Drew Peterson Trial Questions? Ask a Lawyer!

Karen Conti and Greg Adamski

Karen Conti and Greg Adamski

You may remember Karen Conti as the attorney who presented the prosecution’s closing arguments in The People v. Drew Peterson, the WGN-hosted mock trial of Drew Peterson for the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio

Karen Conti and her husband, Greg Adamski, of the law firm Adamski & Conti, host the radio show Legally Speaking on WGN-AM 720, where every Sunday they give their legal insights on current news stories, argue with each other about controversial verdicts, and interview interesting lawyers and litigants.

Karen Conti has appeared on Fox News to comment on the Peterson case, and others. In fact, Ms. Conti was recently featured on the Fox News Chicago morning show discussing Peterson waiving his right to a speedy trial.

Ms. Conti has very graciously agreed to answer the legal questions that we have from time to time. So, if you have a question about the change of venue, the jury, any motions that may be presented, or anything about legal procedure involving this case, just be sure to post it or email it to petersonstory@gmail.com. We’ll send them along and post the answers.

~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

174 thoughts on “Drew Peterson Trial Questions? Ask a Lawyer!

  1. I know I certainly have a question about whether this silly “rumor” that got started by Armstrong, and confirmed by Brodsky, is a tricky way of thumbing their noses at the Judge’s gag order. Since the prosecution actually addressed this rumor, wonder if they’ll formally submit a complaint to the Judge?

    It will be great to have someone answer legal questions that come up now and then.

  2. I would like to know about the change of venue. Do you think it’s fair it should even be considered, given that the defense are the ones that tainted the jury pool (if indeed, it is tainted)?

    Do you think the judge would be right to turn around and say “bad luck, you did this to yourselves, suck it up princess”?

  3. I wonder if Karen thinks the prosecution will actually make use of the new hearsay law for Kathleen’s case. I have read that there are already in place existing exceptions to the right to confront witnesses in cases of domestic violence and plenty of legal precendents.

    Does she think it’s possible that the defense will sink all their resources into appealing the new hearsay law only to have it not invoked?

  4. Does Karen know what was determined as far as Brodksy asking about compensation for witness testimony and why would that have any bearing on the case? I’m referring to this:

    Prosecutors also agreed to reveal whether any money or other consideration was given to Lenny Wawczak and his wife Paula Stark, former acquaintances of Peterson who Brodsky said in court Thursday wore wires and also videotaped his client.

    Brodsky sought the same information about Thomas Morphey, Peterson’s stepbrother, who has said he helped Peterson remove the body of second wife Stacy from the couple’s home in 2007.

    http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/06/peterson-lawyers-want-help-with-discovery.html

  5. KAREN CONTI RESPONSE – CHANGE OF VENUE

    Here’s my wisdom on motions for change of venue.

    A motion to change venue (transfer case elsewhere) should be granted when it is apparent that it will be impossible to find 12 jurors who could not decide the case impartially. The burden is on the defendant to show that there is community prejudice. Voire dire (jury questioning) can be done to prove that impartial jurors are not to be found as can pretrial surveys–literally questionaires submitted someowhat scientifically to random persons to show prejudice.

    It is not enough to show that jurors know something about the case or know the name, “Drew Peterson.” It must be shown that the jurors are simply not able to follow the court’s rules–like the presumption of innocence and oath to be open minded until the trial is over.

    One of the factors that the Court considers is whether inadmissible evidence has been made widely public in the county. So, that if Stacey’s confession to her minister is determined not to be allowable evidence at trial and the whole of Will County knows about it, that may be good grounds to change venue.

    In the case of John Gacy, who killed 33 boys and men, (I was involved in the last set of death row appeals), the case was moved to Rockford, but with Cook County jurors sent there and sequestered. In the case of Richard Speck (mass killer of 8 nurses), the case was transferred to Peoria County. He still complained that this was a bad venue, but the appellate court upheld the conviction.

    In the Drew Peterson case, there may very well be a change of venue granted. However, this is a national news story, so it will be hard to argue that Cook County is any better. The question has been raised as to whether Peterson’s own self-publicity takes away his right to complain about a tainted jury pool. I haven’t seen a case where this was argued successfully. Most defendants know better and keep their mouths shut so there may not be a lot of instances where the issue arose. It is the judge’s job to keep the jury pool untainted and give Peterson his due process right to a fair trial–no matter how self-destructive Peterson’s conduct might be. That is why there is a gag order on the parties.

  6. Will County Circuit Court Schedules
    http://willcountycircuitcourt.com/
    Court Schedule
    OK
    PUBLIC Public schedules

    PETERSON DREW 8 10 9 WCCA 900 09L 000326 Case
    PETERSON DREW W 8 14 9402 930 09CF001048 0 MURDER/INTENT TO 1 Status
    PETERSON DREW W 8 14 9402 930 09CF001048 0 MURDER/INTENT TO 2 Status

    CARCERANO STEVEN 8 14 9 900 09SC000500 Employer

    ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 18 9 WCCA 130 08CH003585 Motions
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 19 9 900 04F 000340 Hearing
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 31 9 404 930 08CF000098 0 BATTERY/CAUSE BODILY 3 Jury Trial
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 31 9 404 930 08CF000098 0 INTIMIDATION/PHYSICAL 1 Jury Trial
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 31 9 404 930 08CF000098 0 DOMESTIC BTRY/PHYSICAL 2 Jury Trial

  7. HLN is advertising a Drew exclusive, tonoght on ISSUES.
    Drew Peterson Exclusive
    A never-before-seen look at Dr. Michael Baden’s autopsy report on Kathleen Savio. Her death was initially ruled an accident, but then Dr. Baden conducted a second autopsy of the exhumed remains and ruled it a homicide. So what will this exclusive report do to Drew Peterson’s murder trial? Jane will have all the latest tonight at 7pm ET on HLN

  8. Tonight: Drew Peterson exclusive — Kathleen Savio private autopsy report with lots of revealing shockers about death of Peterson Wife #3.

    http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/issues.with.jane/

    Drew Peterson Exclusive
    A never-before-seen look at Dr. Michael Baden’s autopsy report on Kathleen Savio. Her death was initially ruled an accident, but then Dr. Baden conducted a second autopsy of the exhumed remains and ruled it a homicide. So what will this exclusive report do to Drew Peterson’s murder trial? Jane will have all the latest tonight at 7pm ET on HLN.

    For Chicago area folks that’s like…now.

  9. That was much ado about nothing. Brodsky is going to file a motion to suppress Kathleen’s statements about her fear of her ex husband’s intent to kill her, and they said the scrapes and bruises indicate defense wounds. Of course, it was brought out that the defense is going to say the coroner got it right the first time, since her wounds, scrapes and bruises were fresh, the day after her death.

  10. The prosecution will present their case, many witnesses will testify,

    ‘the defense’ will file motions and say everything they want to say, and

    the jury will believe what they believe is the truth and make their decisions accordingly.

  11. I read Karen Conti’s response to the change of venue question.

    Thanks Karen 🙂

    It really annoys me that the defendant can behave like a jackass, deliberately and flagrantly self-promote himself and deliberately create white noise, and then be allowed to argue he needs a change of venue.

    I wish the judge could find a way to tell him no, and then it can be used as a precedent for future cases where the defendant thinks it’s a good idea to strut his stuff in front of the media on an almost daily basis.

  12. Calling this Drew’s Law works in Peterson’s favor. It gives the defense all the more reason to push the idea that this law was created specifically for him. As though he, and only he, was singled out for this new law, even though it’s already been used in a trial, and it will be used in trials to come.

    Again, I don’t understand how this particular new law will be used in Peterson’s trial for Kathleen’s murder. AFAIK, he is not being accused of killing her to silence her from testifying against him in a trial. He had other motives for doing so. The hearsay evidence is letters she had written, and things she said to others about her fears of him. Like I said before, how does the new hearsay law apply to the present pending trial?

  13. ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 18 9 WCCA 130 08CH003585 Motions
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 19 9 900 04F 000340 Hearing
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 31 9 404 930 08CF000098 0 BATTERY/CAUSE BODILY 3 Jury Trial
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 31 9 404 930 08CF000098 0 INTIMIDATION/PHYSICAL 1 Jury Trial
    ROBINSON MICHAEL 8 31 9 404 930 08CF000098 0 DOMESTIC BTRY/PHYSICAL 2 Jury Trial

    It doesn’t look like there are any changes to his charges. I hope the trial will be reported…

  14. Here’s a refresher on what M.R. is accused of doing.

    “Robinson was with the two women in an apartment complex elevator about 3:30 a.m. Monday [01/14/2008] when he quarreled with his ex-girlfriend, 32, over a phone call and began choking her, said Bolingbrook police Lt. Ken Teppel. When her friend, age 40, tried to intervene, Robinson allegedly punched her in the face, authorities said. Robinson dragged his ex-girlfriend and the friend into the apartment of a third woman and again tried to choke the ex-girlfriend, Teppel said, and when the friend tried to separate them, Robinson punched her in the face several times, knocking her to the floor. Robinson left, and when police arrived, they saw bruises and cuts on the friend’s face, Teppel said.

    source acandyrose

  15. CNN TRANSCRIPT EXCERPT
    ISSUES WITH JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL

    ….”Plus, an ISSUES exclusive. Could accused killer Drew Peterson soon be a free man? I`ll speak to CNN legal analyst Lisa Bloom, who got her hands on some crucial court documents that could shake up the case, including the second autopsy report that ruled wife No. 3, Kathleen Savio`s, death was a homicide.”

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0907/21/ijvm.01.html

    VELEZ-MITCHELL: In the spotlight tonight, jaw-dropping details in the case against Drew Peterson, the ex-cop charged with the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, and he`s also a person of interest in the disappearance of wife No. 4, Stacey.

    We have obtained the gruesome details of the autopsy performed on Kathleen Savio by the famous pathologist Dr. Michael Baden. You will not believe the results.

    Plus as Drew sits in jail, the question remains: will Kathleen`s desperate plea for help be heard from beyond the grave? We have exclusive information about a motion by Drew`s defense team to suppress Kathleen`s own words from a 2002 letter, where she claims he threatened to kill her. She said, quote, “He knows how to manipulate the system, and his next step is to take my children away or kill me instead,” end quote.

    If they suppress that compelling evidence, could Peterson walk? And will they be able to get a change of venue?

    Straight to the woman who brought us all of these exclusives tonight: Lisa Bloom, CNN legal analyst.

    So glad you decided to come with our show, Lisa. Let`s start with this autopsy report that you obtained on Drew Peterson`s wife No. 3, Kathleen Savio. What does it say about how she died? What stood out to you?

    LISA BLOOM, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, first of all this is Dr. Michael Baden. He`s a very well-respected forensic pathologist. He`s the former chief medical examiner of New York City. He`s testified in a number of high-profile cases. And he was brought in 3 1/2 years after Kathleen Savio died, right after Stacey Peterson went missing. Everyone started to get suspicious about Kathleen Savio, and so the body was exhumed.

    He did that autopsy. This was the third autopsy at that point and he concluded — unlike the coroner the first time around, who said it was an accident — that it was a homicide. And he gives the reasons in his autopsy, of course. And we have it now for the first time. And you can tell your viewers about it.

    Now, let`s be clear. He says the body was in very poor condition. And I saw the pictures, Jane. They`re horrifying. They`re basically decomposed remains. Her head was simply a skull. They`re awful to look at. And of course we`re not going to broadcast them.

    VELEZ-MITCHELL: Right.

    BLOOM: But he talks primarily about the bruises. And he says that there were a number of bruises on her body. A one-inch brunt-force laceration on the back of her head, five scraping abrasions and six blunt- force black and blue contusions on her extremities, abdomen and buttocks.

    Now, some of them you couldn`t see anymore. He`s relying on the first autopsy. But some of them he could still see 3 1/2 years later. And he`s saying that`s indicative of a struggle and, therefore, this was not an accident. According to Dr. Michael Baden.

    VELEZ-MITCHELL: So why didn`t the coroner come to this conclusion the first time around if it was so obvious?

    BLOOM: That`s the question for the coroner. That will be the question at trial.

    But look, let`s be fair. The defense is going to say the coroner did the initial autopsy one day after Kathleen Savio died and the coroner ruled it was an accident. Wasn`t the coroner in a better because position the coroner had a chance to look at all the injuries fresh, just one day later? That`s what the defense will argue.

    VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s talk about this beyond the grave battle. There was an exception to the hearsay law that was passed in this state, and some say it was because of this guy in order to convict this guy. What are they going to do, the defense, about that?

    BLOOM: This is going to be a very big motion that I have learned the defense is going to be filing very, very soon.

    One of the biggest issues in the case, because part of the strongest evidence the prosecution has, Jane, are these beyond-the-grave statements from Kathleen Savio. She told a number of people, allegedly, “If anything happens to me, Drew Peterson killed me. So should those statements come in or not?

    Typically, there would be hearsay, but in 2008, the prosecutor in this case got the legislature to pass law specifically allowing…

    VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`ve got to leave it right there. Come back — come back again.

  16. State law allows hearsay evidence from murder victims
    Drew Peterson case may be affected if his wives’ statements are considered

    By Erika Slife and Ray Long
    November 20, 2008

    http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2008/nov/20/local/chi-drew-peterson-law_20nov20

    Will County State’s Atty. James Glasgow, who’s sought the law for months, said, “This is a bill that will help prosecutors across the state to utilize the statements made by murder victims . . . that previously would have died with them.”

    Glasgow declined to comment on whether the law directly pertains to the Peterson case, but did say that he would “use it aggressively wherever it applies.”

    The House voted 109-0 on the bill, which allows hearsay evidence into court in first-degree murder cases if the prosecution can prove to the judge at a pretrial hearing that there is a preponderance of evidence the defendant killed a witness to prevent his or her testimony. The House vote followed Senate approval a week before..

    ……His defense attorney, Joel Brodsky, said the law will not greatly impact Peterson. Brodsky worked with lawyers to scrutinize the law.

  17. Lisa Bloom: “Now, let`s be clear. He says the body was in very poor condition. And I saw the pictures, Jane. They`re horrifying. They`re basically decomposed remains. Her head was simply a skull. They`re awful to look at. And of course we`re not going to broadcast them.”

    * * * * *
    WTF? AND JV-M promising “gruesome detail”. That’s disgraceful.

  18. Hey, bucket.

    JV-M is, IMHO, hard to take. She barked and growled about this piece when the program started. It was, for me, an infuriating piece. Only because they tried to make it sound so sensational and exclusive. WTF is right. I wish these people would stop growling out their “exclusives,” and report the news in a dignified, composed way. We all would appreciate hearing what’s happening behind the scenes, but not this crap!

  19. Hiya Rescue!
    I agree, I always hate the shouty style, but this is specifically disrespectful to the victim.She should have her head shaved live on tv to atone.

    I’m afraid that’s put me off Lisa Bloom all over again.Just disgusting. I hope the Savios weren’t unfortunate enough to be watching.

  20. It looks to me like the DP Dopey Dream Defense Team VIOLATED JUDGE WHITE’s GAG ORDER.

    Where else would Lisa (anti-women) Bloom have gotten her hands on Baden’s Savio Autopsy Report #3 so she could perform her unprofessional tv gig.

  21. Judgin, they do seem to be pretty consistantly getting around the “no evidence leaks” order. WTF?

    Agree with others that there was no reason to bring up details of the decomposition of the victim on the air and to go on about how “gruesome” they were.

  22. If the defense leaked this it will be because they aren’t the only ones besides the prosecution with access to it because it was privately commissioned by the family, via (ahem) Fox.

  23. My tv does have an ‘off’ button but I follow those shows to keep up with the current issues in the news. I don’t believe a word they say and disregard their B.S. because they make comments without checking their facts.

    I keep my barf bag handy when I watch those shows.

  24. I suppose it is possible they had permission from Judge White to run this story?

    The bruises being there 3 1/2 years later are indicative of a struggle and that is why Baden says it is not an accident.

    And that at trial, they will be questioning the coroner as to why he did not come to that same conclusion.

    That’s what I get from it. Did I miss anything else? I’m feeling a little groggy today.

  25. KAREN CONTI RESPONSE – HEARSAY

    Hearsay evidence is a statement made outside court by someone other than the testifying witness made to prove that what the witness is saying is true. For example, if the prosecution wants to prove that Drew Peterson owned a blue barrel and wanted me to get on the stand and say “John Smith told me that Drew had a blue container in his garage,” that would be inadmissible hearsay. Generally, such evidence is inadmissible because it is unreliable and does not give the defendant a chance to cross examine the person who supposedly made the statement because that person is not in the courtroom.

    The new exception in Illinois law is the case where a witness was murdered to silence him and make him unable to testify. In that case, the law would allow a witness to testify as to what the murdered person said. The way I see it working in the Savio murder is trial is as follows: If it is determined that Drew Peterson murdered Stacy Peterson and that he did it in part to silence her, then Stacy’ minister can testify in court that, “Stacy told me that Drew Peterson killed Kathleen Savio and this is how he did it.”

    Interestingly, in order for this exception to apply, it would have to be shown that Drew Peterson murdered Stacy at least in part to make her “unavailable” as a witness against him. This may be somewhat difficult because, at the time, Kathleen’s death was still deemed to be from natural causes and Drew Peterson was not a suspect.

    Laws similiar to this have been on the books for years and have been upheld on appeal. In fact, there is a federal law that allows such testimony and the law has been upheld generally by the United States Supreme Court.

    I believe that testimony of Stacy’s statements to her minister would be very powerful and may be the evidence needed to prove this murder beyond a reasonable doubt. If the trial judge, in his discretion, allows it in, I don’t see it being reversed.

  26. ~snipped~

    This may be somewhat difficult because, at the time, Kathleen’s death was still deemed to be from natural causes and Drew Peterson was not a suspect.

    If Stacy was going to use what she knew about Drew’s involvement in Kathleen’s death against him in a divorce, and Drew knew this, then there was a good chance there would be a trial, and he killed Stacy to prevent her from coming forward at all.

    Does that make sense? It makes sense in my head.

  27. Noway, in my mind, that is where I see the newly passed hearsay law being used – that is, if there was a trial for the murder of Stacy by her husband, in which he murdered her to silence her.

    I, by no means, think that the matter of missing Stacy Peterson is on the back burner, and I believe he will be charged with her murder. I don’t begin to say I would venture a guess as to when, or what the State’s strategy is for charging Peterson for her murder at any given time, but I can certainly understand the idea of not charging him with two separate crimes at the same time. After all, he’s not going anywhere anytime soon, is he?

  28. LOL — no, I don’t guess he is going anywhere anytime soon.

    Couldn’t the hearsay be used if it is determined he silence Stacy so that there would not be a trial in which she would testify?

    I understand that there was no trial at the time Stacy disappeared (that he was preventing her from testifying in) but could it be used if it is shown that he murdered Stacy so that there would not be a trial?

    I mean, in his mind, if Stacy did not come forward with what she knew, he didn’t think there would be any fallout as far as Kathleen’s death. There would not be an investigation of any kind, no exhumation and no trial against him for Kathleen’s murder.

    IMO, he killed Stacy in order to prevent there from even being a trial. He didn’t think that Stacy’s disappearance would result in Kathleen being exhumed.

    I’ll stop now. I think I’m repeating myself and I’ve edited the heck out of this post. I’m not even sure what I’ve said now.

  29. Pastor Schori’s testimony is not the only ‘Hearsay’ the defense will be attacking. There is the possible testimony of Bimbo Rock, the old hitman mobster, the ‘friend’ of Jeffrey the alleged ‘hitman’,
    Cassandra’s testimony of the August ‘gunshot thru the bedroom floor’ into the garage where DP sent Stacy for pop,
    Sharon Bychowski’s testimony, Aunt Candace’s testimony and many more.

    A good prosecutor will get in the appropriate information in an appropriate manner allowable by the courts.

    A jury will decided innocence or guilt on the whole factual case presentation, not one ‘separated’ issue at a time.

  30. At the time of her murder Kathleen was a witness against Drew in divorce court.

    She produced a lot of hearsay evidence around that time like statements to police, family, friends, doctors, lawyers, judges, and states attorneys. Her sister said there was a whole suitcase of stuff.

    Could it be allowed into court under the new hearsay law?

    Or does divorce court not meet the requirements of the hearsay law?

    Can you ask Karen to comment on this, please?

    Also, can someone give me a link to the final language in the hearsay law? I seem to have lost my link. I think it’s with my mind. 😉

  31. Is a divorce hearing a civil proceeding (property being distributed)?

    http://tinyurl.com/ldsgjo

    a) A statement is not rendered inadmissible by the hearsay
    10 rule if it is offered against a party that has killed the
    11 declarant in violation of clauses (a)(1) and (a)(2) of Section
    12 9-1 of the Criminal Code of 1961 intending to procure the
    13 unavailability of the declarant as a witness in a criminal or
    14 civil proceeding.

  32. I know what you need, Noway! Help yourself to a cold Mountain Dew right down there in my garage 😀

  33. Thanks, but I’ll skip the Dew. The last time I heard about someone getting a soda out of a garage fridge, she was shot at. Allegedly.

  34. PRNewsChannel) / Chicago, Ill. / Derek Armstrong, author of ‘Drew Peterson Exposed,’ has learned that Drew Peterson continues to have young women trouble even in jail.

    “A beautiful 24-year old woman named Ashley is visiting Peterson in jail according to my source,” said Armstrong, who continues to investigate the case.

    Christina Raines, his girlfriend and on-again-off-again fiancé continues to visit as well. According to the source, both women are demanding the other be removed from the “visitor” list but Peterson has refused and continues to see both via the visitation center.

    According to the source, who preferred not to be named to avoid media attention, Peterson met Ashley before he was arrested in a bar. She wrote him a letter asking to be put on the visitor list. She has been visiting ever since.

    “Both Ashley and Chistina are half Peterson’s age,” commented Armstrong, “as were most of his past girlfriends, fiancés and wives.” Peterson is arrested for first degree murder of younger wife Kathleen Savio, found dead in her bathtub, and is suspected in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, his fourth wife, who was seventeen when they married. He is still married to Stacy.

    Mixing up the bizarre soap opera are stories that one of the detectives investigating Peterson had asked Christina Raines on a date. Raines lawyer Gloria Allred didn’t deny the detective asked for a date, but did state there was no actual date and that there was no basis for a claim of improper conduct.

    Joel Brodsky, defense attorney for Drew Peterson, disagrees and is making use of any claims that could be construed as improper conduct. They are also preparing a challenge to the so-called Drew Peterson law, a controversial hearsay law passed last year.

  35. Rescue, please be more specific.

    Which piece of crap?

    Chrissy
    Derek
    Ashley
    Drew
    Joel
    Selig

    Also, how many of Drew’s past girl friends, wives, or fiances were really half his age?

    It’s not “most” as Armstrong indicates was it? Not unless Drew had a whole lot of girlfriends we don’t know about?

  36. Seriously, is this the kind of crap Nurse Pauline is scraping together while he’s been in Chicago? Although it would be hysterical if it were true, I really hope he’s not the source being paid for this caliber of “sleuthing”.

  37. Armie can’t even get all the facts straight, despite writing a book about drew. Stacy was not 17 when they married. She was 17 when they started dating. Sheesh.

  38. Oh that DA load of crap came straight from Drew and Joel. “source” indeed. bah. Yeah, yeah, Drew you’re a right Romeo, but you won’t be getting any probably ever, ever again. 😉

  39. Since we went there, If Christina and her lawyer say there was no improper conduct, the person the claim is about, how does Joel get to prentend there was? Oh no, I hear white noise!! It sounds desparate.

  40. Posted: Thursday, 23 July 2009 6:43AM

    Peterson’s slain wife struggled with her killer

    CHICAGO (WBBM) – There’s new information this morning about the autopsy into the death of one of the wives of former cop Drew Peterson.

    The autopsy done months ago reportedly indicates 40-year old Kathleen Savio struggled with her killer before she was drowned in the bathtub of her home in 2004.

    CNN reports the autopsy reveals bruises consistent with a struggle. They include black and blue marks on her arms and legs, abdomen and buttocks.

    There also reportedly was a one-inch cut in the back of Savio’s head.

    Former Bolingbrook police officer Drew Peterson is in the Will County Jail awaiting trial on charges he killed Savio, his third wife.

    Peterson’s attorney dismisses the allegation and says he will disprove it at trial.

    Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy, has been missing October 2007. He is considered a suspect in her disappearance.

    Copyright 2009 by WBBM.

    http://www.wbbm780.com/Peterson-s-slain-wife-struggled-with-her-killer/4860022

  41. Hmmm, I think it’s safe to assume that since the Brodskers can’t open his pie hole and put out press releases, he needs Armie to deflect any news that comes out against his client. Just doing his job, you know. I guess we’ll know, for the future, that when one of Armie’s ridiculous press releases comes out in the evening, we can expect the next day to be news about the murder defendant.

  42. OK, I don’t know why this is news since we’ve heard this before from Baden…but I’ll take any news about the victim and the crime over gossip about the accused’s love life.

    New autopsy for Peterson’s third wife

    CHICAGO, July 23 (UPI) — The third wife of former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson wasn’t the victim of an accidental bathtub drowning, the results of a new autopsy indicate.

    A re-examination of the body of Kathleen Savio revealed a 1-inch blunt-force laceration on the back of her head and numerous bruises and abrasions all over her body, CNN reported Thursday.

    Noted forensic pathologist Michael Baden has concluded Savio’s 2004 death was a homicide. Peterson has been jailed since his arrest in May.

    At the time of Savio’s death, she and Peterson were going through a bitter divorce.

    Her body was ordered exhumed after Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy, went missing in October 2007.

    Peterson has been identified as a suspect in Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.

    http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/07/23/New-autopsy-for-Petersons-third-wife/UPI-40511248350048/

  43. And again, this one based on Lisa Bloom’s CNN appearance I guess…

    New autopsy: Drew Peterson’s third wife was killed

    (CNN) — A new autopsy of the third wife of former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson shows that the woman was killed, a determination that contradicts an earlier autopsy that said she died accidentally.

    Drew Peterson, a former police sergeant from Bolingbrook, Illinois, is charged with killing his former wife.

    Peterson was arrested in May and charged with first-degree murder in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

    She and Peterson were going through a bitter divorce when Savio was found dead in her bathtub with a gash to the back of her head. The death was declared an accident by a coroner. Then Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, went missing.

    Peterson also has been identified as a suspect in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, though her body has not been found.

    A new autopsy in the Savio case reveals bruising consistent with a struggle.

    There was a 1-inch blunt-force laceration on the back of her head, five scraping abrasions and six blunt-force, black-and-blue bruises on her extremities, abdomen and buttocks, the autopsy said.

    The bruising led well-respected forensic pathologist Michael Baden to rule the death a homicide.

    At an earlier court hearing, prosecutors said Peterson had tried to pay a hit man $25,000 to kill Savio.

    Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky dismissed the allegation, saying it was one of many claims that he would disprove. See timeline of case »

    Peterson remains in jail, awaiting trial.

    http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/07/23/illinois.drew.peterson/

  44. Mixing up the bizarre soap opera are stories that one of the detectives investigating Peterson had asked Christina Raines on a date. Raines lawyer Gloria Allred didn’t deny the detective asked for a date, but did state there was no actual date and that there was no basis for a claim of improper conduct.

    Joel Brodsky, defense attorney for Drew Peterson, disagrees and is making use of any claims that could be construed as improper conduct. They are also preparing a challenge to the so-called Drew Peterson law, a controversial hearsay law passed last year.

    ***********

    If Drew wasn’t asked out on a date by a police detective, how is it that his attorney can make “use of any claims that could be construed as improper conduct?”

    I see this as secondhand gossip, hearsay, maybe, that Brodsky is pursuing, but I don’t understand who’s been harmed by this? Who told Brodsky Raines was solicited for a date? Peterson? Raines? How can he make use of gossip in a court of law, where his client is fighting for his future, trying to beat murder charges?

    It’s laughable that the defense is sucking this story dry. This is the best they’ve got, the day before an official news story is released that Kathleen was covered in defense wounds, indicating a struggle?

    Oh, puleeze. Unbelievable.

  45. Maybe Drew’s other “visitor” told Drew that Christina is dating another cop, which is why Joel is thinking he really has something.

    Yes, I must say I enjoy the autopsy report as to who is crushing on Drew.

  46. I can’t possibly be the only one who reads here that immediately pictured Lenny in drag when reading that “Ashley” has been visiting Sack-O-Crap in jail! 🙂

  47. Facs, is that Baden’s autopsy as reported by Lisa Bloom, or Larry Blum’s autopsy?

    Larry Blum conducted the second autopsy; Baden conducted the third at request of Savio family, IIRC.

  48. I read this on the Who’s Who, and it was something I didn’t realize. Can anyone confirm this (part in bold):

    Peterson, Stephen Paul: Stephen Peterson is the son of Drew Peterson and Carol Brown, Peterson’s first wife. He lives in Aurora, Illinois. He is an Oak Brook, Illinois Police Officer. He married Teresa Peterson in August 2007, who is a Federal Agent of the Inspector General’s Office for the U.S. Housing Department, HUD. Stacy Peterson did not attend the wedding.

    Stephen Peterson called in sick to work on the night of October 28, 2007. He took several days vacation during the month of November, during which time he went to Mexico for a “belated honeymoon,” and upon his return, he extended his vacation several times. His personnel records from the Oak Brook Police Department have been subpoenaed. He reportedly has received nearly $250,000 in funds that were transferred to him by his father, Drew Peterson.

    https://petersonstory.wordpress.com/whos-who/

  49. QUESTION: What “discovery” does the defense have to turn over to the prosecutors? What does that usually consist of?

    RESPONSE FROM KAREN CONTI: Basically, the defense must turn over all evidence that it has. That means investigative reports, witness statements, documents, photographs, correspondence–almost anything except attorney client communications. If the defense fails to turn over something, the judge may bar it from use at trial. The prosecution has the same responsibilities. The defense must further disclose in writing all defenses on which it is going to rely such as an alibi or the like.

    These requirements are set forth in a rule that is designed to encourage full and fair disclosure between the parties prior to trial so that the parties can adequately prepare the case for presentation to the fact finder.

  50. QUESTION: Regarding the recent story containing charges of misconduct on the part of an ISP officer, who monitors the judge’s gag order and how? How might the judge respond to leaks?

    RESPONSE FROM KAREN CONTI: I assume Brodsky is complaining because he thinks that the investigator is doing this to get Raines to tell him her “bedroom talk” with Peterson, which he is hoping may implicate him in this or the other crime. I think that Brodsky has a right to complain if his client’s visitor and “significant other” is being “harrassed” by the police.

    The gag order can be enforced if the judge learns of the violation or if is brought to the attention of the judge by either party. The judge can hold a party in contempt and incarcerate the person, fine him, or further gag him. He has pretty broad powers.

  51. noway406 Says:
    July 23, 2009 at 12:39 pm

    Larry Blum conducted the second autopsy; Baden conducted the third at request of Savio family, IIRC.

    That’s right, you little fact-checker, you! For some reason I was thinking that Baden had just looked over Blum’s reports .

  52. Coffee, when I saw the name “Ashley” I’ll admit for a second I thought of Len in drag. But I really don’t think he could pass for a woman half Drew’s age…or that he’d have any desire to visit Drew in the pokey!

  53. Of course you’re right, facs. And no, of course I don’t believe Len could really pass for a woman half DP’s age. But then again, I don’t believe Armie, either! 🙂

    And HUGE thanks to Karen for all her explanations and information.

  54. coffeeocity Says:
    July 23, 2009 at 2:03 pm

    Of course you’re right, facs. And no, of course I don’t believe Len could really pass for a woman half DP’s age.

    Although Drew was fooled by Len’s tush in a thong IIRC!

  55. Rut Roh. Did Baden say in that vid that he thought the body had been repositioned many hours after death by just the water running out? He says he came to that conclusion in part according to what he’d been told by ISP. I think he means the body was moved, but not by staging. I think that’s a bit of a stretch? It’s a small tub….

  56. Someone emailed this question to us.

    Why is this report about Kathleen Savio autopsy going out without the Savio family not even having knowledge of the autopsy?

    I don’t think we need to refer this one to Karen Conti, so I’ll take the liberty of answering:

    As far as I know (and what has been reported) is that Baden performed this autopsy in November 2007 at the request of the Savio family. The family would have received a report of his findings at the time.

  57. I guess Blum’s the official one, but I don’t see any reason why the family’s autopsy can’t be cited, too. (although we know what JB will have to say about that)

  58. Maybe they leased it to CNN. lol. Fox would look pretty silly to be running it again as if it was new(s).

  59. Just to twit Derek a little bit more-above article states:
    “According to the source, who preferred not to be named to avoid media attention, Peterson met Ashley before he was arrested in a bar…”
    Ahem-he wasn’t arrested in a bar.
    Antecedents, antecedents, antecedents, dear.

  60. Bucket, I’m not sure even FOX had access to the actual report, which is what Lisa Bloom and now CNN have and are making public. Still, not sure why this is big news?

  61. I’m not sure why it’s news either. All this information was out there when Dr Baden first did the autopsy.

  62. If a member of the media gets hold of something, I’m not sure they would need to ask for permission to report it.

    I think the partial gag order may only pertain to the names of witnesses, right?

    Will County Judge Stephen White ordered Peterson’s lawyers on Wednesday to give him phone numbers of family, friends and attorneys that Peterson calls. Peterson has to notify the jail if he wants to call anyone else.

    The judge’s order comes after Peterson called a radio show from jail. White also wants to be notified on all interviews and press releases, and he ordered the names of witnesses and potential witnesses be sealed.

  63. Prosecutors had sought to have the judge to order that all discovery documents be filed under seal and that all attorneys on the case be prohibited to release any information from them.

    My understanding is that the judge did not grant the full gag order. Although, he did take steps to control any interviews or press releases:

    As for Judge White’s requirement that both parties in the case alert him and the state’s attorney’s regulatory body of any planned media interviews or press releases…

    http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/06/peterson-judge-limits-telephone-contact-interviews.html

  64. Thanks, Facs. Based on what you posted, my understanding is that the autopsy results are simply being reported and didn’t violate anything the judge ordered.

  65. Who read the Judge’s Order and knows what is allowed, or not, to be revealed or released to the public?

    Prosecutor Glasgow delivered six boxes, including Dr. Baden’s Autopsy Report, (2 sets) of discovery material to JB. News media states that Judge White gagged the defense team from revealing the names of 805 witnesses.

    Dr. Baden, Prosecutor Glasgow, Anna Doman, JB and DP have a copy of Dr. Baden’s Autopsy Report.

    Lisa Blume, reveals on CNN tv that she read a copy
    who is the daughter of Gloria Allred,
    who is the attorney for Christina Raines,
    who is the fiancee of DP
    who is the provider of the Autopsy Report?
    Who is the leaker?

    Was there a violation?

  66. If Baden or the Savio family were going to share the Baden Autopsy Report, I tend to think they would have released it a long time ago.

    The Savios are very protective of their lawsuit and justice for Kathleen.

    Who knows?

  67. Maybe I am thick, but I am still not getting the ‘news’ angle here. Dr Baden appeared on ‘On The Record’ with Greta Van Susteren early last year when he did the autopsy and discussed the results.

    Or am I missing something? I seem to remember him saying he concluded it was homicide, but don’t remember him going into great detail. Is the detail the new stuff here?

    Forgive my foggy brain today…

  68. I think you’re on top of it Aussie. It’s old news except for the actual document of the report which really only adds some details that might attract morbid interest but don’t appear to add anything significant to the evidence that was already made public.

    I guess the public memory is short and though this ‘news’ is almost two years old, it’s new to a lot of people who either never heard it or heard it and forgot it.

  69. The only thing I can see that was accomplished by the CNN report is to make Lisa Bloom look informed and “important”. I think Mom shared it with her. I’m so cynical, but that doesn’t mean I’m not right.

  70. Drerk Armstrong is trying to take credit for breaking just about everything in the PR from Sells-ick. LOL that Drew says he can con anyone…I think that was Martin Bashir, actually, who got that spectacularly on video. That list of his cracks me up. It looks like he listed everything he knows. lol

  71. Will JB/Selig/Drew figure out that no one cares now how many stupid women may chase Drew or visit him in jail? It was really only a topic of discussion while he neglected his kids to chase them and brought them back to the house. He used to be a risk to the kids and the women. Thank goodness that’s over.

  72. JB’S birthday today. Is he celebrating, or putting his reading on hold? After all, it’s only one more day. LOL

  73. Good morning, everyone, and hiya Bucket.

    Will Armstrong be breaking any news today? Is Ashbutt wiped off the visitation list yet, or does she stay and Cussy Raines go? Does Drew ask them to talk dirty to him, you know, while he takes a break from reading his Bible and thinking about how he misses his kids?

    Does Armstrong have any new angles about how to get the media to pick up his salacious stories instead of the chilling kind, say like the expert’s opinion that Kathleen tried to fight off murderous attacks?

    😉

  74. I thought the autopsy results that were released were the Baden autopsy results. My bad.

    Forensic pathologist Larry Blum examined her body and prepared the autopsy report released Thursday by Glasgow’s office. A third autopsy was conducted by celebrity forensic pathologist Michael Baden at the behest of Savio’s relatives. After his examination, Baden announced live on cable television his belief that the death was a homicide.

    http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=6929758

  75. ?? Glasgow? It’s not just a mistake by abc?? I heard no mention of Blum’s report yesterday. Nor Glasgow releasing anything. Yeah, think it’s a mistake. I’ve seen another virtually identical report except it doesn’t say Blum’s report was released.

    http://tinyurl.com/lx94s7
    “Savio’s remains were exhumed in November of 2007. Forensic pathologist Larry Blum examined her body and prepared the autopsy report. A third autopsy was conducted by celebrity forensic pathologist Michael Baden at the behest of Savio’s relatives. After his examination, Baden announced live on cable television his belief that the death was a homicide.

  76. Thanks for the information, Noway. Now I’m really confused. We were all wondering why Dr. Baden’s findings and report were making such news when, in fact, this says it was Dr. Blum’s findings, released by Glasgow’s office.

    Yet, this is how CBS reported it yesterday:

    Kathleen Savio’s body was re-examined by well-known forensic pathologist Michael Baden in 2007. According to the new details, Baden found bruising on the body consistent with a struggle including “a 1-inch blunt-force laceration on the back of her head, five scraping abrasions and six blunt-force, black-and-blue bruises on her extremities, abdomen and buttocks.”

    I’m not sure abc’s Chicago local news reported it correctly or not. It’s been reported as being Dr. Baden’s findings. Who knows now.

    Guess we’ll try and find out.
    Hmmmm.

  77. Bucket, an error by ABC is likely.

    It’s clear that Baden’s version was released (the pdf is posted above).

    I can’t figure out a reason that both were released but the only one getting “credit” in articles is Baden’s.

    Blum’s would be the one used at trial anyway IMO. And as far as that goes, I don’t know how much, if any, difference there is between the Blum/Baden versions.

  78. #1 – Savio Autopsy Report 03/01/2004
    https://petersonstory.wordpress.com/documents/#g
    March 1, 2004 – Autopsy Report of Kathleen Savio
    March 16, 2004 – Toxicology Report – Kathleen Savio
    March 20, 2004 – Diagnoses – Kathleen Savio
    ******************************************************

    #2 Savio Autopsy Report Letter released by SA James Glasgows office. Thursday, February 21, 2008
    Dr. Larry Blume
    https://petersonstory.wordpress.com/documents/#l
    Pathologist declares Kathleen Savio’s death a homicide
    JOLIET – Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow announced today that his office
    has received the final report on the autopsy performed on the remains of Kathleen S.
    Savio on Nov. 13, 2007.
    Dr. Larry W. Blum, the forensic pathologist who performed the autopsy, concludes in his
    report that the actual cause of Kathleen Savio’s death was drowning and that the legal
    manner of death was homicide. Dr. Blum’s report was delivered to the Will County
    Coroner’s Office on Thursday, Feb. 21, 2008 and immediately forwarded to the Will
    County State’s Attorney’s Office and the Illinois State Police.
    “Dr. Blum’s forensic report renders his expert opinion that this is a homicide,”
    [snipped]
    His report includes the results of microscopic examinations and toxicological tests
    conducted on postmortem tissue specimens. The specimens examined by Dr. Blum were
    collected during the first autopsy on March 2, 2004, the second autopsy performed by Dr.
    Blum on Nov. 13, 2007, and a third autopsy performed by Dr. Michael Baden on behalf
    of Kathleen Savio’s family on Nov. 16, 2007.
    The results of those examinations and tests are part of the investigation and are not being
    disclosed at this time.
    Dr. Larry Blume’s Complete Autopsy Report done Nov. 13, 2007 is most likely to be used in Trial and has not yet been released to the public.

    ******************************************************
    #3 – Savio Autopsy Report, Dr Baden, released 07 23 09
    Dr. Michael Baden’s autopsy report (pdf)
    https://petersonstory.wordpress.com/documents/#a

  79. Maybe “released Thursday by Glasgow’s office” (as posted in my link above) refers to Thursday, February 21, 2008, and they didn’t update that part of the story.

  80. Interesting to note – Gloria Allred completely and PUBLICLY contradicts Joel Brodsky’s statement Christina was subjected to “improper conduct” by a Police Officer (other than Drew – LOL)

    Meanwhile Lisa Bloom is stating the most crucial evidence in the Kathleen Savio case is “hearsay from the grave” as if there is nothing else in the 6 boxes of evidence than a few of Kathleens letters (!!)

    Have all these “experts” read through everything that has been submitted by the States Attorneys Office ???

  81. LMAO — guess there is no telling who Joel has helping him with the reading of the discovery pages. Damn! I knew I should have volunteered!

  82. noway406 Says:

    July 23, 2009 at 12:57 pm

    Stephen Peterson called in sick to work on the night of October 28, 2007. He took several days vacation during the month of November, during which time he went to Mexico for a “belated honeymoon,” and upon his return, he extended his vacation several times. His personnel records from the Oak Brook Police Department have been subpoenaed. He reportedly has received nearly $250,000 in funds that were transferred to him by his father, Drew Peterson.

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

    If the above is correct, this is a scary piece of information that shouldn’t be overlooked !!!

    Also Steven did go on a “belated” honeymoon for whatever reason, which in itself is maybe not so strange, but why the extensions, considering in retrospect and knowing what we know now it doesn’t seem right, logical or innocent (!!)

  83. I also think the new “young and attractive Ashley” visitor at Drews Prison is another of Drews “Legend In His Own Mind” inventions.

    The man is delusional thinking that no longer in uniform and stuck in a prison cell on a 20 million dollar bond still makes him desirable to young women (!!!)

  84. I have read the case file from the beginning, starting first tv broadcast, day one, page one thru to today’s media news…. in chronological order… as it occurred.

    IF Glassgow has any information that Stephen Peterson or anyone else has anything to do with DP’s activities, he would or will be charged at some point and may be cooperating in the investigations.

    Neither Glassgow nor LE is going to tell anyone what they have to present at Trial. Yes, they turned over lots of discovery material and swamped DP’s defense team… kinda like subtrafuge… the defense team doesn’t know what the prosecution will present at Trial.

    It appears to me that Glassgow is in the negotiating process of ‘putting together a rock solid case’ …
    from watching the court proceedings of Carcerano and Robinson, as well as the subpoena of Stephen Peterson’s personnel records from the Oak Brook PD, the Grand Jury meeting dates, Lenny & Paula & Tom Morphey’s Grand Jury testimonies, Bimbo Rock, the old mobster, cellphone records etc …

    The Regular Grand Jury panel has probably been dismissed by now. … and if there is another Indictment for Stacy, it has not been announced.

    Glassgow’s office has their strategy planned for rolling out further charges, etc.

  85. According to the source, who preferred not to be named to avoid media attention

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

    LOL, LOL, there’s the old “source” again who doesn’t like Media attention.

    And then there’s also the “Police source”, the one to quote things police supposedly said.

    LOL, LOL !!

  86. Glassgow’s office has their strategy planned for rolling out further charges, etc.

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

    Absolutely,

    James Glasgow has done his homework and with Drew taken off the streets and Joel Brodsky gagged and muzzled, the world is a better place already !

  87. Insurance should pay Drew’s lawyer?
    Peterson’s lawyer allgedly claims company has an obligation to pay up

    July 25, 2009

    By JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com
    JOLIET — Drew Peterson’s attorney tried to get his legal fees paid through the disgraced former cop’s home owner’s insurance.

    The attorney, Joel Brodsky, claimed Country Mutual Insurance Company is responsible for covering Peterson’s defense against a wrongful-death suit filed by the family of his slain third wife, Kathleen Savio, said Keith G. Carlson, a lawyer representing the insurance outfit.

    Carlson, on behalf of Country Mutual, filed to have the court declare the insurance company not only has no obligation to fund Peterson’s defense, but that it should not be on the hook to pay damages if the accused wife killer loses the wrongful-death suit to Savio’s family.

    Carlson pointed out that while Peterson’s homeowner’s insurance provides coverage for bodily injury, it is not to be paid out in the event the policy holder deliberately caused it, as alleged in the wrongful-death lawsuit.

    The suit, which was filed by Savio’s sister Anna Marie Doman, and father, Henry J. Savio, accuses Peterson of carrying out a plan to “stalk, attack, repeatedly beat, then drown” Kathleen Savio.

    Brodsky failed to return calls for comment on why he believes the insurance company should have to foot the bill for his defense of Peterson.

    The declaration filed by Carlson also named Henry J. Savio and Anna Doman as defendants along with Peterson. He explained that Savio’s sister and father were listed to clarify that the insurance company is not obligated to pay them for any judgment entered against Peterson if he loses the wrongful-death suit.

    Peterson remains in custody at the county jail. He is being held in lieu of $20 million bond while awaiting his criminal trial on the murder charges.

    Brodsky had demanded Peterson’s trial begin within 120 days of his May 7 arrest, as dictated by law, but backed off when confronted by the mountain of evidence the state produced against his client.

    A new trial date may be scheduled next month.

    Besides facing charges for the murder of his third wife, the state police have named Peterson the sole suspect in what they believe to be the possible slaying of his missing fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

    Stacy Peterson vanished in October 2007. Peterson claims she ran off with another man. He faces no charges in connection with her disappearance.

    http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/1684352,4_1_JO25_PETERSON_S1-090725.article

  88. I am surprised by the comment in Joe H’s story that a new trial date may be set next month.

    Why didn’t this come out after the last hearing? I wonder if the attorneys were in court again because of this insurance stuff?

  89. There is also the Hearsay Law challenge JB said he would be filing soon.
    the Change of Venue
    the Motion to lower bond
    the Motion to Dismiss charges

  90. Busy guy! lol and still none of the evidence addressed.

    The insurance looks a little tricky, I think. Wouldn’t it have to be proven that he was the cause of his problems first? On the face of it it looks like the kind of situation where they’d have to pay up and sue it back later, but of course they’d rather not! Who knows what was in the fine print? Interesting, though.

  91. justanotherhen Says:
    July 24, 2009 at 10:45 pm

    noway406 Says:

    July 23, 2009 at 12:57 pm

    Stephen Peterson called in sick to work on the night of October 28, 2007. He took several days vacation during the month of November, during which time he went to Mexico for a “belated honeymoon,” and upon his return, he extended his vacation several times. His personnel records from the Oak Brook Police Department have been subpoenaed. He reportedly has received nearly $250,000 in funds that were transferred to him by his father, Drew Peterson.

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

    If the above is correct, this is a scary piece of information that shouldn’t be overlooked !!!

    Also Steven did go on a “belated” honeymoon for whatever reason, which in itself is maybe not so strange, but why the extensions, considering in retrospect and knowing what we know now it doesn’t seem right, logical or innocent (!!)

    * * * * * * * * * * *

    This Steve stuff hadn’t escaped anyone’s notice, but I think all have been reluctant to condemn or suspect him for having an evil criminal father. I brought shifty Steve-stuff up again awhile back and felt a bit traitorous for doing so.

    I really think he helped his dad, and that was after I cut him slack over extending his vacation because anyone might under the circumstances….stay out of sight, help with kids etc?

    Whatever sent Eric out of his dad’s life didn’t send Steve away. I tend to think he’s a wiseguy like his dad.

    I think he may well be helping LE subsequently, though, because he wouldn’t have much choice.

    JMO, of course, and they change. lol

  92. ‘Waay back, on Greta Wire, there was a young man named Randy Mucha who blogged for a while. He was allegedly a very good friend of Steve Peterson-they had served together in the neighboring town’s police force, up until Randy was fired-he was in the process of trying to get his job back.
    He always maintained (for what this is worth, if anything) that Steve was one of the ‘good guys’ and said he (Randy) would never believe Steve was involved in anything untoward, especially having to do with Drewpy.
    I also remember that Steve was reprimanded and penalized for showing up to testify (at the Grand Jury, I believe) either in uniform or in a city police car. According to his city’s regs, that was against policy.
    Public opinion seemed to be that he was on duty and no harm done.

  93. You know, the issue with Stephen Peterson being involved with his father’s misgivings is, probably, always a possibility, but I certainly hope not. Not just because it would be a shame that he’d let himself be sucked into his father’s vacuum, but because he has his own life, a wife, a new child, and a whole, big responsibility of caring for two small children and two teens.

    To me, it would be tragic for those kids to lose yet another family member, and any stability they may be trying to accomplish right now since their father is going to be gone for a while.

    Stephen was fortunate enough to have his mother in his life through his childhood and now his adulthood. Let’s hope she was a positive influence on him, more so than his father.

  94. Rescue, I pray that’s the case. I don’t want to believe Drewpy has that much control over anyone other than very young and impressionable girls. (Which, of course, is probably why he’s always cultivated them-no one else would believe his line of BS.)
    When the news broke of the $250.000 Drew ‘gave’ to Steve, it was said the money was a defense fund, as Drewpy fully expected to be arrested-not for Kathleen’s death, since the homicide determination had not yet been made, but for Stacy’s disappearance.
    Evidently he trusted Steve that much. Don’t think he would trust him if Steve was a chip off the old block-he must be like Mom.

  95. I agree, Rescue. We don’t want it to be so. 😦 but it does worry me.
    Steve was in uniform and drove a squad car to testify before the GJ. His employers and others find it rightly unacceptable for witnesses to turn up in police uniform and driving a patrol car while acting as a private citizen. This could be interpreted as a way to influence the jurors’ that somehow his is an “official” presence and testimony. It’s against the rules. (then there’s the matter of the fuel used….lol)

  96. I also like to think that they would have somehow prevented him from taking the children if they didn’t think he was clean.

  97. Thanks again, acandyrose.com
    04/09/2008 (www.suntimes.com) “Peterson’s cop son suspended 8 days”
    “Drew Peterson’s police officer son said he was never warned not to drive his squad car or wear his uniform when he was called to testify before the Will County grand jury investigating the disappearance of his father’s fourth wife. Despite his explanation, the Oak Brook police and fire commission Wednesday night voted to suspend Stephen Peterson without pay for eight days from his duties as a patrolman in the western suburb.”

  98. Bucket, I would think so, too, especially knowing the magnifying glass this case is under.
    ***
    So there were at least 2 officers in uniform who testified at the Grand Jury proceedings?

  99. I’m not sure about whether there was another officer in “uniform” that presented himself to the GJ. I know Peterson’s BBPD partner, Alex Morelli, was a witness before the GJ, and so was the Harvey P.O., who’s name escapes me at the moment.

  100. So THREE cops, all testifying in favor of the beastly boy?
    Man-that grand jury never had a chance, did they?

  101. No, cheryljones, I think you’re misunderstanding what I meant. There were two other officers that I am aware of that were called before the GJ besides Steve Peterson. I don’t know that the other two were testifying to help Peterson; they were there to answer the GJ’s questions. Obviously, if they were of any help, he wouldn’t be sitting where he is right now. 😉

    I only meant to point out that there may have been other officers going before the GJ while in uniform, not suggesting that they were doing so to help Peterson. I hope I explained what I meant appropriately.

    ~ Rescue

  102. Followed up with David Turvey (the Bolingbrook fimmaker who is working on a documentary) and he reports that so far he has not been able to get an interview with Drew, but he is working on getting permission.

  103. Thanks for the news, Facs. If it were up to me Turvey would have the next interview, but I don’t think they’ll be letting him in soon. (he could always try dragging it up and calling himself Ashley!)

  104. cheryljones:

    Actually, after Alex Morelli testified before the Grand Jury, he made a statement much to the effect that “Peterson had messed up [his] life” (paraphrased. Morelli obviously was not in the least bit happy about having to testify before the Grand Jury, and I strongly suspect that, albeit he at one time was Peterson’s partner, he did not testify favorably in Peterson’s defense. I do not have a link to the exact quote of the statement that he made after his Grand Jury appearance, but I am sure someone here could find it easily.

  105. Oh, do I ever well remember that statement by Morelli. It’s on one of the local news video clips that I saw it. He said he wants nothing more to do with Peterson, and that he had turned his world upside down.

    I still am not sure how he is related to Attorney Fred Morelli, who is the attorney that represented Peterson in the first few days. Possibly brothers, I think. I don’t think there’s any love lost between any of the Morellis and Drew Peterson!

  106. from acandyrose.com

    CRAIG WALL: “The date of the WILL, March 2, 1997, nearly seven years later almost to the day Kathleen Savio would be found dead in her bathtub. That simple handwritten statement would become her Last Will and Testament.” – “It had been a bitter divorce. Her husband was in the middle of an adulteress affair with 19 year old Stacy Peterson and while Kathleen remembered to change the beneficiaries on her life insurance there was still that WILL.” – “So despite the divorce, Drew Peterson got all her furniture, jewelry and the money from the sale of the home, about $288,000 thousand dollars. He was also named guardian of the children’s million dollar trust fund.” – “But take a close look at the will.”DREW PETERSON: “There really wasn’t nothing sinister about it, just something simple if something happen if we were on vacation.” – “I wrote up the WILL with Kathleen’s instructions and we simply had a couple friends that were over to witness it and that was that simple.”

    CRAIG WALL: “Those friends turned out to be Peterson’s former partners in the Bolingbrook Police Department and according to the Savio family, 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…..

  107. That’s the one–great job, rescue! Morelli seemed none too pleased with Illinois’ current ugliest prisoner.

  108. Thank you, Rescue and Myabelle for taking the time to make that clear to me! I was under the impression they were testifying at the request of DP and his cohorts.
    I look forward to seeing what comes next in this sordid, tangled mess.

  109. You’re welcome, cj. Glad it’s cleared up.

    I’m wondering what comes next too. Since Joe Hosey’s latest article says a new trial date may be chosen next month, maybe the defense already has a target date, who knows. I can’t see how, since it would seem the defense has so much ground to cover to get prepared, but, of course, their client is anxious to get out of jail, and he has no chance of doing that unless he proceeds to a trial.

  110. Thanks, grandam. That’s the video I thought it might be, which is from November, 2007, from Greta’s show. Someone just apparently posted the link yesterday on WS.

  111. Thanks for this link, grandam, even though it is an old one :). Can anyone tell me if they search Sharon’s house in it, or Drew’s?

  112. I think that short clip was Sharon hosting the ISP in her house. She seemed to open it up to law enforcement and media alike. I couldn’t say for sure, though. But, it didn’t look like a search to me.

  113. I’m just chiming in after a few days away from computer.

    As to Steve Peterson, I have never trusted him. Call it a gut feeling, or whatever, but I just don’t.

    There was trouble between him and Stacy as well. Nothing I have read has lead me to believe this, however – she didn’t attend his wedding, which took place just a month or two before she disappeared.

    Right or wrong, my personal belief is that the apple didn’t fall very far from the tree.

  114. If you are right, aussie, I feel really sorry for Stephen’s wife.

    At one point Stephen is different. He speaks much less than Drew does. 😉

  115. Friday, Jan 09
    Lisa Bloom Leaving truTV

    First On TVNewser: TVNewser has learned that Open Court anchor Lisa Bloom — whose show airs on truTV’s In Session daytime block — is leaving the network. No word yet on when her departure is effective.

    TVNewser has reached out to truTV for comment.

    > More: truTV has sent a statement to TVNewser, stating that Bloom “plans to move to Los Angeles to be closer to her family and to pursue a new chapter in her career, including book writing and reporting.” Her last day as Open Court anchor has not yet been determined.

  116. cyrhia, thank you so much. It’s really awesome when you can always get an answer from nice people, like you.

Comments are closed.