Peterson defense wants to keep Stacy’s name and Drew’s interviews out of trial

Drew Peterson on the Today Show


Drew Peterson’s attorneys are back in court today for pre-trial motions. Lead attorney Joel Brodsky is expected to file a motion barring any mention of Stacy Peterson from Drew’s trial for the murder of Kathleen Savio.

Brodsky is also expected to file a motion asking that videotaped interviews with Peterson be barred from the trial proceedings.

UPDATE 12:40: More motions filed:
Prosecution: Motion to disclose compensation to experts – approved.

Defense:

  • Motion to obtain all drowning autopsies from the medical examiner in order to look for descriptions of “accidental drowning” or “forced drowning” rather than just drowning.
  • Motion to squash exhumation search warrant for her body – defense claims it was obtained only on “a hunch”.
  • Motion to delay trial until third week of August.

UPDATE 2:11: A closed hearing on “Drew’s prior bad acts” has been going on since 1:00.

UPDATE 4:15:

  • Motion to delay the start of trial – Denied.
  • Motion to dismiss the indictment – Denied.
  • Motion to sequester the jury – Denied.
  • Motion to quash the exhumation evidence and search warrant of Kathleen Savio’s body – Denied.
  • Motion to suppress evidence obtained in a search warrant in connection to Stacy Peterson – Denied.

Court is out for the day.

We’ll update throughout the day. For the latest news, make sure to check out the comment thread .

Read more at the Chicago Tribune
Joseph Hosey’s Twitter Feed

~By commenting you agree to be bound by the rules of this blog. You can contact admins directly by sending an email 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

115 thoughts on “Peterson defense wants to keep Stacy’s name and Drew’s interviews out of trial

  1. OT – My family is in court today for the Oswego trial today too for some final pre-trial motions by the defense too. It’s amazing the things they tried to block in both of these cases.

  2. rescueapet :joehoseyStill hasn’t started.half a minute ago via txt
    *****
    Geesh, what an unorganized fiasco.

    That’s cuz the judge can’t stop laughing at the Motions presented by the seven member defense team.

  3. The defense still wants the trial delayed until the third week of August. They’ve also presented a couple of other motions, one that deals with the exhumation of Kathleen. I, unfortunately, caught the tail end of that report, but it has to do with the issue of her being exhumed on a “hunch,” whatever that means.

  4. Seems like typical last-minute defense strategy of throwing as much poop at the fan in hope something sticks to it. It’s their last chance to try to do this stuff so they are going to go for it all.

  5. Jason Knowles
    June 18, 2010 (JOLIET, Ill.) (WLS) — Drew Peterson’s lawyers were in court Friday morning asking that fourth wife Stacy Peterson’s name be barred from being mentioned during third wife Kathleen Savio’s murder trial next month.

    The judge has already approved some of the defense’s motions. The judge was still considering the remainder as of 11:30 a.m., including the one to keep Stacy Peterson’s name out of the trial.

    Drew Peterson is charged in Savio’s murder but not in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson.

    Some sealed motions expected to be opened Friday — some by prosecutors as well — ask to disclose compensation to expert witnesses. That was approved. There’s also a motion by the defense to obtain all drowning autopsies from the medical examiner who said in 2004 Savio drowned in a bathtub. They are concerned about the semantics used by that particular medical examiner in other drowning cases. Savio’s body was exhumed after Stacy Peterson’s 2007 disappearance and Savio’s death was then reclassified a homicide.

    There is also a motion to squash the information of some search warrants. The defense says there was no evidence to obtain the warrant for Savio’s exhumation.

    The defense wants to delay the trial until the third week of August instead of July 9.

    http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7506272

  6. facsmiley :
    Is this actually the last chance to file motions?

    No – I’m not talking literally. I just think they are trying to throw as much up there right now to push the trial back to where they want it. You know – give the judge some white noise. In the Oswego crash they are doing motions today and the trial starts on Monday and the crash was 2/11/2007. So I think the motions can go up to the very last minute.

  7. joehosey
    Judge might close the courtroom for argument on admissibility of Drew’s “prior bad acts.”
    3 minutes ago via txt

    joehosey
    Ran through about 10 defense motions. Defense didn’t get much – if anything – through. Short break now.
    4 minutes ago via txt

  8. To rescueapet:

    Regarding my post #52 on the previous topic (All Quiet in Peoria), Sgt. Burek basically said “metal detectors??” about half way through our brief conversation and at the end he thanked me kindly for my suggestion. My impression was that metal detectors hadn’t been brought up before but I could be wrong.

    I guess it all depends on how dependable LE thinks the tip originally was before enlisting any group of people to help them search.

  9. WGN is reporting that Peterson was admonished by the Judge for whispering back and forth to a woman who was in court. She claims to have happened to be in the building and stopped by.

    I might add that it is someone he clearly knew, according to the reporter.

    Heh, heh.

  10. Stacy was his alibi for the time Kathleen was murdered, wasn’t she? Do they not want that mentioned? Why not?

  11. noway406 :

    Stacy was his alibi for the time Kathleen was murdered, wasn’t she? Do they not want that mentioned? Why not?

    I think it may have to do with “opening the door” as Judge White admonished earlier. Any mention of Stacy is going to allow the prosecution to metntion her as well, or something like that.

    As far as I can tell, they are going to pursue a non-alibi stance and just attack the prosecution’s case with ae “no evidence” argument. Wasn’t that why Abood and Lenard split — they wanted to present an alibi and Joel did not?

  12. Prior bad acts…maybe like breaking into Kathleen’s home to take things, or cornering her on the stairs and threatening her? I can see why they would want mention of those acts barred.

  13. Dragging Kathleen into the house by her hair, and being the one responsible for her having to seek medical attention in an Emergency Room. Having a restraining order placed on him?

  14. LMAO

    joehosey
    This closed hearing is still going on. Drew must have a lot of prior bad acts for them to talk about.
    less than 20 seconds ago via txt

  15. Thank you, Rescue. I was kicking myself for not having followed the format.

    BTW, I laughed not because it’s funny that Drew has so many prior bad acts but because I was thinking the very thing Joe posted right when Joe posted it.

  16. facsmiley :A little bird tells us the woman Drew whispered with is Norma Peterson, wife of Drew’s brother, Paul.
    Also…no Reem in court today.

    Just wondering, how/why they let a person close enough to accused murderer in court to whisper. Unbelievable!

  17. Yeah, Grandam, I wonder about a lot of things that go on too. For one thing, although I’m not sure how this works, if court is supposed to begin at 9:30, why are attorneys shuffling in whenever? Don’t they have any respect for the proceedings, the judge, the participants?

  18. Prosecution: Motion to disclose compensation to experts – approved.

    I wonder if this is because the defense keeps saying they need $45,000 to pay for experts and the prosecution doesn’t believe them. Still, I wonder why this is important? This is the murder case, not the HELOC.

  19. Does this count as a bad prior act?

    Peterson said the wall-cutting incident happened before the couple filed for divorce. “Did I do it? Yeah. When I was voluntarily leaving the house, it was still my house, Kathleen changed the locks on me,” he said. “So instead of breaking down a $400 door, I cut a hole in the wall and squeezed through.”

    Source: tp://tinyurl.com/29l7x3a

  20. I actually think the argument on the bad prior act would have a lot to do with the Order of Protection that Kathleen had against him. They may try to argue that since she dropped the charges that it shouldn’t come into play but the prosecution is going to fight tooth and nail to keep it in.

  21. facsmiley :
    A little bird tells us the woman Drew whispered with is Norma Peterson, wife of Drew’s brother, Paul.
    Also…no Reem in court today.

    I wonder if DP’s brother Paul is there? I read somewhere that Paul wasn’t supportive of DP as he was in the beginning. The article I read (some months ago) said he was initially there to make sure the children were okay.

  22. noway406 :
    Stacy was his alibi for the time Kathleen was murdered, wasn’t she? Do they not want that mentioned? Why not?

    I don’t see how they can leave Stacy out of this trial. It was Stacy’s disappearance that led the authorities to re-investigate Kathleen Savio’s death.

  23. facsmiley :
    Prior bad acts…maybe like breaking into Kathleen’s home to take things, or cornering her on the stairs and threatening her? I can see why they would want mention of those acts barred.

    If they’re successful in getting any mention of Stacy banned and DP’s prior “bad acts”, this is going to be a short trial.

  24. joehosey

    The hearing is over. Nothing earth-shattering. Defense asked a couple more times to postpone the trial. The judge said no.
    1 minute ago via txt

  25. rescueapet :
    joehosey
    The hearing is over. Nothing earth-shattering. Defense asked a couple more times to postpone the trial. The judge said no.
    1 minute ago via txt

    Thanks Rescueapet……………I’m anxious to hear which motions were approved and which were not. I’m glad the trial is still on schedule, and I hope most of the defense motions got shot down.

  26. How *can* they leave them out? Are they arguing a further continuance because they want to read a bazillion autopsies? They took a long time to decide they didn’t like “forced” drowning.

  27. http://tinyurl.com/22vnos6

    Drew’s Attorney: Mum’s the Word on Stacy Peterson
    Lawyer hopes to keep Stacy’s name and Drew’s media antics out of trial
    By MATT BARTOSIK
    Updated 12:30 PM CDT, Fri, Jun 18, 2010

    AP At Drew Peterson’s pre-trial hearing this morning, attorney Joel Brodsky motioned to prohibit any mention of fourth wife Stacy during the accused’s trial for the murder of third wife Kathleen Savio, reports Chicago Breaking News.

    Brodsky would also like to keep Peterson’s television appearances (before his arrest) out of the trial proceedings.

    That seems like a tall order, given the attention-seeking media sensationalist that Peterson is…

  28. After a judge reprimanded him for his appearance on radio station WLS, he created a Twitter account to connect with the outside world.

    He had a Twitter account?? I don’t recall that. How do jail inmates get to even access the outside world via the internet and are all of those communications tracked just like letters and visits are??

  29. Hmmmm — Thinking back…

    5-3-08 In response to readers questioning Joel Brodsky’s handling of the case, Joel provides an exclusive Legal Pub Update.

    Joel: I wish to address the person who says my peers are questioning my handling of the case. So far, in court, I have been successful, getting my client the property taken by the state back (police had to resort to illegally revoking the gun permit to keep Drew from getting the guns). 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.

    Posted by Legal Pub at 7:30 AM

    Source: http://tinyurl.com/3xbzvz3

  30. thinkaboutit2 :

    After a judge reprimanded him for his appearance on radio station WLS, he created a Twitter account to connect with the outside world.

    He had a Twitter account?? I don’t recall that. How do jail inmates get to even access the outside world via the internet and are all of those communications tracked just like letters and visits are??

    I think that is false. I’ve tried to correct that on the Wikipedia page but it always comes back. I think they are referring to that spammy DrewPeterson10 twitter account. AFAIK it has nothing to do with Drew.

  31. Jason Knowles

    June 18, 2010 (JOLIET, Ill.) (WLS) — His defense team says it was a good day for Drew Peterson, despite the fact that most of their 12 sealed motions to Judge Stephen White were denied.

    The judge denied a motion to dismiss the indictment and to sequester the jury, for now. He also denied a motion to quash the exhumation evidence and search warrant of Kathleen Savio’s body in November of 2007. The defense says her body was exhumed only on a hunch, not on evidence that Peterson committed a crime.

    Judge White also denied a motion to suppress evidence obtained in a search warrant in connection to Stacy Peterson.

    Peterson is charged in the murder of his third wife, Savio, but not in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson. Prosecutors are still trying to link the two. And Friday morning Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney, said his team wanted Stacy Peterson’s name out of the trial but he changed his tune later in the afternoon.

    “Drew wouldn’t be in the situation he’s in if there wasn’t a bunch of media hysteria that occurred around the time of Stacy’s disappearance. So that question we’ll have to deal with at trial,” said Brodsky.

    The judge is also now considering whether or not to allow prosecutors to present TV interviews of Peterson and whether or not to allow current investigation files in Stacy Peterson’s case to be submitted as evidence. The attorneys general office is representing the state police to keep it sealed.
    “That’s why we call them routine motions, they’re just routine motions,” said Joseph Lopez, Peterson attorney.

    http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7506272

  32. “Drew wouldn’t be in the situation he’s in if there wasn’t a bunch of media hysteria that occurred around the time of Stacy’s disappearance. So that question we’ll have to deal with at trial,” said Brodsky.

    Hoo, boy! I hope the prosecution answered that with Joel’s “White Noise” media saturation technique. For heaven’s sake! A fifth-grader could call them out on this one!

  33. “Drew wouldn’t be in the situation he’s in if there wasn’t a bunch of media hysteria that occurred around the time of Stacy’s disappearance. So that question we’ll have to deal with at trial,” said Brodsky.

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

    So it’s the Media Hype & Hysteria around Stacy’s disappearance that made the State exhume Kathleens body.

    No other reason ???

  34. facsmiley :

    “Drew wouldn’t be in the situation he’s in if there wasn’t a bunch of media hysteria that occurred around the time of Stacy’s disappearance. So that question we’ll have to deal with at trial,” said Brodsky.

    Hoo, boy! I hope the prosecution answered that with Joel’s “White Noise” media saturation technique. For heaven’s sake! A fifth-grader could call them out on this one!

    It may well have only been local media hype if Drew didn’t take it national by going on the Today Show with Matt Lauer and giving such a horrible interview.

  35. joehosey
    This closed hearing is still going on. Drew must have a lot of prior bad acts for them to talk about.
    less than 20 seconds ago via txt.

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

    Considering he was a Police Officer, these prior “bad acts” should be viewed with extreme gravity, as it shows what he had been able to get away with for a very long time.

    Didn’t Chief McGury say A Police Officer is held to a higher standard ?

  36. Time and time again, the media saturation, and how it is detrimental to Drew Peterson, comes up, but as a whine by the defense. Is that because the new guys told Brodsky he made a mess of it and now they mean to clean it up? What ever explanation could there be if, as we all know, Brodsky and Peterson stirred up attention at all times, even when things got quiet, but now they’re all pissy about it?

    Geesh.

  37. justanotherhen :
    joehosey
    This closed hearing is still going on. Drew must have a lot of prior bad acts for them to talk about.
    less than 20 seconds ago via txt.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Considering he was a Police Officer, these prior “bad acts” should be viewed with extreme gravity, as it shows what he had been able to get away with for a very long time.
    Didn’t Chief McGury say A Police Officer is held to a higher standard ?

    Since DP retired before Chief McGury could hold an inquiry into something DP did while on duty, I wonder if whatever he did is known to the judge as part of DP’s prior “bad acts”? Just curious as to whether what DP did is a matter of record, but not known to the public?

  38. If you look back at Joel’s own wording in his post at LegalPub you will see how he deduced that this would work. Scott Peterson didn’t go to the media and he was found guilty. Michael Jackson and Robert Blake did media appearances and they were acquitted. Therefore, everyone who goes to the media is acquitted and everyone who doesn’t is convicted. Guess he missed the day of class where you learn that statistics are only as reliable as the sample size. :/

  39. http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7506272

    Thanks Rescueapet…………I note that the article doesn’t mention the closed hearing on the prior “bad acts.” Are we to assume that the defense and prosecution presented these prior bad acts before the judge, and the judge decided which would be allowed into evidence?

    I would think that any bad acts that DP made that were considered to be a threat to Kathleen Savio would be allowed to show that there was considerable animosity in the relationship. The bad acts led to Kathleen’s murder. Or would this be considered prejudicial?

  40. Aww, baloney with his white noise. Rumor is he made a deal with Peterson that he would get his fee covered via media coverage and appearances, so he had to keep Peterson’s likeness in the news. So he hires a PR agent.

    That also became obvious when Raines said the engagement was a stunt, then backed off when Brodsky spoke out on how she was confused. Or, when his partner voiced her concern about Peterson yapping all the time, Brodsky says the reporter took her words out of context, and she really didn’t mean or say what was reported. You know, that they’d all get book deals.

    He has a client that has a lot of face time and it’s a famous case. That’s all he cares about. Whether Peterson goes to jail or not, Brodsky can still buy a new Harley, go on tv news talk shows, and parade around the next chump that runs to him for a defense.

  41. mollymcgee – I believe Joe Hosey’s coverage/story will be up on the web later, and he’ll probably cover that.

    The problem is, from what I’ve seen in the past, the editors of the Sun Times News Group are so out-of-the-loop, apparently, they’re the last ones to post the day’s events, lagging behind everyone else. I don’t get their logic, when, in reality, it’s a high interest case, and they’re twiddling their thumbs doing whatever it is they do. I’ve even emailed them about it, and they didn’t have the decency to respond.

    🙂

  42. mollymcgee :

    http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=7506272

    Thanks Rescueapet…………I note that the article doesn’t mention the closed hearing on the prior “bad acts.” Are we to assume that the defense and prosecution presented these prior bad acts before the judge, and the judge decided which would be allowed into evidence?

    I would think that any bad acts that DP made that were considered to be a threat to Kathleen Savio would be allowed to show that there was considerable animosity in the relationship. The bad acts led to Kathleen’s murder. Or would this be considered prejudicial?

    There are a few motions that the judge hasn’t made a decision on yet.

  43. The judge denied a motion to dismiss the indictment and to sequester the jury, for now. He also denied a motion to quash the exhumation evidence and search warrant of Kathleen Savio’s body in November of 2007. The defense says her body was exhumed only on a hunch, not on evidence that Peterson committed a crime.

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

    Judge White obviously did not agree Kathleen Savios body was exhumed on “a hunch” (what a bizarre thing to state in a motion in the first place).

    It was exhumed on evidence Drew committed a crime orchestrated and committed when he was a Police Officer, which enabled him a head start and the ability for a cover up from the word go.

  44. Wonder what ever became of Derek Armstrong, and his sucky book? The one Drew didn’t make any money from. Somebody profited from the book, and it wasn’t just the guy who morphed from a book author to a journalist.

  45. I would still like to see the underage girlfriend’s brother’s case reopened. I, personally, IMO, MOO, etc etc and all that-do consider his hanging to be highly circumspect, especially considering that (IIRC) Drew was the first officer on the scene.
    I am SO sorry, and I apologize to his family, because I cannot remember his name, nor find it anywhere. (The links have been removed).

  46. Cheryljones – I think that event is one of those wild rumors that was floating around. Honestly, I don’t think it has any validity. Other than it being discussed on a blog or two, I don’t recall that there was any news stories or articles found that mentioned this. I could be wrong, but I never saw anything.

  47. With the new Defense lawyers on board, I’m curious if the current motions before Judge White are more sensical/logical or are they still the same crazy crackers by the bus driver ?

  48. Oopsies, then. I knew I’d read it, and found references to it, but maybe that’s why the links are gone. Thanks, Rescue. One of those urban legends, hm? I’ll blame Ric Mims, because he was the one talking about it to Greta. Starting erase mode in my brain in 3…2…

  49. justanotherhen :
    The judge denied a motion to dismiss the indictment and to sequester the jury, for now. He also denied a motion to quash the exhumation evidence and search warrant of Kathleen Savio’s body in November of 2007. The defense says her body was exhumed only on a hunch, not on evidence that Peterson committed a crime.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Judge White obviously did not agree Kathleen Savios body was exhumed on “a hunch” (what a bizarre thing to state in a motion in the first place).
    It was exhumed on evidence Drew committed a crime orchestrated and committed when he was a Police Officer, which enabled him a head start and the ability for a cover up from the word go.

    Thanks Justanotherhen,
    This leads to another question. Is DP charged with any “special circumstances?” I would think that if he’s convicted of the murder of Kathleen, they would add a charge of special circumstances for using his position as a police officer to cover the crime.

  50. Drew Peterson’s lawyers haggle over what jury will hear
    As trial nears in drowning of Peterson’s 3rd wife, judge weighs how much jurors will hear about 4th wife’s disappearance

    6:37 p.m. CDT, June 18, 2010

    Less than three weeks before Drew Peterson is scheduled to go on trial for the 2004 drowning of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, attorneys for both sides are trying to settle what, if any, details jurors will hear about the still-unsolved disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

    Defense attorney Joel Brodsky was quoted before a lengthy court hearing Friday saying he planned to ask that prosecutors be barred from bringing up Stacy Peterson. Prosecutors have said Peterson is the sole suspect in her disappearance, but he has never been charged.

    After the hearing, Brodsky said only that the defense had filed a motion to keep jurors from hearing about Peterson’s prior “bad acts.” He said he could not comment further because Judge Stephen White had ruled on “those issues” after closing the courtroom.

    “Team Peterson had a great day today,” said fellow defense lawyer Joseph Lopez.

    White declined to throw out a search warrant executed at Peterson’s Bolingbrook home days after his fourth wife vanished.

    Investigators on Oct. 31, 2007, found 23 firearms, five other weapons including nunchucks, and a red “alibi folder” with receipts from the day before Savio was found drowned, prosecutors said.

    Assistant State’s Attorney John Connor said the folder would be used to show Peterson “staged” the drowning and planned to use the receipts as his alibi.

    White said he would review a video prosecutors made of press appearances by Peterson and Brodsky but didn’t plan to allow jurors to see it.

    White declined to delay the July 8 start date of the trial after Peterson’s lawyers had pleaded for more time.

    sschmadeke@tribune.com

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-0619-drew-peterson-20100618,0,2532852.story

  51. Molly, I believe that’s why his bond is so high, because he orchestrated and committed these crimes using his skills/influence as a Police Officer and a lot of his “bad acts” were committed whilst in uniform/on duty and as such he will be judged by a higher standard relevant to those who “Serve And Protect” as mentioned by Chief McGury.

    Needless to say this is IMO !

  52. Investigators on Oct. 31, 2007, found 23 firearms, five other weapons including nunchucks, and a red “alibi folder” with receipts from the day before Savio was found drowned, prosecutors said.

    I hadn’t realized they had found so many guns.

  53. I don’t get it. Why did they file a motion to bar any mention of Stacy Peterson, then back off later in the day? I’m not even going to begin to imagine what that is all about, but it sure is curious, no?

  54. facsmiley :

    Investigators on Oct. 31, 2007, found 23 firearms, five other weapons including nunchucks, and a red “alibi folder” with receipts from the day before Savio was found drowned, prosecutors said.

    I hadn’t realized they had found so many guns.

    I am sure you do facs, as these are the same guns Judge Schoenstedt got returned and then allocated to Stephen Peterson, because Drews gun license was revoked (!)

  55. rescueapet :

    I don’t get it. Why did they file a motion to bar any mention of Stacy Peterson, then back off later in the day? I’m not even going to begin to imagine what that is all about, but it sure is curious, no?

    I’m confused by this too. What is the defense strategy? Alibi or no alibi. One hour they want NO mention of Stacy Peterson…then in the next it’s OK? WTF?

  56. Investigators on Oct. 31, 2007, found 23 firearms, five other weapons including nunchucks, and a red “alibi folder” with receipts from the day before Savio was found drowned, prosecutors said.

    This is the first I recall hearing about the Red “Alibi Folder”. I knew he said he had receipts for stuff that weekend, but I had no idea that he actually kept them in a FOLDER, for MORE THAN 3 YEARS after she died?

    Makes one wonder, what other receipts did he keep for three years or more in a folder. Only those? For that particular weekend?

    Interesting….

  57. justanotherhen :

    facsmiley :

    Investigators on Oct. 31, 2007, found 23 firearms, five other weapons including nunchucks, and a red “alibi folder” with receipts from the day before Savio was found drowned, prosecutors said.

    I hadn’t realized they had found so many guns.

    I am sure you do facs, as these are the same guns Judge Schoenstedt got returned and then allocated to Stephen Peterson, because Drews gun license was revoked (!)

    You’re right facs, as in this article there is only mention 11/12 guns.

    Maybe Craig Stebic was the one with 23 guns (!!)

    http://cbs2chicago.com/local/drew.peterson.mother.2.682056.html

  58. cheryljones :I would still like to see the underage girlfriend’s brother’s case reopened. I, personally, IMO, MOO, etc etc and all that-do consider his hanging to be highly circumspect, especially considering that (IIRC) Drew was the first officer on the scene.I am SO sorry, and I apologize to his family, because I cannot remember his name, nor find it anywhere. (The links have been removed).

    found on acandyrose
    If you’re upset about your sister’s relationship, do you commit suicide instead?
    Drew Peterson reportedly was one of the first cops on the scene

    Drew Peterson apparently had a girfriend name Monica while he was married to 2nd wife, Victoria Rutkiewicz (They were married from 1982 and divorced 02/18/1992). Apparently, according to Drew Peterson’s former best friend, Ric Mims, Monica’s brother Steve was very upset about this relationship yet he committed suicide hanging himself in a garage, some felt was suspicious.
    [The 1986 date was calculated 21 years ago since Mims said this happened when he was around age 20 or younger]

    His name was Steve Ray.

    http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_mysteries.htm

  59. Thanks Facs! I didn’t mean for you to go find that article – But thanks! 🙂

    I find that folder to be pretty damning. If you did nothing wrong, why keep that folder? KWIM?

  60. harleyjoey :
    Thanks Facs! I didn’t mean for you to go find that article – But thanks!
    I find that folder to be pretty damning. If you did nothing wrong, why keep that folder? KWIM?

    Exactly, You’d only have a red folder with receipts for a certain day, if you had a red folder with receipts for every day, every week, every month and every year. (!)

    If there’s only a red folder with receipts emphasizing and precipitating certain events that is very deliberate and orchestrated, but then of course Drew wasn’t exactly anticipating a search of his house either (!!)

  61. justanotherhen :
    Molly, I believe that’s why his bond is so high, because he orchestrated and committed these crimes using his skills/influence as a Police Officer and a lot of his “bad acts” were committed whilst in uniform/on duty and as such he will be judged by a higher standard relevant to those who “Serve And Protect” as mentioned by Chief McGury.
    Needless to say this is IMO !

    Thanks justanotherhen…………..I hope that DP’s position as a police officer and his use of that position will be considered.

  62. harleyjoey :

    Investigators on Oct. 31, 2007, found 23 firearms, five other weapons including nunchucks, and a red “alibi folder” with receipts from the day before Savio was found drowned, prosecutors said.

    This is the first I recall hearing about the Red “Alibi Folder”. I knew he said he had receipts for stuff that weekend, but I had no idea that he actually kept them in a FOLDER, for MORE THAN 3 YEARS after she died?
    Makes one wonder, what other receipts did he keep for three years or more in a folder. Only those? For that particular weekend?
    Interesting….

    I wonder too if there’s a similar alibi file for the Sunday Stacy disappeared, and the three days head-clearing trip he took that week?

  63. rescueapet :
    mollymcgee – I believe Joe Hosey’s coverage/story will be up on the web later, and he’ll probably cover that.
    The problem is, from what I’ve seen in the past, the editors of the Sun Times News Group are so out-of-the-loop, apparently, they’re the last ones to post the day’s events, lagging behind everyone else. I don’t get their logic, when, in reality, it’s a high interest case, and they’re twiddling their thumbs doing whatever it is they do. I’ve even emailed them about it, and they didn’t have the decency to respond.

    Thanks Rescue………….I didn’t know how slow they were in getting stories up. Anything happening here, the story is up in minutes.

  64. grandam :

    cheryljones :I would still like to see the underage girlfriend’s brother’s case reopened. I, personally, IMO, MOO, etc etc and all that-do consider his hanging to be highly circumspect, especially considering that (IIRC) Drew was the first officer on the scene.I am SO sorry, and I apologize to his family, because I cannot remember his name, nor find it anywhere. (The links have been removed).

    found on acandyrose
    If you’re upset about your sister’s relationship, do you commit suicide instead?
    Drew Peterson reportedly was one of the first cops on the scene
    Drew Peterson apparently had a girfriend name Monica while he was married to 2nd wife, Victoria Rutkiewicz (They were married from 1982 and divorced 02/18/1992). Apparently, according to Drew Peterson’s former best friend, Ric Mims, Monica’s brother Steve was very upset about this relationship yet he committed suicide hanging himself in a garage, some felt was suspicious.
    [The 1986 date was calculated 21 years ago since Mims said this happened when he was around age 20 or younger]
    His name was Steve Ray.
    http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_mysteries.htm

    Thanks grandam………….I remember reading about the brother of DP’s girlfriend hanging himself after he had expressed his concern about DP’s relationship with his sister. I’ve always felt that was a suspicious death, since people who knew him said there was nothing to indicate he was depressed or despondent.

  65. Will Drew’s jury hear about his prior bad acts?
    June 19, 2010

    By JOE HOSEY jhosey@stmedianetwork.com
    JOLIET — The judge for Drew Peterson’s murder case cleared the courtroom so attorneys could argue in private about whether the accused wife-killer’s “prior bad acts” can be referenced at his trial.

    The courtroom stayed closed to the public for an hour and a half Friday, giving the lawyers plenty of time to discuss the former cop’s alleged misbehavior. And if the month-long pretrial hearing held earlier this year is any indication, they had plenty to talk about.

    After the secret session in front of Judge Stephen White concluded, two of Peterson’s attorneys, Joseph “Shark” Lopez and Joel Brodsky, said they were “very happy” with what transpired. And if this happiness stemmed from the lawyers convincing White to keep bad acts committed by Peterson but unrelated to the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, out of the upcoming trial, the jury will be deprived of hearing such stories as the time he supposedly slipped inside Savio’s home and held her at knife-point, the occasion he allegedly beat her to the point she needed to seek treatment at a hospital emergency room, the night he materialized at the bedside of his sleeping second wife after they divorced and the three or four instances he reportedly stuck a gun against her head while they were still married.

    All those tales of impropriety were told during the landmark hearing to determine what — if any — hearsay evidence will be permitted at Peterson’s murder trial. White’s decision on the hearsay evidence will remain under seal until a jury is selected.

    Defense’s requests
    Peterson was arrested in May 2009 and charged with murdering Savio, who was found drowned in her dry bathtub more than five years earlier. Soon after Savio’s body was discovered, state police insisted she was the victim of a freak accident. State police then abruptly changed their tune when Peterson’s next wife, Stacy Peterson, vanished in October 2007.
    State police suspect Peterson may have had a hand in killing his missing fourth wife but have failed to find her body or to charge him with harming her.

    Friday’s closed hearing followed Peterson’s legal team dropping an avalanche of requests on Judge White that ranged from quashing the warrants to exhume Savio’s grave and search Peterson’s home after Stacy vanished, to dismissing the murder charges entirely.

    The defense was largely unsuccessful in getting what they asked for, but White was amenable to reviewing a video montage of Peterson and Brodsky’s media appearances. Prosecutors compiled the video to apparently show how Peterson told contradictory stories about his missing and dead wives during news interviews.

    Defense attorney Steven Greenberg argued, “Just because (Peterson) said something on TV, it doesn’t come in unless it’s an admission” of guilt.

    Greenberg also called the montage the “greatest hits of Drew and Joel on their world tour.”

    White seemed to agree with Greenberg’s assessment of the video, saying that if it is the same tape he watched during the hearsay hearing, “there’s nothing on it.” Still, he agreed to watch the video again to see if it contains anything relevant and admissible.

    Mouthing messages
    Before White came to the bench, Norma Peterson, the wife of Peterson’s brother Paul was spotted in the courtroom gallery.
    Norma Peterson was warned not to communicate with her manacled brother-in-law after a bailiff noticed them mouthing words to each other. Brodsky then approached her to ask what she was doing there.

    “I just stopped in to say hi,” Norma Peterson later explained.

    “I was in the area and out of curiosity’s sake, I just stopped in to say hi,” Norma Peterson said. “I haven’t seen him in a year.”

    http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/bolingbrooksun/news/2409070,4_1_JO19_PETERSON_S1-100619.article

  66. Really, I don’t see how the Judge *can* exclude any prior bad acts that concern Kitty. Totally appropriate. Evidence. Will they need any other PBAs to convict? I don’t think so. 😀

  67. Friday’s closed hearing followed Peterson’s legal team dropping an avalanche of requests on Judge White that ranged from quashing the warrants to exhume Savio’s grave and search Peterson’s home after Stacy vanished, to dismissing the murder charges entirely.

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

    What’s with the request to “dismissing the murder charges entirely”

    Is that because Joel says there is no evidence ?

  68. Before White came to the bench, Norma Peterson, the wife of Peterson’s brother Paul was spotted in the courtroom gallery.
    Norma Peterson was warned not to communicate with her manacled brother-in-law after a bailiff noticed them mouthing words to each other. Brodsky then approached her to ask what she was doing there.

    “I just stopped in to say hi,” Norma Peterson later explained.

    “I was in the area and out of curiosity’s sake, I just stopped in to say hi,” Norma Peterson said. “I haven’t seen him in a year.”

    Could anyone be this naive to think the courtroom is an appropriate place for a social visit with the accused?

  69. Judge White just needs to have a sign printed that says, “The judge says no”.
    He can just hold it up whenever the defense stands up to address the court. Wish I were an artist, LOL. I’d draw a picture of that.

  70. Great idea, CherylJ, LOL what do you think of a button-operated illuminated sign?(and a trap door under Joel’s chair!) We don’t want the judge to strain himself, having to continually raise the sign…

  71. Ooh, good, Bucket! Flashing neon? And maybe just intermittent electrical charges going through to Joel’s chair that will continually remind him w/out a button having to be pushed…We certainly can’t have Judge White getting an idjit digit.

  72. facsmiley :

    Before White came to the bench, Norma Peterson, the wife of Peterson’s brother Paul was spotted in the courtroom gallery.
    Norma Peterson was warned not to communicate with her manacled brother-in-law after a bailiff noticed them mouthing words to each other. Brodsky then approached her to ask what she was doing there.
    “I just stopped in to say hi,” Norma Peterson later explained.
    “I was in the area and out of curiosity’s sake, I just stopped in to say hi,” Norma Peterson said. “I haven’t seen him in a year.”

    Could anyone be this naive to think the courtroom is an appropriate place for a social visit with the accused?

    I just stopped in to say hi …

    It sounds unbelievable to me. I can’t believe any adult would think they could just approach a suspected murderer in court and have a little chit chat.

    How close were they in the past? Does she think he is innocent? Why would she want to say ‘hi’ to him otherwise?

    Did she have something to pass onto him from his brother or another family member?

    Maybe I’m being harsh and she was just naive, but something about this bothers me.

  73. Noway – Honestly, what I find even more troublesome is the fact that Peterson’s attorney, Walter Maksym, went to Sneed of the Chicago Sun Times, and whined that he couldn’t even pass along Christmas cookies to Peterson when he visited him.

    Now, come on. An attorney that doesn’t understand that detention/prison facilities don’t allow such things. That the inmates use money to buy themselves what they want through the commissary? But, in spite of not “knowing” that this is not an option, telling a local columnist about it as though we’re all to feel sorry for Peterson?

  74. Maksym fits right in. I absolutely love to see the photos of Bratsky and Lopez together at the courthouse. A pair of shysters from Central Casting if ever I saw.

  75. justanotherhen :
    Friday’s closed hearing followed Peterson’s legal team dropping an avalanche of requests on Judge White that ranged from quashing the warrants to exhume Savio’s grave and search Peterson’s home after Stacy vanished, to dismissing the murder charges entirely.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    What’s with the request to “dismissing the murder charges entirely”
    Is that because Joel says there is no evidence ?

    I think it’s routine and falls under the category of “nothing ventured, nothing gained.” 🙂

  76. facsmiley :

    Before White came to the bench, Norma Peterson, the wife of Peterson’s brother Paul was spotted in the courtroom gallery.
    Norma Peterson was warned not to communicate with her manacled brother-in-law after a bailiff noticed them mouthing words to each other. Brodsky then approached her to ask what she was doing there.
    “I just stopped in to say hi,” Norma Peterson later explained.
    “I was in the area and out of curiosity’s sake, I just stopped in to say hi,” Norma Peterson said. “I haven’t seen him in a year.”

    Could anyone be this naive to think the courtroom is an appropriate place for a social visit with the accused?

    Facsmiley………..I don’t think it was appropriate for Norma Peterson to come to the courtroom for a social visit. I don’t buy Norma’s “I was just in the neighborhood, and decided to drop by” as being truthful. I was under the impression that DP’s brother, Paul, had distanced himself and family from DP, so I’m surprised by Norma being in the courtroom.

  77. I would suppose only Norma Peterson might know her own motivations for visiting the courthouse yesterday. I think it’s kind of odd but I’m not going to speculate about that.

  78. mollymcgee :

    justanotherhen :
    Friday’s closed hearing followed Peterson’s legal team dropping an avalanche of requests on Judge White that ranged from quashing the warrants to exhume Savio’s grave and search Peterson’s home after Stacy vanished, to dismissing the murder charges entirely.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    What’s with the request to “dismissing the murder charges entirely”
    Is that because Joel says there is no evidence ?

    I think it’s routine and falls under the category of “nothing ventured, nothing gained.” :)

    Exactly! Every legal pundit has said that this is par for the course at this stage of the proceedings. The defense knows that most of the motions will be denied but it’s appropriate for them to file a gazillion motions and hope a few of them are granted.

  79. facsmiley :
    I would suppose only Norma Peterson might know her own motivations for visiting the courthouse yesterday. I think it’s kind of odd but I’m not going to speculate about that.

    Facsmiley………….I agree, it was odd for Norma Peterson to come to court, and we don’t know what her motivation was. I just think the remark that she was in the neighborhood and decided to drop by, was strange. It’s the type of remark someone says when they drop by a friend’s house, saying they were nearby shopping or visiting with someone and thought they’d stop and say hello. A court hearing is not a social setting for visiting.

  80. IMO it seems like the fact that Brodsky would even ask her why she was there and her response that she was just in the neighborhood makes it sound more like she isn’t fond of Brodsky. I’m sure she had her own reasons to go and her answer that was reported had nothing to do with her real reason. Maybe she was mouthing to him that he needs a new lawyer?? 😉

  81. “Mouthing to him that he needs a new lawyer?”

    Oh, no, don’t say that. I don’t want him to get rid of Brodsky. He’s getting just what he deserves with that lawyer. Of course, no one knows what Brodsky will or will not accomplish once the trial starts and the sideshow antics stop, but it’s obvious what style of defense he’s used up until now, and, well, I think things will be just fine with Brodsky’s representation of Peterson in court.

    ¯\(°_o)/¯

  82. You know, TAI, I had exactly the opposite thoughts-my take was that since she was obviously there and communicating w/Drew, Brodsky thought he’d spotted an ally! I thought he probably ran (not walked) over there to see how far he could take this.
    But I’m going to stop speculating, now. Don’t want to get in trouble.
    HAPPY FATHER’S DAY TO THOSE WHO DO IT RIGHT-and there are so many more of those than the ones that do it wrong. It’s just sadly that the bad ones get press. My dad is 91 and still going strong. I cannot imagine his having anything in the world in common w/Peterson, except having a wonderful daughter, of course. 😉
    But then my daddy was there to help raise me.

  83. cheryljones :
    You know, TAI, I had exactly the opposite thoughts-my take was that since she was obviously there and communicating w/Drew, Brodsky thought he’d spotted an ally! I thought he probably ran (not walked) over there to see how far he could take this.
    But I’m going to stop speculating, now. Don’t want to get in trouble.
    HAPPY FATHER’S DAY TO THOSE WHO DO IT RIGHT-and there are so many more of those than the ones that do it wrong. It’s just sadly that the bad ones get press. My dad is 91 and still going strong. I cannot imagine his having anything in the world in common w/Peterson, except having a wonderful daughter, of course.
    But then my daddy was there to help raise me.

    Cheryljones…………thankfully, not too many have anything in common with Peterson. The many many good fathers far out-weighs the bad ones like Peterson, and we’re all lucky in that respect. Happy Fathers Day to all fathers everywhere!

  84. I will lose all faith in the justice system if it allows a man like Brodsky to pimp his client out to the media for a year and a half and then keep it quiet from the jurors. Even though the media was because Stacy disappeared, and not because Kathleen died, it is all relevant IMO. Let them see what a POS DP really is.

  85. I think there are tougher rules on what can be admitted as evidence at the guilt/innocence phase of the trial but I think more of this can come into play during any sentencing phase (if there is one).

    I found an article about Scott Peterson’s case where the judge did allow the TV interviews and said the interviews can “show consciousness of guilt” and the “defendant’s state of mind” and their “probative value outweighs any prejudicial value.”

    http://legacy.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20040323/news_1n23laci.html

  86. Nice cite, Think, thanks.

    Aussie…we know exactly what you mean….sometimes The Rules can create a proper Through the Looking Glass outcome. I’m liking the European non-adversarial, truth-seeking approach to justice these days. 😉

  87. And here is a link that shows how the prosecution used Susan Smith’s TV interviews during her sentencing phase.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1995/07/25/us/focus-on-susan-smith-s-lies-and-a-smile.html

    The second phase of the trial will be much like the first, except that the prosecution will have more latitude in building its contention that Mrs. Smith is a cold-blooded murderer who got rid of her children in hope of reclaiming a lover who had said he did not want a woman with children.

    The lead prosecutor, Tommy Pope, began the state’s case by showing videotapes of Mrs. Smith as she lied about the disappearance of her sons, first in a tearful plea to the nonexistent carjacker outside the Union County Courthouse on Nov. 2, 1994, and then in three interviews on network talk shows the morning of Nov. 3.

Comments are closed.