Medical examiner says Peterson’s defense stiffed him


Brodsky made the examiner sign a confidentiality agreement, but stuck Abood with the bill.

ME: Peterson’s attorney owes me money
April 30, 2010
By JOE HOSEY jhosey@stmedianetwork.com

JOLIET – A medical examiner is accusing Drew Peterson defense attorney Joel Brodsky of shafting him on his fee.

Dr. Brian L. Peterson, the medical examiner for Milwaukee County, Wis., said Brodsky is holding out on paying him for reviewing the autopsy of Drew Peterson’s slain third wife.

“For the first time in my forensic pathology career, now over 21 years, I have been stiffed for the fee ‹ a whole $4,000, by the way,” Dr. Peterson wrote in an e-mail.

Dr. Peterson said he was approached by the “Brodsky team” to review the death of Drew Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio. Drew Peterson is charged with murdering Savio in March 2004 and making her death appear to be an accidental bathtub drowning.

An autopsy that determined Savio did drown was conducted soon after the death. A coroner’s jury later ruled Savio was the victim of an accident.

Three and a half years later, in the wake of the vanishing of Drew Peterson’s next wife, Stacy Peterson, Savio’s body was exhumed and two more autopsies were performed. One was conducted at the behest of State’s Attorney James Glasgow and the other after her family asked celebrity medical examiner Michael Baden to step in. Both of these autopsies determined Savio was the victim of a homicide.

Confidentiality

During a pivotal hearing held earlier this year to determine what hearsay evidence will be allowed at Peterson’s murder trial, defense attorneys presented testimony from a forensic pathologist of their own, Jeffrey Jentzen of Michigan, who insisted Savio may have accidentally died in her bathtub.

Dr. Peterson said Jentzen recommended him to Peterson’s attorneys.

“They wanted an independent review of the Savio case,” Dr. Peterson wrote in an e-mail. “Joel (Brodsky) even, for the first time in my career, asked that I sign a confidentiality agreement regarding my work. I did. And being an honorable guy, I will not tell you what my opinions were – note, however, that I was not called to testify recently.”

Dr. Peterson went on to elaborate on his findings, saying, “What I can tell you, which doesn’t violate confidentiality, is I disagree with Jeff (Jentzen).”

Dr. Peterson said the attorneys told him not to write a report and to simply submit his bill. He said he followed these instructions in December but is still waiting to get paid.

Brodsky blamed the lack of payment on his former colleague, attorney Andrew Abood of East Lansing, Mich., who left Drew’s crew earlier this month.

“Abood went to consult with Dr. Peterson all by himself, without first consulting me or the client,” said Brodsky, who answered questions via e-mail and provided an invoice billing Abood for the service.

“The bill is Mr. Abood’s responsibility, not mine, and that is why he is paying it,” Brodsky said.

Abood said he is picking up Dr. Peterson’s tab, but only so the consultant does not lose out on his fee.

“Andrew seems to be a good guy and has now agreed to pay me independently, out of his own funds,” Dr. Peterson said.

Brodsky did say that, as Drew Peterson’s lead attorney, he must “manage the budget and logistics of a large and complex case.”

Read the story at Suburban Chicago News

Advertisements

81 thoughts on “Medical examiner says Peterson’s defense stiffed him

  1. “They wanted an independent review of the Savio case,” Dr. Peterson wrote in an e-mail. “Joel (Brodsky) even, for the first time in my career, asked that I sign a confidentiality agreement regarding my work. I did. And being an honorable guy, I will not tell you what my opinions were – note, however, that I was not called to testify recently.”

    Dr. Peterson went on to elaborate on his findings, saying, “What I can tell you, which doesn’t violate confidentiality, is I disagree with Jeff (Jentzen).”

    Joel seems to use these confidentiality agreements as a matter of course, to try to control what information is made public about his client.

    Imagine making a medical examiner sign one!

    And as Rescue pointed out in her comment, it’s fascinating that the bills only seem to be paid for opinions that Joel wants. Nice of Abood to man up and pay this doctor.

  2. I know the defense has to hire people to go over evidence. It’s a given. And I know that they may even have an expert disagree with what they want the findings to be. But, for this to come out the way it has, turning into a pissing contest, makes me only hope that this is over soon. Very soon.

    Dr. Jentzen did an unbelievable thing, he did. Testify to findings that are totally off-the-wall. He’s the only man standing in the tub of lies.

  3. Brodsky blamed the lack of payment on his former colleague, attorney Andrew Abood of East Lansing, Mich., who left Drew’s crew earlier this month.

    “Abood went to consult with Dr. Peterson all by himself, without first consulting me or the client,” said Brodsky, who answered questions via e-mail and provided an invoice billing Abood for the service.

    “The bill is Mr. Abood’s responsibility, not mine, and that is why he is paying it,” Brodsky said.

    Isn’t that completely contradicting what Joel mentioned before about strategies and who does what in “HIS” Legal team or is Joel admitting he never had any idea what “his” lawyers were doing all this time ?

    How could Andrew Abood be engaging people, running up bills etc without knowledge of the Lead Council ????

    So much for Joel driving the bus then ……

  4. So Andrew Abood went to consult with Dr Peterson all by himself, without first consulting Joel or Drew, but Joel made Dr Peterson sign a confidentiality agreement (!!)

    How does that make sense ??

  5. justanotherhen :

    So Andrew Abood went to consult with Dr Peterson all by himself, without first consulting Joel or Drew, but Joel made Dr Peterson sign a confidentiality agreement (!!)

    How does that make sense ??

    Excellent observation. How is it that Abood went “rogue” and acted on his own to hire the services of the medical examiner, yet Brodsky had him signing legal papers?

  6. Abood Law Firm: working on filing another complaint against co counsel for making misrepresentations. Do you think that a lawyer should be able to lie to the press with immunity or should such conduct be a violation of the rules of professional responsibility?

  7. It doesn’t even matter if Abood saw him alone, with a gang of gorillas, or sitting on a monkey’s butt. He was working on Drew’s case and he was one of Drew’s attorney’s, therefore it should be charged to Drew’s ever increasing bill. Just because you don’t get the results you were hoping for you still have to for the service. Hmmmm, did Joel tell Drew that if loses this case he won’t have to pay any fees.

  8. April 30, 2010 at 8:27 pm | #7
    Quote

    Abood Law Firm: working on filing another complaint against co counsel for making misrepresentations. Do you think that a lawyer should be able to lie to the press with immunity or should such conduct be a violation of the rules of professional responsibility?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    One can only hope someone finally calls Joel to task and all the better if it’s someone from the so called former “inner sanctum” with proper legal knowledge what constitutes these violations of proper conduct !

  9. charmed4sr :

    It doesn’t even matter if Abood saw him alone, with a gang of gorillas, or sitting on a monkey’s butt. He was working on Drew’s case and he was one of Drew’s attorney’s, therefore it should be charged to Drew’s ever increasing bill. Just because you don’t get the results you were hoping for you still have to for the service. Hmmmm, did Joel tell Drew that if loses this case he won’t have to pay any fees.

    If it’s correct that their understanding was that the attys would work pro bono in exchange for the publicity generated by the case, then I guess the attys are the ones who would need to suck up the bills from expert witnesses.

  10. facs, if that is so why is the Medical Examiner claiming JOEL shafted him on the bill if the agreement was solely and exclusively with Andrew Abood ?

  11. OK – I’m trying to dust the cobwebs out of my brain. For some reason I remember there was an article or a posting somewhere that answered the question of why the defense didn’t do their own autopsy while Kathleen’s body was exhumed. I think that I recall the answer was they were going to have someone just look over the reports. Did Jenzen say he saw the actual reports or was he talking in general?? I need a refresher course!

    Now even if this guy has a confidentiality agreement with Brodsky or Abood – that doesn’t necessarily mean the prosecution couldn’t depose him. Brodsky is making a mistake saying that Drew didn’t hire the guy because that could mean there is no client-attorney privilege right?

  12. Another thought crossed my mind –

    How valid is a confidentiality agreement if you never got paid for the work pertaining to said confidentiality ?

  13. JAH – I believe that non-payment would only get you out of a confidential agreement if it is explicity stated that a payment breach cancels it out.

  14. I just don’t think confidentiality agreements necessarily mean that you can’t tetisfy about something if sworn in during a trial. I’m sure lots of the Enron guys had signed confidentiality agreements with the firm and not everyone pleads the 5th.

    I’m not sure that the prosecutors would even want to call him but if they messed upon this legal privilege (like the Anthony’s did with one of their private investigators) then he could possibly be brought out on the stand.

  15. Looks like Joel only pays if you go along with fantasies about slipping on the soap, falling forward on your chest for the soap to leave bruising yet your face stays completely intact – hmmmmmm

  16. “For the first time in my forensic pathology career, now over 21 years, I have been stiffed for the fee ‹ a whole $4,000, by the way,” Dr. Peterson wrote in an e-mail.

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

    Just goes to show dealing with Joel Brodsky is outside the realm of normality – LOL !

  17. Drew stew . . .

    . . . and a pow wow! Murder suspect Drew Peterson won’t be there, but the cadre of lawyers he calls “The Magnificent Seven” or “The Seven Samurai” met at table No. 1 at Tavern on Rush on Friday night to huddle before their final legal lap next month.

    • Background: Peterson, who has been in solitary confinement at the Joliet detention center since last May, is set for trial June 14 for the 2004 bathtub death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

    • Foreground: The latest legal team, which is headed by Joel Brodsky, consists of various attorneys who have represented mobsters and murderers and civil attorney Walter Maksym.

    • The kicker: Sneed is told the only place Peterson, who is also being investigated in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy, can go outside his cell is the medical pod section of the detention facility, which is the only co-ed area!

    • Coo corner: Sneed hears Peterson and Chrissy Raines, 25, his on-again/off-again fiancee, are not only on friendly terms once more, but she was spotted visiting him at the detention facility last week.

    http://www.suntimes.com/news/sneed/2222440,CST-NWS-SNEED02.article

  18. I’m wondering how saying that his findings don’t agree w/Jentzen’s findings is not a breach of confidentiality.
    Snipped:
    “Dr. Peterson went on to elaborate on his findings, saying, “What I can tell you, which doesn’t violate confidentiality, is I disagree with Jeff (Jentzen).”
    That would be his findings in a nutshell, wouldn’t it?
    Sounds to me like would love an invitation to testify.

  19. Hi Cheryljones.

    The fact that the doctor said he wasn’t asked to testify on behalf of Drew Peterson is a giveaway in and of itself, no? Also, I recall that Attorney Abood mentioned on Greta’s show that they had Dr. Cyril Wecht examine the autopsy results, but, as we know, he’s no where in the picture either, is he?

    As far as him calling attention to the fact that he disputes Dr. Jentzen’s findings, maybe the attorney who counseled him as to what he can and cannot say has outsmarted the one who drafted the agreement.

  20. Abood Law Firm: Under the model rules, lawyers are required to report the misdeeds of another lawyer when the other lawyers conduct amounts to fraud, deceit, misrepresentation or dishonesty.

  21. Abood Law Firm: What do you think? Do you think ALF did the right thing by agreeing to pay Dr. Peterson’s fees? Back in the day, they use to say follow the money. Today, you just need to follow the emails. I save all my emails. Wonder who might like to see those given the comments by one of the lawyers in this article.

    Abood Law Firm: The funny thing about emails is that they can document someone’s involvement in a transaction before, during, and after. Can be pretty compelling.

  22. It still goes without saying – Joel Brodsky stooped to the lowest of low when he thought it was a brainstorm to use his client for his own personal gain. If that’s not professional misconduct, I don’t know what is. If Peterson went along with it as part of the agreement to generate publicity in order for Brodsky to get paid, then I guess he got what he bargained for. Which, if you really sit back and think about it, isn’t much. His defense team fell apart mere weeks before the most important part of his legal problems. Even if Peterson is 100% innocent, the chicken wings, the bar, the non-payment of an expert’s fee, the writing of a book by an “old buddy” who used Drew for his own personal gain (Budenz), only goes to show that he’s nothing but a pawn being used by anyone who can make a buck off of his notariety. But, if that’s what he wants, that’s what he got.

  23. Sure. If Peterson chose to leverage his notoriety rather than pay his representation, then he got what he paid for. The caliber of lawyer who is willing to compromise his professional credibility.

    So Drew bartered for a lead counsel who paraded him to the media, used him to market his side ventures, and falls asleep in court.

    Come to think of it the “The Seven Samurai” were a pretty rag-tag group. If I remember correctly, they were a bunch of losers — masterless samurai whom the villagers had to resort to because they couldn’t afford to hire a better class of samurai to protect them.

    Villager: How can we find a samurai we can pay with only rice?
    Gisaku: Find hungry samurai.

  24. LOL, the more I read the news of the past couple of weeks regarding the Peterson defense, the more I can’t help but think the State is saying dance, dance, dance for me my pet…..

  25. Abood Law Firm:
    Just finished. A sad day when you have to report another lawyer for his misdeeds. This is the second one that I have filed against this lawyer. Not sure what will happen, hopefully, at a minimum, the lawyer will at least look at 8.3 and 8.4 of the model rules. As a courtesy I sent the lawyer a draft to allow him to respond first. But I did this before and no response. I think he blocks my emails. Pretty childish on his part.

  26. If I knew, I must have forgotten what happened w/the first time he filed against ‘this lawyer’. Would someone fill in the blank?

  27. Info for some, refresher for others:

    Model Rules of Professional Conduct
    Maintaining The Integrity Of The Profession

    Rule 8.3 Reporting Professional Misconduct

    (a) A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority.

    (b) A lawyer who knows that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge’s fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.

    (c) This Rule does not require disclosure of information otherwise protected by Rule 1.6 or information gained by a lawyer or judge while participating in an approved lawyers assistance program.

    Rule 8.4 Misconduct

    It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:

    (a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;

    (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects;

    (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;

    (d) engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;

    (e) state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law; or

    (f) knowingly assist a judge or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law.

    http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/mrpc_toc.html

  28. cheryljones :

    If I knew, I must have forgotten what happened w/the first time he filed against ‘this lawyer’. Would someone fill in the blank?

    Today is the first I heard of it. Thanks for the model rules!

  29. You’re so welcome, Facs! Once again, paying my very small pittance for the wonderful blog and all I learn here.

  30. Cheryl, your a great person and what you think are small things are a lot bigger.
    It appears to me that Brodsky is losing more hair lately. If that’s possible lol.

  31. Larry King Live – May 9, 2009 Airing
    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0905/09/lkl.01.html
    (This was a recap after Drew Peterson was arrested)

    KING: Drew, you’re a bright guy.

    Do you begin to think that the public might say that if it looks like a duck and it acts like a duck, it might be a duck?

    PETERSON: Right, but they’re not getting all the duck’s information. So when they get all the information, then maybe we can re-examine that.

    KING: All right, let’s straighten it out.

    The third wife.

    PETERSON: OK.

    KING: What happened?

    PETERSON: I don’t know. I don’t know. She — we got information that she drowned in the bathtub. I was working. I was a watch commander at the police department. And the previous night, I believe it was, she failed to respond at the door to allow me to bring the children home. The children were with me for the weekend. That was unusual for her, so I started calling her on the phone and I started questioning with the neighbors. And they were also alerted because it was unusual for her. I had neighbors go into the house and they found her dead in the bathtub.

    KING: Were you surprised when the body was exhumed and they changed the determination of death?

    PETERSON: Very much surprised, for sure. Because for many years, you know, my children and I’ve been believing that she died in a household accident. I would imagine that the first autopsy, the fresh one, would be the most accurate. But the powers that be are coming up with some new decisions on it and we won’t really know for sure until, you know, we have a chance to go ahead and review that decision and we…

    *********

    Dr. Brian Peterson, did “have a chance to go ahead and review that decision…” for the defense, and he does NOT agree that Kathleen’s death was an accident.

    Good job, heh, letting Peterson talk on tv, with his lawyer sitting next to him!!!

  32. Abood Law Firm: researching a defamation claim. What do you think about defamation? Do you think a party should be able to recover when another publishes a false statement that goes to the party’s business acumen?

  33. facsmiley :Some photos from the Peterson defense team dinner at Tavern on Rush:
    Photo 1Photo 2
    Pictured; Reem Odeh, Joel Brodsky, Walter Maksym, Joseph Lopez, Stephen Greenberg

    Wonder who picked up the tab? 😀

  34. Aw, shucks, the whiners will call us all hens again. At least they’ll have something to cocka-doodle-do about.

    Better to be a hen, than a blood sucking media whore and a lovelorn groupie.

  35. Or an orgasm-author/film producer/lawyer who serves up tidbits to gossip columnists because his name hasn’t been in the papers lately. 😉

  36. Hee hee, Noway. Yeah, yet another step up from Tailgaters. This place appears to be across the street from Gibsons. You can see the Gibsons name behind Atty Greenberg in Pic #1.

    Now Brodsky´s even snubbing Drew´s old Boughton Road watering hole, Tailgaters, on his client´s behalf. He states Drew Peterson will be enjoying Gibsons in Chicago instead, so he can enjoy a better class of folks.

  37. Kristine Mcpherson
    I would expect a lawyer to be honest & forthright, he(or she) should be held to a higher standard…Lying to the press is bad enough, but that could be even worse if others were involved. Being underhanded in your proffession is not acceptable.

    Looks like even Joel’s staunchest fans are gettin’ the heebeejeebees over this crap!

  38. Ha, WB, thanks for the info!

    I guess when it’s quiet, it’s entertaining to see what goes on behind the scenes sometimes. Yup, that’s the same “lady” that told another court observer to avoid me because I was one of the “hens.” Even told her not to “talk” to Joe Hosey, LOL. Very mature

    Sooooooooo, assuming we all are curious what others may have to say, especially those who are staunch supporters of Peterson and his team, we’ll be happy to repost any comments that may make their way online. After all, this is a place to gather and spread information on the Peterson cases. 🙂

    Sometimes it’s good to take a break from all the seriousness and have a laugh or two, heh?

    BTW, this blog is read by professionals, media, the victims’ families and friends, to name a few, so we’re more than happy to be informative when it comes to the Peterson case.

  39. Even #1 fans have their doubts.

    Exlaw
    Joined: Jul 2009
    Gender: Female
    Posts: 261
    Re: Drew Peterson Case Discussion #8

    ——————————————————————————–
    I totally agree with the comments here. Losing Andrew & George is bad news, they were the meat of the group & the best speakers in court. There is something very wrong for this to happen. This can only end very badly unless Joel & the Shark can pull a rabbit out of a hat.

  40. One more fer ya.

    Kristine Mcpherson
    …I think that the entire thing is going to be a circus now. You & George were the bedrock of common sense. This is a big loss for Drew. Frankly this is going to be really bad in the end.

  41. Well, I guess there’s two sides to everything, and two sides to every mouth from which to speak.

    Like I said, sometimes it’s good to take a break and enjoy a laugh. Facs and I work hard on this blog and its legitimacy, so I think we’re entitled to a chuckle every now and then. The pay here is lousy, so…….

  42. I would have more sympathy for Abood’s plight had he not helped & defended said crap attorney and his ridiculous – and hurtful – shennanigans for such a long time.

  43. Hi ho Coffee.

    I’ve wondered, for some time, how it is that Brodsky was able to parade DP around like a dog on a leash, offering him up for interviews as he did (and has been documented!!!), and not be the subject of scrutiny by the local Bar Associations. Very weird.

    I suppose, though, as long as the murder defendant went along with it and he’s not complaining, it’s all good. Although, I don’t think many of us have heard of an attorney, especially one who claims to be a well-known Chicago attorney such as Brodsky claims to be, taking no money but seeking publicity instead. I guess that was his long-term outlook all along – get the national notoriety and wind up with a book deal, whatever the outcome.

    Whatever may come, so far, Peterson has spent a long, lonely year locked up by himself to think. Wonder if he’s happy with his choices?

  44. Exlaw
    Joined: Jul 2009
    Gender: Female
    Posts: 263
    Re: Drew Peterson Case Discussion #8

    ——————————————————————————–
    Considering the comment that I have read elsewhere, I think the circus is back in town. Mr lopez is already making remarks about George & Andrew that they did not know what they were doing. The remarks that both George & Andy made were the type that shows the respect for each other, Drew & Will County. it is a big huge loss. Sorry but thats what I personally think. They were the reason & bedrock of the case , where this goes now ? If Drew was hesitating in front of the judge, that gives me pause for thought too.

    …Andrew & George did the most talking in court, they are both strong speakers, I highly doubt that either were brought on for paperwork. George has kept Craig Stebic out of the media, hes never been charged or gone to jail. That alone speaks volumes to Georges style. Andy is constantly winning cases, high profile ones too. I know someone personally that used ALF and is very impressed. I doubt this has anything to do with Drew, because they are very fond of each other. This has to do more with the style used by Joel. The division is there point blank. Andrew & George will not do something they are not comfortable with, and I highly doubt they would have problems expressing themselves & how they feel. I would bet that the States Att. is thrilled with this change so close to trial…

  45. Aw, Giv’a,(#41) how sweet!
    Facs said, “It will be a year on Friday that Drew has been in jail. Come on, trial!”
    I bet our year’s been a lot shorter than his.

  46. Time has flown by. Maybe because of the warm Spring. Drew must be real sick of his jail food by now. Its strange you just posted Cheryl. I was just thinking about you.I started to post earlier and had to lay down awhile. I was thinking about an old link on JC Facs gave me earlier. It was from 2 years ago. Back in the day Rescue thought heated discussions were interesting yet they were pretty repetitive. Anyway it got me thinking about people who post here now as compared to back then. Then I was thinking about you and that post #41 I made. Then I came back on here and you commented on it. We must be in tune lol.

  47. WB – I guess it’s sort of like an ugly divorce when someone wants to try to stay friends with both the husband and wife. Good luck with that…

    That said, we’ve seen this particular Peterson fan back off before when the going got rough, only to resurface and try to put a positive spin on her betrayal (deny, pretend it was a ruse, etc.). Whatever, it’s water under the bridge. We know how she operates now and I hope her friends are paying attention as well. On to the trial!

  48. It’s all ready happened! She went and deleted most of what she posted. Prolly afraid her friend Reem might see it. But it’s not so easy to make the past disappear.

  49. Smiling here, Giv’a! Think that’s great minds running in the same channels or two fools with the same thought? I’ll vote for the great minds thingy. LOL
    Now as for the Drewpy legal team, I keep wondering if Brodsky has acted this bizarre w/all of his cases, or whether the Drewp has just brought out all this foolishness simply by dint of his attempt to micromanage everything and everyone. Has his notoriety gone to his head, or was it there in his mind all the time?

  50. I guess when all is said and done, the attention has been on the Drew Peterson Scheme Team these past few weeks. Maybe that’s the way they want it — keep the attention away from the murder defendant. That is, except for Maksym telling Sneed Peterson’s girlfriend is back in the picture. Nice.

    But that will all end, and it will come down to what’s either going to convict or acquit the murder defendant. All of these Bozo Circus games will be but a past distraction. And that’s a good thing.

  51. I’m confused about something. Does Jury selection begin the 14th and how long does that usually take? Or will they be ready to start calling witnesses on the 14? Any thoughts?

  52. That link is dead Facs,yet I looked it up on another one. I tried to Google how long jury selection takes but the only link to answer that question was dead also. In the heading though it basically hinted that a juror could be notified they were chosen at noon the same day.So I’m guessing there’s a worse case scenario of where it may take weeks and the best case scenario of where it can all be done with in a day.

  53. Last time I was up for jury selection it took two days. I was selected the first day with a few others and was told to take the next day off while they picked the rest. The defense offered to settle the next day so there never was a trial.

    I don’t think it will go like that for Peterson.

  54. LOL Facs. That would be nice though if the defense settled.

    I still don’t get how they are going to argue about the ruling of autopsy’s on the defense side. The first time the manner of death was drowning and the jury decided it was an accident do to drowning. Do to the shoddiness of the investigation the jury wasn’t given all the facts. I wonder if they will call some of those jurors?

  55. noway406 :
    Quite a step up from wings and a sports bar/grill.
    Reem paid. JMO

    LOL is that because she’s the one who drives a Bentley?

  56. …and further to above, for exlaw it’s really always been a Drew thing,not a Joel thing. But very stupid of her to say anything at all.

  57. Hiya Bucket. Heh. How nice to be known for one’s material possessions and physical attributes when handling the defense of a very famous defendant, rather than for the legal abilities required to do so.

    Drew Peterson Motion Scoreboard: 0 for 0

    Right?

  58. Apropos of nothing, but every once in a while this quote of Brodsky’s comes to mind:

    Asked what makes him proud professionally, Brodsky said: “When I’m able to protect people who are innocent and charged with a crime.”

    He paused to reconsider his answer.

    “Innocence is a strange word,” he continued. “People who the government can’t prove did the crime, or did something bad or committed an offense, and they take them to trial anyway and I win. That’s my proudest accomplishment.”

    Heh, I guess if “the government” can’t prove someone did a crime, so you win the case and the guilty walk, it doesn’t really say much about your lawerying. But hey, if that’s what makes Joel proud…

  59. rescueapet :Hiya Bucket. Heh. How nice to be known for one’s material possessions and physical attributes when handling the defense of a very famous defendant, rather than for the legal abilities required to do so.
    Drew Peterson Motion Scoreboard: 0 for 0
    Right?

    I would rather say that they have an infamous client. After all if it weren’t for one of Drew’s wives to be missing (presumed dead) and another suspiciuosly dead, no one would know or care who he was. Where as at least OJ was famous for his football, commercials, and guest spots in movies before he became infamous.

Comments are closed.