could see Drew going to this house on the video during the search warrant.
    The extract from above just confirmes that Morphey and the neighbor are two pararell issues. BTW, I am curious if Drew was the reason why they moved out.

  32. Rescue – I’m with you on being fed up w. Buttsky’s attacks! Those about about mental health bother me especially, our society is working so hard to move past stigma and this banana slug of a man isn’t helping.

    I wish some reporter would give him a, “Have you no shame?!?” moment. Between (the public records) of his personal history and his personal attacks on individuals it could make for a very juicy soundbite.

  33. Transcript from last night’s Nancy Grace is available now (with Robin Sax, prosecutor and author, defense attorney Penny Douglass Furr, and defense attorney, Daniel Horowitz.

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0903/11/ng.01.html

    [EXCERPT]

    Very quickly, I want to give you the latest in the Drew Peterson case. Has an accomplice to the murder and possibly the disposal of the body of Peterson`s fourth wife emerged?

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    DREW PETERSON, WIFE STACY PETERSON MISSING: Eighteen months ago is when this happened so I`m stuck through that.

    UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: So you don`t think he`ll go to jail now?

    PETERSON: No, no.

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Disturbing revelation in the search for missing Illinois mom, Stacy Peterson. Drew Peterson`s stepbrother saying that he may have unknowingly helped Drew Peterson dump her body.

    JOHN ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: The man told a friend that he helped Drew Peterson haul out a large rectangular container which was warm to the touch and weighed about as much as Stacy would have.

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Three days before Stacy Peterson was reported missing, her sister Cassandra saw a blue container in Drew Peterson`s garage.

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It`s just stuck there in the middle of the walkway. It was a blue container. 30-gallon drum.

    JOEL BRODSKY, ATTORNEY FOR DREW PETERSON: It`s just not the case that there was no blue barrel.

    UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Source say Drew Peterson`s friend, Rick Mims, testified before a grand jury that he and Peterson purchased three of the containers while working at a cable company. After Stacy went missing, he noticed two of the blue containers were no longer in Drew Peterson`s garage.

    BRODSKY: Stacy`s sister said that there was a blue barrel of chlorine. Now we`re talking, now we`re told, there`s a blue container of cable. I mean, the story just is not consistent.

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Sources tell the paper that Morphey overdosed on sleeping pills shortly after he learned that her sister-in-law had vanished and he may have something to do with the disappearance.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    GRACE: Is there an accomplice in the alleged murder of husband/cop Drew Peterson`s fourth wife Stacy. His third wife drowning and beating death in a dry bathtub. Now ruled a homicide.

    Straight out to Kathy Chaney with “The Chicago Defender.” Is there an accomplice and is that accomplice saying that he actually believes he helped Drew Peterson take Stacy Peterson out of the home in a blue barrel?

    KATHY CHANEY, REPORTER, THE CHICAGO DEFENDER: Allegedly so. It`s Thomas Morphey, Drew Peterson`s step brother. He believes that he did inadvertently help Drew carry Stacy`s body out the day that she disappeared and he says that he signed an immunity deal with the Will County state`s attorney to let him know what he knows about the death.

    GRACE: OK, Kathy Chaney, couple of quick questions. He helped, according to him, carry Stacy Peterson`s body out of the Peterson home when?

    CHANEY: The night that she disappeared inside the blue barrel — or it may have been the night before. But he believes that Stacy`s body was inside of the blue barrel that Drew asked him to help move.

    GRACE: OK. Out to the lawyers, Robin Sax, prosecutor and author, defense attorney Penny Douglass Furr, and renowned defense attorney in the San Francisco area, Daniel Horowitz.

    Daniel, doesn`t sound good when you call your stepbrother and you say, do you love me? How much do you love me? Do you love me enough to kill somebody? Well, do you — no, OK, take that down a notch. Do you help me enough to help cover up a murder?

    It looks bad, Daniel. What do you do with that at trial?

    HOROWITZ: Well, I don`t believe Morphey for a second. You know his immunity agreement is based upon in telling the jury the same thing he told the police at the beginning. So he can`t even change at trial. He`s locked into one story that the police want. I don`t believe that you carry a big barrel.

    GRACE: Well, wait a minute, Horowitz. Let me see Horowitz. Why would we want him to change his story? He`s not trying to change to his story. His story has been the same from the get-go.

    HOROWITZ: Right, how about cross-examination, Nancy?

    GRACE: Well, what about it?

    HOROWITZ: The police.

    (CROSSTALK)

    GRACE: Bring it on.

    HOROWITZ: Well, you can`t change your story if you`re going to go to jail for changing your story. That`s perjury. And they`re basically saying.

    GRACE: Well, Daniel, why do you think he`ll change his story? I don`t even know what you`re talking about. This is the same story that he gave at the beginning.

    HOROWITZ: Well, what I`m talking — that`s the point, under cross- examination, you may remember something differently or change. But he has to perjure himself. He has to stay to the original story even if it`s not true or he goes to jail.

    GRACE: OK. You know what? I don`t know what got into your mug of tea out there in California.

    But Robin Sax, nobody`s trying to change a story. This is what he said at the very beginning.

    SAX: That`s exactly right, Nancy. The story and the fact that he says are pretty damning as you say. Here you have a situation where he is saying that he carried out either the night of or the night after Stacy Peterson was reported missing, a blue container that is corroborated to have been missing that has a weight and height that can contain a body, and he`s concerned not to tell the police that he thinks that he could have been involved in carrying Stacy`s body out.

    I don`t know how you call that “inadvertent,” though.

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    BRODSKY: Morphey said, though, he`s — he was quoted as saying that he feels betrayed by the state police and feels betrayed by the state attorney`s office. Obviously that means that they don`t think he`s credible either. They made that determination. That they haven`t taken him before the grand jury for that reason. And therefore, I`m not the only one. Drew and I are not the only people that say that Tom Morphey is not telling a truthful story.

    The state`s attorney and the state police, by their actions, by not taking him before the grand jury, by cutting off contact with him, are also saying that.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

    (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

    PETERSON: Eighteen months ago is when this happened so I`m stuck through that. Right?

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So you don`t think (INAUDIBLE) now?

    PETERSON: No. No.

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. So this doesn`t worry you at all?

    PETERSON: No.

    UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No?

    PETERSON: No, it didn`t worry me 18 months ago either so.

    (END VIDEO CLIP)

    GRACE: Penny Douglass Furr, what do you make of it?

    PENNY DOUGLASS FURR, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Nancy, the most important thing to me is the corroborating evidence. According to the brother-in- law, Drew Peterson told him to hold the telephone, Stacy`s telephone, and while he was murdering Stacy, he called twice.

    The brother-in-law looked down and saw that it was coming from Stacy`s telephone. Now if those phone records show that exact same two calls at that time, I think it makes him a much more credible witness.

    GRACE: But what do you do at trial, Penny? I mean, surely similar transactions may come in at trial. In other words, a jury in the murder case of Stacy Peterson may very well find out about wife number three, who drowned and was beaten in a dry bathtub, Kathleen Savio, while they were having a financial dispute following their divorce.

    I mean, it`s all going to come in like a snowball. And now you`ve got this guy, Thomas Morphey.

    DOUGLASS FURR: Well, I think Drew Peterson is a police officer, and so if he was going to get someone to help him dispose of his wife, he would get someone who was not credible.

    GRACE: OK.

    DOUGLASS FURR: He knows the man has problems.

    GRACE: Listen.

    DOUGLASS FURR: And so that`s who he would select.

    GRACE: Who do you think that killers hang out with, Penny Douglas Furr, nuns and priests and virgins? No. They pick somebody that will go along with their plan.

    Straight to — I want to go to Dr. Marty Makary. There is one fly in the ointment for the state with this witness. He was apparently recovering from an overdose of Paxil and Xanax at the time that he got the immunity deal.

    Do we care? Will that affect his testimony? How would that have affected him, his state of mind?

    DR. MARTY MAKARY, PHYSICIAN, PROF. OF PUBLIC HEALTH, JOHNS HOPKINS: Well, the Paxil has nothing to do with it, but the Xanax is interesting.

    GRACE: OK, what is Paxil? What is Paxil?

    MAKARY: It`s an anti-depressant. It takes three to four weeks to work, so an overdose has no immediate short-term effect anyway.

  34. Thanks for the info, facs, since I didn’t see that last night.

    You know, it’s funny how things take on different versions. For example, what the hell was Horowitz talking about when he said Morphey can’t change his story or he risks perjuring himself. Huh? He hasn’t been before the GJ, and he hasn’t said anything any different than what was leaked out from the get-go.

    Brodsky is full of himself again twisting the idea that Morphey hasn’t been called before the GJ because the prosecutors think he’s not credible. The prosecutors think his client killed his ex-wife, and is responsible for his wife’s disappearance. Put that in your pipe and shove it.

    Now, if want to talk about someone changing their story, let’s just say DP is stuck with his timeline, and it sure stinks to high heaven. Gaps everywhere, says he wasn’t with who they can likely prove he was, possible phone pings that show him being in a place or places he never said he was…..

  35. I got a laught out of Nancy’s comment about what was in Horowitz’s mug of tea out there in California.

    For the immunity agreement to be in place, Tom cannot change his story. I don’t think that means he can’t add details as he’s remembered them.

    And since he hasn’t testified at all (before GJ or otherwise) … that’s not perjury.

  36. It is odd isn’t it that Horowitz talks about Morphey changing his story. AFAIK this is the only time Morphey has told his story in public. What came out in November 2007 was a secondhand report via Walter M.

    And excuse me but WTF?

    “Sources tell the paper that Morphey overdosed on sleeping pills shortly after he learned that her sister-in-law…”

    So the source is …. Drew’s sister or….????

  37. Noway, I think what Horowitz had on his mind was the infuence of Xanax. Xanax overdose symptoms may include extreme confusion. They do not have to but … if they did, Tom’s version may differ.
    However, at least in my opinion, any jury or judge will take it in favor of Tom, because I hope his now and then stories do not differ as for the main points. Furthermore, they are consistent with the other facts on that day.
    One important factor about the whole story is that Drew’s choice of Tom was not accidental.

    Just personally as I am really concerned about Tom’s well-being… Prosecuting Tom would be totally below the belt. This man feels guilty more than Drew, who does not show any remorses. So even if his immunity was withdrawn and he was prosecuted for helping Drew, his mental problems could be used to acquit him.

  38. Levi Page Show
    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/levipage

    Date / Time: 3/15/2009 9:00 PM
    Category: Current Events
    Call-in Number: (347) 838-9781

    The evidence piles up in the case against Casey Anthony charged with the brutal murder of her 2-year-old daughter Caylee. The case has been declared a “circumstancial case” by legal experts and many court watchers predict a “dogfight” in court. Blog Talk Radio host Levi Page looks at where the case stands now with former detective and crime author Stacy Dittrich, criminal defense lawyer Stephen Naratil and murder prosecutor Donna Pendergast in a Live prime time special. Also new developments in the case against Drew Peterson! Will there ever be justice for 23-year-old mother Stacy Peterson who went missing in October of 2007? Joseph Hosey, author and reporter for the Chicago area’s Herald News has the latest.

  39. GRACE: Who do you think that killers hang out with, Penny Douglas Furr, nuns and priests and virgins? No. They pick somebody that will go along with their plan.

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

    Good one Nancy Grace, that reply gave me a good laugh but it’s spot on.

  40. cyrhla @ #55 – wouldn’t that be interesting if all of Brodsky’s ‘disparaging’ comments about Tom’s mental health only served to acquit him of any accomplice charges?

  41. JOEL BRODSKY, ATTORNEY FOR DREW PETERSON: It`s just not the case that there was no blue barrel.

    Doesn’t a double negative make a positive??

    So Brodsky is actually saying here that it is the case that there was a blue barrel.

  42. I don’t think that Tom’s health conditions would get him acquitted as he is not so mentally impaired that he doesn’t understand right from wrong. That is usually the test per what Nancy Grace and the lawyers on her show always say.

  43. What made me laugh too was Joel Brodsky’s peculiar comment that the Prosecution/cops do not find Thomas Morpheys statements credible !

    So the States Attorney offers Thomas Morphey immunity, because he doesn’t believe a word he says !

    LOL @ Brodsky again !

  44. Why do you think Drew and Joel need to so desperately discredit Thomas Morphey ??

    Consider this:

    Thomas Morphey had also worked at the Truck Stop where Drew said he never hung out at 2.30 am Monday morning Oct 29 2007 or the week before or any other time.

  45. TAI, #60: Does it also apply to Tom problems? I think anxiety and panic make people unable to act in a proper way, even if the person can see the diffrence, but I may be wrong and this is not the factor to acquit.

  46. #56
    Think of good questions to call into Joe Hosey!
    Do you say his name hozee or hozay?
    *************
    #44
    Did another neighbor tell them about seeing something by DP and another man being carried out, which they then questioned Sharon about to see if she, too, saw something?
    ———
    A neighbor told WBBM-TV that she had a conversation with Drew Peterson about the relative who reportedly tried to kill himself.

    “He needed me to watch the kids if I could for about an hour and a half; he was going to go visit a relative that had tried to commit suicide,” said the neighbor, Sharon Bychowski.

    Bychowski says she asked Drew about that relative’s well being when he returned from the hospital later.

    “I did ask him, I said, ‘how is your relative,’ and he said, ‘What? Oh, he’s OK, he just had some issues, lost his family, lost his job, you know,’” Bychowski said.

    She also says police asked her about a barrel immediately after Stacy disappeared.

    “The officers when they were searching his home, asked me if I knew anything about a blue, what they called, a container,” Bychowski said.
    http://cbs2chicago.com/national/stacy.peterson.barrel.2.597897.html
    ********************
    ‘What? Oh, he’s OK, he just had some issues, lost his family, lost his job,helped me move a body you know,”

  47. New post up by Susan Murphy-Milano:

    http://murphymilanojournal.blogspot.com/2009/03/drew-peterson-i-didnt-care-then-i-dont.html

    Drew Peterson “I Didn’t Care Then, I Don’t Care Now”

    “Eighteen months said Drew Peterson, I didn’t care then and I don’t care now” [refering to Thomas Morphey and the immunity deal with the State’s Attorney moving a body in a blue barrel]

    With microphones shoved in Drew’s direction. News reporters asked questions in the driveway of Stacy Peterson’s home. I think her name is still on the title of to the house?

    Oh wait, I am confusing this with the recently signed car title to live-in bed warmer Christina Raines. Can he do that? Was the title of the car driven and owned by Stacy in Drew Peterson’s name? Or did he go ahead and sign Stacy’s name anyway to the car title? You know he’s good at signing people’s names to documents living or deceased…

  48. Thomas Morphey didn’t end up in hospital because he is crazy or suffers from mental illnesses. (!!)

    He ended up in hospital when the realization hit him he was set up and used in the murder and disposal of Stacy’s body.

    Isn’t that enough to flip anybody out ??

  49. Oh wait, I am confusing this with the recently signed car title to live-in bed warmer Christina Raines. Can he do that? Was the title of the car driven and owned by Stacy in Drew Peterson’s name? Or did he go ahead and sign Stacy’s name anyway.

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

    Sorry, what are we reading here now ??

    Is SMM saying Drew has signed over the title of a car (belonging to Stacy) to Christina ??

    Am I reading this right ??

  50. Yes, it appears that is what SMM is saying. She apparently is the owner of a missing woman’s car, if Peterson signed over the title to her.

    Nice, heh?

  51. Thank you whitesoxfan,

    I can hardly believe my eyes.

    The man knows no restraint, even under the intense scrutiny of multiple murder investigations (!)

    The question remains however if the car was registered in Stacys name or Drews name, but either way Drew already knows Stacy isn’t coming back in a hurry (!!)

  52. Actually why am I surprised ?

    Drew has said all along he wanted to get a divorce and dispose of Stacys property after she’s been missing one year.

    He’s virtually said that from day one.

    That’s probably the only thing he’s ever been truthful about (!!)

  53. Oh yeah and Christina did say Drew promised to buy her a car !

    Just like the engagement ring, he passed on someone elses property !

  54. Good morning, Bucket. I can post the article, but it’s pretty much a reprint of the earlier story. Apparently, it’s just now being reported in the Bolingbrook Sun. Sometimes, it takes the suburban newspapers a little longer to catch up because they come out once a week.

    ‘The truth needs to be told’
    Peterson stepbrother details fear of aiding in Stacy’s murder

    March 13, 2009
    By JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com

    If he is supposed to be such an unreliable, delusional, mentally ill alcoholic, Thomas Morphey wants to know, then why has Drew Peterson gone to such lengths to discredit him?

    It might have something to do with Morphey recently accusing Peterson of asking him to kill for him the day before Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, was last seen alive.

    And on the next day — Oct. 28, 2007 — Morphey said he helped Peterson carry a blue barrel out of the Peterson home and down to a waiting sport utility vehicle. Morphey believes Stacy Peterson’s body was in the barrel.

    Morphey said the experience left him despondent and fearful for the welfare of his longtime girlfriend and her three children. He attempted suicide two days after Stacy vanished, he said, in hopes they might escape Peterson’s malice.

    Morphey survived the drug overdose. The next day, he said, State’s Attorney James Glasgow offered him immunity from prosecution in exchange for his testimony. The Herald News – a news partner of The Bolingbrook Sun – has obtained a copy of the immunity offer, which demands the full story of what he was up to with Peterson the weekend of Oct. 27, 2007, along with his disclosure of any knowledge he has of the “kidnapping or murder of Stacy Peterson.”

    Since then, Morphey said, Peterson and his attorney Joel Brodsky have done their best to smear and discredit him.

    In fact, Brodsky held a press conference March 10 in Chicago in which he questioned why Morphey has not gone before the grand jury and his viability as a witness.

    Despite the backlash from Peterson and Brodsky, Morphey said he has no regrets about breaking his 17-month silence to go public about the role he believes he played in Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.

    “I just feel like the truth needs to be told at some point,” he said.

    Morphey hinted there may be more potential Peterson witnesses going public.

  55. Cyhia #66:

    I think he could argue “diminished responsibility” but not insanity to get a lighter sentence but people that pass the insanity defense are usually so impaired that they have to be committed to a hospital.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insanity_defense

    Insanity defense

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    In criminal trials, the insanity defenses are possible defenses by excuse, an affirmative defense by which defendants argue that they should not be held criminally liable for breaking the law, as they were legally insane at the time of the commission of alleged crimes. A defendant attempting such a defense will often be required to first undergo a mental examination. The legal definition of “insane” in this context is quite different from psychiatric definitions of “mentally ill”, also that the definition of insanity varies between jurisdictions.

    When the insanity defense is successful, the defendant may be committed to a hospital.

    In the United Kingdom and the United States, use of the defense is rare and it is more common to rely upon a state of temporary mental impairment.

    In the United States a state of temporary mental impairment is not a defense. It falls under the category of a mitigating factor referred to as “diminished capacity”. A mitigating factor (which can include conditions not eligible for the insanity defense such as intoxication) can be used to attempt a reduction of the charges to a lesser offense or in a reduced sentence.

    The insanity defense is available in most jurisdictions that respect human rights and have a rule of law, though the extent to which it can be applied may differ widely between jurisdictions.

    The insanity defense is based on evaluations by forensic professionals that the defendant was incapable of distinguishing between right and wrong at the time the offense was committed. In addition, some jurisdictions require that the evaluation address the issue of whether the defendant was able to control his behavior at the time of the offense. A defendant making the insanity argument might be said to be pleading “not guilty by reason of insanity” (NGRI). A successful NGRI defense can result in an indeterminate commitment to a psychiatric facility.

    Diminished responsibility (or diminished capacity) can be employed as a mitigating factor and is applicable to more circumstances than the insanity defense in the United States. For example, some jurisdictions accept inebriation or other drug intoxication as a mitigating factor, whereas intoxication alone is not accepted as an insanity defense. If diminished responsibility (or capacity) is presented convincingly, the charges may be reduced to a lesser offense or the sentence may be more lenient.

  56. Hiya, Rescue!…it being a reiteration is why I did try to post it to be thorough (and because hinting at other witnesses coming out with their stories was a bit prominent in this version…)not good enough for a Justice Cafe splash. 🙂

  57. Bucket – any help you throw our way is appreciated more than you can know! And, yes, the news of late has made some “splashes!”

    Thank you.

  58. Good morning..Anyone else wonder what all the phone records in KS and SP’s cases indicate ?

    If I could be privy to just one type of evidence that is what I want to see.
    Personally I think that’s what will nail this two time murderer to the wall.

  59. Wonderwoman said
    If I could be privy to just one type of evidence that is what I want to see.
    Personally I think that’s what will nail this two time murderer to the wall.

    * * * * * *

    OOh! Can I have the overhears, please?

    Noway, I don’t know if I heard it described as plastic, or have just assumed it was.

  60. Hi Noway and Wonder.

    Wonder – I think that would be what the jury would want too. I don’t think sitting through a rendition of Boobsky pointing out again and again how Tom Morphey has substance abuse, depression and mental health issues from ten years ago is going to be a slam-dunk acquittal for his client. They want records, barrel chips, phone calls, witness sightings. Boobsky is so uncouth and obnoxious. Now, if he can produce something he obtained legally through his medical records that absolutely proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Tom Morphey can’t possibly be recalling this event with any accuracy or credibility, bring it on.

    Until then, yap, yap, yap, bull, bull, bull. Signing a dead guy’s name to a check sure isn’t credible or noteworthy either. 😉

  61. Noway, I’ve been asking myself the same question since I saw the metal one at the top. If my memory serves me well, Cassandra mentioned a blue plastic barrel, but I cannot be 100% sure.

  62. for anyone interested…
    my BPD friend also said that drew will probably get a change of venue if he asks for it, but that it won’t help his case if he does because he would most likely be moved to more conservative ogle or mcclean county. additionally, another factor in the delay of arrest has been illinois politics. they wanted to wait until after the election of a new SA and the mess with the gov. cleaned up so that there were no loopholes or outs because of all of that. if they would have arrested him before the holidays were over, he could have demanded a speedy trial and would have ended up getting off because no one would want to deal with it at that time (sickining thought, i know, that our judicial system works like that). and IMO, the reason he hasn’t discedited anyone in kathleen’s camp yet is because he is not an “official” suspect in that case, whereas he IS the main suspect in stacy’s disappearance.

  63. cyrhla, I thought the chlorine was in plastic packets so wasn’t sure whether the barrel would need to be plastic too.

    All the barrels I saw on the video of Roy seemed to be metal but that could be it was just what people were throwing away.

    But maybe my memory is being influenced by the barrel at the top of this page too!

  64. “According to the Sun-Times, the neighbor said it happened just hours after Stacy Peterson was last seen. Stacy Peterson’s sister, Cassandra Cales, recalls seeing a large blue barrel in the Peterson garage before her sister vanished. Cales says Stacy said the barrel was full of chlorine that Drew needed to clean the family’s pool.”

    http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_blue_container.htm

    And further down on that page:

    “Chicago Tribune is reporting tonight that a male relative said he helped Drew Peterson carry a large rectangular plastic container out of the Peterson bedroom on Oct 28th, this one day before Stacy Peterson was reported missing by relatives. …”

    Confusion everywhere.

  65. Well it’s off to the Dr’s today for me Hooray ! NOT Have a WONDERFUL day everyone.
    I will BBL to read all the WONDERFUL blogging that goes on here ! 🙂

  66. Noway, I know that but just made a shortcut. Sorry :). I meant if he was going to use chlorine, a metal barrel would very quickly corrode. However, Drew may not have this information 😉 and we cannot be sure that he used chlorine (though the barrel was warm to touch so we may suppose he did). A metal one could have been used for burning Stacy though I doubt he did it because of lack of time (it takes hours).
    I also read somewhere that there were some cases, a murderer would shot holes in a barrel to let it sink. Could it be a reason why he kept one of the guns?
    That’s why I am apt to think he put Stacy into water. Digging takes time and leaves traces, is also easy to find by cavandar dogs. Lots of speculations, I know ;).

  67. I always heard that the chlorine was inside the barrel was in individual packets. Even then I imagine that the container was plastic since the search warrant that was then issued the day after LE talked to Morphey mentioned “…blue plastic, lead weights, plastic shavings…”

  68. plus there are so many waterways and ponds and canals around here that it would be nearly impossible to find her right away because by the time they searched the right one, any evidence would have gone down river and be in the gulf. especially with all of the flooding we have had lately.

  69. Since the warrant mentioned “lead weights” it does seem as if LE thought, at least, at one time that DP disposed of her in water.

    And, of course, they did search the sanitary shipping canal.

    IMO, she may still be there. It seems as if it may be impossible to adequately search that thing.

  70. Hi Noway…..liquid chlorine comes in plastic containers and if it was for cleaning the pool it would most likely be liquid that he would use as it shocks the water then dispenses quickly whereas the powdered chlorine is more stable and lasts a lot longer and you wouldn’t be able to use the pool as fast.

  71. So, anyone have any thoughts on how Drew could sign the Grand Prix over the Idiot Woman-child when it was supposed to be Stacy’s car?

    Was the title in his name only?

  72. You’re right, princess. However, IMO he did not just threw the barrel/body into the river. I think it must be in a pond and a one with no buidings around and also not within a recreational or business area. He looks to be so sure Stacy’s body will never be found! He did not have too much time to hide it far away.

    BTW, I wonder where the cell pings caught him when someone from the PD called him to tell Cassandra had wanted for fill a missing person report. He was in the area of I-55 brigde (correct me if I am wrong) when Cass called him, so it must be the area within 30-minute distance. Lemont Police Shooting Range, for instance (lots of quarry ponds, restricted and bushy area surrounded by railroad tracks, businesses and radioactive area with no access to the public but also not fenced nor guarded). I can remember a psychic once saying ‘under their noses’. This area lies within Waterfall Glen FP in the triangle between 111th st and Quarry Rd (on some maps Railroad Dr) in Lemont and you can easily find it. There is also an artesian well just a few steps from there but I read few people come there because of snakes and bushes.
    This area attract my attention. Furthermore, a permission of Lemont Police is probably need to search it. However, it is possible the area was already searched. I do not know.

    http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=qyfbdz7p0hfn&style=b&lvl=1&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=26393647&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1

  73. Just wanted to note here that not only has Walter Martinek testified before the Grand Jury, so has John Morphey (back in April 2008).

  74. I also think it was in his name. I wonder what he agreed about financial things with Stacy and what he told her to sign. We know Stacy paid the last installment for their house a week before she disppeared.

  75. I think Drew is entering troubled waters by transferring shared marital assets at this point. I don’t care if his name was on that title. As long as he’s still married to Stacy and her whereabouts remain unknown he has no right to dispose of, liquidate or transfer jointly owned property.

    If he wants to try to prove that she ‘deserted’ him, fine. He’s free to try to divorce her on those grounds. But until he’s granted a divorce or she’s declared dead, he needs to stop handing out her assets to his girlfriends.

  76. I really want to know where he went in the days following her disapperence..(head clearing trip)I just pray someone from LE was tracking him….

  77. Peterson appears on radio show

    March 13, 2009 (WLS) — Former Bolingbrook police officer Drew Peterson and his attorney say they will fight to keep relatives of his third wife from gaining control of her estate.

    Peterson made an appearance on WVON Radio’s Matt and Perri Show Friday morning. He claims Kathleen Savio’s father and sisters’ attempts to file a wrongful death lawsuit against him in order to control the estate are motivated by money.

    “Their actions to take over Kathleen’s estate doesn’t surprise me at all,” Peterson said.
    “We can’t see how, if anyone was ever gonna be appointed, it would be these two,” said Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney.

    Savio’s death was originally ruled an accident but has been re-classified as a homicide. She died in a bathtub.

    Peterson has not been charged in that case or in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

    There is a short video at the site as well.

    http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=6708276

  78. As for the assets, he is preparing to the divorce and he probably wants the list of assets shared be as short as possible.
    BTW, is there anyone who can have control over it on behalf of Stacy? I mean someone who can legally stop him from doing so?

  79. http://wvon.com/personality/mattandperri/blog/?m=20090313

    Blog with Matt and Perri
    3/13/09 Matt & Perri Show
    Good Morning Family:

    Some way to end the week, huh? Drew Peterson in person is not the same Drew Peterson you see in the media. Drew is a relatively good looking, affable, calm individual.
    But, he is also creepy as hell. The thought that I might be in the same room with a guy who might have killed two of his wives. Christ! HE MIGHT OF KILLED TWO PEOPLE. Secondly, he is narcissist . For him to think that his kids are fine is insane. They might appear to be fine today, but I guarantee those kids are going to have some issues in the future.

    I am like one of the callers. I want Drew to be innocent, because if he is, that means his wife Stacey possibly didn’t come to any harm. I wish you guys could have been in the same room with him and we could talk about him from that perspective.
    *****
    Have a good weekend and I want to hear from you and your thoughts on Drew.
    And more

  80. “We can’t see how, if anyone was ever gonna be appointed, it would be these two,” said Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney.

    ************
    Let’s just see what the judges, the ones with “credibility” said about this

    In the appellate decision last week, Justice Robert Carver wrote that Peterson isn’t a suitable person to serve as executor or to choose one.

    “The appellate justices questioned this in their written opinion, saying, “Even from an objective standpoint, we can think of no just or fair reason why Carroll, as executor of the estate, would relinquish all of Savio’s interest in the marital property to Peterson individually.”

    Hmmm. The buttheads, once again, are going into attack mode against Kathleen’s family, saying:

    Savio’s father and sisters’ attempts to file a wrongful death lawsuit against him in order to control the estate are motivated by money.

    Oh, and his motives were…. what again? Oh, yeah. MONEY.

  81. Uncle Carroll is the best because he has no control over Drew’s money in fact.
    Maybe Drew is showing himself on TV and publishing books because he has to make up all he was supposed to keep on the account for children and what was spent on his toys?

  82. Cyrhla @ #117: “Uncle Carroll is the best”

    Why should Carroll have anything to do with the will of his nephew’s ex-wife?

  83. That was just irony, facs.:)Sorry.
    In fact, from the point of view of children’s interest, he is the worst person to take care about Kathleen’s money because he is Drew’s relative.That is why the Apellate Court was as it was.

  84. Hi Facs…I don’t know how he got away with using his uncle for his ex-wife’s will that would be a conflict of interest as far as I can see….

  85. I think it’s absurd that an old will, even if genuine, should be honoured after they are divorced…not just divorcing, but final. I believe here in UK, a will’s ultimate test by the courts is determinng what the wishes (will) of the deceased were.
    This would stand a great chance here, I think. They were recently divorced, money extremely contentious, so, sure! Give that monster everything. NOT

  86. @ #121 qhorses said, “…I don’t know how he got away with using his uncle for his ex-wife’s will that would be a conflict of interest as far as I can see….”
    ****
    You’re right; it’s outrageous. The mere fact it would occur to him to try something like that shows not just an utter lack of respect for the law, but a delusional (imho) and aggrandized sense of self. Hopefully, like all else he’s done, he’s only ‘gotten away with it’ so far… and that is going to change.

  87. Maybe the blue barrel in Drew’s garage was empty because you can buy them empty I do because they make excellent water troughs for my horses depending what chemical they had in them. Maybe he bought it empty just for the purpose of getting rid of Stacy.

  88. Peterson made an appearance on WVON Radio’s Matt and Perri Show Friday morning. He claims Kathleen Savio’s father and sisters’ attempts to file a wrongful death lawsuit against him in order to control the estate are motivated by money.

    **********
    I’m sorry. I just can’t get this statement out of my mind, LOL. “Motivated by money.”

    Kathleen’s death, and the filing of a Drew-found will, was damn sure motivated by money. Lots of money. Kathleen. Murder. Motivation. Money.

    What a defense that is going to be. Kathleen’s family is motivated by money. He had to kill his victim to get it. They have to fight in a Court of Law to reverse what was done as a result of her murder. But, he was on WVON tweetin’ and tootin’ his word, as though the god has spoken.

    Two words for him.

  89. Well said, Rescue!

    Does Drew really think that he’s the only one to have material concerns?

    When he goes on the talkshow circuit, sells photos and interviews to novelists, or arranges publicity stunts with Las Vegas promoters it’s an honorable pursuit, but let someone else go through the court system to attempt to win back what he stole, and they are greedy and money-motivated.

  90. facsmiley Says:

    March 13, 2009 at 12:08 pm
    I think Drew is entering troubled waters by transferring shared marital assets at this point. I don’t care if his name was on that title. As long as he’s still married to Stacy and her whereabouts remain unknown he has no right to dispose of, liquidate or transfer jointly owned property.

    If he wants to try to prove that she ‘deserted’ him, fine. He’s free to try to divorce her on those grounds. But until he’s granted a divorce or she’s declared dead, he needs to stop handing out her assets to his girlfriends.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Speaking of conflict of interest, moving assets etc:

    Looks like Drew Peterson has always short changed his wives from day 1.

    Remember wife no 1 saying Drew suggested she’d use the same divorce lawyer as Drew himself (!)

    Carol now questiones the ethics of that lawyer at the time.

    Hmmmmm, how about Drews ethics ??

    Goes to show he started early disadvantaging his wives and small children (!!)

  91. Hello, I’ve been following this case from the beginning and I would like to join when I feel I have something to add if thats OK with all of you. Thank you

  92. facsmiley Says:

    March 13, 2009 at 12:08 pm
    I think Drew is entering troubled waters by transferring shared marital assets at this point. I don’t care if his name was on that title. As long as he’s still married to Stacy and her whereabouts remain unknown he has no right to dispose of, liquidate or transfer jointly owned property.

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

    Facs, I’m begging to think Drew has always operated this way.

    As soon as he wants to move on to greener pastures, he starts stripping assets, stealing personal property such as jewellery, transfer titles to the next “future” wife etc.

    He’s doing exactly the same with Christina right now and all these new fiances/wives think Drew is such a generous and caring guy, but all he does is strip things from the previous wife and “gives” (loan) it to them (!!)

  93. facsmiley Says:

    March 13, 2009 at 11:38 am
    So, anyone have any thoughts on how Drew could sign the Grand Prix over the Idiot Woman-child when it was supposed to be Stacy’s car?

    Was the title in his name only?

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

    To have been given a car thats titled in the husbands name is not usually such a big deal, unless as it turns out that husbands name is Drew Peterson – LOL !!

  94. bucketoftea Says:

    March 13, 2009 at 4:50 pm
    He feels everything belongs to him…his women and their posessions.

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

    Exactly and he can dispose of everything as he sees fit (women and posessions) and it does’nt matter what he has to do to achieve that !

  95. I also think LE is letting Drew run riot to see where it leads them, to see what patterns are emerging and by golly they didn’t have to wait long for the asset stripping to emerge (!!)

  96. bucketoftea Says:
    March 13, 2009 at 4:50 pm
    He feels everything belongs to him…his women and their posessions.
    ******
    Bucket – You give him more credit than I do. I think “his women” are not separate from “his possessions” in his mind, but a subset of same.

  97. Hello again, and thanks for the welcome TAI.

    I was reading post #105 by cyrhla and I think this is an area that ought to be looked at more closely as well. I was looking at pics of this whole area and I found a few that show what looks to be the same dark colored suv in two different locations within this area. These pics were recorded before 10/28/2007 and if you go and look, you will see that they were recorded at different times of the year. I don’t know if this is DP’s truck or not but it sure looks like it. If it is, it could at least show that he is very familiar with this area imo.Please go look at both links. Thank you http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=qyf3437p2gvw&style=b&lvl=2&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=11416044&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1

    http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=qyd9n87p1ggb&style=b&lvl=2&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=41379760&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1

  98. Very interesting bg. Where did you get these links? How can you tell when they were recroded? I don’t recall seeing them before.

  99. Remember also in discussions with “Ashley”, Drew already made mention of selling Stacy’s bike.

    When it comes to cashing in he isn’t even pretending Stacy could come back any tick of the clock if she were really out there alive and well !

  100. I found these over at maps live .com under the birdseye option. If you pan westward from this location and follow it all the way to where the 355 extension was finished last year you will notice that the tollway extension was not yet complete at this time , thus my assumption that these paticular pics were taken sometime before Stacy went missing.

  101. Welcome barneygoogle.

    Personally, I think it’s quite a jump to look at a map site’s satellite photo that includes an SUV and surmise that it could be Peterson’s. Now, if you saw one parked in the driveway of his house, I’d get behind you and venture that it might be his. 🙂 Otherwise, I’m not buying it.

    That said, if you have some evidence that you think might be pertinent to the investigation, I would urge you or anyone else to contact the authorities.

    Tip-line to the Illinois State Police: 815-740-0678

  102. Anything is possible and everything should be considered. I’m not here to sell I’m just throwing it out there for all to consider. Thank you.

  103. Distance from Bolingbrook to Quarry Road Lemont 11.9 miles, driving time approx 22 minutes.

    Anything is possible, sometimes big cases have been cracked wide open by innocuous and seemingly insignificant information.

    Remember Watergate started as a burglary no one took any notice of.

  104. facsmiley Says:

    March 13, 2009 at 6:35 pm
    Hey, nothing personal. I didn’t think that it was Stacy in that Thailand photo either.

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

    What’s this facs, don’t you believe Stacy is dancing somewhere in Thailand – LOL !!

  105. BG – I do recommend that you call the tip line and find out how to provide them the links. They may have already checked here but if they didn’t then it wouldn’t hurt for them to do so – especially since they could go to the website and get the original photos to possible zoom in further for more details.

  106. BTW I’d like to know what Joel Brodsky considers to be “errors” in the Apellate Courts decision to grant control of the Estate to the Savio family.

    What exactly does he consider to be “errors” ??

  107. The appeal filed Wednesday follows last month’s appellate court ruling, which upheld a lower court’s decision to take control of the estate of Kathleen Savio away from Drew Peterson and give it to Savio’s father and sister.

    So…I guess that lower court also made errors?

    Next Joel will be saying that the courts have a documented history of severe mental illness and suicide attempts…

  108. Oke, so what Court is Joel Brodsky up to now ?

    Is this going to be heard by the Supreme Court or does he have to submit a consideration to the Supreme Court first, seeing Martin Glink said this:

    “I would doubt very much the Supreme Court would find this novel enough to hear,” Glink said.

    So if the Supreme Court says they don’t want to hear about it, what happens then ?

  109. I wish I had heard the radio show this morning. We might have had an opportunity to ask questions like that.

    The story I saw said that Drew’s attorneys “appealed to the state Supreme Court to review two lower court rulings”, so I guess if they don’t see any reason to review the rulings they can say, “Nah!” and then…I don’t know!

Comments are closed.