Stepbrother: Drew asked if I’d kill for him
January 21, 2010 By JOE HOSEY and DAN ROZEK
BOLINGBROOK — Drew Peterson’s stepbrother pieced together the accused wife-killer’s allegedly murderous schemes and revealed how he was supposedly roped into helping dispose of Stacy Peterson’s body. Morphey, whose father is married to Peterson’s mother, told his shocking tale from the witness stand on the second day of a historic hearing to determine what hearsay evidence will be allowed at Peterson’s murder trial. Peterson faces murder charges in connection with the March 2004 apparent bathtub drowning of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Prosecutors are trying to prove he killed Stacy Peterson so she could not testify against him. Stacy Peterson vanished in October 2007. The state police believe she may have been slain and have named Peterson their only suspect in the case but have yet to make an arrest.
Stepbrother testifies
Morphey’s testimony mirrored an exclusive account he gave The Herald-News in March. In that interview, and in court Thursday, Morphey told how Peterson asked him, “Do you love me?’ and when Morphey said he did, continued with, “Enough to kill for me?” When Morphey said he could not live with himself if he killed someone, Peterson asked if he “could live with knowing about it,” to which Morphey replied, “I always assumed you killed Kathleen.” Morphey also told how Peterson dropped him off in a park with a cell phone for about an hour the night after Stacy was last seen alive. He said Peterson told him not to answer the phone when it rang. The phone rang twice, Morphey said, and both times the caller ID showed Stacy’s name. Peterson then picked up Morphey and brought him to the Peterson residence. The two men went inside, Morphey said, and carried a blue plastic barrel weighing about 150 pounds downstairs to Peterson’s sport utility vehicle. Distraught at the notion of aiding Peterson in the murder of his wife, Morphey attempted suicide by overdosing on tranquilizers. The state police interviewed him in the hospital and State’s Attorney James Glasgow granted him immunity for his testimony. Morphey also said Peterson confided that Stacy was cheating on him with two possible lovers, one of whom he wanted to frame for Stacy’s murder. Peterson asked him to drive Stacy’s car to Shorewood, where one of Stacy’s men lived, and leave the car there with the keys in the ashtray in an attempt to lead the cops there, Morphey said. He also said Peterson tried to get him to rent a storage locker in Romeoville. “He said he wanted it in my name, that he would pay me $200 up front to rent it and when that ran out, he (would give) me more money. Concerned about a decomposing body beginning stink, Morphey said he asked, “What about the smell?” but Peterson reassured him. “He said a sealed container, he said it would be air-tight,” Morphey said. “He said I should check it from time to time to make sure there was no odor.” “He’d leave the container there for six months until the smoke cleared and then he’d dispose of it,” Morphey said, and “If something happened to him, if he had a heart attack, to dump it in the canal.” Morphey said Peterson told him Stacy was demanding a divorce. She wanted Peterson out of the house in four days, was seeking custody of their two children along with the two born to Savio, who she adopted, and had her eyes on quite a bit of her old man’s assets. “She wanted half his pension, which meant he had to work for the rest of his life,” Morphey said. Peterson was also worried that if Stacy had custody of his kids, her brother, convicted sexual predator Yelton Cales, could get at them, Morphey said.
‘He’s a very ill man’During the hearing, Glasgow played a telephone conversation between Peterson and Morphey that was taped by the state police. On the tape, Peterson orders Morphey not to talk to the press or the police, and warns him about discussing things on the phone. One of Peterson’s attorneys, George Lenard, raised the issue of Morphey’s drug and alcohol problems, pointed out that he suffers from bipolar disorder and claimed Peterson just wanted to rent the storage locker so he could hide things in it before Stacy filed for divorce. Another of Peterson’s attorneys, Joel Brodsky, attacked Morphey’s credibility during a break in the hearing.
Drew’s son speaks Morphey was followed to the stand by Peterson’s estranged son Eric Peterson. The older of two children born to Peterson’s first wife, Carol Brown, who is neither missing nor murdered, Eric Peterson, 31, recounted a savage tale of domestic abuse he says Drew Peterson perpetrated on Savio in 1993. Eric Peterson and his younger brother, Stephen Peterson, were visiting their father and Savio for the weekend when Drew hauled his wife through the front door by her hair. “She was being dragged and fighting to stop being dragged,” Eric Peterson said, adding that Savio was shouting obscenities at her husband, begging the children to call the police and “screaming for help.” Eric Peterson said his father ordered his sons upstairs and pulled Savio down to the basement. He said the commotion downstairs sounded like a train ran through the house. One of Savio’s sisters and the police later showed up. The next morning, Eric Peterson said, there was no sign of Savio, but the house was strewn with broken glass and overturned furniture. Eric Peterson said it was apparent that Savio was drunk the night Drew Peterson dragged her around. Eric Peterson said he has not spoken to his father since January 2003. “I don’t love him or hate him,” Eric Peterson said of his father. “It’s separate of emotion. It’s indifference.”
Sergeant takes stand
The last witness called Thursday was retired state police Sgt. Patrick Collins, who headed up the Savio death investigation. In his 22 years as a detective, Collins said he had never handled a homicide. And the Savio case would not be his first, as he and two other investigators decided about a half hour after showing up at Savio’s house that her death was likely accidental. Savio’s death would be officially classified as such following a coroner’s inquest that featured testimony from a state police special agent who said investigators found no sign of foul play. Collins said Peterson told the state police that he and Savio had an amiable relationship at the time of her death and did not stand to profit from her dying. “He said basically he would gain nothing because during the divorce Kathy changed some of the paperwork,” said Collins, whose testimony will continue today.
~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 tags are allowed: <a href=""> <abbr> <acronym> <b> <blockquote> <cite> <pre> <em> <i> <q> <strike> <strong>
Justice Café 
Isn’t this what is commonly referred to as “domestic violence?” A man, pulling a woman by her hair, regardless of the circumstances, is cowardly. In fact, that is not a man.
He said the commotion downstairs sounded like a train ran through the house. One of Savio’s sisters and the police later showed up. The next morning, Eric Peterson said, there was no sign of Savio, but the house was strewn with broken glass and overturned furniture.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That must have been one hell of a fight.
Did Kathleen end up in hospital that time, since there was no sign of her at home ??
I note that the Suntimes article above states that, “Morphey’s testimony mirrored an exclusive account he gave The Herald-News in March.” Yet Joel Brodsky continues to state in his public statements that Morphey has given inconsistent statements. It seems to me that Tom Morphey is not only consistent but is positive on what was said and what they did.
I remember that a neighbor was a witness to seeing Drew and “another man” carry a container out and place it in Drew’s Denali. I hope that witness is called to give Tom Morphey’s statement even more credibility.
I feel bad for Eric Peterson. His indifference for his father speaks volumes. He doesn’t love him or hate him…….there’s no emotion when it comes to his father. The fact that he testified against his father shows he’s dealing with the reality of who and what his father is. It can’t be easy. I wonder if Eric has any relationship with his brother, Stephen?
The testimony of both Tom Morphey and Eric Peterson would be direct testimony, as they both related instances they each personally witnessed. I think the prosecution is laying out their case to admit hearsay, by using the direct testimony of other witnesses to lay the ground work and be supportive of the hearsay evidence.
The testimony of Sgt. Patrick Collins. is being presented, again as direct evidence, to show how Drew manipulated those around him. Testimony during the trial will show that Drew did, indeed, profit from Kathleen’s death.
Maybe that was the black eye…
This is new. Wow!
I see Kathleen and Drew married in May 1992 and this big fight was in 1993, so how many children did they have at that stage for Drew to “order the sons upstairs” as that could only relate to Eric and Stephen – no ?
He must have then gone on to explain his indifference, I would suppose.
(Source: Chicago Tribune)
From the above it appears the honey moon was over quickly if this violence took place as early in the marriage as 1993.
What’s Drew Peterson’s excuse for being a substandard human being?
Morphey also said Peterson confided that Stacy was cheating on him with two possible lovers, one of whom he wanted to frame for Stacy’s murder. Peterson asked him to drive Stacy’s car to Shorewood, where one of Stacy’s men lived, and leave the car there with the keys in the ashtray in an attempt to lead the cops there, Morphey said.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Once again I wonder what Drews plan was, considering he wanted to frame Stacy’s MURDER on someone (not necessarily her disappearance), so does that mean he originally wanted to dump her body somewhere it would be found ????
I remember a lot of speculation that Drew intended to frame the guy that Stacy had lunch with – the lunch included others who attended the same class that she did. And I think Stacy and the guy talked or texted on the phone a couple of times. Stacy had dated the guy’s brother some years ago.
But, it was just speculation………we didn’t know how close we were to what Drew actually intended.
According to my calculations, Eric would have been about 14 or 15 in 1993 when he witnessed that abuse, and Stephen would have been a couple years younger. I think the oldest son of Drew and Kathleen was born in 1993. OMG…….was Kathleen pregnant when he abused her!
I’ve always felt that when Drew murdered Stacy he didn’t have a clue about what would happen next. In his wildest dreams, he never thought Stacy disappearing would have the national news media camped out in the street in front of his house for weeks on end, and his every movement scrutinized. After all, he had gotten away with the murder of Kathleen, and he expected he would get away with this murder too.
So, his original intent may have been to frame someone else.
Kathleen had a baby four months before this incident. Kathleen’s sister took her to the hospital and the hospital report states that she was still taking prenatal vitamins. That would make the child 16 years old… Thomas.
http://www.acandyrose.com/kathleen_savio_documents.htm
I’m sure Drew was going to frame Morphy. And what a cheapskate! Just 200 bucks for the initial rental. All Tom has to do is keep visiting the site periodically (!)If that had gone to plan, do you think Drew would have carried that through? I don’t. “Illinois State Police? I got a tip….”
or Mommykiller was just gonna “suicide” him.
I wonder how Collins could decide after half an hour that it was an accident?
Excerpts
Ex-cop to speak at Drew Peterson ‘hearsay’ hearing
Complete story
http://www.wbbm780.com/pages/6180820.php
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/22/earlyshow/main6128553.shtml?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CBSNewsEarlyShow+%28The+Early+Show%3A+CBSNews.com%29&utm_content=Twitter
The minor detail of later coming up with a Will that left most everything to him, which they had “tucked away,” was very convenient, and makes him look like a dirty liar. He “basically” WOULD gain everything. I think this is significant testimony for the Judge to consider.
All in all the old question remained: why to hell the investigators did not check the money issues but believed Drew?
God, if the police acted like that in all their cases, jails would be empty.
Sorry, I do not believe Collins, too.
Well I hope LE checked all the storage facilities, and places you can rent those pods in the area where the pings were. It is someone he knows, or his friends know that rented that storage locker, or could be storing her on someone he knows property in one of those pods or something. Who knows though with how shady some of them look, could have fake I.D.s no telling with some of the people he knows. The more this is coming out the more I feel she is out there somewhere waiting to be moved.
But, Cyrhla, if you don’t believe Collins, doesn’t that work in Drew’s favor? Collins basically said he questioned DP about what he stood to gain financially by way of Kathleen’s death and DP lied in his answer. It never went any further by investigating whether her death could have been for financial reasons. It stopped there. Collins believed, apparently, the answer he got to his question/s.
Do you think Collins is lying and that he never asked the financial questions? If so, then Drew is not in the trick bag, because he was never questioned, therefore, he never lied.
It sounds to me as though it could very well be the questions were asked, and LE was good with the answers. End of story.
I remember hearing that Drew said, by the time they find her remains he will be acquitted. So it is a very good possibility that is she is somewhere till they can do something with her remains.
I think any storage unit, pod, anything rented the day before, the day of, or the following day by anyone known, or unknown, to Drew in the area, should be checked out.
Look at the date of this coverage, as it relates to the Morphey testimony!
BTW – Brodsky did a sound bite this morning before Court. He says the Savio investigation was thorough, and the reason it was ruled an accident and no evidence was recovered was because there was no evidence to recover.
***
In any death investigation, even DP admitted the spouse is always looked at suspiciously until shown otherwise.
How could evidence be recovered at KS’s death scene, when the ex-husband trampled all through it prior to any law enforcement official showing up to investigate?
Hopefully, a jury will be chosen that isn’t as stupid as the defense thinks they need be to get through all of this bull crap.
Judgin says…..
http://www.acandyrose.com/kathleen_savio_documents.htm
Drew Peterson is a skunk coward, regardless of what the outcome of this trial is, and the fact that he lies about being a woman abuser shows he’s not worthy of being called a man! Put him in a cell, along with a dude that has long hair, and let him pull him and drag him around, and let’s see what happens!
Yes he is, I noticed on the ER report for the first time that her menstrual cycle was on 4/28/93 listed as last cycle. I wonder if Drew is going to blame that on her PMS too! That just stood out to me because of what he said about Stacy.
Except his main alibi is dead. Unless Drew slept all night with some other family member in addition to Stacy, who can really testify that they knew where he was in the wee hours of the night?
I am so stuck on the picture I have in my mind since Eric Peterson described how DP dragged Kathleen into the house by her hair, screaming. It had to be traumatic if, till this day, he can vividly describe it in detail.
When Lenny approached that coward in the parking lot, he managed to “control” himself enough to speak clearly that someone should call 911. He’s not a man unless he has his gun holstered to himself, ready to pull it out, heh? But, give him a woman to abuse, and he’s bigger than life.
I hope he gets what he deserves, whatever that is.
Yuk that Lisa Bloom. I don’t think much of her analysis. Why no talking heads seem to get it that it’s about Stacy’s murder, too? Not just the “pattern”.
Oh, rescue, I believe that the question was asked. To be put in papersand so on.
I do not believe Collins because I think the reason he did not investigate the case was not the lack of experience in homicide cases. I do believe he was convinced by someone not to look into the case deeper. Why do I think so? There were police reports of abuse, for instance. There were suspicions of Kathy’s family and even documents they did not even wanted to see. And some people who informed the police they had suspicions. That’s all.
This is my very personal opinion, of course. I do think it does not hurt anyone. This man is responsible for having ignored the murder case. IMO, he did not want to know.
I agree, but it could just as easily be that Drew (or someone)has had this one for a long time. I’d like to check all of them whose owners have not been SEEN for a long time. I’ll concede it’s possible that there’s someone else in on this, but it’s not what I believe. I truly believe this is a one pony show. Color that pony Drewpy. Drewpier, even, since his incarceration.
We could debate forever however and for what reasons Kathleen’s death investigation was bungled. The truth is often far simpler and more mundane than we remote observers might suppose…and sometimes far stranger. What we do know for sure is that Drew Peterson is finally being tried for murder and Collins is testifying as witness for the state. That’s good for now.
Heh. Lying skunk.
I think his plan had to deviate some since he did not have Morphey”s help to count on, but I do believe it follows along the same theme of disposal.It will be interesting to know if they trace the call made from Stacy’s phone to Drews phone at nine oclock if it would ping from Shorewood.Therefore still attempting to frame one of Stacy’s friends.I don’t think he wanted Stacy found, but if she were it would have to allow the focus to shift off of him.Thats where this 3 day trip comes in.He realizes Morphey may spill the beans so he has to change her location from a storage area say to somewhere else.The whole plot is getting real clear in my head now that this info backs a lot of it up of what i was working on in assumption.
Craig Wall – Fox News noon report
Also, it’s possible that there will be “other” interesting testimony this afternoon, but the State keeps very close to the vest who will be testifying
WGN report:
Bungling of Savio investigation is focus right now
Collins admits only 45 minutes was spent searching Kathleen’s home when she died
He admitted officers should have done more thorough jobs of interviewing people and collecting evidence, including a glass/mug in home for DNA evidence
No DNA evidence collection was done
Brodsky said they did a very thorough and complete investigation. There was no evidence of wrong doing, it was an accident.
That seems awfully familiar:
Control, manipulate, stalk, bully, intimidate…
The technicain said everything is OK and … put Kathleen’s hands in pastic bags. They said it is done when there is a suspicion of a murder, does my memory serves me well?
I can’t wait what other people will say.
Ummm…is Joel testifying now? Was he there to know anything? Talk about hearsay! LOL.
JB’s BS detector don’t work anyway … it’s programmed toward poorly defending the wrongdoer
Cop admits mistakes in ruling Savio’s death an accident
January 22, 2010 12:33 PM | No Comments | UPDATED STORY
A retired Illinois state police sergeant admitted there were numerous shortcomings in his investigation that concluded the death of Drew Peterson’s third wife was an accident.
“I’m not going to beat myself up right now, you can second-guess anything,” Patrick Collins testified today. “Looking back now, everything could have been important. But at that particular moment, I was looking for things that were more obvious.”
Savio was found dead in an empty bathtub in her home in 2004. After Peterson’s fourth wife Stacy disappeared more than three years later, investigators exhumed her body, ruled her death a homicide and charged Peterson with murder.
Collins took the stand today during a hearing to determine what hearsay evidence, if any, should be allowed in Peterson’s murder trial.
Collins said a crime scene technician considered the death an accident, and that assessment colored his view of what happened because he had never investigated a murder before.
Collins also admitted he broke with normal protocol and allowed Peterson to sit in on an interview with Stacy Peterson, who gave Peterson his principal alibi for his whereabouts in the days before Savio was discovered.
Police interviewed Stacy Peterson for one hour on March 3, 2004. 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. Savio was found the next day, a Monday.
Peterson, a Bolingbrook police officer at the time, asked for “professional courtesy” and sat about a foot away from Stacy while she was interviewed, Collins said.
Collins also said he regretted not reaching out to any of Savio’s family.
Other shortcomings he admitted to: Not examining or saving a glass of orange juice in the kitchen or a cup in the microwave; not specifically asking about the position of Savio’s body in the bathtub; not asking if the people who had discovered her had touched the body.
The initial autopsy concluded Savio, a 40-year-old woman in good health, had drowned. A coroner’s jury ruled her death an accident after a state police special agent testified Savio had probably fallen, hit her head and drowned in the water before it leaked out the drain.
After Savio’s body was exhumed and a second autopsy done, State’s Atty. James Glasgow said it appeared the scene was staged to look like an accidental drowning.
Peterson has pleaded not guilty in Savio’s death. He has not been charged in Stacy’s disappearance, but authorities say he is the only suspect.
— Steve Schmadeke
http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/01/peterson-hearing-turns-to-day-kathleen-savio-found-dead.html
“I’m not going to beat myself up right now, you can second-guess anything,” Patrick Collins testified today.
No “sorry”. No regret.
Five days later Drew was laughing at Kathleen’s funeral and emptied her house.
This stuff makes me sad – really sad.
http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_20071113greta_eavesdrop.htm
GRETA: Have the police contacted you and said to expect one or are you just sort of expecting one?
MIMS: No, I talked to one of the state police officers that are investigating it and he thought I was going to the hearing last week and I told him I never got no papers on it and he’s like well maybe that’s not the one your coming to and well get back with you.
GRETA: And have any police officers called you in 24 hours?
MIMS: Yeah last night Pat Collins called me, we’re playing phone tag right now, I’ve called him, he’s called me, you know I called him back, we’re playing phone tag till we get in touch with each other.
GRETA: Who does he work for, Bolingbrook or the state police?
MIMS: The state police. I would not be talking to the Bolingbrook police.
Didn’t the evidence technician who placed Kathleen’s hands in a plastic bag ask the ISP on the scene how to continue his investigation? I read a big “YES”!
Can’t wait till he testifies and tells his story.
Collins screwed up the handling of the initial investigation. He’s admitting it now. He’s testifying for the State. What happened was terrible, but at least the truth is coming out, and the truth is on it’s way to exposing why Drew Peterson was able to go on and erase another woman’s life.
As ugly as this testimony is, Collins is right. Beating him up now is pointless. Let his testimony stand for getting to the real facts.
*Peterson was allowed to sit alongside Stacy during questioning of her, a “professional courtesy”*
Professional courtesy????
WTF???
I do like the way this is shaping up.
I think it is devastating what Kathleen went through, and even with all the perks of being married to Drew, I don’t imagine Stacy’s life was all that much different. JMO
It does seem as if Drew views women as being pretty much interchangable and that his treatment of them is remarkably consistent. Control, manipulate, bully, stalk, make disappear…
Bucket, I interpreted professional courtesy as an intimidation factor. I hope they have better law enforcement manuals now. JMO
Let’s get to the State’s Attorney (at the time) now, and see why Kathleen’s cries were unanswered, and why they didn’t think Drew Peterson was guilty of anything more than being an ex-husband of a dead woman.
That makes me suspicious. Can’t wait to hear from the technician under oath.
Welcome! I’m sorry we missed your post yesterday.
According to Wall, he says the “prosectuors” are trying to discredit the lead investigator. If that’s true, then they’re showing his incompetency, to bolster their case of trying to prove that this death scene was anything but an accident, no?
How will the defense come back to that contention? Collins admits he screwed up, so is the defense going to say, “no, you did a good job, atta boy?”
I think, Facs, Collins did not come voluntary. He was subpoenaed by the State and he had to come. The State must discredit this investigation. It is logical to me.
Sorry – I read defense for prosecution. Yes, I see what it means now! (Deleted my comment)
I assume all witnesses for these hearings have been subpoenaed. 😉
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=353088
“I’m not going to beat myself up right now, you can second-guess anything,” Patrick Collins testified today.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That kind of says it all.
With a thorough investigation there is no room for second guessing, because all of that has been taken into consideration already.
It appears Drew was all over the investigation, got into peoples ears with his “nice-cop/good husband” act and pushed things into the direction he wanted it to go.
“I’m not going to beat myself up right now” Patrick Collins testified to-day.
An investigation got screwed up badly – one woman dead, one to go, but hey let’s not beat ourselves up over it.
***
In my head, Rescue, I know you are right. But there’s a hot, bad-feeling knot in my stomach and my heart when I read the words “I’m not going to beat myself up right now.”
I appreciate that you and Facs both give an occasional reminder/appeal to my better self. 😉 This is about something more and bigger than P. Collins. A multiple-murderer is finally being called to account. (What an exhale there will be upon his conviction.)
Coffee – sweet, Coffee! 🙂
Considering the ongoing carnage the previous investigation has caused, the remark by Patrick Collins was tactless at best !!
2 women are dead, 4 children are motherless out of which 2 children are motherless twice in 4 years.
If that’s not enough to beat yourself up over what is ???
JAH – Like I said above, I think Rescue’s right that what the world needs from Collins right now is the most full and hoest testimony he can deliver.
However, I can’t personally be so generous to him yet. My honest thought is that if he doesn’t want to beat himself up over it, I might easily be talked into taking on the job.
But, for now, what I really want is for the man to talk.
Rescue – My ‘better self’, which is trying to listen, is being dorwned out by my ‘Harpie Self’ who wants to crack some heads. 😉
… or even ‘drowned out’
I think, since Sgt. Collins’ remark is so stark, at best, we should just move on and discontinue repeating it.
For the sake of calm.
The very first week after Stacy disappeared, Drew took that three-day motorcycle trip to “clear his head”, and when he came back he wore that bandana over his face. I think it’s very possible that Drew stashed Stacy’s body somewhere and during those three days moved it somewhere far from Bolingbrook. After he came back from the three-day trip, he was confident and extremely arrogant………as if he knew he had covered his tracks.
Thanks Cyrhla!
Any time they mention Sharon I recall her describing Stacy’s kitchen perfectly clean the day after she was murdered. I mean when Drew asked Sharon to come to share the news that Stacy had left for another man.
You’re welcome 😉
It will be interesting to hear what Sharon has to say. I’ve wondered if Sharon is the neighbor who witnessed Drew and “another man” loading a container into the Denali???
Drew has to listen to Sharon now. He can’t shout rude, obnoxious, stupid things over her truth the way he’s used to doing.
Must be such a relief for her not to have that horrible obnoxious man right next door to her anymore (!!)
I’m sure it’s a relief not to have that man next door! I wonder what’s happened with the house? Is it empty or just closed up? Does anyone come to maintain it? Or is it looking derelict?
WGN said most of the testimony today was from Collins. Clip of him saying “hindsight is 20/20”.
Sharon testified that Drew acted erratically the day after Stacy disappeared.
Clip of Abood acting cocky and saying when the case goes to trial that the there will be a two-word verdict delivered in the end.
Did he mean: VERY GUILTY?
LOL!
I was thinking, “INCREDIBLY GUILTY!” myself. 🙂
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/01/22/general-us-drew-peterson_7296865.html?boxes=Homepagebusinessnews
Was it thorough and complete, or shoddy?
Are they sure they are on the same “team”?
For Joel
thorough
–adjective
1. executed without negligence or omissions: a thorough search.
complete; perfect;extremely attentive to accuracy and detail; painstaking
I guess that’s what I was trying to get at earlier today. If the defense goes after Collins…what does that mean? That Kathleen’s death scene should have been treated as a crime scene? Just not sure how attacking Collins is going to end up making Drew look innocent.
We’ve got Joel speaking out of both sides of his mouth. It’s like he’s so simple that he feels he has to go on the attack on the cross-examination even when attacking the State’s witness doesn’t help…
As Jowl’s lawyering skills are thoroughly shoddy, I do understand how he could become confused.
Oh, it’s so obvious that the defense is going to hang their defense on the fact that even if KS was murdered, the investigation was so flawed, it’d be impossible to prove who murdered her. That’s one thing Peterson would have going for him–the fact that there’s no credible evidence in that regard. That’s scary.
But, the prosecution might have some fine-tuned details that Stacy relayed before she went missing, so, maybe that will be his undoing after all.
I think they realize they can’t support Collins’ investigation if even he’s saying it wasn’t good, because that doesn’t end up helping Drew look any better either. But, if they go with “everything was just so totally screwed up at the site,” perhaps they have a chance for reasonable doubt on any evidence?…
Officer: I gave favors to Peterson during probe
Testimony reveals details, missteps in investigation of ex-cop’s wife’s death
updated 12 minutes ago
JOLIET, Ill. – The lead investigator in the death of Drew Peterson’s third wife said he never collected any forensics evidence from the home where her body was found in a dry bathtub, telling a pretrial hearing Friday he never considered the possibility she was murdered.
Retired Illinois State Police Sgt. Patrick Collins, testifying at a hearing to determine what, if any, “hearsay” evidence prosecutors can use during Peterson’s murder trial, also said he granted Peterson favors during the investigation because he was a fellow police officer.
Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police officer, has pleaded not guilty in Kathleen Savio’s 2004 death. Officials exhumed her body and ruled her death a homicide only after Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared in 2007. He hasn’t been charged in her disappearance, but authorities say he’s the only suspect.
Collins said he even allowed Peterson to sit in on questioning of Stacy Peterson as investigators inquired about Drew Peterson’s whereabouts the day Savio died — something Collins acknowledged was unusual. He said Drew Peterson even spoke up to answer one question to his then-wife about what he and Stacy had eaten for breakfast that day.
Among the potential evidence crime technicians failed to collect from Savio’s home was a glass of orange juice left on a counter and the clothes she had been wearing that day, Collins testified. He also never interviewed members of Savio’s family.
One of the things that led him to believe Savio’s death was accidental was that he found no defensive wounds on her body.
But when someone else at the scene suggested Savio may have received a gash on her head by accidentally hitting the back if the tub, Collins said he never tried to verify that. Collins also didn’t attempt to account for why her body was slumped forward when investigators arrived; he said he didn’t ask if anyone had touched or moved her body.
Collins also said it never occurred to him that the scene in the bathroom might have been staged. After Stacy Peterson’s disappearance, authorities said they did believe Savio’s death was a homicide staged to look like an accident.
Collins stopped short of admitting he was ever wrong to believe Savio’s death could only be accidental, though he conceded his investigation could have been more thorough.
“If I had to do certain things over, yes, I would,” he said.
Defensive on the stand
Both prosecutors and the defense hit Collins with tough questions, with prosecutors trying to show he could have gathered evidence pointing to Peterson’s involvement in Savio’s death. For their part, the defense appeared to want to demonstrate that the investigation was so shoddy that it would be impossible to discover the identity of any killer now.
On a few occasions, an otherwise calm Collins appeared defensive on the stand, saying at one point in response to questions about the initial Savio investigation, “I’m not going to beat myself up right now.”
Although the hearing is intended to focus on “hearsay” evidence, Collins was the latest witness to focus on direct evidence that had nothing to do with “hearsay.” Prosecutors haven’t explained why they have called such witnesses.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35021365/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/
January 22, 2010 at 6:03 pm | #89
Quote
Oh, it’s so obvious that the defense is going to hang their defense on the fact that even if KS was murdered, the investigation was so flawed, it’d be impossible to prove who murdered her. That’s one thing Peterson would have going for him–the fact that there’s no credible evidence in that regard. That’s scary.
But, the prosecution might have some fine-tuned details that Stacy relayed before she went missing, so, maybe that will be his undoing after all.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I bet the farm Drew interfered/meddled in the investigation and there’s evidence of that.
Every time I see Abood talking on tv, I can not see the guy as a serious, effective, successful attorney. Now with this latest comment, I see him as…
http://www.tvacres.com/admascots_mr_six.htm
* I wish it was in video form …
I’ve been wondering about a few of these witnesses too, that are giving testimony that is not hearsay. When will it all come together?????
joehosey To read about Sharon Bychowski’s testimony today,
read the account she gave in Fatal Vows. It is nearly identical.
6 minutes ago from txt
Well at least they took photos of the death scene, so hallelujah something was actually done (!!)
Collins’ statement that he would have done things differently is OK, but that doesn’t excuse the ME or the GJ that came afterward, does it?
You know, the fact that Drew’s even in that courtroom is a miracle, when you think of all that had to be overcome.
***
And Molly Mcgee, you’re absolutely spot-on with the timeline. Where, oh where? Wish there were a way to have him accidentally inject himself w/some sodium pentothal. In front of witnesses. With a digital video camera.
Retired Illinois State Police Sgt. Patrick Collins, testifying at a hearing to determine what, if any, “hearsay” evidence prosecutors can use during Peterson’s murder trial, also said he granted Peterson favors during the investigation because he was a fellow police officer.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There you are – Patrick Collins granted Peterson favors during the investigation because he was a fellow police officer (!!)
A past commentary (July, 2008) about the Lenny & Paula tapes
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25821027/ns/msnbc_tv-msnbc_tv_commentary/
*********************
How the Peterson ‘tapes’ could break the case
Ex-cop’s friends say they wore wires and recorded incriminating evidence
COMMENTARY
By Clint Van Zandt
msnbc.com
updated 1:24 p.m. CT, Thurs., July 24, 2008
Excerpts
Two word verdict on the defense: You Losers
n seven months of taped recordings, Wawczack and Stark say Peterson referred to investigators who initially found Savio’s death to be an accident as “idiots,” adding that had he immediately cremated her body, he wouldn’t have the problems he does now.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Was Drew considering Sgt. Collins to be one of the “idiots”, since he granted him favors during the investigation ?
If that’s the stand they want to take then Joel needs to stop saying things like, “They did a very thorough and complete investigation.” He said that today.
Drew’s pals wore wire
July 23, 2008
BY JOE HOSEY Sun-Times News Group
Excerpts
Now, please play the tapes!!!!!!
LOL, LOL !!
The lying skunk was very sly.
Going into that house with the neighbors and all was the perfect cover-up for any DNA or evidence he could have possibly left behind. Very clever.
But, getting to the defense, this morning Joel Brodsky (on the video at the top) says there was no evidence to gather because the investigation was thorough and it was an accident.
This afternoon, am I getting this right? They’ve flipped and said the investigation was shoddy?
OMG, again, make up my mind for me. I can’t keep this all straight anymore with this Scheme Team.
Peterson even said whatever he uttered in the presence of Stark and Wawczak would help clear him.
“I’m almost glad,” he said. “Good.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yeah and all the “idiots” that helped him with favors must have been happy to discover Drew breezed past “collect” for his million dollar bounty !
That’s kinda what I was getting at, Facs. Same as the entire time we’ve known Blabsky; there isn’t really a plan. Earlier in the day the investigation was ‘thorough,’ but later they switched to ‘so shoddy there’s no evidence.’ I’m thinking it’s another typical day for the Drew Crew: full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
The lying skunk was very sly.
Going into that house with the neighbors and all was the perfect cover-up for any DNA or evidence he could have possibly left behind. Very clever.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes and the fact that was never even an issue (his self assigned well being check with friends/neighbors going into the house) is astounding in itself (!!)
I suppose he (Drew) proved one point – that he can pretty much con an entire Police Force, but as soon as he tried to con young Cassandra it was all over for him (!!)
Start on page 124…
Cop admits missteps in Peterson’s third wife’s death
By Christy Gutowski | Daily Herald Staff
n the early days of the disappearance of Drew Peterson’s fourth wife, neighbor Sharon Bychowski said he appeared on her Bolingbrook doorstep acting “kind of crazy,” insisting she follow him back home.
A barefoot Bychowski complied.
“I said, ‘Oh my God, Drew! Is there something wrong with Stacy?'” she testified Friday in a unique pretrial hearing to determine if certain hearsay statements are reliable enough for a jury to hear at trial. “He said, very dramatically, ‘Well, she left me.'”
Bychowski told Will County Circuit Judge Stephen White she was immediately suspicious since she said Stacy, with whom she was close friends, would never leave her kids.
“She would leave him, but not without her kids,” said Bychowski, who tearfully described Stacy as “the world’s best mother.”
Stacy Peterson, 23, hasn’t been seen since October 2007. Her disappearance sparked a renewed investigation into the mysterious drowning death of her husband’s third wife, Kathleen Savio, 40, found dead in her dry bathtub March 1, 2004, while the former couple battled over finances and custody of their two sons.
Authorities initially ruled Savio died in an accident when she slipped in her tub but, after her body was exhumed for a second autopsy, they deemed her death a homicide.
Drew Peterson, 56, is not charged in Stacy’s disappearance, but the former Bolingbrook police sergeant was arrested May 7, 2009, in the Savio investigation.
In lengthy testimony Friday, retired Illinois State Police Sgt. Patrick Collins conceded missteps were made in the Savio investigation, including a lack of forensic testing of items inside the Bolingbrook home.
“If I had to do certain things over, yes, I would,” said Collins, the lead investigator. “I’m not going to beat myself up right now. You can second-guess anything you do in life.”
Collins said it was his first murder investigation, and he relied heavily on the opinion of the lead crime scene technician would considered Savio’s death an accident.
There was no forced entry to the home, no obvious defensive injuries on her body and nothing appeared missing or out of order. Collins admitted he broke from normal police procedure in allowing Drew Peterson, a fellow police officer, to sit in on the interview with Stacy as she provided his alibi. Collins said Drew Peterson was never a suspect.
He said Stacy Peterson was very nervous and visibly shaking.
“Drew was sitting next to her, very close,” Collins said, “guarding her. He was looking at her mouth, listening to the words she was repeating to us.”
Police did not question Peterson’s neighbors or double check his receipts and phone records to verify his whereabouts. They also didn’t interview Savio’s family, sons, or her attorney in the often volatile divorce.
Collins said it never occurred to him that the scene in the bathroom where Savio’s body was found might be staged – as authorities now allege.
So far, 13 witnesses testified in the hearsay hearing. In earlier dramatic testimony, Drew Peterson’s stepbrother described how he believed he might have helped him dispose of Stacy’s body in a large blue barrel taken out of the couple’s home. The stepbrother, Thomas Morphey, said Peterson suggested but never directly admitted killing Stacy and the two never talked about what was in the barrel.
Bychowski said Drew Peterson told her he last spoke with Stacy that Sunday, Oct. 28, 2007, when she returned his call to say she had left him for another man and took $25,000, some new clothes, as well as the titles to their house and a car.
“If she was going to leave, I would have known,” Bychowski said.
The Will County hearing resumes Monday, with the defense’s cross examination of Bychowski. Judge White said he won’t rule until the hearing’s conclusion, likely another two weeks.
http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=353261
Savio murder probe superficial
January 22, 2010
By JOE HOSEY jhosey@scn1.com
JOLIET — The Bolingbrook police called in state agents when the estranged wife of one of their own sergeants turned up dead in the midst of a contentious divorce.
These state police detectives didn’t speak to the dead woman’s relatives.
They did not interview any of the officers who worked with her husband, Sgt. Drew Peterson.<
They took him at his word when he told them he stood to gain "basically nothing at all" financially from the death of his wife, Kathleen Savio.
They did not subpoena Peterson's cell phone records or review the court file for his divorce case.
They did not question either of the couple's two teenage sons.
They spoke to none of Savio's Joliet Junior College classmates.
They allowed Peterson to be interviewed at his own police station instead of the local state police headquarters.
They let him stick around for the interview with his new wife, Stacy Peterson, and jump in to answer her questions while she was establishing his alibi.
And they did not even consider Peterson a likely candidate as his wife's killer.
"We did not interview him as a suspect," said retired state police Sgt. Patrick Collins, whose testimony Tuesday revealed how little his agency investigated Savio's death.
Hearsay hearing
Collins, who headed up the investigation of Savio's March 2004 drowning, was the 13th of 60 witnesses to be called in the hearing to determine what hearsay evidence will be allowed at Peterson's murder trial.
Peterson has been accused of killing Savio, who was his third wife. The state police had considered Savio's death accidental for more than three and a half years and only altered their position when Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, vanished in October 2007.
Stacy Peterson remains missing. State police think she may have been slain and have identified Drew Peterson as the only suspect in their "potential homicide" investigation, but have yet to make an arrest for her disappearance.
Prosecutors now are trying to prove Drew Peterson killed Stacy to keep her from testifying against him. Proving that would allow some hearsay comments to be used in court during the Savio murder trial.
First homicide case
Collins testified that he had never worked a homicide case before he was called in to probe Savio's death. He described himself as "naive" and said he relied heavily on the guidance of state police crime scene technician Robert Deel, who advised him that it appeared Savio slipped in the tub and hit her head.
Collins also said Peterson asked him to show "some professional courtesy," and allow him to be present for the interview of Stacy, who had an 8-month-old son and was pregnant again.
"He said she was really shaken, very upset, that she had just had a baby, she was very young, and he asked to be present for the interview," Collins said.
During the interview, which was conducted in the basement of Peterson's house, Stacy, who was 20 at the time, "was emotional," Collins said, and "broke down and started crying."
Collins admitted he would handle things differently if given another crack at the case.
"I would have reached out to more people, interviewed more people in regards to this investigation," he said, adding, "I'm not going to beat myself up right now."
Strange behavior
Stacy Peterson's close friend and next-door neighbor, Sharon Bychowski, followed Collins to the witness stand. Bychowski recounted Peterson's curious behavior in the days following his wife's disappearance.
Bychowski's testimony will continue Monday.
http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/peterson/2006516,4_JO22_Savio-murder-probe-superficial.article
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-talk-peterson-trial-odeh-0121-20100120,0,5642856.story
Not a very flattering pic of Reem they’ve got accompanying this story and the comments. Ouch! All I can say is that they were asking for it with such a ridiculous press release.
And these are the thoughtful ones…
Susan Doman said her family were told by the police the investigation was in progress. They wanted to speak to the investigators and they did not even want to talk to them. They did not return they phone calls. Then, all of sudden, they learnt it was over.Why? How does it go with Collins’ testimony? Why didn’t they simply tell the family Drew was not a suspect in the case or that there was no evidence pointing at him? I cannot understand.
No, I agree, Cyrhla. I think there’s more to it than “inefficiency”, and what we’ve heard from Collins so far doesn’t change that for me… even if it is “only” Professional Courtesy to let someone who should be a suspect have his story accepted at face value. If the senior crime scene tech said it looked OK, why did they bag her hands? It’s all smelly, smelly, smelly.
Additionally, how does it go with the coroner’s inquest? They said they run a thorough investigation. They said they talked to people. They said they had asked for telephone records… and so on. They were lying! They also had “their” person on the panel there to convice the jury Drew was innocent.
Yes, it is smelly, bucket. And I cannot stand it.
Look, Collins got retired when Stacy went missing…
It will be interesting to see how this all comes together. I am just not grasping what Sharon’s (and other’s)testimony has to do with Hearsay and Kathleen’s murder.
Reem Odeh should win court cases, as a lawyer, based on her God-given abilities, education and determination. Not her “stunning”, model-like looks that her press release claims she has. I certainly never judged her abilities on whether she was attractive or not. I judge the Scheme Team’s abilities, as a whole, on the outrageous, unorthodox method they have chosen to defend the likes of Drew Peterson.
Once again, this Scheme Team has proven their inability to determine what the majority of the public’s reaction is going to be to one of their silly, goofy press releases. They have no grasp of what the public is seeing, which, apparently, is not the same vision they have. They are misjudging the public’s view of them and their client. Since Brodsky, the main-man, and Peterson have been the prominent characters in the media, they get the blame. This looks as though they threw Reem Odeh a bone in which to keep her appeased. Otherwise, if things were going smoothly, we wouldn’t be reading this press release garbage. The Scheme Team needs to hire someone who really, really, does have a grasp of what the public’s view currently is, and work on changing that!
Of course, this press release was outrageous. If this kind of press release was put out for a male member of their team who was drop-dead gorgeous, would Reem Odeh have stood up and noticed, wondering what a male partner’s abilities have to do with his looks?
Reem Odeh should get out of this circus while she can. Maybe she is a good, capable lawyer, but she’s sure not going to shine being in the shadow of this train wreck.
BTW, I think the remarks about her “looks,” one way or the other, are uncalled for and cruel. Unfortunately, this is another example of why this ignorant Scheme Team should STFU and do what they need to do.
I really really want this defense to use their brains (or borrow some) and at least appear to be competent. Is there an appeals court in the country that at this point you think would not find cause for inefficient counsel?
Something funny I saw on a news bite last night. A reporter asked Andrew Abood why it is the State is trying to discredit the witness, Sgt. Collins.
He paused for a bit. His answer was “because they have to.”
Sorry, Andy, but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to decide, after reading all of the information that came out yesterday, that Sgt. Collins is not the brightest bulb on the Christmas tree in the way he ran the initial investigation. So, yes, “they have to.” It needs to come out why there was a meltdown in how Kathleen’s death was classified as an accident. The State doesn’t see it the way you guys do. They’re showing the reason. You guys just yap and think what you say is taken as the “word.” You guys need help.
Not a vast conspiracy, IMO, but a bunch of incompetent boobs is more like it. And, it appears that the murder suspect knew who and what he was dealing with. What did he call them? “Idiots.”
In order for the hearsay to be admitted, doesn’t the prosecution have to build a case showing the judge that Drew killed the two potential witnesses (Stacy and Kathleen) thereby making them unavailable to testify?
I think this is why we are seeing so much at this hearing that isn’t technically hearsay.
I think Rick Mims’s testimony will also be very intersting. He was following Kathleen on Drew’s behalf. He knew Drew tapped her phone. He also spent three days with Drew’s children when Drew left the house to “vent” after Stacy went missing (and many suspicious situations happened then).
I think the tapes will prove to be important. Matching up things he said, without really knowing he was being taped, with events/evidence the State can connect, should be helpful.
Then, if I recall, there is another interesting character who is not aligned with Drew anymore. His partner, Alex Morelli. He said Drew turned his world upside down and he wants nothing to do with him. He’s also one of the witnesses to his handwritten will with Kathleen.
I hope we hear from him soon too.
IDK, Cheryljones – I have actually seen this Scheme Team referred to as “THE BEST.” Really, I am not making that up.
So, I guess “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” If they think they’re doing a slam-dunk job, well, then, so must he.
Of course, from seeing it with my own eyes, even the lousiest acting clients blame their attorney when they lose their case. They expect and demand success, at all costs. I’ve seen clients blame their attorney, even though they did the opposite of what their attorney told them not to do, and they still went ape when they lost and blamed it on them.
By Steve Schmadeke and Erika Slife, Tribune reporters
January 24, 2010
Drew Peterson’s oldest son testified under oath that he did not love his father, and a neighbor told of a secret meeting in an Oak Brook hotel with disgraced-LA-cop-turned-media-personality Mark Fuhrman.
A retired state police investigator admitted leading a flawed investigation into the drowning of Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio. Peterson’s stepbrother told of trying to kill himself by overdosing on Xanax shortly after helping move a blue container he thought held the body of Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.
It was an eventful first week in a unique pretrial hearing on whether certain hearsay evidence can be admitted at trial in the murder case against former Bolingbrook police Sgt. Peterson, charged in the 2004 drowning of Savio.
Will County Judge Stephen White will rule at the end of what is expected to be a monthlong hearing on whether a preponderance of evidence shows Peterson, who prosecutors said had worked as an evidence technician, killed Savio and caused Stacy Peterson’s disappearance. If White finds the prosecution’s case meets that threshold, under a new state law, certain hearsay statements could be heard by a jury.
The coming week in the Joliet courtroom will begin as last week ended, with testimony from Sharon Bychowski, a close friend of Stacy Peterson’s who pleaded for help after her next-door-neighbor disappeared. She is expected to be questioned by George Lenard, one of Peterson’s attorneys, on Monday morning.
Bychowski repeated her version of events the weekend Stacy Peterson disappeared, but with a few new wrinkles. Though said she instantly doubted Drew Peterson’s story that his wife had left him for another man, Bychowski testified she allowed Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren to record an interview with Peterson’s then-friend Rick Mims in her home shortly after Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.
After allowing Van Susteren to change in her bedroom, Bychowski said, she told the TV personality that Stacy Peterson was a wonderful mother who would never have left her children and that Mims’ description of the woman as unstable was a lie.
Afterward, one of Van Susteren’s producers called Bychowski and told her Fuhrman was willing to advise her about keeping Stacy Peterson’s name in the press. Bychowski said she and her husband met with him for about an hour at a Marriott hotel in Oak Brook shortly afterward.
Bychowski helped raise $18,000 to pay for airplane fuel, a boat and other expenses related to the search for Stacy Peterson, she testified.
So far, 13 of the potential 60 people on the prosecution’s witness list have testified.
Others expected to take the witness stand include Stacy Peterson’s sister Cassandra Cales, who has said her sister feared that her husband would kill her, and pastor the Rev. Neil Schori, who has said that Stacy Peterson confided in him that Drew Peterson killed Savio.
sschmadeke@tribune.com
eslife@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chicago/ct-met-0124-drew-peterson-hearing-bd–20100122,0,1174787.story
I keep my fingers crossed for Sharon. That must be a horrible weekend for her to wait for Monday. If you read it, Sharon, good luck on Monday! 🙂
THE WASHINGTON POST
Experts: Police botched 1st Peterson investigation
By MICHAEL TARM and DON BABWIN
The Associated Press
Saturday, January 23, 2010; 1:57 PM
JOLIET, Ill. — From nearly the moment the lead investigator stepped into the suburban Chicago area home where former policeman Drew Peterson’s third wife was found dead in a dry bathtub, he treated her death as a tragic accident.
Illinois State Police Sgt. Patrick Collins collected no forensics evidence from the scene – not fingerprints, unfinished drinks or clothes. Most disturbingly, say experts, Collins let Peterson sit in on what may have been a vital interview.
Six years later, as prosecutors and defense attorneys prepare for Peterson’s trial on charges of murdering Kathleen Savio, one thing has become clear: Police blew the initial investigation, undermining prosecutors’ ability to prove their case.
“The incompetency that comes out is somewhat unbelievable,” said Richard Brzeczek, a former Chicago police superintendent who now works in private criminal defense. “It seems that, pretty fundamentally, what should have been done was not done.”
Among the litany of mistakes: Collins said he never asked anyone whether Savio’s body had been touched or moved, he never tried to account for her body being bent forward, and he never interviewed her relatives. And when he left the house, he didn’t seal it, meaning someone could walk in and take, move or even clean something.
“They could have had the evidence with a proper investigation,” Brzeczek said. “A prosecution’s extremely more difficult now.”
The now-retired Collins testified Thursday and Friday at a pretrial hearing meant to determine what, if any, “hearsay” evidence prosecutors can use during Peterson’s murder trial.
Both prosecutors and defense attorneys hit Collins with tough questions, with prosecutors trying to show he could have gathered evidence pointing to Peterson’s involvement in Savio’s death. The defense, which has long claimed Savio’s death was an accident, argued that even if someone had killed her, the investigation was so shoddy it would be impossible to determine who that was.
Peterson has pleaded not guilty in Savio’s 2004 death. Officials exhumed her body and ruled her death a homicide only after Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared in 2007. He hasn’t been charged in her disappearance, but authorities say he’s the only suspect.
Brzeczek says one of the glaring examples of Collins’ poor judgment was permitting Peterson to attend an interview of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, in which she was asked about her husband’s whereabouts the day Savio died. Peterson and Savio had divorced and Peterson married Stacy Peterson before Savio died.
Collins testified that Peterson not only sat in on the interview, he answered a question put to his wife about what they ate for breakfast that day.
“Collins should have said, ‘I’m sorry there are serious considerations here, we have a death investigation, and at this point there will be no profession courtesies,'” Brzeczek said. “You just cannot do those kind of things.”
The spokesman for the Illinois State Police office where Collins worked didn’t immediately return a message for comment Saturday. Attempts to reach Collins at listed phone numbers weren’t successful.
Savio’s death was the first homicide investigation for Collins, a more than 20-year police veteran who previously had taken part mostly in narcotics and gaming industry crimes. But Chicago attorney Michael Helfand said Collins’ apparent blunders don’t necessarily point to incompetence. They may have more to do with an entrenched police culture in which cops, almost by reflex, trust and protect each other.
“Within the profession, it takes a lot for a cop to go after another cop,” Helfand said. “I don’t think it’s corruption. I don’t think they would purposely cover a murder up. They just think, ‘That’s just the police way (to watch out for each other).'”
If one of Peterson’s other wives had under died mysterious circumstances before Savio, it’s likely Collins and other officers would have taken the possibility of murder more seriously, Helfand said. As it was, investigators likely assumed Peterson was telling the truth.
“It wouldn’t surprise me if, what happen was – with Drew’s reputation as a smooth talker – he says to investigators, ‘Gosh, I’m all broken up about this, and if you find out there’s foul play, please let me know. But here’s what I think happened,'” Helfand said.
Collins testified it wasn’t so much that Peterson was a police officer that led him to believe the death was an accident, but the opinion of a far more experienced crime scene technician, who told Collins shortly after he arrived that Savio’s death appeared accidental.
“I relied pretty much on his judgment and his opinion,” Collins testified.
But good homicide detectives, Brzeczek said, always gather everything that could conceivably be evidence if a death turns out to be a homicide. When a cause of death isn’t obvious, as in Savio’s case, that’s all the more reason to do a thorough examination, he said.
Fingerprints are nearly always a must, even if investigators expect to find a husband or ex-husband’s prints because he once lived in the home or came by frequently.
“Maybe they say Peterson’s would be there because he came there a lot,” Brzeczek said. “But why not dust for prints to see if anyone else’s were there?”
Collin’s conceded in court Friday he didn’t do all he could have. Under questioning from one of Peterson’s attorneys, he acknowledged he didn’t recover or even examine bedding, a glass of orange juice left on the kitchen counter and other items that might have revealed clues.
“Looking back now, everything could be important,” Collins conceded.
Ironically, Peterson may have been the one person in the house who knew that. Peterson’s career as a police officer included time as an evidence technician, according to prosecutors. But Collins, who didn’t interview any of Peterson’s fellow officers, did not know that.
Collins testified he didn’t try to verify someone else’s suggestion that Savio got a gash on her head when she accidentally hit the back of the tub. He also said it never occurred to him the scene in the bathroom might have been staged.
After Stacy Peterson disappeared, authorities said they believed Savio’s death was a homicide staged to look like an accident.
Collin said one thing that led him to believe the death was accidental was that he found no defense wounds on Savio’s body.
He stopped short of admitting he was wrong to believe Savio’s death was accidental but conceded his investigation could have been more thorough.
“If I had to do certain things over, yes,” he said, “I would.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/23/AR2010012301379.html
I think this is exactly what the prosecution is doing. They’re making the case that both Kathleen and Stacy were killed by Drew, and are therefore unable to testify. But what they said to others – the hearsay evidence – is the crucial evidence to support the direct evidence.
So far all the testimony from the witnesses that have testified has been direct testimony, and thus the prosecution is laying the ground work with facts and direct testimony, before introducing the hearsay evidence.
I think the prosecution’s strategy is brilliant! By the end of this hearing, the hearsay evidence will be seen as an important component to the case in whole. I think the judge will be able to see why a good portion of the hearsay evidence should be allowed.
I have a question………..have any of the articles mentioned Drew’s demeanor during the hearing? I think it would be very interesting to know what impact the testimony so far is having on him. There was one statement on the first day of the hearing that Drew’s face was red (with anger?), and I think that was when TM was testifying. But what was Drew’s reaction to Eric’s testimony or Sharon’s???
And when he left the house, he didn’t seal it, meaning someone could walk in and take, move or even clean something.
Collins, a more than 20-year police veteran who previously had taken part mostly in narcotics and gaming industry crimes….
Peterson’s career as a police officer included time as an evidence technician, according to prosecutors.
========
New, important information for me.
I wonder if prosecutors asked Collins if he had known Drew before.
BTW, thanks for the news, Rescue 🙂
New PostUp Now
https://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2010/01/23/experts-say-kathleen-savio-investigation-botched/