Glasgow drops bombshell: Peterson tried to hire someone to kill Savio


In 2003, Drew Peterson offered someone $25,000 to kill his third wife, Kathleen Savio, a year before he himself killed her, Will County state’s attorney James Glasgow told the new judge in the case as she let Peterson’s $20 million bond stand.

Glasgow revealed no details about who Peterson approached or how the plot was supposed to have been carried out.

The prosecution also alleged that Peterson told a police officer he would be better off if Kathleen Savio was dead because he would be financially ruined by a pending divorce. She was found drowned in her bathtub three weeks later, a gash to the back of her head.

The defense first asked Circuit Judge Carla J. Alessio Policandriotes to recuse herself on the grounds that she had minor contact with Drew and Kathleen over their divorce case in the past. She refused.

No word yet who this police officer is who says Drew told him Kathleen would be “better off dead”, but Fox once reported that Drew’s former partner, Alex Morelli, severed all ties and says that he wants nothing more to do with Drew and has nothing positive to say about him. He has said Drew has “turned his world upside down”.

Several police officers have testified at the special Grand Jury over the last year and a half.

A source said the would-be hit man was an undercover narcotics officer who had once worked with Peterson when the disgraced former cop was a member of the Metropolitan Area Narcotics Squad.

Joel Brodsky says, “Amazing how people are suddenly starting to remember these things in the last six weeks. Obviously, someone came forward and we’re going to find out who it is. But, in these high-profile cases, they often bring people out of the woodwork making allegations.”

A pretrial conference is scheduled for June 17.

Read story at CNN
Read story at Herald News
Read story at NBC News

Morelli info from Acandyrose

~By commenting you agree to be bound by the rules of this blog. If you spot a rule violation, send an e-mail to

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic in comments. The following HTML is allowed if you want to use some: <a href=""> <abbr> <acronym> <b> <blockquote> <cite> <pre> <em> <i> <q> <strike> <strong>


337 thoughts on “Glasgow drops bombshell: Peterson tried to hire someone to kill Savio

  1. makes me feel that they really really think this body found could be Stacy…why risk letting him loose now that a body has been found…seriously, he probably does know it’s her, was hoping to get released and then take off…I’m soooooooo happy it was denied!!!

    pretty soon I hope it’s revoked all together! He should have ZERO chance of bonding out!

  2. “Drew Peterson tried to hire someone for $25,000 to kill his third wife before he himself killed her, Will County state’s attorney James Glasgow told the new judge in the case as the judge let Peterson’s $20 million bond stand.”

    wow I wonder who it was???? obviously that person has spoken up if Jim Glasgow knows about it…could the initials belong to an MR? a SC? doubtful it’s Bindy only because for a guy like him that may be small potatoes but maybe he did so through Bindy?

    yeah I know I’m speculating…but I’m allowed to do that based on this latest report…obviously they have some type of evidence to back up this statement!

  3. Before the hearing,
    “Rather than roll the dice we stayed with this judge,” Joel Brodsky said of Judge Carla Alessio-Policandriotes. “She is very fair-minded, has a very good judicial mind, a very good judicial temperament and a great reputation for fair-handedness.”

    After the hearing Brodsky said “[beep]” LOL

  4. What a relief for the Salvio and Cales families along with the witnesses and neighbors of the suspect this must be.

    Prayers to them all.

  5. Well, I’m sure Brodsky will let us all know that it’s all a lie, and the person who claims such a thing is mentally unstable, a liar, a drug addict, an alcoholic, deep in debt, or otherwise seriously flawed. Actually, it will be interesting to see what his deviant mind conjures up as a rebuttal to that accusation. Nothing he says would surprise me.

  6. OMG!! I am guessing that was the never heard before evidence. Did Joel faint? I can see now why they were keeping what they had very close to the chest.

  7. cfs7360 Says:
    May 22, 2009 at 2:35 pm

    Well, I’m sure Brodsky will let us all know that it’s all a lie, and the person who claims such a thing is mentally unstable, a liar, a drug addict, an alcoholic, deep in debt, or otherwise seriously flawed. Actually, it will be interesting to see what his deviant mind conjures up as a rebuttal to that accusation. Nothing he says would surprise me.
    It would be funny to learn from Brodsky who this person is … LOL

  8. Prayers to his kids. I don’t even know how to express what I’m feeling for Kris and Thomas right now.

  9. “And Peterson told a police officer he would be better off if Kathleen Savio was dead because he would be financially ruined by a pending divorce. She was found drowned in her bathtub three weeks later, a gash to the back of her head.”

  10. GREAT NEWS!!

    Drewpy is so going down…..Finally. 🙂

    I can’t wait for the DETAILS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  11. He’ll say he’s being framed …probably by someone who is very very jealous of how smart and good with the ladies he is. guff. faw.

  12. Keep it coming Facs! And Noway, yes, this truly will be devastating news to those children. So sad. I’m sure Steve will “gloss it over” for them in some way. Although, at some point all of those children will be confronted with the “real” truth about their dad, whether they choose to believe it or not.

  13. CFS, the last time Sun-Times used that picture emails were sent to complain about it. They really don’t seem to care.

    At least we know, via Joe Hosey, that the reports do not have a hand in choosing the photos that accompany a story.

  14. From a candy rose – Drew’s best man at their wedding. Alex Morelli, Drew’s former partner says he wants nothing more to do with Drew and has nothing positive to say about him. He said Drew has turned his world upside down.


    Drew sure is hanging his nasty old gray head in this photo. It’s about time he acts like he had something to be “concerned” about. Bet he started sweating bullets in that thermal underwear when Glasgow started talking in court this afternoon. Where’s Brodsky’s sour puss and big mouth this afternoon?? He’s probably shocked into a stupor somewhere trying to recover from the hearing.

  16. Facs, I have never seen that picture, but it was discussed a lot months ago, and Brodsky is the one who brought it to light on “that other blog.” Really hate that it’s being used in the press, but decorum doesn’t mean much anymore, especially if it doesn’t help sell newspapaers.

  17. CFS, that photo first appeared in Joe Hosey’s book. I think he used it as an offensive strike, since it was known that Joel had it and was probably going to bring it out along with some negative hype. Since then the Sun-Times has dragged it out whenever there is a story pertaining to Stacy. What it has to do with an attempted hit on Kathleen is beyond me. 😦

  18. noway406 Says:
    May 22, 2009 at 3:12 pm

    So the question is: Will he post bail? $2,000,000 is a lot of money.
    He can’t. Brodsky wrote in the motion he has no such financial resources LOL

  19. Thanks Facs. Makes sense about Joe, and I agree that it is being used to sensationalize anything about Drew.

    Wouldn’t that be a hell of note if Drew made bond, after Brodsky tried to make a case for all the reasons he couldn’t and shouldn’t?

  20. Was there no press conference after this bail hearing? Was Glenn Selig not on the ground ready to answer my questions?

    Does anyone know what kind of documentation, if any, Glasgow had to provide, or was he just able to make these statements and the judge accepts them?

  21. I think someone finally found the magic button to shut Brodsky up. Of course we know it won’t last.

  22. Now I am really disappointed that there was no follow-up press conference.

    Noway, “Glasgow revealed no details about who Peterson approached or how the plot was supposed to have been carried out.”

  23. One other cop that HDI reminded me that testified was Richard Berg who testified before the grand jury 05/15/2008.

    There was also a cop that lived next door to Drew and Kathleen on Walden who Drew wss buddies with. HDI reminded me the cop neighbor name was Don Bolger.

    Last but not least is Bindy Rock as he received immunity for some reason when he testifed before the grand jury.

  24. HELL TO THE YEAH!!!! Whoever it is/was that came clean, THANK YOU for doing the right thing. I’m confident there are many more folks who turned on DP than this person/people. Time will tell.

    Facs, I thought the same thing when I saw $25k, what a coincidence! I wonder if DP intended to pay TM $25k to erase Stacy, but it didn’t go according to his plan because TM didn’t love him that much. I never did make any sense out of why DP insisted she took $25K & her bikini.

    Kathleen’s boys…oh my. My heart goes out to them, and I am glad they are *finally* seeing for themselves that it’s not ok for dads to erase moms. I would assume they are being shielded from news at Stephen’s but you can’t stop their classmates from doing what kids do at school.

    Wow! We may actually see some justice. I’m so excited.

  25. Brodsky was shamed today. He’s probably in hiding. Hope this is just a taste of how it’s going to go for him every time he makes a court appearance.

  26. Thanks, Facs. I wasn’t sure whether he had to show something to the judge.

    Guess the Stooges are having a pow-wow at Camp Marshmallow as we speak.

    I’m not sure I’m going to want to read the result of that.


    Attorneys: Drew Tried to Hire Killer –
    $20 million bond will stand, judge rules

    Updated 2:49 PM CDT, Fri, May 22, 2009

    Surprising new allegations came out Friday in the case against Drew Peterson. During a bond reduction hearing, the state’s attorney said he believes the former police officer tried to hire someone for $25,000 to kill his third wife in 2003.

    Prosecutors also said that three weeks before Savio’s death, Drew told another Bolingbrook cop he would be better off if she were dead, because he’d be ruined by their divorce.

    Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, denied the hit man allegation and that Drew talked to another cop about killing Savio.

    “Amazing how people are suddenly starting to remember these things in the last six weeks,” Brodsky said. “Obviously, someone came forward and we’re going to find out who it is … but in these high-profile cases, they often bring people out of the woodwork making allegations”…

  28. WOW!

    I would have loved to have seen the look on Brodsky’s face in court today. PRICELESS!

    And Drew’s for that matter.

  29. Obviously, someone came forward and we’re going to find out who it is …
    Joel, just ask Drew.

  30. “Amazing how people are suddenly starting to remember these things in the last six weeks,” Brodsky said. “Obviously, someone came forward and we’re going to find out who it is …

    How does he know it’s someone who testified within the last six weeks if it’s not true?

  31. I wonder..When does the two time murderer go back to court ?? Also does anyone know about how long we are looking at before the SA has to turn over thier evidence to the defense ?? I think I remember someone saying they have 60 days from some date but I can’t remember the rest of it. HELP TIA

    I wonder…Who didn’t love DP enough to kill for him ?? Hmmmmmmmm

  32. “Drew just wants to go home.” 🙂

    Each time I see that in print, it makes me smile!

    hahahahahahahahahaha Drew, no going home for U…..

  33. He probably doesn’t have a clue when this person testified. Could have been 6 days, 6 weeks, or 6 months for that matter. But when he says, “and we’re going to find out who it is” it almost sounds like a threat of some sort. What’s he going to do, take a deposition?? OOOOooooo, scary!!

  34. ~~~snip

    A source tells CBS 2 that the new judge’s husband is an investigator with the Will County Sheriff’s office.

    Peterson hung his head as he left Friday’s hearing, and got into a van to go back to jail.


    Brodsky said that he had heard talk about Peterson hiring someone to kill Savio, but said it was “nothing substantive.” He added that they would investigate the prosecutor’s allegations on the murder plot.

  35. Okay, sorry, I do not know why my quotes are not working today. Facsmiley or rescue, could you fix that for me please?

  36. Myabelle, forum code doesn’t work on WordPress Blogs. If you want to customize your comments, you’ll need to use HTML. The codes allowed are at the bottom of the main post.

  37. I think that Drew’s head is hanging low because now all of the little girls will know he doesn’t have the $2M to make bail so they may not find him as atractive as before.

    It is about time that something wiped that smart ass smirk off of that man’s face. He truly thought that he wouldn’t be charged. He didn’t have an ounce of fear. I think that after two boring weeks in the pokey and now realizing that he isn’t getting out that fast has helped the seriousness of this matter sink in.

    I wonder if they will keep him in that nice and protected area. Drew is a tough guy – he has martial arts training right? I say give him the same treatment as everyone else and stop the star treatment that he’s been getting there. It’s pretty easy to be a role model inmate when you don’t have to share a bunk.

  38. Joe Hosey was just on HLN via telephone. He was discussing the news that Drew had tried to hire a hit man. Hosey said that from what he understood it was NOT Bindy Rock.

  39. Thanks Charmed and Myabelle. More from the CNN story:

    After she first died, we were all convinced she was murdered,” sister Susan Doman said. “I can’t believe this day has come. … It’s a very bittersweet victory.”

    Doman said that she knew Savio had a $1 million life insurance policy and that she had removed Peterson as beneficiary before her death.

    “I knew he was the beneficiary at one point,” she said. “I don’t know if he knew she had changed it.”

  40. He’s never looked better, head hanging down. Not so perky anymore…Amen! Wonder if Robinson had anything to do with it.

  41. I guess we shouldn’t gloat. Those poor kids will never trust anyone again. They’re going to need major counseling.

  42. CLTV videos of Cales and Savio family members talking about the results of today’s hearing.

    Also video of Joel saying that he needed to make the judge aware of her previous history with Drew and “give her the option” to recuse herself:

    Guess there was a press conference….

  43. I just love the way Glasgow is rolling the dice in this case. It looks like the Skunk’s house of cards is falling down…Finally. Justice is finally being served.

    Sundayschild I agree with you on both comments, the one about the Skunk and the one about the children. I have no doubt that the Skunk is feeling very dismayed at what is happening. I also feel that after he is convicted he will no longer be kept in protection. He will be just like any other inmate and treated as such, JMO

  44. let’s hope their older brother loves them enough to put aside his own personal belief’s in dear old dad and get those kids into therapy PRONTO!

  45. Overlay on HLN just stated that the human remains found are NOT those of Stacy and are NOT those of Lisa Stebic.

    Can someone pleae confirm this?

  46. I just realized that they did not say that DNA results confirmed that. Until I see an official report regarding DNA I will not believe them.

    I continue to maintain hope that this is Stacy.

  47. Facsmiley, I think it must be based on the preliminary information that O’Neil released yesterday. Where else could they have received that information and no one else is reporting the same thing?

  48. I think I’ve figured out Drew’s goal for acting like such an idiot with his inappropriate humor. I think he’s going to try to come back to the testimony from his old police officer friend and the alleged hitman by saying that he was just joking around when he said those things.

  49. its been a regular roller coaster ride around here this past week. I can only imagine how it has been for the family. God give them strength.

  50. Nice of Brodsky to say how much of an extra burden it will be on him that Drew’s case will move along faster since he is incarcerated.

    If you play that video backwards you can hear Joel say – “Damn! It is going to cut into my 15 minutes of fame and media gigs.”

  51. I think that HLN is only speculating about who it could be or not. there is nothing on google or any other news searches that say that , some news outlets say things to get ya to watch, I have never trusted cnn or hln on things .. so we have no Idea as to whom it could be. I do hope it is of stacy . and he gets what he deserves . jail for life. I also do not like hosey at all. seems like he is arregent and thinks he knows all of the peterson stuff. HEY NOWAY HOW YA DOING LLOL

  52. OMG – I just listened to the news conference video at CLTV ( and Abood screws up terribly at 4:24. He actually said:

    What he didn’t say – and he either did it because he didn’t know or because he doesn’t want to say is “How did Stacy die?”


    Drew Peterson’s Legal Team Issues Statement on Denial of Bond Motion – May 22, 2009

    (PRNewsChannel) / Joliet, Ill. /
    The following statement is from Drew Peterson’s criminal defense team regarding today’s denial of the motion to lower bond.

    “We’re disappointed that the motion to reduce bond was denied. We feel the state’s attorney made references during the hearing that were irrelevant to the case, such as statements made in regard to Stacy Peterson. These statements had nothing to do with the case involving the death of Kathleen Savio.

    “We will immediately appeal this decision to the Illinois Appellate Court. Appeals of motions to deny bond are heard in an expedited fashion. We are confident the appellate court will reduce the $20-million bond to a reasonable level. We expect to have the appeal on file by the end of next week.”

  54. At 5:50, Joel is talking about what the prosecution would need to prove a person killed Kathleen, when he stops himself and actually talks to himself a bit, then stammers and stutters before he gets back on track.

  55. Facs,

    just listen to video and thansk for posting. I almost fell off my chair when other lawyer misspoke, or did he?

  56. Watching those two just vindicates what we’ve been saying on here for months. It’s nice to finally see how their over confidence, lack of compassion for the victims and/or their families, and their sheer arrogance isn’t winning motions in court for them.

    Maybe now Brodsky will figure out what it’s really like to try a case in Court, since he lost the case in public.

    And to think, while all of this posturing goes on, Peterson sits in jail. Awww.

  57. Good catch Rescue. I wonder what that fact would be. I guess if Joel loses his appeal and Drew stays in jail we will get to hear the details about the prosecutor’s case much faster.

  58. I’m still waiting for Brodsky to bring on all those lawsuits against all of us for “slandering” his client…lol…guess he’s got his hands full with other things at the moment…like his guilty client and his doofus of a co counsel…freudian slip much???

    got stacy on the brain should!

    I watch HLN and it did not say it wasn’t Lisa or Stacy…it said “both families awaiting confirmation, most likely 2 weeks before DNA results confirm or rule out”

  59. Rescue, I saw that earlier. I guess he got mixed up on what he’d seen when he was there when Kathleen was found and what he’d seen when he was killing her.

    And my bad … rumor and innuendo are what Joel always says. 😳

  60. Prosecuters Say Drew Peterson Hired Help for Murder
    Remains Found on River Bank Near Blue Barrel Could Be Stacy Peterson’s or Lisa Stebic’s

  61. Brodsky starts off with “Drew’s only concern is, and has always been his children”.

    Oh really?? Then why did he kill their mothers?

    He isn’t at all concerned about Stacy? Never was?


    Boggles the mind, that he is an attorney.

  62. if he gave two beeps about his kids..their mothers would still be ALIVE!

    again, lets hope their older brother has enough love for them to get them into therapy NOW!

  63. The prosecution claimed today that Kathleen death was staged to look like an accident.

    That reminds me of another “accident.”

    Cassandra Cales is talking about the time she says her sister Stacy Peterson told her she was almost shot in her home. Cales said it happened just a few months before her sister disappeared.” CASSANDRA: “She told me that Drew’s gun had went off while she was in the garage getting a soda when he had come home from work. And she peeled the carpet opened and showed me a bullet hole through the floor.” Cales said her sister had gone to the garage at the request of her husband.”
    CASSANDRA: “She heard a bang or pow or didn’t know what happened and when she went back upstairs Drew said his gun had went off.”

    “She [Stacy] heard a pow. It scared her. She looked around the garage—she didn’t know what it was,” [Cassandra] Cales told the Tribune on Tuesday [12/11/2007]. “Drew went down there. He picked up all the pieces and he never made a report [to police]. He patched the ceiling. Stacy showed me the hole. She peeled the carpet back and showed me where the hole was.” Cales said she sarcastically asked Stacy if the gunshot was an accident. She said her sister just stared at her. Cales said the gun incident happened in August [2007].”

  64. In addition, the state told the court that Peterson knew fact of the case that only the killer would know.


    That is always what gives them away and especially with someone like Drew who needs to talk all the time (!)

    I bet Drew and Joel don’t like Judge Carla now !!

  65. Joel Brodsky says, “Amazing how people are suddenly starting to remember these things in the last six weeks. Obviously, someone came forward and we’re going to find out who it is. But, in these high-profile cases, they often bring people out of the woodwork making allegations.”

    So, they heard rumors, but they are “going to find out who it is.”

    Hmmm. Seems like the defense has been in denial too long and listened too much to their client’s unreliable blubbering, and now they’ve been smacked, but good, in court. Besides, they’re so non-credible, who would believe a word they say anymore?

  66. Oh, BTW, something caught my attention in Brodsky’s statement:

    “Amazing how people are suddenly starting to remember these things in the last six weeks.

    What might he mean by the remark “last six weeks?” Wonder what’s up with that?

  67. This type of news is not going to be a realization for the children and change their view about their Dad overnight, especially if they are in an environment where Drew will always be considered innocent, no matter what will transpire or come to the forefront.

    Young Thomas may say he has “the Greatest Dad”, but he will also remember his parents violent arguments and his mothers fear and distress.

    Maybe one day these children will work out for themselves that “being the greatest Dad” is not synonymous with terrible violence in the home !!

  68. again, lets hope their older brother has enough love for them to get them into therapy NOW!


    Considering the older brother (Steven) issued the statement their Dad is innocent (and he knows this how ?) he’d be the last one to consider therapy for these children (!!)

  69. Catching up, wow on that catch @ 6:15 Rescue, thanks for all the crib notes here, I was only able to catch bits on the radio.

    Has anyone mentioned the following other possible fellow officers who may be the source of this info revealed today:
    – Marcus Patterson
    – Mark Dicken
    – David Schurr

    November 21, 2007

    “On Tuesday [11/21/2007], the Tribune learned that Harvey police officer Marcus Patterson also appeared before that grand jury Nov. 7. Patterson, 34, was a Bolingbrook police officer from October 1999 to April 2002 and worked on the department’s Gang Suppression Unit, headed by Drew Peterson, Lt. Ken Teppel said. Patterson declined to comment on what he told the grand jury.”

  71. In regard to the Brodsky video, I cannot stand to watch him when he talks the way he rocks back and forth, Abood kind of did it too, maybe there was a just a really strong wind.

    Now I get that they will want to look into this matter but the reference to the trucker that said he met up with Drew early in case that turned out to be false, I just want to point out to Brodsky that it was the police that eliminated that person and therefore is not part of the case, not because of his fine detective work. I think that was his moment to say see someone else might have done it.

  72. “Amazing how people are suddenly starting to remember these things in the last six weeks,” Brodsky said. “Obviously, someone came forward and we’re going to find out who it is …


    Joel is talking as if “one” person has come forward in all of this.

    Maybe Joel should have paid more attention to Sergeant Bureks statements over time (!!)

  73. Of all the bizarre points made by Joel Brodsky in his Motion To Reduce Drews Bond the one about Drew not being a flight risk, just about takes the cake.

    Joel is actually listing the Countries Drew can flee to and in particular the ones with no extradition with the USA (!!)

    His reason for Drew not being a flight risk himself is even more bizarre as Joel states Drew travelled to California, New York and Florida WITH HIS PASSPORT on him, but always went home, which is conclusive prove he is no flight risk (!!!)

    I wonder what Judge Carla made of that totally unhinged reasoning and this is Joel after he stated he put “a lot of thought” into presenting this Motion – LOL, LOL

  74. I went back a little more than 6 weeks.

    This is who appeared before GJ that I know of:

    JANUARY 2009: Alexander Beck and Charlie Doman
    FEBRUARY 2009: Christina Raines
    MAY 2009: Lenny Wawczak, Paula Stark, Tom Morphey, Steve Carcerano, and Mike Robinson

  75. and you just happen to find out which Countries have no extradition with the USA on your way over – LOL !!

  76. If Drew goes to Wallmart with his passport in his pocket, that is conclusive proof he is no flight risk (!!)

  77. Joel Brodsky’s Secret Defense Strategy must have worked as he made Drew sit in jail and he is still there (!!)

  78. It’s only a one-business day continuance. It’s not a big deal.

    I’m thinking it’s beginning to feel like one to Drew Walter Peterson.

  79. ” Drews concern is and always has been the children ”
    Total unadulterated BS. More like ” Drews concern is and always has been for himself ” He is a willing tool of the devil and now he will have lots of time to think about it. As for the pet jackass Brodsky, he is way way out of his league and he just doesn’t know it. Stay tuned for more stammering and pathetic news conferences and major lameness.

  80. What I’m staying tuned in for is the mounds of other stuff that is going to come out, since the State’s Attorney did say they were ready to arrest him back in October. Six or seven months ago. Doesn’t sound like they’re wavering in their confidence, if they were prepared for this that far back.

  81. Funny too how someones demeanor can change from arrogance and goading to “sombre” when there is no favorable Judge on the horizon !

    I can’t get it out of my head Drews mention to Christina if ever he gets arrested he will “go to jail for a couple of days but will be bailed out”; like it was a given !!

  82. I am looking forward to the Savio family investigating the handling of Kathleen’s estate and all the various *courtesies* extended to Drew by unc Carroll. Unc The Skunk. He’s gonna have some ‘splaining to do.

  83. I’m really somewhat under the weather, but I am so happy I can hardly stand myself by the events of the last couple of days. Also, just want to say — Facs and Rescue, you are just awesome!! I’m so glad you got those tickets, Rescue. You’re such a little trooper!

  84. I wonder what he spent the $ 25.000.00 on he saved killing Kathleen Savio himself !

    Did he have any other hits to take care of ???

  85. Also from Hosey’s article:

    At the start of Friday’s hearing, Brodsky accused Policandriotes of ordering Peterson to pay child support to Savio during their divorce proceedings. Policandriotes said this was impossible, since she was never on the divorce call. Brodsky later said he thought he read this in a newspaper.

    Brodsky also said Policandriotes dissolved a 2002 order of protection Savio secured against Peterson. Policandriotes said she had no recollection of this, but court documents list her as the judge for this matter.

    “That may make your honor a witness” in the murder trial, Brodsky said.

    Brodsky had failed to put his concerns in writing, and Policandriotes did not take them into consideration.

    Brodsky said he felt it was his “duty” to raise the issue of Policandriotes’ prior involvement in Peterson’s legal disputes.

  86. I love that Joel tried to get the judge to recuse herself based on something that he “thought” he had “read in a newspaper”. I guess that’s just as valid as anonymous editorials used as evidence.

  87. From Hosey’s article:

    “A source said the would-be hit man was an undercover narcotics officer who had once worked with Peterson when the disgraced former cop was a member of the Metropolitan Area Narcotics Squad.”

    So I’m still betting that Drew is going to say he was just joking. But it is truly sad that this undercover officer didn’t go the authorities with this information before (or even after) Kathleen died. Or did they but no one listened like they didn’t listen to the Doman family??

  88. Brodsky missed another lesson from Law 101. In a court of law all motions and requests must be in writing.

  89. State says Peterson offered to hire killer
    Bolingbrook ex-cop’s bail stays at $20 million

    By Steve Schmadeke | Tribune reporter
    May 23, 2009

    Facing “financial devastation” from his divorce with Kathleen Savio, Drew Peterson allegedly offered someone $25,000 to kill his wife in late 2003, just months before she was found drowned in a dry bathtub in her Bolingbrook home, Will County’s chief prosecutor said Friday.

    State’s Atty. James Glasgow for the first time laid out part of his case against Peterson — who faces murder charges in Savio’s 2004 death — during a hearing on a defense motion to reduce the former Bolingbrook police sergeant’s $20 million bail.

    Judge Carla Alessio Policandriotes denied the bail request. Peterson’s attorneys said they will appeal.

    Glasgow told the judge others will be able to testify that Peterson wanted his wife killed.

    Peterson may have worried that money problems could cost him his relationship with Stacy Peterson, whom he had wooed with his “financial security package,” the prosecutor said.

    “My life would be easier if she were just dead,” Glasgow quoted Peterson as allegedly telling a fellow police officer he saw at the courthouse before Savio’s death.

    Dressed in a jail-issued blue jumpsuit, Peterson, who has been in custody since May 7, sat at his attorneys’ table.

    Attorneys Joel Brodsky and David Abood denied that Peterson tried to hire a killer or told another officer he wanted his wife dead.

    Brodsky told reporters Glasgow “said a lot of things he can’t substantiate.” Brodsky said much of what was presented in court will not make it into any possible trial if the state’s new hearsay law is not upheld.

    “When you really look at what [Glasgow] said, if that hearsay law is found to be unconstitutional, then they don’t have much of a case,” Brodsky said, referring to a new statute — dubbed Drew’s Law — that allows certain types of hearsay evidence into court.

    Abood said prosecutors left out what could be the linchpin of the case.

    “What he didn’t say was, how did Kathy die,” he said. Savio’s drowning initially was called an accident but later was ruled a homicide.

    Glasgow did provide other details — confirming a Chicago Tribune report that the state has hired a financial expert to determine how much Peterson stood to lose in his divorce with Savio. Glasgow said $60,000 was missing — in violation of the divorce judge’s order — from a “bank account” that held cash from the sale of the Petersons’ Montgomery bar. That money was to be split between the parties, he said.

    Glasgow told the judge that Drew Peterson is the only suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who vanished in October 2007.

    “We are looking for her body,” he said. Family members of Stacy Peterson and Savio were in court and said they were relieved Drew Peterson would remain in jail.

    “I’m going to sleep well tonight,” said Cassandra Cales, Stacy Peterson’s younger sister.”We haven’t smiled in a long time, and this is our day,” said Sue Doman, Savio’s sister.

    Doman said, “I feel like I’m getting my answers. And [Peterson] is where he belongs.”A pretrial conference is scheduled for June 17.,0,7228690.story

  90. TAI, agreed. It’s tragic that 2 mothers were murdered before this guy did the right thing by mentioning that little tidbit.

  91. Aw Sugarbabes, thank you! We really work to try and make this a wealth of information for everyone, and as accurate as possible. Throw in a little dig here and there to the Dread Team, and all’s well.

  92. “When you really look at what [Glasgow] said, if that hearsay law is found to be unconstitutional, then they don’t have much of a case,” Brodsky said, referring to a new statute — dubbed Drew’s Law — that allows certain types of hearsay evidence into court.


    Now, see, here I am a “lay person,” as Drew likes to call the rest of us, and I can read that comment and see it makes no sense.

    What was laid out today is that Drew tried to hire someone for $25,000.00 to murder his ex-wife, and there is a witness who claims Drew told him he’d be better off if his ex was dead. It was draining him financially.

    Where in these recent revelations does the “new hearsay” law apply? The new hearsay law looks to allow into evidence things said by a deceased person, such as Kathleen saying she was afraid Drew was going to kill her, or documents and letters she wrote saying so. The new hearsay law would be challenged by the defense because they wouldn’t be able to cross-examine the witness; she’s deceased.

    Seems to me the murder-for-hire dude is alive and well, and so is the police officer who said Drew didn’t want his ex to live much longer. If I am not mistaken, they can be cross examined by the defense, since they’re living and breathing.

    But, then, what do I know. I’m just a lay person.

  93. Methinks States Attorney has a lot more bombshells up his sleeve than just the Kathleen Savio hitman.

    There could very well be a laundry list of bombshells !!

    Meanwhile Joel Brodsky keeps prattling on about the Hearsay Law !!

  94. Joel has really latched onto the new hearsay law and is doing his best to publicly trash it, but from what I’ve read and heard, there are already hearsay exceptions in place that apply to domestic abuse that might come into play in Kathleen’s case, and which wouldn’t even require the use of the new law at all.

    He seems to be basing his defense on fighting things like the bond assigned to his client, or the laws in place, or the judge not being to his liking. Is he ever going to get to the point where he is just ready to defend his client based on evidence of his innocence?

    Oh wait…there is a quote from his somewhere. He says something like, he isn’t so interested in proving innocence but in poking holes in the prosecution. I’ll see if I can find it.

  95. Peterson may have worried that money problems could cost him his relationship with Stacy Peterson, whom he had wooed with his “financial security package,” the prosecutor said.


    This is interesting as he has been wooing Christina the same way, promises of “high end” jewellery, a car, a house “that is paid for”, plenty of money to spend and as Ernie says: “She don’t have to work no more”

  96. As rescueapet says, Joels constant barraging of the Hearsay Law and therefore States Attorney “doesn’t have a case” is completely irrelevant with what has been presented to date !!

  97. Do you think his attempt to solicit murder for hire could be the bit of news some people learned a little while back, before JailBoy’s arrest? Remember, they were shocked that DP wasn’t picked up and Hosey even feared an arrest might never happen if it wasn’t happening then.

  98. Is there a possibility that bizarre “Will” was drawn up around the time Drew was solliciting a hitman ???

  99. I always had the feeling Drew wanted to kill Kathleen whilst on vacation.

    Go to the Bahamas and Kathleen has an “accident” and the will was conveniently in place just before they left !

  100. I also wonder if DP has EVER told JB the truth. Even if he tried, I don’t know if he’s capable of relaying info which doesn’t paint him in what he sees (BIG qualifier there) as the most favorable light. Meaning, if he’s describing the crime to his atty, I can easily imagine him coloring facts to make himself appear more clever, brave, well-liked..anything.

    Despite his comment to the contrary, IMO JB had no idea Glasgow was going to hit them with this and DP is certainly stupid enough to lie to his lawyer.

  101. Or maybe no Bahamas, but just preparing the will before the hitman strikes.

    Hitman didn’t strike but he still had the will !

    Came in handy later on …….


    In the case, Mark Jensen, a Wisconsin man, was found guilty of murdering his wife Julie in 1998. Several weeks before her death, Julie Jensen talked to local police, her son’s teacher and a neighbor, and told them that she suspected her husband was planning to kill her. She went so far as to give her neighbor a sealed letter that detailed her suspicions, and asked her neighbor to give the letter to the police if anything happened to her.

    On Dec. 3, 1998, something did happen to Julie Jensen. After having fallen ill and taken to bed, she was found dead. Prosecutors allege that her husband fed her several doses of ethylene glycol–the sweet, syrupy but poisonous liquid commonly used as antifreeze–and then possibly smothered her with her pillow when she started to recover from the poisoning.


    Wisconsin Supreme Court determined that Julie Jensen’s letter to police could be used as evidence in the trial if prosecutors could demonstrate there was sufficient evidence that Mark Jensen had murdered his wife, thus making it impossible for him to face Julie Jensen in court. The Wisconsin Supreme Court also ruled that Julie Jensen’s statements to her neighbor and son’s teacher were “non-testimonial” in nature, allowing them to also be admitted into evidence.


    The Wisconsin Supreme Court based its decision of the “doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing.” Essentially, it said that Mark Jensen forfeited his Constitutional right to face his accuser, because his alleged actions (murdering his wife) made it impossible for her to appear in court.

  103. I’m really impressed with the prosecution thus far and I’m ROFLMAO at boobsky. He is too funny! I think an overworked newly graduated public defence lawyer would do a better job.

    This latest news certainly is a bombshell. I wonder how long they have known though? One would think if they knew a little while ago, they would have said something at the first bond hearing?

    I’m not at all surprised he tried to hire somebody to do his dirty deed. I bet the real reason he ended up doing it himself was he took great pleasure in the act. Just like the true psychopath he is.

  104. Re: your above post hedidit – and so the court should! It has always pissed me off when people kill their witnesses and then are able to use the lack of witness to get off.

  105. JB spouting that crap about DP caring only about the welfare of his kids reminds me of the old definition of chutzpa: Defendant charged w. killing his parents begs for mercy because he’s an orphan.

  106. In the book ” Erased ” the author offers some suggestions to close the legal loopholes the eraser-killers are able to manipulate. I highly recommend this book; one of the very best I have ever read.
    Additionally, when the civil rights of a victim are violated, as in the case of Kathleen Savio and many others I might add, action must be taken by the justice department against those responsible. It absolutely infuriates me to think KS was ignored by those who were supposed to equally protect her. WRONG.

  107. I, too, am wondering why this narc cop who was offered 25K to murder KS kept quiet.
    Isn’t this called ” solicitation to commit murder” ?
    What on earth was he thinking of ? Was he offered immunity in return for testifying ? How many others who took an oath to serve and protect looked the other way and why ? Was he, too, afraid of Drew ?

    Every stinking enabler needs to be held responsible !!

  108. In light of what Drew Peterson stood for and his ability to manipulate, perhaps we should be grateful for those that have come forward rather than query why they did not do so before.

    Perhaps these people treasured their own lives and that of their families over trying to deal with a system corrupted by Drew !

  109. Don’t you love it though — what an IDIOT brodsky is! “….haven’t given evidence to substantiate hit..” etc., etc., why would they idiot — it’s not a trial!! The guy sounds more ignorant every time he talks. We’re sure he’s going to get bond lowered; uh no — didn’t happen. We’re sure they can’t use gossip about hit man because it’s hearsay; uh no — I’m sure who ever is saying this is still alive and went forward to police via their own mouth! We weren’t shocked by the new allegations; uh yea — cause your client did it!!! IDIOTS!

  110. Just thinking too that drew will be in jail for a long time until trial is heard. pretrail is even mid-June for excitement sakes! Do you even think any of this is sinking in to drew’s head yet that maybe he will be there from this day forward? He’s talking to the kids on a daily basis; do you think the older son is now questioning maybe he did kill mom or do you think they still believe him? I know the younger son probably never did believe him because he is suffering in silence more than the older teenage son.

  111. My guess is this would-be hitman probably was offered immunity if he is talking to LE now. JMO.

    As for Drew talking to Joel about his crimes, I really, really doubt he would have done that. No defense attorney wants to hear anything from their client except that they are innocent (unless they intend to plead guilty). It’s kind of Drew’s obligation to provide only the information that will help Joel do his job. Otherwise, he puts Joel in a really uncomfortable position and could possibly cause him to step down.

  112. You know facsmiley, what you said is very true, however, it would only be true if we’re dealing w/normal people here! Drew would never tell Joel b/c he of course, in his own mind, didn’t do it!! And as far as Joel stepping down because he heard the truth — forget about it — he has no scruples — wouldn’t bother him if drew told him the truth or not! But in a real world, not drew/joel fantasy world, your statments are oh so true!

  113. My guess is too that especially now many more will start to come forward since Drew Peterson is finally behind bars and can’t find himself a favorable Judge for the first time in 29 years !!

  114. Well, I really can’t find the quote from Drew where he explains what he likes about his job, but I do remember that he said the satisfaction for him does not come from proving a client innocent, but from picking holes in the arguments and case that the opposition offers.

    Maybe that’s what most defense lawyers like…the game of it.

  115. Yea, I would think so too. So far, that’s all Joel’s done is pick pick, even though he’s ALWAYS been so off the mark!

  116. Remember when Joel said Drew never had a fold-up gun in his life… or something like that! Hahahahah! IDIOT! You think he’d want to cut his losses already. Drew’s probably never told him the truth about anything since day one.

  117. It was great to see Drew wearing glasses on the way to court yesterday — I guess that was to prove that he was squinting b/c he couldn’t see (because he wasn’t wearing them the other day) and not that he was making faces at Kathleen’s family!

  118. Isn’t it wonderful that the States Attorney was able to keep all this evidence quiet. So much more BANG! this way. IMO

    Joel read it in a newspaper. Plan to read about your client’s conviction there too, Brodsky. 🙄

  119. and especially with Joel Brodsky bleating the States Attornoy “doesn’t have much of a case” whilst he has no idea what the States Attorney actually does have – LOL !

  120. That video reminds me of an SNL skit. Specifically, the skit on the Obama/McCain debate, where McCain was walking all around (Abooboo) while Obama spoke. Abooboo couldn’t refrain from playing on his cell phone during the “press conference”? What a pro!

  121. Seems to be Joel Brodsky’s bloated ego so far has done nothing to help his client. Not helped him in the public’s opinion, and not helped him in preliminary court matters.

  122. Why, oh why, has Brodsky been on a media blitz all these months, publicly denouncing the unknown variables of the case against his client?

    When the facts, as the State presents them, do come out, isn’t that going to make him look even more non-credible?

    As hard as I try, I can’t see any good in what he has done to help his client.

  123. hmmmmmmmmm would Drew admit he approached someone for a hit on his wife ??

    Joel Brodsky certainly thinks so considering he said they are going to find out who this person is (!!)

    Joel, if your client never even thought of killing his wife, why would he be looking for a hit man ?????

  124. Can any legal entity remove Brodsky as incompetent before the trial, or do they have to wait, and if convicted, Drew could claim that he had an incomeptent defense?

    What are the criteria for claiming your lawyer was incompetent?

  125. JAH, with all due respect, of course Brodsky would be looking for this “hit man.” He’s a State witness. Whether Joel believes in this witness or not, it IS his job to find him and investigate him. Nothing in this statement shows he’s admitting there is a hit man, just looking for the witness the state is offering. JMHO.

  126. There’s no doubt that the person exists and has made an allegation. Joel is doing his job by seeking out more info about him.

    But, the whole “find out who this person is” struck me as strange because Isn’t the defense going to be granted discovery at some point before the trial? If that person is going to testify, won’t they most assuredly be told the identity of the would-be hitman without the need for any kind of detective work?

  127. I just read this. Didn’t see it posted in this thread, but delete it if you need to.

    Drew Peterson owed Savio a lump sum of $200,000, [for] monthly child support and alimony if she was alive, the prosecutor said. Conversely, with Savio dead, Peterson stood to gain all of that plus an annual $20,000 in Social Security benefits to raise their two sons, and her $1 million life-insurance policy. Savio recently had removed Peterson as the beneficiary of that policy and replaced him with their boys.

    I can see why he thought he’d be ruined financially.

  128. Well, all Joel need do now is “read the newspaper” to find out a little background on the guy, since it’s been reported he’s a former narc, if he doesn’t want to wait for the discovery.

  129. I keep going back to the statement that the State was ready to proceed with an indictment in October. I can’t help but think they are on such solid ground, that there is going to be just an amazing amount of evidence to be divulged.

    I’m not saying there won’t be bumps in the road, because this man surrounded himself, sometimes, with some real characters, but it appears that the State is confident they have what it will take to convince a jury this man took the life of his children’s mother for his own sinister reasons. So far, the State is not the one that needs to be laughed out of court, or anywhere.

  130. I think the find out who this person is was just a way for Joel to indicate that his client had no idea.



  131. Noway, as with anything, of course, the court would have to hold hearings on whether or not a client can discharge his lawyer. I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a court initiating proceedings to discharge a lawyer in pre-trial situations. If the client is confident in his/her defense, then so be it. It’s his/her call.

    A client would, I believe, contact another lawyer and ask to be represented by the new lawyer. The new lawyer would then prepare the paperwork to have the present lawyer dismissed, and file his substitution. All of this is done under the direction of the court. The judge would question the client and approve the dismissal/substitution.

  132. Yes but for the record and as far as Joels Defense is concerned his client is supposed to be innocent, so he shouldn’t even publicly address the issue of the hitmen by saying he is going to look for him – WTF

  133. An innocent client doesn’t go looking for a hit man, so Joel as a Defense attorney should have NEVER publicly entertained the idea that there was one !

  134. BESIDES – Kathleen was supposed to have had an ACCIDENT and here is Joel publicly accepting the States Attorneys allegation there was a hitman somewhere along the line – hmmmmm

  135. I think Joel is not saying there is a hit man, rather that there is someone who came forward who said he was a hit man.

    He was going to find out who this man was that came forward (which he can now do by reading the newspaper).

    I’m sure Joel will be issuing statements about the deficiencies of this undercover officer shortly.

  136. JAH, I’m sorry but as a defense attorney, what do you think Joel should be doing about this new state’s witness?

    I don’t agree that it would behoove his client to simply ignore it. Denying that a witness exists is not going to help his case. It’s true, that up to this point, Joel hasn’t demonstrated himself to be a very wise lawyer, but I think even he is smart enough to go after a new witness when he hears the prosecution say they’ve got one. I’m not going to fault him for that.

  137. I took the statement that Buttsky made as being a threat, in his words (Obviously, someone came forward and we’re going to find out who it is.) To me it seemed like he was publicly telling this witness that, he/she will be sought after. That is some scary stuff right there, JMO

  138. Facs, you’re right. The Head-In-The-Sand strategy has not worked too well for Brodsky so far.

    He might actually need to put the newspaper down and start researching a little bit.

  139. I agree littlemamajo that it sounded like an aggressive way to put it, but JB never sounds grown-up and businesslike anyway.

  140. Hosey posted this on his facebook this morning. Doesn’t say when tho:

    “Joseph Hosey is talking about the Peterson case on Fox News Channel today.
    7:52am “

  141. As little respect I have for Brodsky, he wouldn’t be dumb enough to threaten a witness publicly (don’t know about privately).

    It is against the law for anyone to threaten or intimidate a witness about appearing in court or giving evidence.

  142. JAH – again, with all due respect, acknowledging that he is going to hunt down the State’s newly revealed witness does not mean he’s admitting anything. He’s acknowledging the State’s witness as someone he needs to reckon with to defend his client against his allegations. That does not show that he is acknowledging this is a hit or he is legitimate. Call him what you will; he is a witness for the State with allegations against his client. It’s his job to find him and investigate him.

  143. the United States, the crime of witness tampering in federal cases is defined by statute at 18 U.S.C. § 1512, “Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant”. The punishment for such an offense is up to 20 years if physical force was used or attempted, and up to 10 years if physical force was only threatened. The tampering need not have actually been successful in order for it to be criminal.

    This is why I don’t think Joel was threatening any witness. He was trying to discredit anything the witness may have said. IMO

  144. Remember, he only has Drew’s side of things. He doesn’t know what Glasgow has against his client.

    None of them (Drew’s lawyers) are good at interviews where they don’t know what the questions will be.

  145. I am somewhat surprised, though, that Brodsky brought up the idea that he heard rumblings recently about this witness, but got blindsided by the explosive allegations that are now public. He admits to having to track down who this is. So, how did he get wind of this previously, but, yet, doesn’t know who it is?

    Again, I say, he should ask him client, since we can assume he’s read about him in the newspaper by now.

  146. Rescue, IMO it could be that Joel doesn’t like to look like he was blindsided so he made up that they’d heard rumblings (again dismissing the credibility).

  147. I so agree it is the defenses job to check out each and every witness, but why not wait until you are given that information though discovery motions.

  148. Littlemamajo, the defense could find out more than the State did about a witness (not too likely in this case but I mean in general).

    The defense should not hope that the State has done a thorough job of investigating any witness.


  149. LMJ, I thought that at first too, but then we do know how Joel likes to get the jump on things and dig up as much dirt as he can on not only witnesses, but the family members of victims, etc.

    He’s not going to be able to milk that retainer unless he actually bills some hours, y’know! 😉

  150. Has Joel really been sitting on his butt this whole time?

    Assuming he and Drew have actually talked about potential witnesses against him (if ever he were charged in Kathleen’s death) and what the State might come up with, you would think that the name of the guy(s) you approached about killing your wife might come up. Even if you were joking. Even if you were dealing with the stress of divorce. Oh, I think Brodsky has the name.

    He’s acting like he doesn’t and discrediting his very existence, so that when the name is released in discovery or the media, he’ll come forward with some verbal attack on the cop’s character.

    If he hasn’t had any conversations with Drew about potential witnesses, I be he sure is now.

  151. I’d love to talk to someone who has gone up against Joel in court and find out whether he was as idiotic then as he appears now.

  152. Doesn’t Joel Brodsky supposedly have an innocent client ??

    Why would an innocent client have had the need for a hitman ?

    That should be Joel Brodsky stance, rather than publicly say he’s going to track this guy down – HUH ??

  153. That would be good, Noway! I think the 2 researchers from Abood’s firm who have been meeting with Drew must be doing that kind of thing. Joel is the “talent” that rolls in for the trial(or tv appearance)

  154. Well, let’s give this place even more credit with some interesting ideas that come up and look at this latest witness.

    IMO, since the amount of $25,000.00 came up in the State’s revelation about the hit man allegation, this would tell me to ask if there is a money trail. In other words, did this murder-for-hire plot go so far as for money to be exchanged? How would the State show that exchange of money? Money withdrawn from Peterson’s account? Anytime a large sum of money is deposited into an individual’s account, it’s reported to some governmental body, because high sums of money could be signal drug activity.

    Any other ideas as to what you would look for in this witness’ allegations that would help you believe him?

    Of course, proving that he had contact with Drew would be another important point. Other people seeing them together.

  155. Maybe a combo … something like:

    My client is innocent and would have had no need for a hit man. We have heard rumblings of there being a “hitman” but since my client is innocent, we didn’t give them much thought. We intend to dispose this witness (be careful not to say dispose of, Joel) and are confident that we will show our client is innocent and this officer was confused. He has a drug and alcohol problem, hasn’t worked in years and is generally unstable.

  156. JAH – once again, he has to track him down, whether his client is innocent or not. He’s a State witness. He’s making allegations against his client.

    What you are saying is Joel should publicly ignore him and he’ll go away, because Drew is innocent. Sorry, JAH, I am just not getting your train of thought on this one.

  157. Here’s another thought I had.

    Did this witness come forward voluntarily, or was he approached first by the State? If he came forward voluntarily, why? What would he have to gain by doing this, outside of seeing Drew Peterson convicted of killing his ex wife?

    If he was approached first by the State, how did they find out about him, or suspect him of being involved in the KS case? Did someone else bring him to the State’s attention, or did the State find something to tie-him to KS?

    If he was approached by Drew Peterson to carry out a murder of his ex-wife, does this mean that this man, along with DP, are involved in dark, dirty deals that we are only just now going to hear about? Where does one come up with $25,000.00, when one is barely trying to keep their head above water during a contested divorce settlement?

  158. What you are saying is Joel should publicly ignore him and he’ll go away, because Drew is innocent.

    Is that what I said ??

    That is news to me.

  159. Rescue, those are all very good questions. Along those lines …

    Did he report it at the time and it was ignored, did he mention it to someone else who then mentioned it to the GJ, or did he keep it to himself until Stacy disappeared, (insert all of Rescue’s questions) and is he now being offered immunity.

  160. Sorry, JAH. That’s what I thought you were saying too. But rereading your post, maybe you were just saying that Joel made a poor choice of words?

  161. Rescue, based on what Glasgow reported their financial consultant had learned about the missing funds from the court ordered bank account intended to hold the funds from the sale of Suds Pub until the division of assets were finalized, sounds like Drew had a $60,000 cushion floating around somewhere in that time frame.

  162. I wonder what his lawyer’s “creative accounting” explanation will be for that one, Sugarbabes.

  163. noway406 Says:

    May 23, 2009 at 2:24 pm
    Sorry, JAH. That’s what I thought you were saying too. But rereading your post, maybe you were just saying that Joel made a poor choice of words?


    Very bad choice of words and putting his client in a bad light as far as the hitman goes (!)

  164. I would say there’d better be some pretty clear money trail that documents those funds either went for the downpayment on Drew’s new love nest with Stacy, or some other major expenditure. Otherwise, it’s going to look mighty fishy.

  165. I keep wondering if that dicky will was written around the time Drew approached the hitman, as that would be very telling.

    Drew has said that will was written before they went on a vacation(the Bahamas).

    I wonder if they ever did go to the Bahamas (!!) or if that was his explanation for organizing the hit on Kathleen.

  166. Years have passed since Kathleen’s death. Did this hit man remain in DP’s life, did he not? Is he retired now, or is he still an active officer? Why did he not follow through with the murder for hire plot? Did he even consider it at the time, or did he run for the hills after he was approached by Peterson? How did Drew Peterson feel comfortable with the fact that this man knew he wanted his wife murdered and would remain quiet, especially after she was found dead? Was this man part of the investigative team that looked into the circumstances of Kathleen’s death? Did he fear for his own safety if he ever came forward with the knowledge he had?

  167. If I understood Glasgow’s comment, the money in that account was to be split between Drew and Kathleen ($30k each).

    Wouldn’t a paper trail of the money spent prove wrongdoing on Drew’s part while the money missing and no paper trail would make one suspect wrongdoing?

    Or are you saying Glasgow better have a paper trail if he’s to prove this?

  168. Was this State witness involved in the murder of Kathleen? Did he help Drew carry out the murder in 2004, rather than doing so the year prior? Just what is his involvement?

  169. Wow, Rescue! Some pretty chilling blue line questions that can be asked of both LE officers who now appear to be on the prosecution’s witness list. I would suspect the narc officer did have some fear for his safety, given Drew’s past when he ratted out the other narc officer back in the mid-80’s. It’s absolutely chilling to contemplate that this person might have been part of the initial investigative team that didn’t really investigate Kathleen’s death.

  170. Noway – I am wondering, I guess, why a specific dollar amount even came out in these revelations. Is there something that coincides with that exact amount? Otherwise, why not just say: the witness was offered money to kill Kathleen. Without saying how much.

  171. If the money is missing, prosecutors don’t have to say where it went, do they? Good enough to show it’s missing?

  172. These narcs were seconded form different forces, weren’t they? Could the alleged wouldn’t-be hitman come from somewhere like, oh, I dunno…Harvey?

  173. Just from the little bit of information we have here, I can see it coming at Drew from all sides, so one can only imagine what the State has on him !!

    Joel better start doing some serious home work instead of talking wonderous double talk on t.v. and flogging chicken wings and burgers !

  174. Maybe this witness was offered $25k and turned it down (Drew tried to pay someone to kill his wife). I just wonder if there isn’t someone out there who was offered more and turned it down or didn’t. If they can’t account for the $60k, it possibly could have gone to a successful hit man.

    Speculation, I know. I’ll try to stop.

  175. Noway, it was my understanding there was supposed to be a whole lot more in that account than $60,000. I’m saying if there’s no confirmed money trail of where the $60,000 went that has been identified as missing, that is highly suspicious that Drew pocketed the money to bankroll a hit on Kathleen. If a money trail exists that it was used for a down payment on the new house or some other large expenditure like the ultra light, then it may not be so suspicious — but nevertheless wrongdoing on Drew’s part, because he was court ordered to have the funds from the sale of Suds Pub in that account until the financial division was settled. Either way Drew’s guilty of wrongdoing, but without a confirmed money trail it looks far more nefarious on his part that he was attempting to buy a hit on Kathleen.

  176. Did he fear for his own safety if he ever came forward with the knowledge he had?


    I’d say that would have been a pretty good deterrent for a lot of people, especially if they knew Drews navigation around of the legal system (!!)

  177. Thanks, Sugar. True, while a money trail would show that he took the money for his own use, no money trail of more than $60k definitely makes the hinky meter go wild.

  178. Why would Peterson approach an undercover officer, a co-worker, to do a murder-for-hire, when, in all his years of service, he could have approached a street rat or drug arrestee that could have been erased without anyone ever suspecting he died by any means other than a drug deal gone bad? Why another police officer? Why this particular police officer?

  179. I would only ask someone to kill if I knew they were already a bit bent. Someone who participated in any of Drew’s suspected extracurricular activities?

  180. Those questions make the hair on the back of your neck stand up and pay attention — huh, Rescue?

  181. Why would Peterson approach an undercover officer, a co-worker, to do a murder-for-hire, when, in all his years of service, he could have approached a street rat or drug arrestee that could have been erased without anyone ever suspecting he died by any means other than a drug deal gone bad? Why another police officer? Why this particular police officer?


    Yes, I’ve been wondering about that too.

    Why one of his fellow officers, if there are people around that do this sort of thing for a living ?

    Maybe a street rat or drug arrestee would goof up too easily, but there must be a specific reason for Drew to have approached another Police Officer (!)

  182. rescueapet Says:
    May 23, 2009 at 2:53 pm

    Was this State witness involved in the murder of Kathleen? Did he help Drew carry out the murder in 2004, rather than doing so the year prior? Just what is his involvement?

    One thing which came to my mind here is that Derek Armstrong said Brodsky opposed to ask Drew any other person’s involvement in Kathleen’s death during the polygraph test.
    I think if this person was not finally directly involved in(let’s say refused to help Drew), it could raise his blood pressure a lot while thinking that this person KNOWS the truth.
    We do not know anything in details about this person. This person could have informed the police then and it was ignored. That might have been the reason why the whole investigation procedure was not performed.

  183. Rescue, we’re not talking about a goody-two-shoes kind of police officer, maybe someone Drew could intimidate? Or thought he could.

  184. Drew was cheap. Would a professional hit man have charged more than $25,000?

    It sure does make you wonder if he was setting someone up. Because it’s just the kind of thing you wouldn’t do (ask a fellow cop). Unless you knew he did this kind of thing on the side.

    My head is spinning. I’ve got to stop thinking about it.

  185. Oh well at least Daddy Day Care is still behind bars and not going anywhere in a hurry.

    Not to New York, not to Costa Rica, not anywhere !!

  186. Did he ask him to do it himself, or ask him if he knew someone who would? They were undercover with bad guys, after all.

  187. Glasgow seemed pretty confident in his statement that Drew had himself killed Kathleen. So, there must be more evidence they have to back up that theory.

    However it happened that this narc officer came to light is hard to say, but I’m grateful Glasgow has this evidence. It is troubling that there’s no explanation about why this revelation has not previously surfaced, which causes us to wonder if this person carried this around for years and why, or did they track him down, or might he have reported it and it was swept under the rug in 2004. We can only speculate at this point, and that sure makes my stomach churn. Why does our patience have to be tested so many times with this horrible tragedy? I guess because the truth has been so buried in such a mountain of deception for so long by so many people–the answers sometimes seem like piecemeal. But I sense a big leak has sprung in the dam, and we’re on the verge of some critical answers.

    One thing that came to mind for me about this narc officer is that he may have been a better con than Drew. Drew might have miscalculated the advantage he thought he had over this person. Narc officers are trained to con the socks off of anyone in their path, and being the best at it. Maybe this time Drew has been outdone.

  188. I still think that the hitman being a narc officer is an assumption made by the reporter…it clearly states that Glasgow stated he offered someone money to kill Kathleen THEN it states he made a statement to a fellow officer about being better off is she was just dead

    based on the timing of both statements…the hitman was in 2003…the statement about her being dead was 3 weeks before she died

    obviously two separate instances not necessarily related to who was asked and who was told

  189. yeah okay..what source?

    we’ve heard a lot of things from different “sources” that have been wrong

    that’s sort of an open ended statement to me…”approached was a narcotics officer on the same teams as Drew in MANS” okay…was that for the hit? or was the regarding the statement of her being dead? it’s not too clear to me

    again there is too much speculation as to who the hitman was and too much being made that it must be Alex Morelli because of their crumbled relationship

    I’m gonna wait for what Glasgow has in detail before I start to run amok again with who it could be

    the only thing I will say is that I find it VERY odd that two key witnesses SC and MR were called back to the GJ AFTER they already testified and that happened AFTER his arrest

    where is Mike Robinson’s docket????

  190. It would also make sense that M.A.N.S. could have an undercover officer(s) watching the narc cops to make sure they were staying on the right side of the law. Sort of like a double agent.

  191. Dearheart, the article I read said that the would-be hitman was the person reported to be on the same undercover narcotics team as Drew.

    Not even the federal government can make a reporter reveal a source. 😉

  192. exactly…that is why I want to wait for Glasgow’s clarification and not that of some anonymous source and a reporter

    sugar..if this was an officer he himself committed a crime by not reporting the hit request…what kind of deal or punishment do you think should come to an officer that has knowledge that another cop wants to hire a hitman?

    I don’t expect a criminal to tell right away but I certainly expect a cop to turn him in…and apparently that was never done back then because Kathleen is indeed dead

    again..Glasgow has his ducks in a row..he is confident they can prove the offer was made and that Drew did it himself

    quack quack…I’m gonna trust that Glasgow has done his job.

  193. “A source said the would-be hit man was an undercover narcotics officer who had once worked with Peterson when the disgraced former cop was a member of the Metropolitan Area Narcotics Squad.”

  194. and AGAIN…who’s to say that the source isn’t just assuming

    they could be thinking that the hitman and the one to be told about him wanting her dead are one in the same

    wow a “source” sources are known to be wrong

    so..if it was a narcs officer..what kind of punishment do you think he deserves for failure to report this crime?

  195. Dearhheart, you asked if the narcotics officer was supposed to be the actual hitman or merely the person who reported it, so I copied the bit from the story so you could see.

    I certainly don’t have any information one way or another. I just gather up the news and info and make sure it makes its way to the blog.

  196. Did he fail to report this? We don’t know that either. He could have reported it and the powers that be let it go. We just don’t know yet.

  197. Facs is right.

    We can only discuss the “facts” of the case as they are reported by the media. And yes, sometimes a “fact” ends up being fiction.

    The choice for each of us seems to be to talk about them as reported or not talk about them at all.

  198. yeah we don’t know but if it was a cop..and he didn’t report it..he’s got blood on his hands..if it was a cop and he did report it and the powers that be did nothing about it..they have blood on their hands

    but I’m not going to stick with some anonymous source that states it was a narc officer that was approached until Glasgow confirms this…and then I would like to know what sort of charges that cop is going to get if he failed to report this crime..her death could have been prevented by WHOEVER it was that was solicited..whether cop or street rat

    hearing this information is good on the level of nailing Drew but it also makes me sick because if the dime had been dropped on him they could have nailed him BEFORE anyone ended up dead

    so forgive me for questioning this version of the story..but I do because either way it pisses me off..her death could have been prevented!!! up to a year before she actually died??? How disgusting is that? it disgusts me…she’d be alive and Stacy too would be alive because his sorry murdering butt would have been put away back THEN

    sorry I’m done for the day…normally I don’t give out so early but this troubles me more than I think you realize

  199. DH, we don’t have information at this point that tells us when or if the narc cop did report it. If he reported it and it was swept under the rug, there should be more heads that roll. I agree, it’s a crime to not report the solicitation of a murder whether you’re a narc cop or an average joe citizen, and I do indeed believe if that turns out to be the case-there should be charges filed. On the other hand, just because we know Kathleen was murdered is not iron-clad proof that this person did not report it. I’m still grateful Glasgow has this information in his arsenal to prosecute Peterson. Whether this person should be prosecuted will be determined by Glasgow based on the facts, and for right now, he alone knows what those facts are. Just another invitation to test our patience until he makes that determination. We’ve all got to put our big girl panties on (sorry guys) and make our own determinations about which reporters we have found to be trustworthy with past information, and that determination is our own responsibility and not likely going to be influenced by what others have to say about that person.

  200. Don’t know if there’s anyone interesed in researching M.A.N.S. but this might be an interesting resource for someone looking into it.

    The Joliet Metropolitan Area Narcotics Squad (MANS) covers the Illinois counties of Grundy and Will.
    Combined, these counties had a 2002 total population of 598,700 – 53 percent more than in 1990. In
    2002, 11 local Illinois police agencies participated in MANS. These include the Grundy County Sheriff’s
    Office, the Will County Sheriff’s Office and the following municipal police departments: Coal City,
    Frankfort, Joliet, Lockport, Mokena, Morris, New Lenox, Rockdale, and Romeoville. These agencies
    served nearly 59 percent of the population in the two-county region covered by MANS in 2002 (see Map
    1 on page 31). A participating agency is defined as one that contributes either manpower or financial
    resources to MANS.

  201. If Glasgow had to offer immunity to get this testimony, so be it. I’m still glad Glasgow has the testimony and that he feels it will be upheld in court.

    See you all later … my Memorial Day Weekend has now officially begun (a bit late, I know).

  202. My guess is that if it was an actual member of this Narc squad, he is probably only coming forward with a guarantee of immunity.

    That’s how this kind of thing often works…

  203. Hi everyone. Don’t post often, if I have at all on this forum, though it is my favorite to read to keep up with this case. I do see that we are all getting a little testy, or at least that is my perception, my apologies if I am wrong. We need to remember that a LOT of things have transpired in the past few weeks, its like an avalanche has satrted its path down the hill, or the tiny leak in the dam has finally broken open. *S* and ONE good thing is that DP is behind bars. And he will stay there for a good long while. It is my firm believe that we are going to be made privy to many many things as this case develops, things we probably would not even have fathomed (sp). I also believe that Glasgow has much more then he is letting out of the bag at this point. While I hunger for facts like everyone else, I do try to understand that this is a very complicated case that has many many tenticles. And News is what it is. Honestly I rather read the boards and the debates then read the news. I think we are all going to experience Shock and surprise and disbelief, as everything develops. I am just glad that he is finally behind bars, and things can be brought to light. I don’t really care if it takes 3 yrs for this to come to trial, the fact remains, that those 3 yrs also mean he will be spending it behind bars. Where he belongs. IMO

  204. That’s interesting, Facs, that Bolingbrook PD isn’t listed as one of the partipating agencies with M.A.N.S. Does anyone know why that is the case?

  205. All good points lostacres. We’re are only at the beginning of the legal proceedings for this case. I can’t wait to see what else is going to be brought out in court.

    The fact is though, most of our information comes to us through public sources: news reports, court documents, online info searches. Even when we get inside info from a family member or someone close to the case, the info is only as good as the source. Our little blog microcosm is rife with rumor and speculation, as much as we try to keep it in check.

    That said, if we’re going to discuss the case at all, those same sources are going to be our starting point, accurate or not. I think everyone here is smart enough to know that a news report isn’t the harbinger of truth, but then neither is a history book.

    There is this central nugget of agreed-upon ‘facts’ that we branch out from — the tentacles you mentioned. We just need to make sure we retract them from time to time and back off when it seems things are going too far. These are the lives of real people we’re discussing and I think we all try to be mindful of that.


  206. Actually, Bolingbrook only seems to be missing from the part that Facs posted, but once you get inside this lengthy document it does show Bolingbrook numbers, too. Interesting.

  207. I agree Facs…after all, we are not there, or most of us aren’t, and speculating, discussing and taking the news further, which is after all, Human nature, and our desire to come to the truth. All this is what makes this case so interesting to discuss. Beside the fact that most of us cannot even imagine the evil that has gone on there for may years with DP. I appreciate everything you two have done, and keeping things in check. I am though, being human and all, looking forward to the many twists and turns this is going to continue to take, before its over. AND I do believe it will be over one day and all will come to light. Incompetent lawyers or not. Again, as I stated, I am glad he is behind bars. My heart will continue to go out to all those directly involved and living this nightmare.

  208. A comment has been moderated.

    Folks, personal attacks and insults are not allowed on the blog. Please keep your comments on-topic.


  209. A lot of strong, intelligent personalities on this forum. Even if feathers are ruffled sometimes. Thats why I continue reading here. Sorry gatekeep if I overstepped any bounds. I will go back to reading.

  210. Dearheart, I’m not fan of Mike Robinson either. I think he’s a dirty dog and has something to do with Stacy’s disappearance (or at least helping Drew afterward).

    I don’t know about his court docket, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he got some sort of plea deal in exchange for info. I think he was in court just last week.

  211. I think the one thing we can all agree on is that Drew really wanted his ex wife DEAD no matter what he had to do and that is what the States Attorney was bringing forward in order to keep the Bond at 20 million dollars.

  212. I can’t believe I would agree with Jowl, but I can’t find real evidence in someone going through divorce wishing their ex dead.

  213. You’re right, JAH, and the fact that he is a flight risk. I’ve always believed Drew’s never completely taken fleeing off the radar. I still believe that was his intent when he initially vanished for those three days in that first week, but someone convinced him to come back and fight it out with a good lawyer. I have no confirmation, but I believe he did slide right past everyone when he pulled that vanishing act. Then he got on the roll with Brodsky, and they figured they could play it all out in the media. Didn’t Brodsky say that when Drew traveled out of state that he had his passport with him? Hello, isn’t that a pretty good clue that he’d have taken off from wherever he was if he got the phone call? The gun charges were the least of his worries; that’s pretty small potatoes to what he’s now facing. He’ll try everything he can to flee if they let him out on bail. They want that bail reduced, so he’d still have some money to live on the lam. He needs to stay right where he’s at.

  214. bucketoftea Says:

    May 23, 2009 at 7:35 pm
    I can’t believe I would agree with Jowl, but I can’t find real evidence in someone going through divorce wishing their ex dead.


    If the ex actually does end up dead, they must have been serious (!)

    All the others were just upset.

  215. did anyone else catch that when Joel presented the no flight risk argument he stated that Drew had traveled to California, Florida and MEXICO and came back…when did Drew ever go to Mexico??

    that’s the first time I ever heard of him going to do we know that during his trip to Mexico that he didn’t set up funds and a way to take off if he needed to…and as someone just mentioned Joel stated that Drew takes his passport everywhere with him even when traveling in the states…Take his passport with him to Nevada maybe maybe hoping to be there if the rumor of his arrest were true and then be able to take off from there…so they moved in on him before he got that chance?

    makes sense to me

  216. oh yeah he forgot to add WISCONSIN…and that was supposedly where he went on his 3 day trip..seems to me that would have been the strongest argument of all for Brodsky…”your honor..within a few days of his wife Stacy leaving him he took a 3 day head clearing trip to Wisconsin and came back..if he weren’t innocent of wrongdoing the time to have taken off was then”

  217. LOL, dearheart–your post at 8:02pm.

    This must be where Chrissy got the idea that she needed to have a passport to go to Nevada.

  218. Yes, DH, that Mexico comment did catch my attention, but I have no idea when he went to Mexico. Brodsky just sort of dropped that out there. As if that’s somehow proof that he wouldn’t flee now that he’s facing such serious charges. I don’t know anyone that carries their passport with them when they’re traveling inside the states. If Brodsky thought that was somehow proof that he wouldn’t flee, I wasn’t impressed. And, was’nt there some foolish comment that Drew would be willing to turn in his passport if he’s sprung from jail? I would have thought ISP would have found that and confiscated it when they did the last search warrant right after his arrest. Who knows, maybe they couldn’t find it. He needs to stay right where he’s at!

  219. Besides looking for a hitman may be an indication too that it’s more than just a wish !

    Or saying they can kill you and make it look like an accident and low and behold the ex ends up dead as the result of an “accident”

  220. A court-ordered bank account is exactly that and the bank or depository normally holds a certified copy of the court order, so where did the money go and who took it ? That should be pretty easy to find out. There are records and copies of checks and paper trails. I suspect there are many variations of theft Drew inflicted upon Kathleen. Documents he notarized himself, forgeries, unc the skunk who gave Drew all of KS’s $$$ via a *will* All these pathetic fools who partook in Drews wicked acts..they all need to be accountable. Glasgow is ripping the thing a new one and buffoonsky has made a complete global ass of himself with his ignorance and double-talk. Evil people need to do their deeds in darkness and now light is being shed on his every deed. The bigger they are, the harder the fall. Even now, the thing is taking on an appearence of a defeated old man. Is this the pity defense? HA ! Couldn’t have happened to a nicer guy. God Bless everyone here and the families of KS & SP justice will prevail.

  221. dearheart,
    he also said that dp traveled with and without the court’s permission. Maybe Mexico was the “without”, or one of them.

  222. I only heard Joel mention that Drew had travelled to Southern California, very near the Mexican border, or hear words to that effect. It’s in one of his post-hearing videos.

    I’ve never seen Joel say that Drew actually left the country at any point.

  223. from the Associated Press

    “But attorney Joel Brodsky said Peterson has not fled during trips to Mexico, California and Florida since police named him a suspect in Stacy Peterson’s disappearance. Peterson’s attorneys said they planned to appeal the judge’s refusal to lower his bail to under $1 million.”

  224. ..Drew Peterson faced ” financial devestation ” over
    his divorce..blah-blah-blah. Aw, Poor Drew 😦
    The sheer unfairness of it all. He should have been able to replace his wife with a pregnant teen and keep every nickel and stick of furniture and the kids but intead he was forced into this act of desperation because the legal system would not go along with his interpretation of fairness.

  225. Hey Sweetie, I haven’t seen you in forever!! I’ve missed you! We can’t pm each other here, but I also hang out at I’d love to hear from you.

  226. I’ve seen that mention of Drew going to Mexico in the AP stories. I’ve never heard Joel actually say it tho. I have seen Joel say in a video that Drew travelled to Southern California, very close to the border of Mexico.

  227. writerofwrongs Says:

    May 23, 2009 at 8:17 pm
    A court-ordered bank account is exactly that and the bank or depository normally holds a certified copy of the court order, so where did the money go and who took it ? That should be pretty easy to find out.


    What a fantastic post writerofwrongs !

    and yes what the hell happened to the money from a Court ordered Bank account no less.

    You have to be pretty good to be able to make even that money disappear from that type of account !!

  228. The motion to reduce bail does not say he went to Mexico, just 100 miles from the border, and the ISP has his passport….another case of media misinformation. I read somewhere that it said dp traveled with his passport, too.

  229. Trust me, hen, the money did not disappear and it will be traced. Likewise his RE transactions will be scrutenized. For example who signed and notarized the waiver of homestead rights for the house D bought down the street from the one he owned w/KS ? The proceeds from the businesses. Everything. Not a stone unturned. He is a despicable murderer and thief.

  230. Thanks 1chord. I knew the mention had something to do with borders, but I forgot it was in the actual motion to reduce bond:

    “During this period, Mr. Peterson traveled, with this court’s permission and otherwise, to Los Angeles California (aproximately 100 miles from Mexico), New York, which borders with Canada, and Florida, (from which several Caribbean, and Central American, non-extradition countries can be reached by boat or plane)”

  231. “During this period, Mr. Peterson traveled, with this court’s permission and otherwise, to Los Angeles California (aproximately 100 miles from Mexico), New York, which borders with Canada, and Florida, (from which several Caribbean, and Central American, non-extradition countries can be reached by boat or plane)”


    Yeah Drew and Joel researched that real well and then go put it in an official Court Motion – LOL, LOL !!

  232. lol and he still never mentioned Wisconsin…which also can access Canada at a border…a place he supposedly went to before he was announced as a suspect..could it be possible that it was omitted from Brodsky’s list because that trip never did happen?

    where was Drew really during that 3 day trip???

  233. writerofwrongs Says:

    May 23, 2009 at 8:58 pm
    Trust me, hen, the money did not disappear and it will be traced. Likewise his RE transactions will be scrutenized. For example who signed and notarized the waiver of homestead rights for the house D bought down the street from the one he owned w/KS ? The proceeds from the businesses. Everything. Not a stone unturned. He is a despicable murderer and thief.

    I know writer, States Attorney James Glasgow is very meticulous and thorough.

    Besides devious criminals like Drew think they are original in what they do, but they all follow the same path and sooner or later attract unwanted attention to themselves.

    Drew just had a bit of a head start on the investigators (like 29 years lol)but they have caught up with him pretty soon.

    Amazing chutzpah to rob the Court ordered Bank Account though !!

  234. I can tell you the border with Canada in Wisconsin and Minnesota are a joke! Several unmanned posts on the honor system. No problem to sneak off into Canada, and if you’re survival skill trained – you could survive up in the boundary waters areas forever.

  235. that’s not really chuzpah…that’s just Drew’s sense of entitlement..he can do no wrong you know!?

  236. Folks, once again, we must ask that you stay on topic, and not get into theories on this board concerning unsolved serial murders in locations outside of Illinois. Unless and until Drew Peterson is linked to any other crime, we feel it is inappropriate discussion.

  237. I was just listening to AM780 and they said that the authorities found more evidence in the Des Plaines River today related to the remains that were found there. They said that a source said it may be some more bones but that the police weren’t saying anything officially.

  238. oh God Lord!

    I’m sure they will say something eventually…these poor families having to sit and wait and wonder…prayers to them!

  239. Additional Remains Found Along Des Plaines River
    CREST HILL, Ill. (CBS) ―

    Remains were found along the Des Plaines River last week, fueling speculation it could be those of one of two missing Will County women. Additional remains were found Saturday, sources said.

    CBS 2 has learned that Illinois State Police recovered more evidence from the Des Plaines River that sources say is related to a body found on the river bank on Wednesday.

    That body was a human torso missing a head, arms and legs below the knees.

    Police would not confirm that the items found Saturday were bones from the skeleton.

    The Will County Coroner’s Office is conducting DNA tests to determine if the body belongs to either of two missing Will County women: Lisa Stebic, who vanished more than two years ago, or Stacy Peterson, who disappeared in late October 2007.

    The coroner said the gender of the body could not be determined but sources tell CBS 2 it appeared to be a woman, based on the clothing found with the remains.

    DNA analysis should be complete in the next couple of weeks.

    Investigators have DNA samples from both missing women.

  240. I have been following this blog for a few weeks, and I just love it. Seems like Mums the Word on C. Raines. Wonder if they plan to question her Re: promises Drew made. They may be pesenting Drew’s pattern of showering the new woman with worldly goods (all acquired on the blood money of the former wives). I recall Gloria Alred stating that Chrissy may be called to testify and she will tell the truth. Mike R.–Could he be the solicited hit man. He may wish to strike some kind of deal to resolve some of his problems. (it was reported M.R.s demeanor was hostile when leaving court.) BTW-does anyone think JB’s head looks similar to the tip of a wiener?

  241. Wow, so they are still out there searching–good for them and for the family of whomever this person is.

    My guess as to the would-be hit-man would be Marcus Patterson. He worked with Drew undercover on the narcotics squad and was one of the first people to testify at the Grand Jury (he testified on November 7, 2007).

  242. thinkaboutit2 Says:

    May 23, 2009 at 11:16 pm
    I was just listening to AM780 and they said that the authorities found more evidence in the Des Plaines River today related to the remains that were found there. They said that a source said it may be some more bones but that the police weren’t saying anything officially.


    That’s wonderful news.

    Let’s hope they can piece everything together and get a better picture whose body this may be and what evidence it holds !

  243. Flashback from November, 2008

    Eric Zorn, Chicago Tribune

    He would not discuss his evidence or plans in the Peterson case, but assured me that the new law would be applicable to old cases.

    I asked him if he would be attempting to use the law to introduce the alleged statements of Stacy Peterson (the missing 4th wife) in a prosecution of Peterson for the murder of Kathleen Savio {the slain third wife).

    “If he did kill Stacy Peterson, he killed his alibi in Kathleen Savio,” Glasgow said. He advised those interested in gaining insight into Drew Peterson’s character to watch the movie “Internal Affairs.” “The character played by Richard Gere is a window into Drew Peterson’s soul,” he said.

  244. granny5 Says:

    May 23, 2009 at 11:48 pm

    BTW-does anyone think JB’s head looks similar to the tip of a wiener?


    LOL,LOL, I never looked at it that way, but I did notice how much Drew has aged in the last week or so and also gone is the arrogance and cockiness, he’s shuffling around like an old Grandpa instead (!!)

  245. Gosh – Joel has to appear on Dana’s show solo these days. Stacy Dittrich and Robin Sax are really good. I hope they’ll be talking to Joel and not calling in separately.:

    “Joel Brodsky LIVE Sunday night at 9 pm ET when he is one of Dana’s guests on Scared Monkey’s radio.

    Join Dana Pretzer Sunday at 9 pm ET and listen live.

    Special Guests will include:

    Stacy Dittrich – Author of the new book ’Mary Janes Grave’. She is an award winning 15-year law enforcement officer and former detective specializing in sex crimes.

    Joel Brodsky – The attorney for Drew Peterson will fill us in on what is going on with the case against Drew Peterson, charged with the murder of his third wife Kathleen Savio.

    Robin Sax – Nothing But the Sax ”

  246. Thank you for the interesting reading re Kathleen Savios body.

    Drew had said to Stacy he had “committed the perfect murder”

    Not so perfect if he got his liver mortis mixed up by placing the body in the tub opposite to how she died – HA !

  247. As far as the hitman goes, maybe we shouldn’t be guessing to his identity as Drew worked with lots of Police Officers over time and some of them may have had to endure him rather then accommodate him, so to have their names synonymous as a possible hitman may do them a great injustice (!)

  248. I agree with that, Justie. I’m really grateful that LE know who it is….and that we’ll find out soon!

  249. I’m also very grateful that he is LOCKED UP where he can’t physically hurt anyone. (God knows what he will yet say that’s hurtful)

  250. WBBM radio is reporting, they have found more evidence in river, which may be connected to the body that was found. Thay have not released any info as to what they found as of this am.

  251. I wonder…What is this new evidence ??

    I wonder..Is it more remains ??

    I wonder..How much longer the family of this poor
    soul has to wait to find out whoever this really is ??

    I wonder..What other surprises are in store for the public as they learn about the actions of the two time murderer ??

  252. LOL Wonder….when I read your posts of this style I can hear the announcer’s voice say “tune in next time…” at the end. 🙂

  253. Just an aside….I’m still laughing at the notion of listing his 5 different vehicles of transport as reasons why Drew wouldn’t go anywhere. lol lol lol

  254. The man in the FOX video said they found leg bones.
    Forgive me this speculation but I think IT IS Stacy and Drew had parted her or broken her bones before putting her into the barrel because of rigor mortis.
    Formerly they had found a corpse and parts of femurs what makes approx. half of a body. The heigth of average barrel is 33″ (80cm). I am not going to say “Do the math, folks” because I am sure you can and you know what I mean.
    He will never go out of jail.

  255. Hi, bucket!

    All the story adds up so much. The location, the timeline, the testimonies of the first wittnesses (Cass, Thomas, Sharon).
    When I look back, and remind myself when I/we had been speculating on Drew’s abilities, connections, sophisticated plans… not that I am going to laugh at it … but how much we used to over-evaluate him. Now I can see how simple and primitive he actually is. Like his first letters on Stacy.

  256. I have a question as I am not up on the legalese so to speak. In light of the new evidence that the suspect attempted to hire someone to murder Kathleen…wouldn’t that bring about a new criminal charge in addition the the one he is being held for now? Seems to me it should be criminal and something he is arrested for and go to trial for as well.

  257. Hi folks,

    For the sake of readability of the comment thread, while there is so much going on in the case, we are making a few requests.

    1. When feasible, please paste only excerpts of news articles or short articles. In other words, only include the “new” part of the news articles whenever possible.

    2. Please make an effort to keep personal opinions short and to the point. We all have opinions but they are like dreams…the details are fascinating mostly to ourselves.

    3. Please resist the urge to speculate and go off on tangents. It’s fine to question something and to wonder but once we start to speculate, there’s really no stopping and we quickly lose credibilty. The answers to many of our questions will be revealed in due time.

    We do appreciate your understanding and cooperation.


  258. One more question if I may and thanks in advance to anyone who knows the answer…since additional “remains” have been found at the site…is the search still active there over the weekend?

  259. DOES anyone remember what ELSSE JOE said , I heard it on fox or greta or nancy but was reported about kathleen that the kids were with DREW when the body was found. joe said that the oldest one is a witness and he was there when she was discoverd and that is his alibi that he did not kill her. the kids where not with them at all that night with the key guy or the others that went into the house. was drew in a cop car or his car that night.???

  260. cyrhla,

    Thanks for posting as I missed the report last night. Seems as the earlier heavy rains this year is finally helping bring these up. This was always the hope of the volunteer search team.

  261. Lugnut, I haven’t heard about it. Do you mean Eric, Stephen or Tom?
    I heard about Mary Pontarelli’s son on the scene, but never about Drew’s children.

    In Stacy’s case, some people say that the children were witnesses. At least, they were at home and must have heard something.

  262. About the solicited hitman being a cop; the suntimes reports that the ex-partner heard DP make the “I’d be better off with her dead” statement, but did not say that the Solicitee was a cop. Did I miss something?
    My impression from the recent months goings on is that it was an associate on the street like Rock. His friend (A female) was tracked down in prison last month to answer questions, and she alluded that she wouldn’t tell them anything and that it was their (ISP) job to find the information. So there WAS information to be had.
    Q?: If you have knowledge of a murder solicitation and don’t report it is it a crime?
    I don’t think her type would come forth, and DP would know thats usually true on the street (but not true of most cops).,Peterson-woman-says-was-questioned_jo041509.stng,drew-peterson-savio-murder-offer-money-052209.article

  263. His friend (A female) was tracked down in prison last month to answer questions, and she alluded that she wouldn’t tell them anything and that it was their (ISP) job to find the information. So there WAS information to be had.

    She was someone who corresponded with Bindy Rock, an “acquaintance” of hers, while in prison, which alerted ISP to follow up on. It appears she merely discussed “rumors” she heard, as did the public, that Drew cremated Stacy as a means of disposing of her remains. I think they only questioned her because of the ties between her and Rock, and the fact that she discussed what she had “heard” about Drew disposing of Stacy. Nothing, apparently, came of it.

    The former co-worker of Drew’s, from what I’ve read has been divulged, says Drew “told” him he’d be better off with her dead.

    The “hit man” is yet a different individual, as I understand it from the news reports, that was a former undercover narc, who was solicited by Drew to murder Kathleen.

Comments are closed.