Drew Peterson’s gun charge dismissal won’t be appealed

The Chicago Tribune has reported that prosecutors have decided not to appeal Judge Richard Schoenstadt‘s decision to dismiss the weapons charges against Drew Peterson.

After becoming the only suspect in the disappearance of his wife, Stacy Peterson, three years ago, Peterson’s home was searched and his weapons confiscated. He appealed successfully to have his confiscated weapons returned, but it was determined that one weapon, a Colt AR-15 had an illegal 11½-inch barrel and that led to his arrest on the illegal weapons charges.

Drew Peterson remains in jail awaiting trial for the murder of this third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Chicago Tribune Story

~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>


17 thoughts on “Drew Peterson’s gun charge dismissal won’t be appealed

  1. …State’s attorney spokesman Charles Pelkie said “circumstances have changed” — Peterson is now jailed on $20 million bail in the drowning death of his third wife — and prosecutors didn’t want to risk an appeals court decision “that would bind the entire state.”

    “The bottom line is, an illegal gun is not going back on the street,” he said. Anyone who wanted to claim the gun from state police must show that it is registered under the National Firearms Act, something they won’t be able to do, Pelkie said.

    Peterson’s attorney Joel Brodsky said the gun was never illegal but was pleased by the state’s attorney’s decision to let the case lie.

    “That’s the first smart move (State’s attorney) James Glasgow has made in a long time,” Brodsky said.

    When asked if Peterson wanted his rifle back, Brodsky said he’d answer tomorrow — after the deadline for prosecutors to file an appeal has passed.


  2. Drew Peterson’s son will continue to be paid as Oak Brook cop
    Village’s police board refuses to suspend him without pay; Nov. 30 disciplinary hearing set

    By Steve Schmadeke, Tribune reporter

    9:26 PM CDT, November 1, 2010

    Oak Brook police Officer Stephen Peterson can keeping collecting a paycheck as he awaits a hearing later this month on whether his behavior after his father’s fourth wife, Stacy, went missing violated village codes.

    The village’s Board of Police and Fire Commissioners voted 2-1 Monday night to deny a motion by police Chief Thomas Sheahan to suspend Peterson without pay. They also set a hearing date of Nov. 30 on the three charges against the 31-year-old officer.

    Peterson has been suspended since August, when he testified at a hearing that he accepted three guns from his father, Drew Peterson, who was worried state police would confiscate them after his wife vanished in 2007. Prosecutors charged him in 2008 with owning an illegal weapon.

    More at Chicago Tribune

  3. Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow has opted not to appeal Judge Richard Schoenstedt’s dismissal of felony unlawful use of a weapon charges against Peterson, the disgraced former Bolingbrook police sergeant. His embattled Oak Brook cop son, Stephen, however, learned Monday that his chief is going ahead with his bid to fire him.

    But Stephen Peterson has dodged one bullet — Oak Brook police Chief Thomas Sheehan failed to convince the village’s board of fire and police commissioners to suspend him without pay pending a Nov. 30 hearing on whether to fire him.


  4. Part of the problem with the Police commission is that it is hard to fire these officers. These officers know this, therefore this is why they do some of these things, because they know they will get away with it! Like Father, like son, he will probably get away with this just as Drew did, and keep his job. What will it take for the commission to see these two guys don’t play by the rules? Regardless if the gun charge was thrown out or not, Stephen still possessed an illegal weapon in his home, and hid them from law enforcement. What he did anyone else would of went to jail for doing! He shouldn’t be allowed to be an officer anymore!

  5. Hi, Lorie. Are you local?
    I know down here in southeast Texas it is very difficult to fire an officer, just as you said. It’s even harder to prove wrongdoing on behalf of an entire police dept-harrassment, discrimination, etc. Brings us back to the age-old question of (paraphrased) who polices the police, doesn’t it?
    It’s been a slow few days, hasn’t it? But I wish this weren’t the news we were given to discuss.

  6. Hi Doggie,

    Yes I am local here in the same town Skunk is from. It is very hard to prove wrongdoing by the Police. Things that need to change, not just here but across the nation. Just because they have a badge doesn’t give them right to do as they please, and get away with it! IMO he needs to be fired, and I think maybe we should all write to the commission and let them know how we feel about it. Maybe that will help to inspire them to do the right thing. If any of of us did something like this we would be arrested, and charged. What makes him so special to hide evidence from the Police, and hold unto an illegal weapon?

  7. To be honest, the less I hear about this case in the news the happier I am.

    It means that Drew is in the most hated position he could be in. He’s behind bars, in isolation, and no one is paying him any attention. You couldn’t pick a better hell for that man.

    Enjoy the silence!

  8. Interesting comment from a fellow officer of Stephen Peterson (cleaned up a bit):

    Anonymous said…
    …Petersons son is a idiot who has commited many offenses he should have been fired for. I was oak brook police officer and i can tell you that kid is a jackass. You wouldn’t believe the shit he got away with that hasn’t even been reported…
    November 2, 2010 1:43 PM

  9. It seems that Michael Sneed has really become Peterson’s and Brodsky’s flunky. To think that anyone really cares that Peterson thinks his son is being targeted unfairly for taking and holding potential evidence in a criminal investigation is ludicrous. To think that anyone cares that Peterson doesn’t exactly like the man who is prosecuting him is laughable. For Sneed to take that crappy gossip from Peterson and/or his attorney and put it in her column as though it’s worthy of anyone’s time is pathetic. About as worthless as the news that Maksym gave her about not being able to give Peterson a Christmas cookie last year.

    Maybe Stephen Peterson will beat these current charges, but he was no choir boy prior to his father’s notoriety, so blaming his missteps on anything but his own actions isn’t going to cut it.

    Tell me again why we should have any compassion for Peterson and his outrageous opinions of his detractors? I’d rather that the issues of domestic violence and wayward cops be the focus of those of us who think those matters are of more importance than what Peterson thinks of another man’s hair, or what his son’s supervisor thinks of him.

    Peterson is where he needs to be, finally. I think most of us agree on that, regardless of what latest gossip Brodsky hands over to Sneed.!!!!

  10. Peterson is where he belongs alright,and the best part of it,no-one cares to listen to the crap that comes out of the mouth of him or that flunky lawyer. It is such a blessing that he is being silenced. So glad we dont have to hear his nonsense anymore. He knows what he is, and he has to look at himself each and every day,knowing what he did. Mirror Mirror on the wall,imagine what the mirror is saying back to him.

  11. Drew can lash out at the luxurious locks of the State’s Attorney all he likes. Meanwhile he’s facing life in prison, and a rash (and eternal damnation if you believe in that sort of thing).

  12. Wow, whoever thought the State’s Attorney’s luxurious locks would annoy the murderer, DP, so much. or is it JB who is so jealous… 🙂

  13. judgin :

    Wow, whoever thought the State’s Attorney’s luxurious locks would annoy the murderer, DP, so much. or is it JB who is so jealous… :)

    Haha, exactly. This comment,

    “Working that hairdo of his.”

    should be sheer embarrassment for Brodsky, as Peterson’s attorney. Letting his client channel his name-calling, silly remarks through Sneed is just another reason to think that Brodsky has lost his grip, and is grasping for any attention he can muster during these lulls in Peterson’s case. Since they are able to get Sneed to print anything they throw her way, what the hell are they waiting for in not giving her real proof or evidence that Peterson’s exact whereabouts during the timeframe of Kathleen’s death are indisputable? All these two boobs do is get more outrageous in their personal attacks and name calling.

    Funny that these two, Peterson and Brodsky, would channel their loosey-goosey name calling, letter writing, personal attacks on their latest targets. I don’t know, eventually they’ll have to run out of people to attack for Peterson’s woes, no? The victims, their families, friends, the cops, a few judges, the attorneys prosecuting the case, Stephen Peterson’s chief. Who’s left? Still, no matter how you look at it, Brodsky’s client is still cooling his jets in jail, and no credible “leaks” of exculpating evidence have we heard as to why Peterson is being held without basis. In other words, no one is running to Sneed on behalf of Peterson with anything more than attempts at blame and name calling, rather than thought provoking information to clear Peterson’s name.

    Peterson is where he should be, and should be for a long time to come. As to his son, he’s a big boy and can and should handle his own accusations in the proper way, and not let daddy call his supervisor names. Of course, it was daddy that got him in this mess in the first place, so I guess he’s good with letting daddy and daddy’s bad boy attorney verbally attack in the media those who hold his career on the line

    They are all a joke.

  14. Loosey Goosey. LOL

    Let’s say Drew was suspected of being a bank robber and Stephen was a private security guard at a mall, and Stephen hid guns from the police for his dad, do you think he would keep his job?

    It’s a joke, isn’t it? They are alledgedly held to a higher standard than “civilians” (eg they can’t beat their wives, eh, Drew?) but it doesn’t seem to work that way, does it, if DP got away with identifying an undercover cop to a baddie and worked “independently” and Stephen may yet get away with perverting the course of justice by hiding potential murder weapons from a lawful investigation, regardless of the illegality of one of the firearms. He bloody well knows better.

  15. Just like he knew better than to drive his patrol car and wear his uniform to appear before the Grand Jury. Wiseguy like his dad.

  16. Wiseguy he is, Bucket. If, though, as his daddy says, he is being targeted unfairly, well then I guess he’ll get the distinguished privilege of continuing to police the streets he claims he so loves to do. If not, then his smartass attitude and ways may come back to haunt him. I think, though, that maybe Stephen Peterson might want to tell daddy and his attorney to back off the wise cracks and digs that have to do with his own circumstances, and act like his own man. Daddy is the one that got him in his mess, but he might finally want to realize that daddy has deconstructed his own individual life. He’s guardian of his siblings, he’s lost his marriage, he’s close to losing his job, and his name in the media isn’t exactly doing him any good. Geesh, who’d want a father like that? No thanks.

Comments are closed.