Drew Peterson denied bid to get out of jail…again.

Not surprisingly, Joel Brodsky’s latest attempt to spring Drew Peterson from jail while awaiting an appellate court’s decision on hearsay evidence, was denied last week.

Brodky’s motion read very much like previous bids, and even seemed to have contained a paragraph or two with outdated information cut and pasted from previous motions. Since virtually nothing about the circumstances had changed since the last request, it was pretty easy to assume that the decision would be the same this time – and it was.

Peterson remains in solitary confinement at the Will County Adult Detention Facility, where he has been detained since his arrest in May 2009. He is charged with the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Read more at the Shorewood Patch

~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.~

Advertisements

53 thoughts on “Drew Peterson denied bid to get out of jail…again.

  1. The jury has reached a verdict in the Casey Anthony case. The verdict will be read at 2:15 Florida Time/ 1:15 p.m. Central time.

    The attorneys are coming back to the courthouse.

  2. I love the “Denied” graphic over Drew’s picture. Glad to see this was denied, AGAIN.
    Isn’t Stephen’s appeal scheduled to be in court soon?

  3. Interesting verdict on the Casey Anthony charges and a lot of public reaction (reminds me of the anger and dismay over the OJ verdict). Wonder if it could result in a backlash in Drew’s trial.

  4. This jury’s ruling takes a lot of getting used to, that’s for sure. I think the hardest thing for me to consider is that she will probably make a lot of money after all of this, surround herself with the idiots like the guy who gave the prosecutor the finger in court last week, and live la vida loca.

    But, as I heard one talking head say, this will not be the end of her. Like OJ, she’ll mess up some time or other. That’s probably true, but that baby’s death should have received the correct verdict, and I don’t believe that happened.

  5. So is Glenn Selig saying he wouldn’t take Casey Anthony as a client? I sort of don’t believe that. Although his comments here make it look as if he thinks it wouldn’t be profitable so…I guess that might stop him.

    …”Casey is going to be a tough person to market,” said Glenn Selig, founder of Tampa-based The Publicity Agency. “She is in the category of O.J. Simpson. The majority of people feel she got away with something. At the end of the day, you have a child who is no longer with us.”

    The sad story of Caylee Anthony, first reported missing in July, 2008, has achieved a sensational level of media attention and become part of the national discourse. But movie studios, book publishers and media bookers have to decide if they want to risk a negative reaction for paying Anthony to tell her story, Selig said.

    ABC, said Selig, received a backlash for paying about $200,000 for “licensing fees” to use images of Casey Anthony and her daughter.

    Shortly after the verdict was announced Tuesday afternoon, Facebook postings cropped up promising boycotts of advertisers on any show to feature Anthony.

    That, said Selig, is a serious consideration.

    “I think people want to hear what Anthony has to say, but all business people in the end are trying to make money,” said Selig. “They are asking themselves the same question. If Anthony is directly associated with any project, how will it make them look?”…

    http://www2.tbo.com/news/breaking-news/2011/jul/06/3/will-casey-anthony-profit-from-her-story-ar-242158/

  6. Looks like the IRS still has money to get from her, Zenaida’s lawyers have reportedly filed for her to provide her deposition now, and Tim Miller is talking about going after her to recoup his organization’s expenses of trying to find Caylee.

    I wonder who is going to want to take her on. Unbelievably – according to TMZ.com Vivid Entertainment has allegedly taken their offer off of the table due to the public’s negative reaction to Casey. If they don’t want to touch her with a 10-foot pole that is either a sign of her being totally unmarketable or them doing a publicity stunt – it’s 50/50 to me.

    In the meantime, I am just saddened that no one is even doing time for throwing that baby away like trash – even if her death was an accident. :/

  7. Everyones saying Casey will leave the state , or the country, but she was sentenced to one year probation for the check charges, To begin whenever she was released from jail. Heres judge stricklands ruling.
    She was sentenced to 412 days of time served in jail and one year of probation and ordered to pay $348 in court fees and $5,517.75 in investigative fees.
    I wonder if judge Perry will remind her about the fees due and the probation that will begin if she gets out tomorrow.

  8. According to Dr. Drew lastnight, lightning hit a tree where the remains of that precious baby was found. I heard it on his show, and also a friend of mine told me this. Makes you go HMmmmm

  9. Good Lord, this is vile to look at.

    This isn’t the Rob Lowe you’re used to seeing.

    There’s nothing pretty about the Parks and Recreation star in his new role as accused wife-killer Drew Peterson in Untouchable, a Lifetime thriller now shooting in Los Angeles.

    To play the 57-year-old former Illinois police sergeant – jailed since May 2009 on charges he drowned his third wife, Kathleen Savio – the chameleon-esque actor, 47, goes through a nine-hour transformation every day.

    http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20508774,00.html

  10. Hahaha, nine hours? Wow. That’s amazing.

    Good thing those nine hours are only spent on making him look like Peterson. It would take years to make him as dark and conniving as the character he’s portraying.

  11. Where are the big bags under his eyes? Sorry all, Rob Lowe make the Skunk look good. And we all know that ain”t right.

  12. I certainly can’t say that I was surprised that Drew’s request for release was denied…I just hope that when his case comes to trial that we dont see the same travesty that befell the Anthony trial.. To say that I was apalled by the verdict is mild…I was numb in disbelief …

  13. Looks like Selig is still trying to figure out how to get his name out there or get money somehow by riding the Casey train…

    “A Tampa-based public relations firm has an offer for the men and women who decided the fate of Casey Anthony in her murder trial: If you’re not charging for your story, they won’t charge for representation.

    The Publicity Agency announced the offer of pro-bono work on Friday. The reason, founder Glenn Selig said in a statement, was “to help those jurors who want to tell their stories.” “Given the public backlash, members of the jury must be scared or worried about speaking,” Glenn Selig said. “They may want to speak out but likely feel overwhelmed given the level of media attention.”

    http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2011/07/08/5624981.htm

  14. Drew Peterson said to be pleased by Anthony verdict
    Ex-cop heard the news through jailhouse grapevine, lawyer says

    Among those encouraged last week when a Florida jury found Casey Anthony not guilty of murder was none other than Drew Peterson, who quickly heard the news through the jailhouse grapevine, his attorney said.

    Joel Brodsky said his client, held for more than two years on charges that he drowned his third wife, was pleased that jurors in the high-profile case based their decision solely on the evidence.

    “The jury is not to judge people morally; it’s to judge whether there is sufficient evidence,” Brodsky said. “There was more evidence against Casey Anthony — circumstantial evidence — than there is against Drew Peterson. It’s good to see a jury do the correct thing.”

    Others didn’t draw the same comparison.

    “Every case needs to be judged on its own merits, and we are preparing to move forward with this prosecution,” responded Charles Pelkie, a spokesman for the Will County state’s attorney’s office. “The state’s attorney has great faith in our system of justice and jury system.”

    A little more than a year has passed since Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, was set to go on trial in the 2004 drowning of Kathleen Savio, his third wife, found dead in a dry bathtub inside her Bolingbrook home.

    The case has been on hold ever since prosecutors decided at the last minute to file an appeal over hearsay evidence that a judge, who has since retired, threw out. In a strange twist, a panel of three appellate judges in February heard Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow ask them to ignore a hearsay law he helped create and instead base their ruling on existing common law.

    It was the first time oral arguments before the court had been televised.

    Attorneys from both sides expected a decision to be handed down in several weeks and were busy preparing for trial. But as weeks turned to months, everyone has “gone into a holding pattern,” said Peterson defense attorney Steve Greenberg.

    Greenberg said he doesn’t expect the case to go to trial until next year. If the higher court’s ruling goes against them, Brodsky said his side won’t appeal.

    “We’re primed and ready to go,” Brodsky said.

    The delays haven’t kept Peterson’s name out of the news. Filming is under way for a Lifetime television movie about Peterson and his still-missing fourth wife, Stacy, who vanished in 2007. Rob Lowe is slated to play Peterson in the movie. Prosecutors say they believe Peterson strangled her in the bedroom of their Bolingbrook home, but he has never been charged.

    Peterson’s attorneys said they expect the film to be biased against their client but don’t expect it to affect the trial.

    “How many people are actually going to watch that?” Greenberg asked. “They’re not going to get on the jury anyway, so it’s not a big deal.”

    Besides the movie, a comedic play called “Waiting for Drew Peterson” — a story of two unhinged sisters who are convinced Peterson is innocent — had a short run at Chicago’s Annoyance Theater, ending last week.

    In February, Peterson’s son, Stephen, lost his job as an Oak Brook police officer for allegedly obstructing the investigation into Stacy Peterson’s disappearance. He did not immediately tell police that he had accepted three guns and $236,800 from his father shortly after Stacy disappeared, officials said.

    Another son, Tom, graduated at the top of his Bolingbrook High School class last month and plans to study neuroscience.

    Drew Peterson also found he could sometimes make his own news, sending a 10-page letter complaining about life in jail and his treatment by the justice system that the Sun-Times published lengthy excerpts from in two installments in August.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-drew-peterson-0710-20110710,0,1355434.story

  15. Prosecutors say they believe Peterson strangled her in the bedroom of their Bolingbrook home, but he has never been charged.

    Really? I didn’t know that. You learn something new every day. In all these years, I didn’t realize that the prosecutors openly mentioned that they thought Stacy was strangled. Hmmm.

  16. No, it’s Stacy. I thought I remembered reading or hearing that the theory was there was a confrontation in their bedroom, ending with her maybe hitting her head on the nightstand. Which nightstand, I believe, became mysteriously missing from the room. Something like that. I never heard a reference being made to Stacy being strangled. I can’t imagine where that would come from, unless one of the kids heard something and relayed it to LE at the time. It’s just that that reference to Peterson strangling Stacy was kind of a shock to read, since I never heard that before.

  17. Wow, a “second cousin” who is so special to Cindy as to know a book is in the works fingering George Anthony as a molester of his daughter. Believe that? Not me. I mean to say, I don’t know what George Anthony is or isn’t, did or didn’t do, but I am relatively sure this obscure second cousin of Cindy’s is full of it. Will the next tell-all fool be a sixth cousin, five times removed?

    A former sister-in-law of Cindy and George Anthony, who was married to Cindy’s brother, has been spewing her b.s. too, and has a problem keeping things straight as she recites them from one interview to another.

    That’s the sad part of all of this–the weirdos are going to come out of the woodwork with their claims of knowledge into the workings of the Anthony family. I don’t think any of us need to hear from them. I think enough has come out of the mouths of the Anthonys directly to see they’re dysfunctional people. The worst thing, though, is that any of these nut cases, especially the former murder defendant and her screwy family, can profit from this. Now, that’s really pathetic.

  18. It’s sad to me that although Hosey’s book is called “Fatal Vows: The tragic wives of Sargent Drew Peterson”, the movie based on it is being called “The Drew Peterson Story” all over the media and all we see are photos of Rob Lowe. *sigh*

    At least NBC made one creepy observation:

    …It might be somewhat unnerving to realize the pose Lowe is striking comes from a photograph of Peterson taken with his fourth wife, Stacy. No one has seen or heard from her since October 2007.
    Peterson has been jailed since 2009, on charges he killed his third wife, Kathleen Savio…

    http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/PHOTO-Rob-Lowe-playing-Drew-Peterson-makeup-Lifetime-movie-resemblance-125288473.html

  19. rescueapet says:
    July 9, 2011 at 12:01 am (Edit)
    “Prosecutors say they believe Peterson strangled her in the bedroom of their Bolingbrook home, but he has never been charged.”

    Really? I didn’t know that. You learn something new every day. In all these years, I didn’t realize that the prosecutors openly mentioned that they thought Stacy was strangled. Hmmm.

    Prosecutors probably didn’t say it. Especially if this came from defense sources. I’ve seen them attribute erroneous info to the prosecutors before.

  20. I did a little poking around and could come up with nothing quoting prosecutors saying that they think Stacy was strangled. That said, there has been lots of speculation on forums etc. that Stacy was strangled or suffocated since there was no blood found in the bedroom (indicating a beating or stabbing) and certainly no gunshots heard. It makes sense if that is what the prosecution thinks.

    Ages ago, when former friend of Drew’s, Ric Mims, gave an interview to the Enquirer it was mentioned that “some investigators” believed Stacy was strangled. Maybe that’s where the Tribune got the idea.

    12/17/2007 National Enquirer Exclusive Interview with Ric Mims

    …”Kris heard Drew fighting with Stacy in their bedroom on the day she disappeared,” said Mims. “Kris’ bedroom is right next to his parents’ bedroom, and when Stacy argues, she shouts.”

    Mims is convinced Drew “snapped Stacy’s neck in their bed. Drew’s a karate expert and has been since he was a young man. It’s quick. It’s quiet. And she wouldn’t have a chance to scream.” (Some investigators believe Stacy was strangled.)…

    http://www.acandyrose.com/2007-12-17-NE-RichardMimsInterview.htm

  21. Ah, that’s where the reference to strangulation comes in. Now that I think back, there was a mention of Peterson having knowledge of Martial Arts techniques that he could have used to incapacitate someone.

    I wasn’t really convinced that prosecutors did say that Stacy Peterson was strangled. That’s why I said I’ve never heard that before. I thought that was a broad reaching comment, since Peterson hasn’t even been charged with anything related to Stacy Peterson, and, thus, there was never a formal news conference. If anything, news from the Will County SA’s Office is slim to none.

  22. Looking at what just occurred with the Casey Anthony trial, I guess there is a chance that DP will go free, after his trial. I do not want to go there, as the KC trial took a lot out of me. Guess the devils can celebrate together. KC is JUST up DP’s alley.

    What a world this has become

  23. LostAcres: There rarely ever is a murder that is captured on film, right? Most trials proceed based on circumstantial evidence. In the case of baby Caylee, there wasn’t much left of her to autopsy and find tissue to use. The pieces of the puzzle were many, and from what’s been reported, two-thirds of the nation believed she was guilty and would have voted that way. I don’t know what was going on in the minds of the rest of the jury that haven’t spoken out yet, but Juror #3 made no sense in her explanation of how they supposedly voted, when they were given three options of guilt.

    I was reading a story from a former OJ Simpson juror, and she said it was a year of hell listening to her family, friends and others ask her what she was thinking when she voted to acquit him. In fact, she said she followed this trial, and would have voted guilty. Go figure…..

    I laugh when I hear attorneys like Brodsky bitch and moan that they can’t stand the hearsay laws. In fact, Baez’s opening argument included, as we all know, explosive details that said the monster mother was molested by her father and brother. You know how he wanted to get it in? He wanted Casey’s boyfriends to testify that she supposedly told them Lee (never her father) was standing over her as she was sleeping, and she awoke to find him doing so. HEARSAY statements by the boyfriends. Two of them. Baez wanted it to come in. Didn’t find a problem at all with the hearsay statements. BAH!!!!!!!

    The next time you hear one of these media whore attorneys cry and whine about hearsay, just remember that they love it when it suits them.

  24. Juror #3 said, if one person would have said Casey abused Caylee, they probably would have voted guilty. In Peterson case theres plenty of proof of abuse, hospital records, etc.

  25. That is true, LA. It only takes a couple of strong personalities to sway the others into believing one thing or another, no matter how impartial they all vow to remain.

    As for the Casey Anthony and Drew Peterson murder cases, I don’t see a huge grounds for comparison. You’ve got apples and oranges.

    1. A body decomposed to the point of skeletonization (no way to determine manner of death) vs. a body only a few days old with visible injuries and manner of death determined to be drowning.

    2. Vague motive that can only be guessed at (wants the Bella Vita?) vs. Big Motive (50% of shared assets, a million dollar life-insurance policy, control of the children, etc.)

    3. No testimony that she considered hurting the victim vs. people who can testify that Drew tried to pay them to kill Kathleen

    4. Can’t place Casey at the murder scene vs. Drew is the first one in the house, shoos people away and rearranges death scene.

    5. No one to testify (even second hand) that she killed Caylee vs. Pastor Schori’s testimony that Stacy told him Drew had killed Kathleen.

    6. Caylee never told anyone that she was afraid of her mother vs. numerous letters and statements from Kathleen stating that Drew was going to kill her and make it look like an accident.

    Etc…

  26. Are you kidding me? She partied and carried on for 31 days during which her baby was dead, and that juror said if there was proof of abuse they’d have voted guilty? Now I know they’re nuts!!!!! One statement after another defies logic.

    Personally, I think they were tired of the long month they were there, the constant interruptions, and it being the Fourth of July Holiday weekend. They just wanted to be unanimous and get out of there, IMO. Can’t convince me otherwise.

  27. Facs. I am with you 100 percent. I am just scared after what I have seen with this KC trial. There is no doubt in anyones mind that this girls was guilty of murdering her daughter , except the jury.
    Will there be doubt in DP’s case?

  28. I couldn’t say, LA and I share your concern. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence in the case and if the jury wants to see DNA, and videotaped surveillance it isn’t going to be there.

    That said, if Drew is acquitted of Kathleen’s murder, I get the feeling that it won’t be long before he’s charged with Stacy’s. Too bad Drew didn’t spent that year and a half before his arrest trying to locate his “runaway” wife. 😉

  29. grandam says:
    July 10, 2011 at 6:02 pm (Edit)

    Juror #3 said, if one person would have said Casey abused Caylee, they probably would have voted guilty. In Peterson case theres plenty of proof of abuse, hospital records, etc.

    I hadn’t heard this from Juror #3, but now that I think about it, what a ridiculous thing to say. No, there’s no evidence that Casey abused Caylee, but she didn’t take on any of the responsibility that goes along with caring for a toddler. She was merely a part-time babysitter for her daughter. She didn’t work, so she didn’t feed, clothe or shelter her. If it wasn’t for her parents, Caylee wouldn’t have been showered with toys, cute little girl outfits, and so on….

    One thing that has come out of this is, as they say, you can never predict what a jury is going to do. So, in Peterson’s case, he has as much chance of being convicted as not. A guy with his wife problems will be looked at closely, I’d think. Just as the jury saw a smiling, happy mama playin’ with her beautiful daughter, Peterson’s jury will see pictures and reports of physical abuse against Kathleen, and a son who will testify that his father dragged her through a door by her hair. If that jury needs proof of abuse, well then, it’s in the bag. 😉

  30. So to clear up the mystery about prosecutors theorizing that Stacy was strangled in her bedroom. Apparently, this is not previously undisclosed news and I just didn’t look hard enough for when this was first stated.

    James Glasgow surmised that Stacy was strangled in his closing arguments from the hearsay hearing last year.

    Drew Peterson, the former Bolingbrook police sergeant, likely killed his 23-year-old wife Stacy using a chokehold in their bedroom on the Sunday morning family and friends first noticed she disappeared, Will County’s top prosecutor said Friday.

    State’s Attorney James Glasgow, who referred to Peterson as a “knucklehead” and “hideous B-movie stalker,” laid out for the first time a theory of how Stacy, who disappeared in 2007, was killed.

    Glasgow’s comments came during closing arguments in a unique pretrial hearing on whether hearsay statements can be heard by a jury in Peterson’s upcoming trial for the 2004 drowning death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio…

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-02-20/news/ct-met-0220-drew-peterson-20100219_1_kathleen-savio-drew-peterson-prosecutors

    My apologies for hinting that the Tribune may have gotten erroneous info!

  31. Holy moly! So it is true the prosecutors laid it out that she may have been strangled by DPeterson’s choke hold. The Trib got it right, and the reporters are accurate in their details for this story.

    Since it’s coming up on four years, even if remains of Stacy were to be found, the cause of her death would be pretty much undeterminable, no? If Peterson is charged, isn’t this going to be another trial of extensive circumstantial evidence, like most trials are? Or, are we going to morph into a society of cutting loose murderers because the cases against them don’t pass the CSI checklist? How did juries convict people before DNA and CSI? Did they connect the dots, evaluate the circumstantial evidence and use common sense? Maybe. Now, you almost need to be a rocket scientist to sit through and listen to the complicated testimony of forensic experts with degrees that takes 40 years to obtain, and be expected to evaluate it and know what it all means. Yeah, right.

  32. I would imagine that with how long Stacy has been missing that it would be hard to determine an actual cause of death. If her bones are still in one place, maybe they are able to see the neck bone is broken?? Or if she was shot – they could see damage to bones by bullets or knives. I am surprised that the prosecutor would even say anything about the case outside of a trial. All that will matter though is what they tell a jury – if they ever do go before a jury.

  33. Anyone else hit by the bad storms this morning? I’m lucky to have survived. We were vacationing in our trailer in Michigan and a tree crushed our trailer with us in it.

  34. Oh man, TAI, the angels were watching out for you!! So sorry about your trailer, but glad you and yours are okay.

    On a lighter note, maybe you should go buy a lottery ticket cuz you’re on a lucky streak.

  35. That is what someone else told me. I have a feeling though I am a person who is not lucky in monetary rewards but definitely lucky in other ways. I still am freaked out and cannot believe we are alive. My daughter and her boyfriend were with me looking out the back window. We had no idea there were even storm warnings as we had just woke up.

  36. It started out a beautiful, sunny morning. I kept seeing severe t-storm warnings on the early morning news, and I thought it looked too nice out for them to be right. Once it did roll in, it was the worst I’ve seen it in a long time. The block before ours had a tree topple over onto a car, trees down everywhere, power lines down.

    Luck continue to be with you!

  37. TAI said, ” I am surprised that the prosecutor would even say anything about the case outside of a trial.”

    Glasgow outlined the theory during closing arguments at the hearsay hearings. It was only a theory and there’s no reason why it would have any impact at an eventual trial…if there ever is one. The prosecution can’t be held to a theory they proposed during that hearing. It just doesn’t work that way.

    But why not guess that she might have been strangled? As I noted above, no blood at the scene, no gunshot sounds. Reports of an argument and then silence. Drew knew how to put people in a choke hold. He had done it to Kathleen on the front lawn of their house in front of witnesses. To me it looks like a pretty good deduction.

    Glad you came out of the storm unscathed! We had a large branch come down but it flew about 30 feet and somehow missed house, deck, wires and fence and landed in the driveway. Feeling very lucky as well.

  38. Facs – I had forgotten that they already had part of the trial with the hearsay trial. You are right. I was thinking that they said he had just said that to the media. Definitely a far different cry and one that he had to do in an effort to get the hearsay evidence in. I also agree that the scenario makes the most sense with the lack of blood evidence and the argument then silence. That has long been the theory that I had as well – but totally forgot the prosecution had to say anything on it.

    Thanks for the thoughts. I’m glad the tree branch by you missed everything and everyone by you is OK.

  39. TIA, very glad to hear that you are safe even if your home away from home is not. Things can be replaced people cannot.

    As for the Anthony trial…I believe the jurors were wrong, I think they were looking for the TV way things play out; major confession, DNA evidence, someone saw something. In the real world those things are just not there. But the jury has spoken and that is just how it has to be, like it or not. The jury also is not privy to all the information they we as spectators are.

    I do think sympathy was high for her for some reason. People have a hard time believing a mother could kill her child, especially when the video tape shows her playing with her and enjoying her.

    Now, Drew is not as sympathetic. He is older. He is not as good looking as he thinks. He is control freak. He has a history of abuse with his wives, he has had wives. I just think the jury will look at him differently.

  40. Charmed – Very well said.

    If videos, pictures and eye witnesses are solely the evidence needed anymore to determine guilt, then why bother prosecuting gangbangers beating another victim to death, caught on numerous cell phones with video and pics, wasting everyone’s time and money? Why not just say guilty, and merely have them appear before a judge for sentencing?

    On the other hand, if there’s no video, pictures, or eyewitnesses to a horrific crime, why bother anymore bringing a suspect to trial? Might as well live with the idea that the victim’s dead and gone, and nothing can be done about it. Like in Caylee Anthony’s death. That’s what happened. The jury, one by one, continues to say they know monster mom is guilty and it sickened them to vote for acquittal, but they just HAD to do the right thing. So that means if a different panel of jurors had unanimously come to a decision of guilty, they would have been wrong? Why were millions of dollars wasted then on bringing that waste of a being to trial? Sorry, but I’ll never understand that. Doing the right thing has many aspects to it, and those people had other options besides acquittal.

    Maybe, in the future, there won’t be a need for celebrity criminal defense attorneys. Just more sentencing judges will be needed. Hey, there you go–the celebrity criminal defense attorneys can argue what’s a fair sentence and what’s excessive, eliminating the need for a trial.

    As my buddy Facs says, “pics or it didn’t happen.” Guess that’s the new justice.

  41. WGN just featured a short piece about how Drew Peterson is very pleased with the Casey Anthony verdict, because of how the jury evaluated the evidence. But, what was eye catching was they showed a clip of a protester holding a sign.

    “Casey Anthony should marry Drew Peterson. That’s a match made in heaven!”

    Now that’s an outstanding idea, her becoming the future Mrs. Peterson. Sounds like a plan!

  42. I guess Drew is pissed that he’s not making any money off the Lifetime movie.

    Drew Peterson demands halt to movie about him

    10:05 a.m. CDT, July 14, 2011

    Lawyers for Drew Peterson are demanding that filming be halted on a made-for-TV movie about the former cop, arguing it invades his privacy and is nothing more than a “character assassination” that would “prejudice any potential jury pool.”

    The lawyers ask the makers of the movie to “cease and desist” all work on the movie by Friday or face legal action.

    “Please govern your conduct accordingly,” attorney Walter Maksym ends his seven-page letter to Lifetime Entertainment, A&E Television Networks, Disney and others.

    Maksym even sent a copy to actor Rob Lowe, who has been chosen to portray Peterson, accused of murdering his third wife Kathleen Savio and a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

    The movie is based on the book “Fatal Vows: The Tragic Wives of Sergeant Drew Peterson,” a nonfiction account by Joseph Hosey, a former reporter for the Joliet Herald-News. No air date has been announced but work has begun on it.

    “Mr. Hosey’s extremely opinionated, blatantly biased, less than seriously researched and defamatory book does not even contain a table of contents, index, bibliography or source references, nor did he ever attempt to fact check any of it by making any effort to obtain my client’s input or comment before he sold and had it published,” the letter states. “We must therefore conclude that, the movie, like the book, it is based on also falsely imputes homicide to my client.

    “Frankly, we are aghast,” the letter adds. “Beyond the misappropriation of my client’s name, identity, persona and likeness for commercial purposes, such a false, misleading and inaccurate movie would not only impute defamatory criminal conduct to my client but serve only to mislead, taint and prejudice any potential jury pool and undermine my client’s fundamental right to a fairtrial.”

    There was no immediate comment from makers of the movie.

    http://www.wgnradio.com/news/local/breaking/chi-drew-peterson-demands-halt-to-movie-about-him-20110714,0,4405143.story

Comments are closed.