Drew Peterson lawyers asking for trial delay

Drew Peterson was in court today and his lawyers filed a motion requesting a delay in the start of his trial for the murder of Kathleen Savio.


It was just three weeks ago that the team was making statements to the press that they were eager for the trial and would be ready on June 14th, despite losing two of their team to personal conflicts.

“We absolutely want to go on as planned. Drew wants to go to trial June 14, I want to go to trial on June 14 and Mr. Lopez will be ready on June 14,” Brodsky said in a telephone interview…

also…

For their part, Joseph “Shark” Lopez, another of Peterson’s lawyers, said he and his colleagues are primed to go. “We’ll be ready to rock and roll on this case,” Lopez said.

and who could forget…

“These motions aren’t filed to delay the start of the trial,” said Joseph “Shark” Lopez, one of the six lawyers representing the accused wife-killer. “They’re filed for the purpose of protecting Mr. Peterson’s life under the Constitution.

Updates will follow. Check out the comment thread for the latest.

~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>

Advertisements

64 thoughts on “Drew Peterson lawyers asking for trial delay

  1. One thing we have learned from this defense, whether it’s past, present or future, is expect the opposite of what they say.

    So, if they say Drew Peterson will be acquitted, my guess would be not!

  2. joehosey

    Peterson hearing just started. Judge White cleared the courtroom for defense to argue its first motion. The motion is under seal.

    3 minutes ago via txt

  3. Defense lawyers want the trial to begin in mid-August. They say the State added four expert witnesses, and they want more time for that.

    They’re also asking for some of the evidence to be omitted from trial.

    They’ll be back in court at 1:30. On break now.

  4. Also, apparently, the courtroom was cleared when discussing motion/s that pertain to the judge’s hearsay ruling.

    The report I just saw says it appears it’ll be a long day.

  5. Drew Peterson’s lawyers seek trial delay
    Defense wants more time to prepare for prosecution’s new expert witnesses
    Bill Kissinger, Marcella Raymond WGN News
    May 28, 2010

    CHICAGO – Lawyers for Drew Peterson went back to court Friday to ask for a delay in the start of his murder trial.

    The former Bolingbrook police sergeant is accused of killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in 2004. Her death was originally ruled an accident.

    His trial is scheduled to begin June 14, but defense attorneys want the judge to push back the start date to MId-August. Peterson’s lawyers say they need more time to prepare for the addition of new expert witnesses introduced by the prosecution.

    http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-drew-peterson-hearing-may28,0,5904245.story

  6. thinkaboutit2 :

    Does anyone know what new expert witness the prosecution added?

    I don’t know, only that the defense claims there are four of them. I’m wondering why this would matter considering there is “no evidence”. 😉

  7. Ooops, almost posted that myself, Judgin.

    Holy cow, they tried to get Judge White removed. Nice way to piss off the judge that’s going to hear the case.

    Heads. Should. Be. Examined.

  8. rescueapet :Ooops, almost posted that myself, Judgin.
    Holy cow, they tried to get Judge White removed. Nice way to piss off the judge that’s going to hear the case.
    Heads. Should. Be. Examined.

    Removed ^_^

  9. Doesn’t it seema little late in the game to be trying to get a new judge? There was all that jostling at the beginning and then it was all decided. I wonder if they cited the fact that he intends to retire in October?

  10. facsmiley :Doesn’t it seema little late in the game to be trying to get a new judge? There was all that jostling at the beginning and then it was all decided. I wonder if they cited the fact that he intends to retire in October?

    0_0
    I wonder if they told the judge that the defense team is out scratching for new pro bono clients to fill in their spare time 🙂

  11. I have to say, I wish, I hope, that we will know the reason for the request to have Judge White removed from the case. I can’t imagine why they would take this kind of a risk, especially now that they were denied and he remains on the case.

    Go figure.

  12. rescueapet :I have to say, I wish, I hope, that we will know the reason for the request to have Judge White removed from the case. I can’t imagine why they would take this kind of a risk, especially now that they were denied and he remains on the case.
    Go figure.

    Their ‘client’ is a risk taker. They are leaving no stone unturned in their efforts to provide an avenue for a successful ‘Appeal’ in the United States Supreme Court.

  13. Hi Lee! Feel free to copy and paste this comment over at SYM – just like you do everything else that you read at this site. Only this time why dont you say that you read it at JUSTICE CAFE?
    GUTLESS! HYPOCRITE!

  14. They all read here, and then go back over there and slam us for providing the information they copy and paste anyway. Sick and tired of those cowards.

  15. Me thinks that White might have given them a preview of his decision about the hearsay evidence and the Defense Team freaked. They wanted him GONE!

  16. Joe Hosey

    The defense wants to postpone trial until 8/23. Prosecution does not object. The judge seemed to be against the idea.

    1 minute ago via txt

    Joe Hosey

    The judge will rule on this Wednesday.

    less than a minute ago via txt

  17. LOL @ widebirth. Oh, well. People know to come here for the latest updates. It would be nice to be given credit where it’s due (which this blog insists on) but if the Tribune won’t do it, maybe we shouldn’t be surprised that obscure forums don’t do it either.

  18. Judgin – I just was going to comment about that saying the courts weren’t being to kind-hearted with approving trial delay requests. I think that case and the defense’s reason to request the delay are very different so Drew’s judge won’t take it into consideration at all.

  19. Judgin – Unfortunately, one doesn’t have anything to do with the other. Blago wanted a delay until the Supreme Court decides on a ruling that he thinks is relevant to his case, even though the prosecutors re-filed some of the charges against him. Judges rule on the facts. The Supreme’s ruling has no bearing on this case.

  20. Hi Y’all. I’ve been busy, but checking in from time to time.

    If the prosecution suddenly brought in four new expert witnesses, I can’t help but think they felt they needed to tighten up their case. (Not that they had a weak case before, but this new “shark” fella sounds like he’s quite likely to pull some underhanded stuff and they just want to make sure they have an iron-clad case.)

    JMHO!

  21. Gee, I guess they’re just throwing everything out there. I suppose they accused White of being biased, or White’s jealous of Drew’s success with women or something. I hope he doesn’t grant a delay. He knows they’re taking the piss.

    That’s about 8 weeks. 4 experts. That’s a fortnight each if tackled one at a time. 🙄 How many lawyers has he got?

    BTW SYM is still active in the mommy murderer debate? I’d forgotten all about it…

  22. I don’t think this has been posted, yet:
    http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/05/peterson-defense-attorneys-ask-for-2-month-trial-delay.html

    Peterson attorneys ask for 2-month trial delay
    May 28, 2010 4:48 PM

    Defense attorneys today asked for a two-month delay in Drew Peterson’s murder trial, saying they’ve had to bring in additional lawyers to deal with the complicated forensic evidence and four new expert witnesses.

    The June 14 trial date was set in February. The request for a postponement until Aug. 23 irritated Will County Court Judge Stephen White.

    “I have two weeks totally blocked off on my schedule,” for the June trial, said White, who will rule Wednesday on the continuance motion. “I’ve also had jurors on call since October who were given these dates.”

    Peterson, a retired Bolingbrook police sergeant, is accused of murdering his third wife, Kathleen Savio, who was found drowned in her bathtub in 2004. His fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, has been missing since 2007.

    State’s Attorney James Glasgow told the judge he would not fight the defense’s request.

    “I want to make sure a fair trial is held and the record is clean for appeal,” Glasgow said.

    After the proceeding, defense attorney Joel Brodsky said it’s not unusual for a trial date to be set and then pushed back, especially in a murder case. There could be grounds for an appeal if Peterson were to be convicted after his attorneys asked for a delay because they were not prepared, Brodsky said.

    He added that it was the prosecution’s introduction of new witnesses less than three weeks before the trial that caused them to do more forensic research.

    “The new neuropathologist just got the (trial) materials this week,” said attorney Steven Greenburg, who is handling the case with Brodsky and two other lawyers. “The state has added new expert witnesses and a different pathologist.”

    The defense is also asking that state prosecutors obtain all written documents and untelevised videotape from the appearance of Dr. Michael Baden on Fox News. At the request of Savio’s family and with the assistance of Fox News, Baden did the second Savio autopsy that determined the woman had been murdered rather accidentally drowned, as had been the original pathologist’s finding.

    The state’s attorney’s office plans to use Baden as an expert witness. Because Baden was likely paid by Fox as an expert analyst for some of his televised appearances, the state has an obligation to request all documents and video related to Baden’s participation, including comments he may have made in e-mail or while he was being taped but not on the air, defense attorney Ralph Meczyk said.

    The judge made no ruling but suggested that the defense attorneys should subpoena the material.

    Defense attorney Joseph Lopez said after the hearing that it was more logical for the state to seek the information because they would have greater latitude and likely better success in getting it, and that both sides would have need of the information.

    — Karen Sorensen

    ***
    Am I wrong, or is Lopez’ statement utterly preposterous. Isn’t a subpoena a subpoena? No matter from whom it’s issued?

  23. Defense attorneys today asked for a two-month delay in Drew Peterson’s murder trial, saying they’ve had to bring in additional lawyers to deal with the complicated forensic evidence and four new expert witnesses.

    Umm…didn’t they say three weeks ago (see the main post for quotes) that bringing on new attorneys was going to have no effect on their preparedness for trial? Guess they were wrong about that.

  24. http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/bolingbrooksun/news/2329816,Peterson-motion-judge-white-JO052810.article

    Peterson motion to remove judge denied

    May 28, 2010
    BY JOE HOSEY jhosey@stmedianetwork.com

    JOLIET — A motion made by Drew Peterson’s defense team to get Will County Judge Stephen White taken off of Peterson’s murder trial was denied Friday.

    The defense also wants to postpone trial, from the scheduled June 14 start date to Aug. 23. The state did not object, but the judge seemed to be against the idea.

    White said Friday he would rule on the move for postponement on Wednesday, June 2.

    Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, is charged with the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, who was found dead in her bathtub in 2004.

  25. That’s exactly what I was going to say! No doubt he was also thinking “you lazy little shit”

  26. I could also hear in my imagination Bratsky at some appeal or other down the line pointing out that “the judge had subpoenaed this material so he must have been concerned.”

    It is all so not about Baden!

  27. And what about his statement that it would be better for the prosecution to subpoena the information “because they would have greater latitude and likely better success in getting it”?
    When did they giving out law degrees in Cracker Jacks boxes?

  28. Peterson’s attorneys ask judge to delay trial

    John Garcia

    May 28, 2010 (WLS) — Former Bolingbrook cop Drew Peterson’s defense attorneys are asking the judge to delay the start of his trial.

    Peterson’s trial is scheduled to begin on June 14. He is accused of killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

    Peterson’s legal team is asking the judge to push back the trial date to August 23.

    They say if the trial begins as scheduled, then they will not be ready because the prosecution added several new witnesses to the list of people they may call to testify during trial.

    Surrounded by deputies and wearing a blue jail jumpsuit, Peterson was escorted into a Will County courtroom Friday morning for a motion hearing in his upcoming murder trial.

    Peterson’s lead attorney, Joel Brodsky, said his team needs more time to interview witnesses that prosecutors plan to call at trial.

    “The state disclosed expert witnesses – hired guns – two weeks before trial,” said Brodsky. “I think that once again shows that it is still scrambling to try to put together a case here.”

    Brodsky said the state is relying on experts because their case against Peterson is shaky.

    “They don’t have any real hard evidence that Drew Peterson is guilty of any wrongful act at all,” said Brodsky.

    Will County State’s Attorney Jim Glascow told Judge Stephen White that he will be ready for trial whenever the judge wants, but White wants to make sure the case is solid in case of an appeal. As such, he said pushing back the date would be all right.

    One of Peterson’s new attorneys, Joe Lopez, said that most murder trials do not start on time.

    “We are going to be ready, and we will be ready, and I think the judge is expecting everyone to be ready,” said Lopez. “If he does grant this continuance, this case is going to be going on that day.”

    Peterson’s attorneys were denied a motion to have Judge White removed from the case.

    Both sides will return to court on Wednesday morning.

    The judge says he needs additional time to see if he can reschedule other trials he is involved in to accommodate a possible delay.

    Most of Friday’s hearing was sealed.

    Both sides discussed motions dealing with the controversial hearsay evidence that may or may not be used a trial.

    The judge’s ruling on that evidence will not be announced until a jury has been seated.

    http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7468051

  29. It seems to me as though they want to catch Baden saying something that contradicts his testimony. Or something that could be seen as being “bought” by the Savio family or Fox News.

    Just a hunch. I guess they can request it, but who the heck knows how long it would take for Fox News to get all that material? Months? 🙂

  30. Brodsky said the state is relying on experts because their case against Peterson is shaky.

    And who was it that said Drew needed to sell his “rare” Harley to get money to hire a what? A biomechanical engineer that needs to explain the unexplainable way Kathleen’s body ended up the way it did? Who was that?

  31. “The judge’s ruling on that evidence will not be announced until a jury has been seated.”

    That’s a new piece of news, isn’t it? I thought they judge had said he’d disclose his decision about the hearsay evidence a couple of weeks before trial.

  32. Atlgranny @ #46 – Nope – that’s what he said all along. So as not to influence the jury in any way about his decision to either allow or not the hearsay testimony, he said it would remain sealed until they were seated.

  33. Oh, okay. I think it’s better that way as nobody can say the jury was tainted. Maybe White said that he’d tell the attorneys two weeks before….I could swear there was a two-week before the court date tied into hearsay.

    And, if that’s the case, maybe my first hunch was right — the Defense requested that White be dismissed ’cause he told them what he’s allowing to go forward at trial.

  34. bucketoftea :

    Gee, I guess they’re just throwing everything out there. I suppose they accused White of being biased, or White’s jealous of Drew’s success with women or something. I hope he doesn’t grant a delay. He knows they’re taking the piss.

    That’s about 8 weeks. 4 experts. That’s a fortnight each if tackled one at a time. :roll: How many lawyers has he got?

    BTW SYM is still active in the mommy murderer debate? I’d forgotten all about it…

    Yeah, still active, Bucket. I heard they have a guy posting over there that is so sexually, graphically explicit in slamming us, that he sounds like he belongs on one of those predator lists. To think, there’s still women that post over there with that stuff going on. Go figure.

  35. I’d really like to know exactly what went on with asking Judge White to be removed. On what grounds, exactly, and how it worked…roll in 2 different judges? How does that work? What were they asked? What did they answer? Will we ever know? I want to know now!

  36. Hiya Bucket. Yeah, I would really like to know what that was all about too.

    Watch the Fox video up top if you want to see Brodsky explain how Peterson is good with the delay if it’s for his own welfare.

    Yeah, right.

  37. I note that a couple of the reasons, according to this report, for asking that the trial be delayed is because there’s four new attorneys on the team that need to get up-to-speed, and because of scheduling conflicts. That appears to me to mean that not all of the new attorneys are able to be at the trial as scheduled.

    Also:

    “The state disclosed expert witnesses – hired guns – two weeks before trial,” said Brodsky. “I think that once again shows that it is still scrambling to try to put together a case here.”

    I really don’t think it’s very impressive to say the State is scrambling, when defense lawyers have been going, coming, not prepared, lacking experts, having a hired expert divulge he was stiffed on his fee, and whining they need money for their own experts. Ha, what a deserving defense Peterson has!

  38. I’m sorry I didn’t see this sooner. Joe Hosey’s piece has a lot of additional information. Those editors of his need to get with it and get his stories up sooner!

    Getting out of jury duty

    During a Friday hearing in the Drew Peterson murder case, Judge Stephen White released a list of unidentified jurors from among the pool of 240 selected in August who have excuses for missing the trial. Attorneys will argue Wednesday whether to keep the potential jurors in the pool. Here are the reasons they gave for not being able to take part in the trial:

    • Is unavailable after June 14

    • Has no viable form of transportation

    • Is going on vacation beginning the Fourth of July

    • Has a note from a doctor with the Department of Veteran Affairs asking that he or she be excused

    • Is suffering financial hardship

    • Excused by Judge White already after showing up to the August hearing in his police officer’s uniform

    • Believes jury duty might result in the loss of the job he or she recently started

    • Is suffering financial hardship due to a birth and joblessness in the family

    • Cannot miss daytime nursing school classes

    • Has difficulty walking due to medical arthritis in both knees

    • Has no childcare for a special-needs child

    • Is a full-time student who has no plans to return to Will County this summer

    • Has family members who were friends with Kathleen Savio

    • Has no childcare in the summer months

    • Several jurors cited moving to such locations as Cook County, Texas, Arizona, North Carolina, California and London.

    http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/peterson/2329816,Peterson-motion-judge-white-JO052810.article

  39. Peterson motion to remove judge denied
    Drew’s team continues to press for delay of trial

    May 29, 2010
    By JOE HOSEY jhosey@stmedianetwork.com

    JOLIET — Drew Peterson’s legal team needs a month and nine days to “get up to speed” if they’re going to properly defend the accused wife-killer.

    “Your honor, it’s a question of justice and due process,” said Ralph Meczyk, one of six attorneys in court Friday to represent Peterson.

    State’s Attorney James Glasgow insisted his side was ready to go but willing to wait.

    “I want to make sure a fair trial is heard, and the record is clear on appeal,” Glasgow said.

    But Judge Stephen White voiced his opposition to pushing back the trial, pointing out that he blocked out two weeks to devote solely to the proceeding and that a pool of 240 potential jurors was notified to be ready to go nearly a year ago.

    The murder trial for Peterson, who is charged with drowning his third wife, Kathleen Savio in March 2004, is set to start June 14. If his defense attorneys get their way, it will be postponed until Aug. 23. White said he would decide the matter Wednesday.

    Peterson’s attorneys noted that two lawyers quit the defense team and four more joined on in the past month and a half. Steven Greenberg, one of the new four, said he and his colleagues “don’t think we’ll be up to speed.”

    The fact that prosecutors have brought in more expert witnesses was another reason to delay the trial, said Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky, and a sign that Glasgow’s group was “scrambling.”

    And even though two weeks in June were set aside for the Peterson case, they need not go to waste, Brodsky said, as he plans to file “at least another dozen motions” and they could be heard during that time.

    Closed hearing about judge
    Prior to the defense team arguing to delay the trial’s start, Judge White ejected the public from the courtroom to hold a secret hearing. During this secret hearing, heard by Judge Edward Burmilla, Peterson’s attorneys tried and failed to have White removed from the case, a source said.

    Brodsky said he could not comment on the closed hearing.

    After arguing to postpone the trial, Peterson’s attorneys asked for a hearing to review a video montage of Peterson’s numerous media appearances. They want the video, which was produced by the state’s attorney’s office, examined in hopes of convincing White to delete portions before it is seen by a jury. White said he will decide this Wednesday as well.

    Is medical examiner biased?
    Greenberg also presented a motion requesting that White order prosecutors to surrender any information regarding celebrity medical examiner Michael Baden’s relationship with Fox News Channel. Baden is on the state’s attorney’s list of expert witnesses, and Greenberg asked the state to produce any correspondence, notes or video that might prove Baden was paid to give the opinion that Savio was the victim of a homicide.

    Assistant State’s Attorney John Connor contended that his office does not have this information. White said he was not going to tell prosecutors to do the defense team’s job for them.

    Brodsky insisted that Baden, who frequently appeared on Greta Van Sustern’s Fox News show to discuss the Peterson case, was playing the role of an entertainer, not an unbiased medical expert.

    “These shows, like Greta Van Sustern, they’re not really news,” Brodsky said. “If (Baden) was told to say something, and he said it, it was because he was paid to say it.”

    http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/peterson/2329816,Peterson-motion-judge-white-JO052810.article#

  40. rescueapet :

    He is anxious to get the case over with but he is weighing 60 days against a lifetime,” said Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky about his client’s thoughts on the potential delay.
    “Each member of the team has explained to him the reason for needing more time and he is in agreement if it’s that necessary that we should request a continuance,” he said.

    http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/drew-peterson-trial-delay-request-20100528

    60 days vs a lifetime, Brodsky? Sounds like the Brodsky Defense Team DOES think there’s good potential that Drew is going down.

  41. After arguing to postpone the trial, Peterson’s attorneys asked for a hearing to review a video montage of Peterson’s numerous media appearances. They want the video, which was produced by the state’s attorney’s office, examined in hopes of convincing White to delete portions before it is seen by a jury. White said he will decide this Wednesday as well.

    Are you kidding? Really? A montage of appearances that Peterson and his attorney, Joel Brodsky, participated in willingly and freely, and they want portions of it deleted so as not to be seen by a jury? Would that be the newly added attorneys that don’t approve of the way Brodsky shuffled around his moronic client? Would that be the parts that they don’t think qualify as their idea of being favorable to Peterson, all the while he was trying to influence the public to favor him? OMG, ROFLMAO!

  42. After arguing to postpone the trial, Peterson’s attorneys asked for a hearing to review a video montage of Peterson’s numerous media appearances. They want the video, which was produced by the state’s attorney’s office, examined in hopes of convincing White to delete portions before it is seen by a jury. White said he will decide this Wednesday as well.

    Oh Joel, where is your “white noise” strategy now that a video montage of your client is going to be shown in court?

    Joel Brodsky: “If you say just a few things they can pick it apart for inconsistencies, but if you say alot then any inconsistencies will cancel each other out.”

    Or be used against you in a court of law…

  43. Peterson’s attorneys noted that two lawyers quit the defense team and four more joined on in the past month and a half. Steven Greenberg, one of the new four, said he and his colleagues “don’t think we’ll be up to speed.”

    Do I even need to point out… Nah.

  44. Just for shits and giggles, once more here’s Joel’s explanation of his media-saturation “strategy” which is now coming back to bite Drew in the ass (and not for the first time)

    Joel: …The only criticism I get, and the criminal defense bar is split on this issue, is that I let my client give a total of four (4) controlled interviews, and make a number of sound bite comments on certain issues. The “rule book” in criminal cases is for the client to say nothing. This is what I call the “standard model”.

    I have given this a great deal of thought, and talked to many other lawyers about this, (including my excellent co-counsel, Andrew Abood of the Abood Law Firm of East Lansing Michigan, and my partner the very sharp Reem Odeh). My conclusion is (and its my decision), that the standard model does not apply in extremely high profile cases in the post O.J. world. The O.J. Simpson trial changed everything. It made and broke big time media careers, and consequentially made the media, and by extension public perception, an additional party in extreme high profile cases.

    Now, in these rare cases, the media and its influence is in the courtroom and jury room. Therefore, the media must be addressed and engaged in these extreme cases. Examples: (1) Scott Peterson did 3 short tv appearances (I wouldn’t call them interviews) before he was named a suspect and then he remained totally silent. He was convicted. (2) Robert Blake and Michael Jackson both did media interviews. Michael Jackson even produced a TV special on his case to counter some bad publicity, and Blake did an interview from his jail cell without his lawyer present as well as other interviews. Both these men were acquitted.

    I could go on for a long time on this issue, as well as spell out the problems that my clients media appearances before I came into the case created, and how our media strategy addressed these issues, (one for example which I call the white noise effect), but suffice it to say nothing we do is hap hazzard, or done for publicity or to satisfy some psychological need of my client. A good lawyer thinks like a chess player, looking 5 to 10 moves into the future for each move he does now. I am a good lawyer.

    http://legalpublication.blogspot.com/2008/05/legal-pub-is-firm-believer-in-our.html

Comments are closed.