Transcript: Testimony at Kathleen Savio’s Death Inquest from officer who was never at the scene

We’ve long been aware of the existence of a 28-page transcript of Katheens Savio‘s death inquest. However getting a look at it would seem to have been a fleeting privilege granted to the media in early November 2007.

About that time we did see the transcript quoted from and were especially intrigued by the testimony of Illinois State Police Officer Herbert Hardy. Hardy testified on behalf of the ISP investigators, although he was neither present at the scene of Kathleen Savio’s death nor at the autopsy following.

Q. Any indication what the initial call was in reference to maybe when you got your call?
A. Well, I wasn’t called. The Master Sergeant Covey (phonetic) was called, and they related to him that it was – they had an individual deceased in her home in the bathroom, the master bathroom.
Q. And you never went to the death scene, sir?
A. No, I was never present at the death scene.

Recently, we were supplied with a portion of the inquest transcript (pages 7-15) in which Officer Hardy is questioned by Coroner Patrick O’Neil. We share it with you here.

If we get our hands on any more of the transcript document, we’ll make it available here!

Thanks to commenter Cyrhla, who emailed us the PDF!

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

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>

Advertisements

140 thoughts on “Transcript: Testimony at Kathleen Savio’s Death Inquest from officer who was never at the scene

  1. Kathleen’s boyfriend Steve was not out of town after all? He was too tired to come over. Interesting. Joel will have a field day with that, if it turns out to be true.

  2. I’m trying to find a reference to something that explains why I thought he was out of town at the time of Kathleen’s murder. If anyone knows, please let me know.

  3. Just a refresher from an interview on Greta with a juror who heard the testimony, Walter Lee James:

    VAN SUSTEREN: Now, we have heard, and maybe you could clarify this for me, that there was a police officer on this panel who knew Drew — Sergeant Peterson. Is that true or not?

    JAMES: He — there was a police officer on the panel, and he indicated at the time he knew or knew of Peterson. And he indicated to the panel that he thought that Peterson was a good policeman. He was charitable and helped his neighbors, and so on and so forth. So I think that — I think that might have influenced some of the panel members, but I don’t know that for sure.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Are you troubled today by the decision of your inquest jury?

    JAMES: I’m satisfied with our decision, with the evidence that we had at hand. We were not helped by the coroner or anyone from the outside. We alone reviewed the evidence, and that’s the conclusion that we came to.

    VAN SUSTEREN: How long did it take for your panel to review all the evidence and render a decision?

    JAMES: Well, I believe, if I remember correctly, we had seven cases to review that day, and probably, we took maybe 30 minutes to 45 minutes to come to a determination.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Were you at least — did you at least discuss the bruises on her body, the laceration to her head and the blood-soaked hair? Did you talk about that in the inquest?

    JAMES: We did, and I was kind of apprehensive with one photograph showing her face down in an empty tub. And there was a lot of blood remaining in the tub, and I just — I didn’t — myself did not consider — it was inconsistent with drowning. I feel that the blood that was in the tub should have probably dissipated into the water and drained out with the water. But like I said, I’m not an expert forensic person, so as a layperson, that’s just how I felt.

    VAN SUSTEREN: Did you — did you look at…

    JAMES: I did mention…

    VAN SUSTEREN: Go ahead, sir.

    JAMES: And I did mention that to the other panel members, if I remember correctly, and they kind of shrugged it off.

    VAN SUSTEREN: So was there any part of anybody who thought, Hey, maybe this is a homicide, looking at the autopsy picture — autopsy report, looking at all the blood in the tub?

    JAMES: Well, I think as being panel members, and also being laypeople, we just — we didn’t have the expertise to determine how the bruises occurred. And I think that was one of the reasons why we just dismissed the bruises. Or we didn’t dismiss them, but we just said that we did not know how the bruises occurred.

  4. Another quote from Walter Lee James (Thanks ACR!)

    We were given evidence and photographs by the coroner at the time, and we were asked to review them and come to a conclusion as to the cause of death.” – “We heard from a couple of the relatives. They came in prior to our reviewing the evidence. But they left the room, and then we were left to review the evidence at hand.” – “we were only told to review the evidence at hand, and when we were through reviewing the evidence, come to a conclusion and then call the coroner in and tell him that we reached a conclusion.” – “in reviewing the evidence at hand, we did decide that it was an accident due to the fact that we were laypeople and were not medical examiners or anything like that. So with the evidence that we had, we determined it wasn’t natural, of course, and we — also being laypeople, we could not decide whether it was a homicide.

  5. Greta on OTR, talking to Sue Doman.

    GRETA VAN SUSTEREN (HOST): I’m going to read for you the transcript that we’ve obtained, that Mark Fuhrman and Corey obtained for us from the coroner, at page six. And this is where you’re quoted as saying, when you were asked a question about, “Is there anything else you’d like to add, ma’am?” And you respond, “Yes, I just — it’s very difficult for my family because of my sister telling us all the time — and I can figure everyone, everything — one, that she has seen that if she would die, it may look like an accident, but it wasn’t. She just told me last week, and she was just terrified of him. He always threatened her. He had her in the basement one time. He did many, many things to her. He wished only for her to go away.

  6. Those are very interesting, Facs. In your search, if you come across anything that answers my question about why I thought SM had been out of town, I’d be interested in seeing it.

  7. That’s why I’m wondering why I thought SM had been out of town. I’ve found posts of mine in which I say it and have found others’ posts in which they say it, but no source.

    Did find mention of a National Enquirer article (LOL) that said Steve and Kathleen went out on the night of Saturday, February 28. He took her home about 9PM and she talked to him on the phone around midnight.

    Up until now, I thought the phone call took place while he was out of town and she was at home.

    I also saw article by Joe Hosey in which it is stated that Hardy did question some of Savio’s neighbors, but …

    “I didn’t talk to the ones that were really close to her,” Hardy testified at the inquest. “Myself and [another agent] did what we call a ‘neighborhood canvass,’ and we did speak to quite a few of the neighbors in the general area of the residence.”

    I’m not sure what he meant by “really close” … geographically or friendship-wise.

  8. That quote from Hosey’s article is in the 9 pages we got. It really seems like the extent of Hardy’s actual involvement was this “neighborhood canvass”.

    Q. And the state police had the opportunity to speak with many people, maybe to some neighbors and that. Did you head up that part of the investigation?

    A. I didn’t talk to the ones that were really close to her. Myself and Agent Girten did what we call a neighborhood canvass, and we did speak to quite a few of the neighbors in the general area of the residence.

  9. Hi all, Well done Cyrhla and Facs.

    I thought the same. Give as little detail, say the least you can get away with. He also hedges many statements with “I believe” etc.

    The “close” neighbours, did he mean the Pontarellis? Were they present?

  10. Where in heaven’s name is Peterson’s testimony??? If anyone should have been there, shouldn’t he have been? Why is this transcript so elusive and such a mystery? The media had it available to them, but, yet, it’s not found anywhere online. Hmmmmm.

  11. Facs, I cannot find the link. I was trying all the evening yesterday to save my/your time in rewriting it. Unfortunatelly, there were only these pages. And the reason why I was not able to send the original copy to you yesterday was that its properties are secured.

    Sorry, that I did not rewrite it on my own. It was late at night for me yesterday and I have been busy today.

    I will try to find the link. I wonder if I did not sent it here a month or two ago.

    I found the link by chance when looking for Hardy.

  12. Yes, it is really interesting why they did not ask Drew to testify though he was a witness.

    I found another information which I must have missed earlier. This is that Drew worked on Sunday.I knew he was with the family on that Sunday and only left for doughnuts in the morning but not that he was at work. Did he kill Kathleen then?

    Sorry if I write about the things you have been familiar with before.

    “Police interviewed Stacy Peterson for one hour March 3. She said she and her husband had spent the weekend with the children, backing up Peterson’s statements made to police a day earlier. She said they had spent Saturday hanging around the house and had gone to the Shedd Aquarium Sunday. The only time Peterson left was Sunday morning to get doughnuts and to go to work Sunday evening. Savio was found the next day, a Monday.”

  13. I was going through last Fall’s article in the Sun Times, which refers specifically to Hardy. However, I found this to be very interesting:

    Hardy never laid out a specific scenario about what state police believe immediately preceded the fall in the tub. Had Savio, at the end of her bath, stood to unplug the drain but slipped before she could do so? Had she slipped getting into the tub? State police didn’t say; perhaps it was not something that could be determined. The tub stopper was down — that was confirmed at the inquest — but there was no mention of having tested the stopper to see how fast a tubful of water could seep away. Would a plugged-up tub drain and dry out in less than two days, the amount of time between Savio’s phone call with her boyfriend and the discovery of her body? Would a body lying in a tub trap some water underneath it that wouldn’t evaporate in that time? If any of these questions factored in to the state police’s deliberations, the public never knew of it.

    **********

    “No mention of having tested the stopper…..”

    That’s funny, I KNOW I heard Peterson himself say the the stopper WAS tested. I realize he mentioned the kids saying when they took baths the stopper leaked, but now I see this and it has me wondering where Peterson got the information himself that the stopper/drain was tested.

  14. The Sun Times published an excerpt from Hosey’s book that gives some more of the Hardy testimony (not in the 9 pages we’ve got). I’ll paste here what I see that we don’t have.

    “Did you find any signs of foul play during the course of your investigation?” O’Neil asked.

    “No, sir,” Hardy said. “We did not.”

    There were no indications of a burglary or home invasion, no weapons in the house and, according to Hardy, no signs on Savio’s body or in the home that a struggle had taken place.

    “Everything seemed to be in order,” he said. The only possible exception was an unmade bed with some books and magazines on it. “Nobody related to us that they saw anything unusual in the neighborhood those last few days.”

    “We think that the laceration from her — that she sustained to the back of her head — was caused by a fall in the tub,” Hardy said. “There was nothing to lead us to believe that anything else occurred. There was no other evidence at this time that shows that anything else occurred.”

    “And at the point we’re at now,” Hardy said, “we’re still waiting. . . . All alibis, all stories were checked as to where people were, and if I remember . . . if I recall correctly, the only thing we’re waiting for now is some phone records to find out if certain calls were made when they said they were made. So at this point, that’s where we’re at.”

    http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/1149189,CST-NWS-fatalvows07.article

  15. I was struck by how Hardy discussed Drew as if he was completley off the hook:

    Q. Did anyone speak with – is his name Drew Peterson?

    A. Yes, I believe.

    Q. That would be the ex-husband?

    A. Right.

    Q. And what did he relate to the department about some of his activities in the days prior to her death?

    A. Well, prior to that, he had the children, they got up that weekend, they went to the Shedd Aquarium, I believe it was. His – his whereabouts were totally accounted for that whole weekend.

    Q. Okay. You checked with his work?

    A. Yes, all that was checked.

    Totally accounted for the whole weekend? Like at 2 am? They must have talked to Stacy. Did she say that he was with her all night?

    I really wish I could see this whole thing.

  16. Yes, there is, and I’m trying to find his comment regarding this.

    I did comment on this recently myself, AAMOF:

    rescueapet Says:
    May 17, 2009 at 7:01 pm edit

    I saw Drew Peterson on a recent interview somewhere say something to the effect that they did a test on the drain in the bath tub and it actually had a small leak, which is why the water leaked out of the tub.

    Okay. He said that. But, I am curious about whether that actually was mentioned in any of the prior information made public, or if that was even done.

  17. Found it. It was during that Dateline airing that was on recently:

    Drew Peterson: Well the– the– the police did a– a test on the tub and they filled the tub up. And they guessed there was a leak, or there was a leak in the drain. And it took, like, two hours for the tub to drain dry.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30651282/page/2/

    ********

    So, ummm, they hold an inquest, rule it accidental, yet, there is no mention at the inquest that they did this drain test?

    Did Drew slip up, or did LE decide to do this drain test after the inquest just to amuse themselves?

  18. He said the same to Mike Pucinelli in a CBS interview. He even mentions it was done at the time of initial investigation!

    “PETERSON: I believe Kathleen had an accident, a household accident. People say that’s impossible but it’s not. You get all these characters on television saying that she drowned in a dry bathtub. How do you drown in a dry bathtub? I’d really like to clear that up. The state police came in when they did their initial investigation and they did a drain test on the bathtub and they filled it up with water and it took two hours for the thing to drain

  19. Drain tests that were not performed, phone records that were not requested … the list goes on and on.

    And the list of people who screwed up royally gets longer and longer. How can these people even think for one second they did their jobs and did them well?

  20. Maybe Drew had the present examination of the bathtub on his mind, after the police removed it after KS’s exhumation? 😉

  21. I don’t think the test was done. It takes a coupla minutes to set the recovery of phone records in motion with a phonecall, but they’d have to actually go there and, well apply themselves to a bath drain test. Nah, I don’t think it was done at all. DP fantasy.

  22. If the ISP never did the drain test … why did Drew say they had. And how did Drew know it took 2 hours for the tub to drain when full? Personal experience?

    He talked about the kids complaining about it and them not wanting to take baths — but certainly 2 hours is enough time for 9- and 11-year olds (at the time) to bathe.

  23. If you look at the very beginning of that PDF you can see what I believe is Susan Doman calling out from the audience that the financial situation was yet to be settled between Drew and Kathleen, while another family member was testifying:

    AUDIENCE MEMBER: About four weeks.
    BY THE WITNESS:
    A. Four weeks it would have been coming up. And what the settlement was going to be was she was going to getting the house, and he didn’t want her to get the house. he absolutely did not want it. And she was going to get the house, sell the house and move away.
    BY MR. O’NEIL:
    Q. Anything you’d like to add?
    A. I don’t think so.
    MR. O’Neil: Okay. I have no further questions. You may be seated with your family.

    Joe Hosey, who attended and wrote about the inquest at the time it took place discussed this with SMM on her radio show:

    SUSAN: Also what didn’t come out at the time was how the divorce proceedings took place because technically, the issue of the financial matters had been reserved.

    JOE: Right, and I did write about that at the time. I did raise that issue.

    SUSAN: But they didn’t. That was not a consideration and it should have been because that’s a huge red flag that he had had his lawyer set aside these things and wasn’t it interesting that technically, even though they had just divorced, the will and other things played a part in this?

    JOE: The only time that was brought up during the inquest was when Kathleen’s sister called out from the audience about it. I don’t even know if the detective from the State Police was aware of it. I think he knew they were divorcing or divorced. He didn’t seem sure of anything and Kathleen’s sister called out from the audience and told these horror stories. I don’t know how much credence the jury puts in a bereaved family member, an obviously stressed family member who just lost a relative or the official from the State Police who is supposed to be of some stature, is supposed to be the authority.

  24. Sorry I can’t copy and paste to-day (sometimes I can/sometimes I can’t on this site), so my replies are just to whatever stood out whilst reading:

    Re Steve Maniaci not being out of town and too tired to be with Kathleen.

    I don’t understand why Joel Brodsky would have a field day with that if Steve and Kathleen went out for dinner that (Saturday) night and/or spoke on the phone etc.

    If they weren’t fighting/arguing or in a bad relationship etc (would Kathleen have picked another Sociopath for a boyfriend this time ?), Steve Maniaci would have absolutely no reason to go and kill Kathleen a few hours later.

    That just doesn’t make sense and especially if he weren’t the beneficiary of any of her Insurance Policies, her children’s Insurance Policies, her Estate, or interested in her 2nd hand furniture, posessions etc, like her ex husband was (!!)

  25. Re Drews whereabouts totally accounted for that weekend as per Herbert Hardy.

    Hmmmmm, getting donuts and going to the Aquarium during the day is being totally accounted for at night between 2 am and 6 am ????

    Stacy did make a statement Drew was in bed with her that night and Drew even went as far to say they were “making love all night” (Ugh)

    BTW Drew just recently said he was nursing Stacy during that weekend as she had her wisdom teeth extracted, so once again totally inconsistant stories to what is on record.

  26. and no phone records to boot considering they would have been pretty incriminating with Stacy calling him all the time when he supposedly was in bed with her.

    Drew is also known to have said long before the inquest, the investigation would prove it was an accident (!))

    Hmmmmm how did he know that ??

  27. JAH, right. The fact that Steve M was in town the night his girlfriend was killed still doesn’t give him any motivation for killing her, whereas Drew did have a motive and not only was he in town, he was right down the street, and he’d broken into her house before and had threatened her!

  28. Another point I picked up on:

    Herbert Hardy said he did not know if Drew was in uniform on Sunday evening (when Kathleen was discovered), but in the same document it is stated Drew went to work Sunday evening.

    Steve Carcerano also stated in one of his many versions Drew drove up to him in his squad car, so if Drew was working that Sunday night and drives around in his squad car, it is not known if he is in uniform (LOL)

    May Drew was driving around in his squad car in his pyjamas or his boxer shorts ???

    Makes you wonder if Drew was doing all this messing around “bringing his children back” and running around finding locksmiths (!) and friends to open the door of his ex-wife’s house that Sunday night, he was really supposed to be on duty (!!)

  29. Haha, Herbert Hardy really cornered himself there by saying he didn’t know if Drew was in uniform, as if he said Drew was in uniform that means he is admitting Drew was doing all sorts of private stuff whilst on duty (like supposedly trying to bring his children back, all the locksmith balony etc)

  30. Don’t you just find this silly? Hardy answers that he is familiar with the investigation, and that he was, in fact, one of the investigators. He says he’s familiar with the “entire investigation.”

    Yet, he didn’t know if the locks had been changed or not on the doors, he did not know if Peterson had arrived in his uniform, he did not know if the children were with him at the time of the discovery of Kathleen. He states the “water must have drained out after sitting for such a long period of time,” but doesn’t elaborate on the fact, as DP now has said, that a test was done on the stopper/drain. Unusual, to say the least. Someone is lying here. Either Hardy was bullshitting his way through this sorry excuse of an inquest, or DP is making up his own stories about what tests were done.

    Isn’t this the same guy that claims they just needed to get the phone records to verify people were where they said they were? The same phone records that never materialized?

  31. Yes, Rescue, it is absolutely horrendous when you get to see the transcripts.

    Their stories have more holes in them than a Swiss cheese and it would be comical if it didn’t concern a woman being MURDERED in the prime of her life and two small childrens lives never be the same !!

  32. Re the phone records:

    My guess is they never bothered with getting any phone records OR they did get them and did not want to submit them for obvious reasons !!

  33. Oh, JAH, so, so true. So sobering. It’s nothing to laugh about, by any means, yet, it is beyond silly what went on that day in the investigation of the death of Kathleen Savio.

    I hope her family sees every bit of justice they’ve been looking for, however it comes to be. I am looking forward to the State uncovering what happened.

  34. Makes you wonder what would have been in it for Herbert Hardy to put his own reputation on the line like that (!!)

    Was he ordered to BS like that or did he volunteer ??

  35. Apart from Drew, as he will always think he’s invincible and committed the perfect crime, I bet a lot of people broke out in a cold sweat when the State’s Attorney announced they were going to re-investigate Kathleen Savio’s death and all their dicky statements would come under proper scrutiny !!

  36. I think another serious issue is coming to the fore here:

    If Drew was working that Sunday night and in uniform/with squad car (ie official duties as a Police Officer for BBPD)was BBPD aware he was “checking on his wife” and “trying to bring his children back”, “calling a locksmith”, “rounding up friends” etc as part of an official welfare check or was he doing this as a private citizen/concerned husband bringing back his children and doing all this other stuff in his own time ??

    Hmmmm he identified himself as a Police Officer, first on the scene, when Medicos/Police arrived so he must have been in uniform, with squad car and on duty, so where does the “bringing the children back, calling a locksmith and rounding up friends” come into it ??

  37. I think I worked it out:

    Drew is on duty on Sunday night and notifies BBPD he wants to do a well being check on his wife as he has been trying to take his children back for two days.

    BBPD then advises him to go find Steve Carcerano and see if he can call a locksmith and round up some friends like Mary to go into the house with Steve and BBPD also tells Drew to stay outside with the locksmith as they don’t want Kathleen accusing him of stealing things by going into her house.

    BBPD advises Drew if Mary or Steve find Kathleen injured or dead, just give them another call and they will come over later !

  38. It’s kinda of odd that Drew thought something was wrong with Kathleen and enlisted the help of lay people to enter the house.

  39. Another thing I picked up on re this case was that no one seemed well informed how recent Kathleen and Drew were divorced and that a financial settlement was still pending.

    The way it reads in this document makes it look like the divorce/financial settlement were a while ago as Drew had remarried and already had a new family.

    It doesn’t show anywhere everything was done back to front to basically benefit Drew in every way !

  40. Strange question too from Coroner O’Neil –

    if Drew was in uniform and if he had the children with him.

    I think he was trying to establish if Drew was wearing his Police Officers hat or his “Daddy Day Care” hat or both at the same time – LOL !!

    One can also assume without too much imagination Police Officers generally don’t take their children to work with them (!)

    Too bad the questioning if Drew was there on his own behalf or as a Police Officer stopped there as next he starts asking questions about the plug in the bath tub.

  41. Good morning!

    Hardy said there was another ISP agent interviewing people from the neighborhood with him, Joe Girten (District 15 – Downers Grove – Trooper).

    Joe Girten is a member of the Patriot Guard Riders and a fan of Harley Davidson.
    http://vukf.com/nilCom_Contact.htm

    I do not know if he and Drew know each other or not.

  42. I am not sure if there is any connection between Joe Girten and Janet Girten (both from Oak Lawn, IL) but […]Janet Girten has been the Deputy Laboratory Director at the Forensic Science Center at Chicago, the state’s largest forensic laboratory, for the past five years. Ms. Girten is responsible for the Forensic Biology/DNA section, the Trace/Microscopy, and the Drug Chemistry Sections. She has served 22 years with the Illinois State Police Forensic Sciences Division, with nine years as a bench scientist.[…]

    [sorry, it does not want to get through with the link to the above info]

  43. It’s all coming out now; all the “staging” and sloppy
    paperwork and the complete farce of a coroners jury. Wait until the estate of KS, along w/ the Will Co. states attorneys office begins to uncover the grand scale fraud and violation of fiduciary between ” the thing” and unc the skunk Carroll. Things are going to get very interesting, indeed.

  44. I’m afraid it has popped into my mind unbidden that a (sorry) psychic said long ago that a woman who worked in the forensic labs with a name beginning with J “got rid” of some evidence for Drew. Just sayin’.

  45. What does WCCA stand for in the court docket?
    PETERSON DREW 8 10 9 WCCA 900 09L 000326 Case
    PETERSON DREW W 8 10 9 402 930 09CF001048 0 MURDER/INTENT TO 2 Pre-trial

  46. As for the phone records, no warrant was issued in this case so Hardy was lying or was misinformed.

    Kathleen was pronounced dead on March 1st and the autopsy performed on March 2nd. Her funeral took place on March 6th. Only 5 days after her death Drew took all the things from her home though he was not married to Kathleen anymore and had no right to her personal things. Would he have done it if he had known he had been a suspect? I do not think so.
    I wonder how he could legally enter the house then.

  47. He could not legally enter the house then any more as any other time, but he did anyway as who was there to stop him ??

    He’s an opportunist, takes advantage of a situation and doesn’t worry about any consequences, that is for other people to worry about and sort out.

    His motto is “possession is 2/3 of the Law”
    and what can anyone do when he’s emptied the house ?

  48. You’re right, JAH. I should not wonder. Even if someone had called the police, the result would have been the same.

  49. The problem with calling the Police is at that time he WAS the Police.

    Who do you call when the thief and the Police is one and the same (!)

  50. In this case everyone did his best, it seems to me.
    BBPD called ISP because their officer was involved. Jeff Tomczak gave his assistance to Patrick Collins from ISP to perform the investigation. The investigators could not believe such a nice person like Drew could be a killer so they hardly run any investigation; the more that Drew had alibi of his wife (who BTW stated that he was at work that night). They wanted to close the investigation as soon as possible to let poor Drew run his life. They sent two policemen to the coroner’s jury to ensure themselves no one would bother Drew anymore: one to testify on the (not)collected evidence, and the second one to convince the jury about Drew’s innocence and great personality. The coroner had his private opinion after seeing the evidence but had to stay neutral and just asked the questions the investigator could not fully answer. [Why did he have to determine on the case if ISP had not finish the investigation? That’s the point]. The jury wanted the ‘undetermined’ option as well but they had learnt there hadn’t been such, so as lay persons and having another policeman on the panel who knew of Drew, they decided it was an accident. The coroner put a sign under their decision and Jeff Tomczak could not do anything with it.

    You are right, writerofwrong, if we add all the things connected with the estate issues, the story is a farce. And it is not over, I am afraid.

  51. justanotherhen Says:
    June 13, 2009 at 10:06 am

    Who do you call when the thief and the Police is one and the same (!)

    —-

    I call my Lord 😉

  52. When it comes down to that Civil Case about Kathleen’s estate, John Q. Kelly is going to make mince meat out of Brodsky’s Case. John Q., will show Brodsky what a well informed lawyer can really do to bring justice in a case. After this whole this is over with, Brodsky will probably try to get a job with Selig. A good lawyer he is NOT.

  53. Absolutely prudancejuris.

    Yeah, Drew picked his lawyer well.

    Someone with exactly the same traits as himself (!!)

    When John Q Kelly speaks one listens and learns.

    He is a credit to the Savio Estate and will restore Justice for Kathleens rights and legacy.

  54. Wait until the subpoenas start flying out from Kelly.
    Bank records, real estate records, insurance records and on and on….there are a lot of dirty little fingers in this pie. Drew had help, wether overtly or covertly he did not act without help and it will all cone out very soon. Oh, I love it! Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy and his enablers.

  55. so…Drew entered Kathleen’s home the day of her funeral and emptied it out…how?

    HOW did he enter her home that day? Did he somehow get a key? Did he cut the drywall and crawl through it? Did he call another locksmith? Did he just break the door down?

    who helped him pack up and load up the truck? what did he throw out? what did he keep? what did he sell? what did he save for those kids? what did he give away?

    Did Kathleen’s family ever call the police or file any sort of complaint of him entering and removing her property? If they did…why did THAT not come into the inquest and if it did come into the inquest why in God’s name was it just ruled an accident and not looked at even closer?

    A LOT of people dropped the ball…they know it, they are scrambling, others are going to go down, Drew is not the type of man to go down alone…me thinks heads are going to be rolling soon and it’s not just Drew’s head!

  56. Drew said it was still his house and he could go in anytime he wanted.

    It is only my opinion, but even with my most objective head on it still seems unlikely that it was just a matter of dropping the ball. It would mean a universal incompetency at every touch of the ball. It doesn’t make sense, and you know what Judge Judy says about things that don’t make sense….lol

  57. Good morning!

    Do you have any idea if Patrick Collins from ISP who was the chief investigator in Kathleen’s case is the same Pat Collins who was an Assistant U.S. Attorney till April 2007 and is a private attorney now?
    I think this is another person but wanted to be sure.

  58. Sorry, I managed to find it :). They are two different persons: Pat M Collins (now attorney) and Sgt Pat D Collins from ISP.

  59. Drew must have had everything planned very well. The moment to move the things out of the house was just perfect. Mary, her neighbour, was probaly out of her house and attended the funeral reception. Simarly to the other neighbours, except Carcerano,of course. She would be the only person to notify the family or the police personally. When she returned home she might have not even realized that Drew had been there before and taken all the things out. As we know very well, he did not make any list of the things.
    He was so much afraid of getting into Kathleen’s house on the day she was found dead but 5 days later he felt free to do it. Does it make any sense again? She could not accuse him of anything, right?
    Rick Mimms said that he was helping Drew in invigilating Kathleen from the late 2003 till her death and informing Drew if she is or not at home. It means that Drew perfectly knew that after the divorce and all the agreements made in court he was not allowed to enter the house. And he did not do it openly; there are no police reports from this time.

    I think after Kathleen’s death no one reacted for the sake of the children.

  60. I wonder…No one reacted to the fact that they thought DP murdered KS but for the sake of the children they dropped it ??

    I wonder…Am I misunderstanding your point ?? 🙂

  61. I meant, fighting with Drew and his company would cost the children a lot. I may be wrong, however, and the reason could have been diffrent.

    BTW, the family of Kathleen was cheated. They trusted the police and they were told to wait and be patient… right? I think they had not predicted the decision of coroner’s jury would be as it was and would result in closing the investigation as soon as at the beginning of May. IMO here is the point. Drew’s collegues and ‘friends’ knew he was guilty and they had enough evidence to convict him but for some reason they did not want to do it and wanted to close the case as soon as possible. The coroner’s jury was a great place. That is why the testimony of Hardy was like it was, the other policeman was in the jury, and someone told the jurors they had only two options.

    There were a lot of people who were sure Drew killed Kathleen, but they did not have the evidence the police had. If they went to the police station they would not have achieved anything.

  62. See what happens when someone shuts up Peterson and Brodsky? Life goes on, peacefully.

    They’ll rear their ugly heads soon enough, and we’ll all be back to shaking our heads in disbelief. Only, I, personally, expect to hear the State to shock and awe us all. They’ve listened to the defense discredit the victims and witnesses all these months, showing their strategy, and have had a big head start to meet the “challenge.”

  63. Before the gag order, they were allowed to present any ‘evidence’ like fake photographs of Stacy or those of Thomas Morphey taken 10 years ago to the general public. Now when their show finished, anything they have must be more sophisticated and more reliable. The more that the prosecutor can always call up their manipulations with the evidence in front of TV cameras.

    I agree with you rescue that the State is going to shock Brodsky (and us) with what they have. And I do not regret ;).

  64. I listened to part of the WGN rebroadcast of the mock trial. It really wasn’t much in the way of what might really happen, as the attorneys just gave an argument based on the facts that are in the public right now.

    I can and do understand there being two sides to this hot issue of DP’s guilt or innocence. That’s the way it should be. But, to listen to an individual, as I heard today, say he’s not convinced that it wasn’t an accident would take a lot more than saying she could have hit her had and fallen into the tub. Nope, that’s not going to work. She would have had to hit her head on something. What? Show me the relation between the object that she could have hit her head on and the actual gash. Where that object is in the bath room or adjoining bedroom. If she did this in the tub, say, on the faucet, why wasn’t hair and or tissue from the gash seen on the faucet? The gash on her head had to leave behind a fleck of skin, a strand or two of hair. Because, some theorize, this gash apparently was so significant, that it may have caused her to black out. I would certainly hope that the cops looked at the faucet for possible “evidence.” If there was no obvious skin, hair or blood on the faucet, then she hit it on something else. Since there was no obvious blood anywhere on the floor from her head dripping, that would give me some doubt that she hit her head anywhere but in the vicinity she was found. Otherwise, she would have been stumbling, trying to grab onto something, overturning things. Nope, nothing was amiss.

    When she did hit her head, wouldn’t she have put her hand up immediately to the head wound to see if she was bleeding? That’s a spontaneous human reaction to someone hitting their head. You feel for blood and immediately look at your hand for inspection. Am I to believe that she possibly did this, but then fell into a tub full of water and it washed away any blood she may be had on her fingertips from feeling the head gash.

    If she hit her head so hard that she immediately went black, then she would have been found where she hit her head. Which puts us back in the tub. She could not have hit her head anywhere else without stumbling around, causing a disturbance, dripping at least one drop of blood, and then falling face forward. In this case, a tub full of water, which faucet had been turned off prior to her falling into it.

    This isn’t even getting into the ways, means, and motive of her ex-husband. This is just getting an explanation from any doubter that says she hit her head and drowned in a tub full of water, which just happened to drain out due to a leaky stopper.

    Match it all up and explain how and where she hit her head to be found as she was. Just one logical, sensible explanation.

  65. I do not know if you agree with me but I really think the factor of children played very important role when Kathleen was murdered.
    We can all remember him shouting in dispear “What am I going to tell my children?”. I am sure he repeated it many times in this or other way.
    I do not justify it in any way but I think some people might have wondered what would have happened to the boys and Stacy with one little child and being pregnant. Even Kathleen showed some empathy about it and agreed on earlier divorce. I believe Drew wanted the family and the investigators to have doubts and he wanted the case to be finished as soon as possible to take over the money. He must have conviced someone in ISP that he was acting in the interest of the boys.
    I may be wrong, but it is really difficult for me to believe so many people intentionally helped Drew.
    I guess that it was him who wanted a death certificate with a determined cause of KS’s death to start all the money issue and someone from ISP helped him at this stage.

  66. Cyrhla – yeah, but that fails to take into account the very instant/night Kathleen was found. A decision was made on-the-spot to treat her death as anything but a potential homicide. Yes, at first, her hands were bagged and pictures were taken, etc. But, as I remember, some Mr. Law Enforcement Man made the decision that night that all appeared to culminate in an accidental death. Why? At the very least, it’s shoddy, unprofessional work. What was the reason for going around and canvassing the neighborhood if her bagged hands were but a fleeting moment?

    I expect part of the State’s case will be the reason that Kathleen’s death investigation ended in the determination it did, which had a domino effect on the rest of the investigation. Canvassing neighbors, and asking an ex-husband’s wife if he was with her is, of course, crucial, but the forensics part of the investigation sucked.

  67. I absolutely agree with you as for the forensic issues not being adequately checked and investigated. I also think Drew’s innocence was determined just a few hours after Kathleen’s death and no one ever bother to investigate.

    Any time I think about the laceration on Kathleen head a missing night table stands in front of my eyes. What would be the reason for Drew getting rid of it?

    This is also ‘funny’ when Hardy mentions canvasing the neighborhood and not speaking to the closest one. I am sure he is telling the truth. That is why they sent him, not the other agent who would have to lie. It is clear how he avoids any answer that could incriminate Drew. I can see some kind of cooperation between prosecutors who failed to present real evidence and the coroner who did not leave the ‘undetermined’ option to the jurors and put a policeman who knew (of) Drew onto the panel.

    I somehow feel the main character here was the BB mayor who was afraid of Drew knowing a lot of him. Though it is just my speculation, or rather deduction. Claar threatened his opponents and I can remember one of them saying he had a police car in front of his house with its lights directed toward his windows on the days before the election. The mayor was also untouchable as for his drinking issues (think about his car plates). Rick Mimms said he was close to the mayor and that he was like an uncle to him. Stacy got a job in the hall though he had an affair with Drew being still adolenscent and no one – except the anonmous letter writer – reacted in this case in a proper way. The mayor also wanted to control all the press releases after Stacy went missing. He also, IMO, got rid of McGury, because he was too determined to do something with Drew. Look how insolent Drew was. I believe his uncle has always been very helpful to him but I am convinced Drew was supported by someone more significant in local politic relations than he.

  68. bucketoftea Says:
    June 14, 2009 at 3:00 pm

    Call me cynical, but it makes me wonder if any canvassing actually went on.
    ——–
    Exactly.
    Did they interview Clow Airport passangers? 😉

  69. I guess, cyrhla, if you “feel” the mayor has something to do with this, that’s your right, but I cannot, in good faith, agree with that. He didn’t investigate the scene, he didn’t do the canvassing, he didn’t gather the forensics or analyze them, he didn’t control the inquest. It’s really not fair to implicate a man merely because he is the mayor of the town the accused murderer came from, and he was “close” to the accused murderer.

    It’s really not, IMHO, wise to speculate on someone’s involvement if they weren’t implicated or part of the investigation to begin with. Doesn’t that lie with the first responders, the investigators, the people in the coroner’s office?

  70. Rescue, what mistakes were done by the first respondents. I cannot see any.
    The description of the scene, bagged hands and so on, even the autopsy, are pretty detailed and in fact if we learned anything about the scene, it came from these very first hours. So I think there were no mistakes made just at the very beginning. The problem occured a little bit later, IMO. And the problem might have been someone around Drew who had a strong position and was easily manipulated by Drew. He was not liked at his work and I do not think he was covered by his colleuges.

    So I do not “implicate a man merely because he is the mayor of the town the accused murderer came from”. I gave my reasoning above. Both Drew and Mimms say they knew him closely, so why would Claar say he hardly know them a he does?
    I think my speculations are not further than those made on O’Neil’s family crematory.

  71. Okay, cyrhla, I understand your reasoning. You explained yourself. I just meant that I cannot, in good faith, find the mayor responsible without or before any other information comes out, that’s all. I was just clarifying my position.

    BTW, Ric spells his name Mims.

  72. Sometimes you can tell more from an investigation what’s missing than what’s actually there, to determine what actually happened.

    e.g. if procedures weren’t followed or only marginally, sloppily, hastily, it is pretty easy to find the source as to why things weren’t done properly or omitted alltogether.

    Suffice to say Drew would have meddled in the investigation at the time, making sure it was going towards the result he required to claim his bounty !

    I bet he used his “I would have taken a bullet for you” trump card plenty of times.

    That seemed to have worked pretty good until recently !!

  73. I’m not clear on or convinced the first responders did anything right, to tell you the truth. If the present SA only looked at the pictures of the scene and immediately felt it was staged to look like an accident, what the hell did the lead investigator see? Maybe the photographer did something right, and the gentleman who first bagged her hands, but, from that point on, it was anything but a focused, thorough investigation.

  74. Rescue, thanks for the correction; I got used to the wrong spelling of Ric Mims 😉
    I ask myself the same questions if I use my logic, but I think no logical explanation and any sense of justice should be taken into consideration here.

    My answer is that the investigators knew what had happened but the case was later directed and manipulated (by person/s X) toward closing it as soon as possible, without any investigation that could run to Drew’s indictment. That’s why they did not ask for phone records, for instance. If I am wrong, all these investigators should be sent back to school. 🙂

  75. Glad you mentioned the crime scene photos as they are written in stone, no matter how much the rest was manipulated, omitted and concealed.

    We also need to keep in mind Drew was the “first officer on the scene” which is a very important role, that’s why it is so incredulous Herbert Hardy says in his statement he doesn’t know if Drew was in uniform – HUH ??

    If Drew was at the death scene as “first officer on the scene”, what the hell was he doing there if he was not there in his capacity as Police Officer and he obviously wasn’t or he would have followed PROPER procedures and not round up friends, neighors and a supposed locksmith to do the initial dirty work for him (!!)

    That whole initial “discovery of the body scene” stinks to high heaven and it is AMAZING he even got away with that !!

  76. Maybe this will serve as a major wake-up call to law enforcement that they cannot cover-up crimes commited by their fellow officers but honestly, I doubt it because IMO there may have been some sympathy for “it”
    since cops have such a high divorce rate and sexism prevails with such statements as “..she gets half of everything thats MINE ” The thing racked up the transgressions, in the form of KS’s trips to the emergency room and still….she was not afforded equal protection under the law and I want to to know why this is ? For our sisters and daughters we need to demand to know why. God Bless KS’s sister Susan Doman.

  77. You’ve got that right, sent back to school.

    It’s very discouraging, to say the least, that someone would direct or guide an investigation in another direction. If nothing else, morally, ethically, it’s a heavy burden, isn’t it?

    What I don’t get is, if her death had been seen as a possible homicide from the get-go, and that theory had to be ruled out, according to Hardy, they followed through with this. He says they canvassed the neighborhood, questioned his wife for an alibi, and were in the process of subpoenaing phone records. In other words, they focused on a possibility that Kathleen’s ex may be a person of suspect. So, during this initial investigation what did they find to think so? Or, was it just an assumption that he was, in this case, a likely suspect due to being the ex-husband?

    The only “evidence” they have that exculpated him at the time was, according to Hardy, the neighbors being questioned and denying seeing anything (seeing the ex coming or going from the house), and a pregnant wife that said he was with her. That’s all well and good, but, in reality, what would they have expected his wife to say? He was off murdering his ex wife? Hardy mentioned the phone records as a way of verifying Peterson’s whereabouts, but we know that never came to be, yet, it was something they would have used as a tool to back up his alibi.

    Other than that, obviously, there’s no evidence that was found that would have exculpated him. Because, if there were, he wouldn’t be sitting in a jail cell right now with a $20,000,000 bond hanging over his head. In fact, maybe those very phone records that were elusive may have pointed the current investigators in a direction that helped them uncover a whole new set of circumstances.

  78. I’m just wondering how many more self assigned “investigations” Drew got away with over time ????

    The discovery of Kathleens body surely wouldn’t have been the second one !!

  79. Okay I do just follow and read, but I would like to make some small comment. Clow airport I would assume, does not have passengers. Look at it as a litle airport we all ave in rural areas. To fly and land private little teeny planes, and bikes on wings, or whatever. It is not a normal airport, as what we see airpots as. So no cameras, no nothing…just a landing strip for the little planes.

  80. I think we got a problem as long as investigators don’t even know if a Police Officer on duty is wearing a uniform or not or his children are tagging along on the job !!

  81. Folks, we ask that you refrain from singling out any one particular profession or group with personal innuendos.

    Any comments along those lines will be deleted.

    Thank you for your cooperation.

  82. Writerofwrongs, I think Kathleen got all the protection under the law that she sought but chose not to persue certain legal actions against Drew because she did not want him to lose his paycheck or retirement which she wanted to share in and rightfully so. After her death is when the police force failed her i feel.

  83. snipped

    The only “evidence” they have that exculpated him at the time was, according to Hardy, the neighbors being questioned and denying seeing anything (seeing the ex coming or going from the house), and a pregnant wife that said he was with her.

    I keep seeing mention that Stacy was pregnant when Kathleen was murdered, but I don’t think she could have been.

    February 29, 2004 to January 1, 2005 (don’t know exact date in January that Lacy was born) is 43 weeks rounded down.

    This is longer than a pregnancy is usually allowed to go (37 to 42 weeks is considered a term pregnancy) but that could have happened.

    Certainly if she was pregnant, she was not very far along — days or maybe a week?

    I suppose that would make sense if she had dental surgery as Drew had mentioned.

    Or do I have the date of Lacy’s birth wrong?

  84. Noway – I don’t know whether she was pregnant or not, to be honest with you. I thought I remembered hearing that she was, and if anyone even suspected her of being involved in the death of Kathleen, it would have certainly been difficult for her, being in a state of pregnancy.

    In the meantime, here is one reference to her state of pregnancy:

    Before her disappearance, Stacy Peterson revealed to three people, including a clergyman, that her husband had bragged of killing his ex-wife and making it look like an accident, a source tells the Chicago Sun-Times. Drew Peterson, now a suspect in his fourth wife’s disappearance, was already living with a pregnant Stacy in 2004 when Kathleen Savio’s body was discovered in an empty bathtub.

  85. Yes, Noway, I pictured Stacy being in an advanced state of pregnancy as well, and like you, I don’t know why I thought that.

    But if, in fact, Lacy’s birth month is January, then references to Stacy being pregnant at the time of Kathleen’s death are inaccurate.

  86. It is easy to get confused with all these dates and pregnancies as Drew did everything back to front as far as his divorce/financial settlement was concerned.

    Drew and Stacy were married in October 2003, about ONE week after his divorce from Kathleen became final.

    Anthony was already born by then(for any doubters he is in their wedding photos)

    If young Lacy was born in January 2005, she would have been conceived around april 2004, unless it was the gestation of an elephant as that would have taken a lot longer (!!)

  87. No elephants. It could be that the date of Lacy’s birthday is wrong but I did think both she and Stacy’s birthdays were in January.

  88. Hello to everyone: On an earlier post on this thread, someone wondered what Drew may have taken from the home of Kathleen on the day of her funeral. I do remember reading way back on a 2007 thread, that Drew mentioned takeing the bed.( did not mention when) I think he mentioned it cost a lot of money. (From Kathleen’s home) Perhaps the headborad and the other parts of it also. We already know that Kathleen had complained about some of her jewelry being taken while she was at work. (Not a thing was ever done about it..and this was when Rick Mims was Drew’s look out) There is no way I would not believe that Drew would have taken the rest of her valuable Jewelry..especially anything he had given her. That is the kind of man he is. As to who might have helped him, it could have been anyone from ‘Carcerano’ to ‘Lenny and Paula’..to migrant day laborers he could have paid for. If there was an alley behind her home, I would not be surprised if it was done that way. As to how Drew got in,..well I certainly think he could have used the same locksmith he used when he did a well being check. LOL Either him, or Carcrano as they both had lock pick sets. I see Drew taking crystal, figurine items, and expensive silverware etc. To be honest, without the mattress, it would not have taken all that long at all. What a total creep this man is. I am so glad he is locked up. PJ

  89. I’m curious – is this Herbert Hardy still a police officer? I shudder at the thought.

    Also, bucket, you mentioned hearing about a forensic woman whose name starts with J helping get rid of evidence. I don’t know about that, but I do know that the woman in question was fired for doing personal work in the lab. She did some DNA testing on some underpants to see if her husband was cheating!!

  90. Yes, he took the 4 poster canopy bed that made his bedroom in his new home look like a torture chamber as it doesn’t have the canopy on top, only the four posts sticking up in the air.

    Of course I don’t know from personal experience what his bedroom looks like (ugh), but from the Mr.Mom videos and photos. LOL

  91. prudancejuris says:

    As to who might have helped him, it could have been anyone from ‘Carcerano’ to ‘Lenny and Paula’..to migrant day laborers he could have paid for.

    ******

    Lenny and Paula were not in Drew Peterson’s life much when he was possibly stealing jewelry and such from Kathleen’s house. Lenny and Paula became involved on a regular basis with Peterson at the time Stacy went missing. Shortly thereafter, as has been reported, they were asked by law enforcement to participate in taping Peterson.

  92. I always thought that the day Drew was picked up, that the States Attorney knew or felt strongly Drew might not be able to come up with the bond money. I am waiting for the other shoe to drop down the line. Between what Morphey has had to say, what Lenny and Paula have on tapes, and perhaps one good roll over friend of Drew’s…..Could it ever be, that Drew ends up getting arrested for Stacy’s Murder also and now his bail is up another $20, million. Could that happen? Wow a double coup! You better believe old Brodsky is checking out possibilities for Media shows, a Book, and Movie rights. What a Lawyer that guy is. I bet Reem Odeh, is cursing the day he ever talked her in to takeing him on as a partner. This is just one big Oy Vey, the way I see it. As to that card game Drew and Nutsky were playing, can’t you just see some of those cards with pictures of judges on them and Drew is suppossed to pick one and put it face down on the table. A kind of ‘Thats the boy we want’. OMG PJ

  93. Rescueapet, 8:41pm Thanks for that update. I guess the only reason I may have mentioned their name was,..that when the tapes had come out..he (Drew) was asked on some show how he knew Lenny and Paula. I remember him saying something to the effect that he use to know Lenny as somewhat of a (miscreant-my word) and kind of knew him from the area. I cannot remember the show etc. But I do think Drew, knew of Lenny and Paula before Stacy. I am not sure though, sorry. PJ

  94. I believe he also took the much discussed night stands from Kathleens house.

    There is an inventory of Kathleens jewelry, but considering she had a lot of bling, there isn’t much on it.

    Drew on the other hand admitted to having a drawer of jewelry in his house, which he was at liberty to give to new fiancees when it came to pass and again according to him that jewelry did not belong to Stacy or Kathleen, so hmmm where did that come from then ?

  95. Drew at one point said that the day of Kathleen’s funeral he removed the boys’ beds from her house so they would have something to sleep on at his.

    If they had been in the process of divorcing for two years, I assume he had visitations during that time. Are we supposed to believe he had the kids sleeping on the floor for two years?

  96. Yeah LOL, that’s right Facs,

    Drew and Kathleen were always sparring over the childrens visitation, when they were going to be picked up and when they were going to be brought back and none of their arguments were over the fact the children had nothing to sleep on when they were staying at Drews (!!), but Drew just suddenly urgently “needed” the childrens beds, he took them when everyone was at Kathleens wake (!!)

  97. PJ, I take the statement drew made about knowing lenny as a wayward teen with a big grain of salt.

    Every person who has been against drew gets painted in the media (by drew and boobsky) as a street rat, somebody who he had previously arrested, somebody he helped get out of trouble.

    Personally, none of the cops I know count a bunch of people they arrested over the years as their friends. They wouldn’t be caught dead hanging out with them – nor would they want to!

  98. Funny too when Christina moved in for five minutes with her two children, Drew supposedly rushed out and bought $ 2.000 worth of bunk beds and bedding, yet wants everyone to believe his own children had no beds for all that time during his seperation from Kathleen (!!)

  99. Lenny said, and it’s been reported, that he’s known Peterson for about 16 years, rather than the 25 years Peterson claims. Lenny is 43, I believe.

    As to arresting Lenny:

    Wawczak also called Peterson a liar, saying the former Bolingbrook police officer’s claim that he’d arrested Wawczak regularly was not true. Wawczak said Peterson never arrested him, which police Lt. Ken Teppel corroborated.

    So, where Peterson gets the idea he knows Lenny as having been a wayward teen is something he pulled out of his you-know-what.

  100. see and we know that is BS about the bos’ beds…hello? Stacy and Drew lived in that house for how long before Kathleen died? they have how many rooms in that house? but we’re supposed to believe that Drew desperately needed their beds the very day of her funeral? I don’t buy that they had nothing to sleep on while with their father until after their mother died

    that makes NO SENSE..unless they lived in a tiny apartment etc

    see what is bugging me is that the death scene seems to initially been treated as suspicious considering the photos taken, the bagging of her hands and a supposed “test” on the tub drain that Drew claims happened…no evidence that an actual bath took place but plenty of things out of place in the bedroom..enough so that should have raised enough suspicion and must have…why have the inquest if something wasn’t suspicious?

    how does a friend of the ex husband of the woman that is found dead end up on the coroners jury..even if it was just a former colleague or friend of a friend? that is one of the first things that gets covered in choosing people for any jury…do you know the victim or potential suspect?

    that is what I mean by dropping the ball…they obviously must have had some suspicion to be questioning neighbors and Drew’s household..but somehow people he knows of and who know of him are on the inquest…that to me just doesn’t sit right

  101. I do believe that there was! I think the equity on that house was part of the protected court ordered money that “someone” withdrew $60,000 from…if there was an equity line you can pretty much guarantee there was insurance in the event of death. I’m not positive..but I understood that Drew sold the house for over $300,000 and that was how he was able to pay off his and Stacy’s house was from the sale of Kathleen’s home.

  102. That is what we should do, count up the number of insurance companies that are going to come after their money with intrest.

  103. What I don’t get most of all – how did Drew get away with the stupid and pathetic lying that he does ??

    How did he maintain any form of credibility at his work, with his Superiors, family, friends, neighbors, acquaintances, whatever, when his pathological lying is nearly insulting to the intelligence of a two year old (!!)

  104. Yeah, the fraud charges are going to be something else.

    Insurance and Finance Companies don’t pussyfoot around when they’ve been shafted.

    They don’t care much for poor Drew or if he was prepared to take a bullet for them (LOL)

  105. Unless of course he was part of a big Insurance fraud scheme and that’s why he could submit such terribly shoddy paperwork, but hey that is another conspiracy theory on my part (!)

  106. JAH, re your question about how he got away with it for as long as he did: who knows!!! I certainly don’t understand it.

    I also don’t understand how the system is as it is re a coroners jury getting to decide if a person was murdered or not. Surely that is something that should not be decided by lay-people?! That should be the job of a medical examiner.

  107. that guy in the front row..in the purpole…the one who looks like Grimace from McDonalds..or maybe Barney the Dinosaur…isn’t that Nurse “Pauline”? The other disgraced former cop? so does he really work for Peterson or not? Looks like he’s taping..hmm wonder what his cut is going to be? oh! probably the same as Brodsky’s and Selig’s…ZERO!

Comments are closed.