Does Stacy Peterson’s family really agree with Joel Brodsky?

Stacy's sister, Cassandra Cales and Pam Bosco, family spokesperson

Drew Peterson’s lawyer, Joel Brodsky, has followed up the airing of the Lifetime movie, Drew Peterson Untouchable, with a series of media appearances. Considering the record-breaking views the movie got, the intent of these interviews would appear to be damage control. Brodsky has been quick to describe the movie as inaccurate, laughable and possible grounds for requesting a change of venue when it comes time for Peterson’s murder trial.

Something that Brodsky has mentioned repeatedly (ostensibly to strengthen his case) is that the family of Stacy Peterson has also called it inaccurate. He’s even taken to his Facebook page to crow that “Stacy Peterson’s family and friends state that the made for TV movie “Drew Peterson: Untouchable” is misleading and inaccurate.”

While it’s true that the family has complained about discrepencies, and didn’t like the idea of the movie being made, one would be very wrong to assume that means they are in any kind of agreement with Joel Brodsky because that is far from the truth.

In a recent interview with Amy Jacobson, family spokesperson, Pamela Bosco detailed what she and Stacy’s sister, Cassandra Cales, felt Untouchable did not portray accurately. Besides the typical complaints about a movie adaptation; timeline discrepancies, the flora and fauna of a location, etc. their complaints appeared to be more that the movie didn’t do enough to convey the actual horror that a family deals with when a loved one goes missing and fear that she has been murdered.

The Television incident:

“There was a damaged TV but it was not…Cassandra was not told it was because of what happened in that scene. Things like that we would have never known happened because we weren’t told them. We didn’t experience that. Some things were told to Cassandra about what he was doing and we did know that he was tracking her left and right in the end.”

Note that Bosco doesn’t say that it never happened, only that there were things that Stacy didn’t always tell the family, or everyone in the family. Kerry Simmons, Stacy’s step-sister related the TV incident in an interview with Hoda Kotb. While Cassandra has stated to the press, “I have seen him, personally, throw my sister across the room.

The day Stacy disappeared:

“There was more horror to the real details of this that if the public actually knew they would…feel the trauma that the family is now going through.”

“The whole scene about Cassandra trying to find Stacy from the day she left my house and throughout that evening. She didn’t confront him in the morning. She never ran into the house. (The original plan for that day was to get together and paint Yelton’s house but instead) Cassandra came to my house to drop off a puppy that day so there was a thing there where she didn’t–she changed her plans and so because of that there was a delay in her first following through and contacting Stacy.”

So the film did them a disservice by compressing the incidents of that day. Only Stacy’s family can know how it felt to realize that a loved one is missing, to suspect that she’s been hurt and to spend the day trying to contact her without success. I’m sure that for them no movie would be able to really convey the awfulness of that day.

Rob Lowe’s portrayal of Drew Peterson:

“Rob Lowe didn’t seem to put his heart into it–the sense of danger that this man, that you would feel when you were around him. He just smirked and I think tried to get through this movie as fast as he could.”

So yes, Brodsky. The family states that the film is inaccurate. Inaccurate because Lowe didn’t effectively convey the sheer creepiness of your client, Drew Peterson. Hey, she knows the man. Who are we to question her take on this?

However there was one aspect about Drew Peterson that Bosco thinks the film got right:

“One thing they got right in the movie was Drew’s controlling nature. He was very controlling, very suspicious, and poor Stacy could not fight against that. But she had these children that she absolutely adored. If you could only understand what a great mother she was, then you would know that she would never leave those children.”

And lastly from Pam Bosco:

“These kind of productions we aren’t in support of but we actually appreciate when the public is still interested in Stacy’s case.”

Listen to interview with Pam Bosco
Listen to interview with Joel Brodsky

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


124 thoughts on “Does Stacy Peterson’s family really agree with Joel Brodsky?

  1. It is true that in these so called accurate portrayals that “artistic license” is used to either enforce or downplay a perpetrators participation in the acts committed…Incidences can be eliminated or made up…Just remember these ‘special’ movies are made for TV and written by playwriters…Take it for what it was…entertainment…I’m not surprised in the least that Brodsky would use it as a means to seek a change of venue…

  2. Well said, Facs. As you have tried to convey, it’s just more of Brodsky’s blubbering. Of course, we know it’s his job to defend his client, but he is doing just as he did leading up to, at the time of, and after Peterson’s arrest. He throws things out there and assumes people are going to believe his version of events.

    He wasn’t there with Stacy and Drew, and he’s not one of Drew’s poor wives. He did not experience anything. He’s merely reciting what his client has told him. I do know that he reacts to the victims’ family, friends and witnesses with disdain when he doesn’t like what he hears, and sharpens his teeth to reply, but it’s sickening to think that he is using something he thinks he heard to twist the truth of what was said.

    Damage control is exactly what he is doing. I find it unusual that he’s standing alone in that regard. No team alliance, no meeting of the legal minds. Just him. It is laughable that he was all in favor of his white noise nonsense and using the media to generate publicity and sympathy, but he wants everyone to believe nothing in the movie is factual, and expects the public to separate fact from fiction. Huh, since when is what comes out of his mouth the truth? He only repeats what he has heard from his client. Drew Peterson has a very small fan base when it comes to supporting him.

  3. No matter what you think of the movie it’s just gross of Brodsky to pretend that he has some kind of common ground with the families of Stacy or Kathleen.

    He actually says that the Savios agree with him as well, which is complete BS since AFAIK the Savios didn’t even watch the movie, much less comment on it.

    I just thought someone needed to call him on such a dirty move.

  4. A good blog post reviewing Untouchable from the standpoint of someone who advocates for domestic abuse victims:

    I’m not heartily recommending this movie, but I am saying that as long as it’s out there, let’s learn what we can from it. There is reality even in its cheesiest lines that can educate the public on domestic violence and be used to stop it. Knowledge is power. Awareness brings change. We must continue to speak out against the Drew Petersons of this world until domestic violence ceases to exist.

  5. The truth is, Brodsky is relying on a line written by Fox News staff member about the family agreeing with him specifically. The line he is puffing his chest out about is the Fox News staff member’s, not a direct quote from Stacy’s family. However, I believe he is wishing it to be and makes it come across that way.

    He wants people to turn into pumpkinheads and think this is the direct quote from the family:

    Stacy Peterson’s family agrees with Brodsky and says the movie was completely inaccurate.

    That is Fox News’ quote. I have not heard or seen either family spokesperson, Pam Bosco, nor Cassandra Cales, say they agreed with Brodsky about anything.

  6. There have been some outrageous events that occurred during these years since Stacy’s been missing. Some may not be known nationally, like the chicken-wing hawking Brodsky had his client do to promote his bar, or the incident where the murder defendant was trying to put the moves on yet another 20-something woman named Kim, but I would have to say that almost everyone knows about the win-a-date-with-Drew fiasco. That is the most bizarre and ridiculous thing a lawyer could have gotten his client involved in, and it’s stuck in the minds of many. Oh, and according to Christina Raines, her engagement and love-in was staged as a publicity stunt. Until Brodsky stepped in and said she was nervous and confused and didn’t mean to say that. That was national news, and Martin Bashir covered it.

    No wonder his two defense partners say they’re more worried about pre-trial stunts those two engaged in, not the movie.

  7. Nobody deserves whatever terrible fate Stacy Peterson met. No matter what it is my opinion that this is aweful. The movie, however makes Stacy look like an angel. Lets not forget she was having sex with a married man in his house while his wife slept. I am the former wife of an arrogent cheating cop. Had she not been fooling around with someone else’s husband, she would probably be alive and well today. She had the morals of a dog in heat. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, odds are…’s a duck! Just saying. Some will post that it was his job to be faithful not Stacy’s. Wrong. If I knew a guy was married I did not get involved with him. Period. She was in the wrong just as much as him.

  8. Joel confuses me. He says the movie is not a depiction of anybody’s life. It’s entertaiment, a Hollywood story, and should be taken as such.

    Then he goes onto say “after Mr. Peterson is acquitted, then Lifetime is going to have to answer to what they did …”

    If it’s all in the name of entertainment, if it’s not factual, and it’s not a depiction of anyone’s life, hysterical even, according to Drew himself … then what would Lifetime have to answer to?

  9. I agree with you completely, Noway.

    I keep wanting to ask him “So what are you saying?” The more he shouts to the rooftops that the thing is a fictional work of fantasy, the less he’s implying that it could possibly damage his client’s reputation.


  10. Beth, IMO the movie creates two-dimensional caricatures of everyone. Kitty was a shrill harpy, Drew was evil incarnate, Stacy was simply sweet and young. It helped them squeeze a complicated story into 100 minutes.

    Of course, the real people involved had all the dimensions that real people have. As I’ve said before, Drew Peterson may have murdered two women but that didn’t mean he walked down the street kicking a puppy in front of him. And neither Stacy nor Kathleen were perfect. They both slept with Drew while he was married to other people.

    As for opinions about infidelity, Everyone has got one. For my part I believe that people shouldn’t cheat on their spouses and dating married people is a bad idea.

    That said, my expectations of a 47-year old married man and father are higher than those I have of a 17-year-old girl. I’ll go even further and say that since Drew Peterson was technically in a position of power (police sergeant) when he started a sexual relationship with Stacy Cales, that he should have been prosecuted for statutory rape. If that had happened, perhaps Stacy would still be alive now.

    Lastly, comparing someone to “a dog in heat” is unkind and very unfair. Especially since the person in question is almost certainly dead and has no way to defend herself from attack.

  11. I can’t imagine ANY attorney not wanting respect for his abilities and actions when it comes to defending a client. I think we can all agree that Mr. Brodsky’s defense of Peterson has been unorthodox and against how most defense attorneys handle their clients’ cases. I think its undisputed that he went against the common practice of keeping his client quiet, out of the media and at least acting concerned and respectful about the fate of his two wives.

    IMO, I think Brodsky’s star is falling fast, if not already crashed and burned. One minute he’s parading he and his client around to any media outlet that would have them, promoting the murder defendant’s version of “facts,” and the next he’s urging people not to believe every thing they see on tv.

    We all know it appears he used his client to his benefit, and it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that. The icing on the cake was the latest comments by his co-defense counsel, Lopez and Greenberg, who didn’t mince words by saying they’re more concerned about what he and the murder defendant have already done in the media, not this Lifetime movie.

    You reap what you sow.

  12. Just a quick note on the movie: In my opinion it is not how people were portrayed but the fact that 1 woman is dead and 1 woman is missing, regardless of their personal character.

  13. Looks like HLN got Tom Peterson on the phone for JVM’s show last Thursday. They had a bad phone connection (or that woman was just shouting too loud) but Tom did manage to make a brief statement:

    LVM: Did you see the movie and what was your reaction to the movie?

    TP: …It’s something you’re going to expect with a typical Lifetime movie. I mean you got a suave guy who comes in and he’s all good and doing good will for everybody and then by the end of the movie he’s got horns coming out of the top of his head.

    At the end it’s like…yeah, they, with the movie they really portrayed my dad as being more sinister than he actually is.

    On Facebook Tom said that:

    “..My dad is DEFINITELY NOT as much of a bad ass as Lowe portrayed him to be, nor as a jerk of a father”

    Hardly the strongest defense of a dad from his son. Because in essence he’s admitting that his dad is somewhat sinister, somewhat of a badass and somewhat a jerk of a father.

    And heavens, didn’t Joel Brodsky turn red and squirm when JVM asked him if he was excited about the possibility of Drew’s trial being televised because it would mean Joel would become more well-known.

  14. Did Drew Peterson become “hysterical” when he saw this depicted in the Lifetime movie, where the characters are shown at Stacy’s sister’s funeral and he accuses her of having an affair with her late sister’s husband? He also told his lawyer that she was having an affair with Pastor Schori.

    Schori told Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren that Stacy Peterson told him she knew her husband killed his third wife, Kathleen Savio, though he declined to reveal specific details she allegedly shared. On Tuesday, when Abrams asked Brodsky if he was saying Stacy and the pastor had a relationship, Brodsky said yes.

    “Honest to God. I don’t know if there’s any validity to it,” Brodsky told Abrams.

    At a news conference outside the courthouse Wednesday, Brodsky declined to comment further, but he later acknowledged to the Tribune that the source of the rumor was his client.

    “Drew told me that,” Brodsky said. “He said he thought they might be seeing each other.”

    Asked about Brodsky’s statement, Peterson said his wife always talked about how “cute” Schori was. “Every time she’d go meet him, she’d get all dolled up; she dressed seductively,” he said.

    Schori has not responded to requests for comment.

    But Bosco said, “That was an amazing insult and disgusting insult. … Any time we go to make a confession with a pastor or a priest or anyone of that profession and share our deep darkest secrets it’s going to be insinuated that we’re having an affair with them? It’s uncalled for and totally disrespectful to that man who had the courage to come forward with that information.”

    Stacy’s family and friends have said it is not the first time Peterson accused his missing wife of infidelity. They said that at her sister Tina’s funeral in 2006, as Stacy walked with her late sister’s husband, Drew asked her if she was sleeping with him.

    And Stacy’s friend Scott Rossetto said he, Stacy and a group of friends were having dinner at a restaurant Oct. 19 when Drew, who was still a Bolingbrook police sergeant, showed up unannounced and asked Rossetto how he would feel if his wife “went off with another guy.”

    Minds may disagree about many aspects of this movie, but there sure is quite a bit in this movie that is based on actual events!

  15. No doubt about it Drew is/was an insecure, jealous demeaning and demanding husband…I’d be suspicious of his accusations of Stacy’s infidelity as so often it is the accuser that is guilty of the act…Stacy was an abused wife and wanted out of her marriage and Drew felt threatened…in more ways than one…

  16. “In more ways than one”

    No kidding, Estee. Imagine an already possessive controlling husband now also worried that his unhappy wife might spill the beans about the fact that he murdered his last wife. Peterson was extremely motivated to make sure Stacy either stayed under his control or was silenced.

  17. In the movie, Drew Peterson’s character had a partner, who was prominently portrayed in the movie.

    In reality:

    CRAIG WALL, FOX NEWS, JANUARY 15, 2008: “… Alex Morelli, Drew’s former partner says he wants nothing more to do with Drew and has nothing positive to say about him. He said Drew has turned his world upside down…”

  18. I just saw this message from Stacy Peterson Facebook page. I wonder what’s up? I hope they get some cadaver dogs!

    “In need of some cadaver dogs ASAP!! Message Me if you know of anyone willing to come out searching today!!”

  19. Hey song4sky, I know that Cassandra still does regular searches. I’d bet that the recent attention that the movie has generated has gotten her more help in that area. I certainly hope so!

    Cass added:

    Ive been out all night with my brother, following leads that have been coming thru since the movie came out

    (We’ve received offers of help and even $ since the movie aired and have tried to send people in the right direction.)

  20. BTW, if the Lifetime movie has made anyone curious to see and hear more factual accounts, this clip from the Biography channel with Susan Murphy Milano and Joe Hosey also contains a fair amount of video and photos of both Kathleen Savio and Stacy Peterson and is worth a look.

  21. Yea, it said new leads since the movie! So, who knows? In the meantime, thinking positive thoughts and sending wishes that she will finally be found soon!

  22. So glad to hear that the movie is drawing attention in a good way, new interest in helping, especially since there has been so much opposition to the movie.

  23. I hope the tips coming in aren’t from more of the phony psychics. I hate to see people’s lives messed with over some one’s hunch, dream or “vision”.

  24. Those psychics need a kick in the ass! They make me sick with their visions and dreams, using victims’ families at their most vulnerable to either make a buck, or get recognition. If there were, indeed, a legitimate psychic around, Stacy, and all of the other poor missing souls, would have been found long ago.

    Just my opinion….

  25. I see that Sue says someone (a distant relative) is writing an unauthorized biography of Kathleen. There’s no way to stop that from happening, but I can’t imagine what it would be like to see a loved one being portrayed in a movie or book, vulnerable to bias or inaccuracies. It’s got to be hard.

    Just like with the Lifetime movie, I guess all you can hope is that it raises awareness about the issues of domestic violence, the blue wall and shoddy investigations.

  26. Yeah, it sorta seems likely that any new leads would be from psychics, real or fake. Hopefully some of the sources are genuine. I recall psychic talk being frowned up here, so enough on that one. Either way, new attention and interest because of the movie is a good thing!

  27. There’s always hope that someone knows something. Maybe Peterson had help or even mentioned something to someone, knowingly or even unknowingly.

    Maybe Peterson has been out of circulation long enough to make some people feel comfortable enough to come forward with information.

    I would think, though, that if someone did have information, they would alert the ISP and convince them that they have good reason to believe Stacy’s remains are in a certain location. That would be the logical way to handle this.

  28. My guess is the only way they find her by now will be either by pure accident, or else someone who knows where she is says something.

    For once it could be advantageous that Drew liked to surround himself with gutter rats – maybe someone will have a lucid moment while under the influence of some stimulant or other.

    Or maybe someone will think about the reward money (AFAIK it’s still there) and decide they could really use it.

  29. That said, I would never discourage anyone from continuing to search. If it were my sister I’d be searching too.

    I just hope she’s not unduly influenced by a fame-seeking fake (as Sue Savio points out “anything for fame”), or even worse some person who thinks they have some kind of gift and then imposes themselves on a desperate family when they really are just emotionally unfulfilled people who’ve been convinced by TV shows that they are a ‘ghost whisperer’ or something. Shame on them.

  30. I hope there is someone involved in this who knows something, anything, that would shine a light on this mystery of Stacy’s disappearance once and for all, and bring this to a conclusion. If Peterson was willing to drag Tom Morphey into this, there’s no telling who else knows something, and it just shows how stupid and moronic Peterson was to involve others. He dragged Carcerano and the Pontarellis into his scheme to find Kathleen. Maybe after he figured out that Kathleen’s boyfriend, Steve, wasn’t going to be the one.

    With Stacy, he admitted to looking for a storage locker with Tom Morphey just prior to Stacy’s disappearance. Mike Robinson was called by him to help him acquire a cell phone he could talk on without the cops taping him. He used his son, Steve, to store guns he didn’t want confiscated in a search by the cops.

    Why anyone thinks he’s smart is beyond me. He couldn’t control his anger and hostility towards his wives when they weren’t attractive or attentive enough to him, so why believe he didn’t involve someone enough that they know more than they’re letting on? He doesn’t care about these people, he cares about saving his own butt when the heat’s on him. Then, and only then, does he pretend to backtrack and act like he cares that they’ve been dragged into his messes. Whether one believes he’s involved in the demise of either Kathleen or Stacy, doesn’t take away the fact that he used people close to him in the early hours and beyond to prop up his sorry self!

  31. He also relied on Ric Mims in those first days when Stacy went missing, and Mims has testified that at one point he kept an eye on Kathleen in order for Drew to enter her house when she wasn’t home.

    Peterson also approached Jeff Pachter in 2002 when he asked him to procure a hit-man to ‘take care of’ Kathleen.

    He was friends with Lenny Wawczak and Paula Stark until he tried to pass off a gun to Paula and their undercover stint had to end.

    It’s Drew’s MO to seek help from other people and involve them in his suspect acts. He doesn’t like to act alone. He even dragged one of his sons along with to cut down Stacy’s memorial ribbons on Pheasant Chase Court!

    I really hope there is one more person out there who has not come forward yet, who knows something helpful and who is getting ready to tell what they know.

  32. FYI


    Chief Justice Thomas L. Kilbride announced on Tuesday that the Illinois Supreme Court has approved the application from the 14th Judicial Circuit in northwestern Illinois to allow news media cameras in trial courtrooms in the state for the first time.

    Chief Judge Jeffrey W. O’Connor of the 14th Circuit applied to the Supreme Court for approval last week, one day after Chief Justice Kilbride announced that an experimental program was unanimously approved by the seven justices on the Court.

    The 14th Circuit is comprised of Henry, Mercer, Rock Island and Whiteside counties…

  33. Yippeeeee, we get to watch it…Know I’ll be glued to chair then…Wonder if Drew will preen for the cameras…Just when can we expect this to get underway???

  34. I believe most of the counties will have cameras. It’s a matter of applying for and getting approval. The court system wants transparency, and what better trial to do that but Drew Peterson’s.

  35. The 12th Circuit court (Will County) is considering applying to take part.

    Twelfth Judicial Circuit Court to Study Pilot Project for Extended Media Coverage

    Chief Judge Gerald R. Kinney announced today that the Twelfth Judicial Circuit Judges will review and consider a request to participate in the recently announced Pilot Project for Extended Media Coverage in the Courtroom. The project was announced by the Illinois Supreme Court on January 24, 2012 and provides for the Circuit Courts to request permission from the Illinois Supreme Court to allow for television, audio and still camera media coverage in the courtroom.

    “Our primary concern is to ensure that the rights of all parties are protected and that any coverage is allowed in the least obtrusive manner,” said Chief Judge Kinney. “This is a new concept at the Circuit Court level and we must proceed cautiously yet expeditiously.”

    The Supreme Court policy will be reviewed by the Circuit Judges who will first decide whether to request permission to participate in the pilot project. In the event that the Twelfth Judicial Circuit Court joins the project, protocols and procedures will need to be developed which conform to Supreme Court policy. The process may take several months before a formal procedure could be announced.

    “Although the Supreme Court has drafted a policy that attempts to limit the financial burden on the Circuits, there are always unanticipated costs whenever large scale changes such as this take place,” Chief Judge Kinney said. “We must consider all aspects of this project and make decisions that make sense both in and outside of the courtroom.”

  36. Someone, somewhere knows something……….

    There’s been a case in Atlanta GA where someone finally came forward with invaluable information after 10 years and the person in question was never even on the investigators radar……..

    The question is more – what is the deciding factor for someone to come forward ??

  37. HI JAH. Nice to “see” you.

    There was a horrific murder at a Brown’s Chicken some years back here in a Chicago suburb. It took 7 years, I believe it was, but a woman who knew inside information about the murders finally came forward to solve the crimes and bring justice to the victims. The two murderers were found guilty.

    So, it happens. And we wait….

  38. It was 9 years, actually.

    The Brown’s Chicken massacre was a mass murder that occurred at a Brown’s Chicken restaurant in Palatine, Illinois, a northwest suburb of Chicago, in the United States in 1993. The massacre occurred on January 8, 1993, when two assailants robbed the Brown’s Chicken restaurant and then proceeded to murder seven employees. The case remained unsolved for nearly nine years, until one of the assailants was implicated by his girlfriend in 2002. Police used DNA samples from the murder scene to match one of the suspects, Juan Luna. Luna was put on trial in 2007, found guilty for seven counts of murder, and sentenced to life imprisonment. James Degorski, the other assailant, was found guilty in 2009 on all seven counts of murder, and also sentenced to life imprisonment

  39. I agree with the editorial, especially the reaction to Judge Kinney’s position on cameras in the (Will County) courtrooms. “What?”


    …Over the years, the ban generated a whole series of thin rationalizations on why trial courts should not be open to public scrutiny. No evidence has sustained those concerns.

    Now the Illinois Supreme Court has ruled that on an experimental basis, each of Illinois’ 23 state court districts can apply to have media cameras present for civil and criminal trials involving adult defendants. If the pilot program is successful, Illinois could be the 37th state to change its mind about courtroom cameras.

    Cook County Circuit Court Chief Judge Timothy Evans said he will apply for the program, but his Will County counterpart, Gerald Kinney, seems somewhat reticent, saying it “could take several months to draft protocols.” What?

    We don’t think it should take that long, and we urge Kinney to join Evans in moving expeditiously to allow the cameras. Illinois is not breaking new ground on this issue and has examples from 36 other states on how to implement an effective system.

  40. The way I read the press release, Kinney wasn’t saying that they would wait months to apply, but that he thought it would take months to come up with protocols if and when they were approved for the program. I could be wrong though.

    In the event that the Twelfth Judicial Circuit Court joins the project, protocols and procedures will need to be developed which conform to Supreme Court policy. The process may take several months before a formal procedure could be announced.

    He does seem to indicate that they will move quickly though, which is heartening.

    This is a new concept at the Circuit Court level and we must proceed cautiously yet expeditiously.

    At any rate, I agree with both you and the editor that his time estimate is exaggerated and over-cautious. The protocols are pretty much already outlined in the Supreme Court’s policy, right down to the number of cameras and how to go about pooling media. If they need more guidance than that, just do what the other states do.

    Here’s a handy guide!

  41. Hmm, kind of confusing. It would seem to me that Judge Kenney is talking about establishing protocol in the Will County Court system first, and then applying. But, since I don’t have any idea how that works, I can’t say.

    A few counties have already been approved for cameras in the courtroom. That being said, I guess Judge Kenney can do whatever he pleases as far as allowing the cameras in his jurisdiction. Funny, the one county that will eventually be hosting a high profile trial, and we’re left wondering now when and if that will be during this camera experiment.

  42. Walter Dante isn’t exactly a prize catch.Which is why Laura Bakersfield shocks her friends when they find out she’s dating Walter Dante!

    Ha. Change the names to Drew Peterson and Chrissy Raines, and what do you have? Another match made in hell.

  43. Now hearing that Powell is also dead.

    It was a supervised visitation but the social worker was locked outside. The social worker called her supervisors to report that she could smell gas, and the home exploded.

    Powell had just been denied custody of the boys last Wednesday and he was slated to take a psychosexual examination and undergo a polygraph test.

  44. Devastating. What else is there to say? This guy’s mother and a sister raved about what a fantastic father he was, how attentive to his boys he was, and how protective he was. They wrote letters to the judge in his custody case on his behalf. He has another sister who knew otherwise, and was of the mindset that he killed the boys’ mother and didn’t want to see him regain custody of the boys.

    How this monster’s family could be at opposite ends of the spectrum as to his mental state is beyond me. It’s not going to bring those little boys back.

  45. I see that Josh’s creepy father who is in jail awaiting trial for child porn and voyeurism has been put on suicide watch.

    From what I’ve seen, he was obsessed with Susan to an unhealthy degree. If he knows anything about what happened to her I hope he talks before he opts out too.

  46. Was listening to the 911 calls from Sunday. Left with the impression that those who oversee that system need to look into a serious overhaul of the procedures, technology, protocol…everything. Incredibly frustrating to hear people repeating the same info over and over again, being asked silly extraneous questions, not being listened to, being patronized and lectured, all while the minutes tick by and two little boys are being murdered.

    I don’t think anyone could have stopped Josh Powell from what he did once those kids were in his house, and I don’t blame anyone but him for their deaths. I’m just making an observation based on what I heard on those tapes. It’s a wonder anyone gets the help they need…


    Case Number: 2011MR000291
    Next Court Date: 02-09-2012
    File Date: 03-04-2011
    Next Court Location: COURTROOM 2005
    Next Court Time: 09:00 AM

  48. Great…Please keep us posted…I hope they don’t reverse their decision…I know the son should not be responsible for the sins of the father, but Steven knew better…Ignorance is no excuse…

    Just when can we expect Drew to go to court?…I hope Bolingbrook allows cameras in the courtroom for this one…Why are they dragging their feet on their decision????

  49. Steve Peterson’s case was continued:

    Case Number 2011MR000291
    Next Court Date 06-12-2012
    File Date 03-04-2011
    Next Court Location COURTROOM 2005
    Next Court Time 09:30 AM

  50. Boy o boy this is so redicaless that it should be continued just tell the POS to PAC YOUR BAGS AND MOVE ON TO SOMTHING ELES!!!!!!!!

  51. Review of the latest Peterson-inspired play:

    Who Cares Whodunnit when you’re Dating Walter Dante?

    By Angeli Primlani

    If you yelled at the TV when you heard that Drew Peterson was engaged to a 23-year-old girl despite being suspected of murdering two of his four previous wives, oh boy is this is the play for you! The Raven Theater’s world premiere of Jon Steinhagen’s Dating Walter Dante turns this tabloid situation into a delectable murder mystery, which teases a deeply human drama out of the cheap and familiar headlines.

    Walter Dante is not exactly Drew Peterson. His first wife drowned in a swimming pool, not a bathtub, and Dante was married only twice, not four times. Unlike Peterson it is just possible he is innocent. That does not matter. This is not a play about the Drew Peterson case. It isn’t even really about Walter Dante. Instead the play asks why on earth any sane woman would date such a person, much less sign on to be Dead Wife Number Three?

    Is Laura Bakersfield naive or brave to love this man? Are her friends justifiably concerned, or absurdly paranoid? Did Walter Dante really kill his two ex-wives, or is he an innocent man in a tragic horrific situation? And what is up with his dead wife’s ghost? Is this, as the characters conflictingly claim, a drama, comedy, tragedy, dramedy, murder mystery, ghost story or love story? That’s for the audience to decide. The answers do not come easily.

    Each member of the fine cast walks a delicate line that leaves the audience guessing. But Kristin Collins’ crushingly hopeful Laura is the heartbeat of the piece. At turns ridiculous, sensual, and flaky, she still has small town Midwestern steel carrying her willful optimism. You may find yourself wanting Walter to live up to her belief in him. Or you may want to scream that he can’t.

    Dating Walter Dante is at the Raven Theater, Fridays-Sundays through March 24th. If you love true crime, murder mysteries, love stories, or just a head cracking good tale, make sure you don’t have to rush home. You may want to stand out in the cold discussing the play with total strangers afterwards.

  52. Celebrity ME Compares Whitney Houston Death to Drew Peterson Case
    By Joseph Hosey

    Celebrity medical examiner Michael Baden drew comparisons between the bathtub death of Whitney Houston and that of Drew Peterson’s slain third wife, Kathleen Savio.

    Celebrity medical examiner Michael Baden dropped by On the Record With Greta Van Susteren to talk about the untimely demise of Whitney Houston and compared her death to that of the woman Drew Peterson has been charged with killing.

    Baden, who testified in 2010 as an expert witness during pretrial hearings in the Peterson case, told Van Susteren that “many people fall asleep relaxing in the bathtub. They don’t drown because if their nose and mouth goes under the water, it’ll wake them up. You have to be unconscious to drown.”

    Baden then went on to connect this to the circumstances surrounding the death of Drew Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio, who was found drowned in a dry bathtub in March 2004:

    “You’re going to see this with Drew Peterson — remember Drew Peterson out in Illinois — is one of the issues that’ll come up. But a healthy person who’s conscious doesn’t drown unless something causes them to lose consciousness.”
    Interesting, because Kathleen Savio was breathing-in water when she drowned. Sounds like Kathleen may have been held down under water until she did drown.

    According to Anna Doman, while being interviewed by Greta Van Sustern:

    GRETA: According to the death certificate which we have here it says it was an accident. Do you believe that? – ANNA: No. How does a healthy forty year old woman with no drugs in her system, no alcohol, pass out in the bathtub which is a little oval corner bathtub, a whirlpool tub, the bottoms not even big enough to stretch your legs out? And she’s taller than me, I’m 5′ 3″ and she was about 5’5″, 5’6″. How did she scrunch down under the water? – GRETA: What did they say to you when you ask that? – ANNA: Well, she had to drown because she had water in her nasal cavity but they said she did, was trying to breath because of the way her lungs were, where the air was, I don’t really understand that but they said she was trying to breath. I’m wondering if somebody gave her something and she passed out or I can’t see how she stayed under the water. The tub is too small.

  53. Of course, Kathleen had suffered a head injury which the defense will argue made her unconscious and that’s why she drowned (was not conscious and therefore couldn’t respond to brain stimuli to get her nose and mouth above water).

    However, Dr. Blum already testified in the preliminary hearing that he didn’t think the head injury was serious enough to have knocked her unconscious. If that’s the case and she was awake then someone would have to have held her under the water while she drowned.

  54. In a petition filed Friday listing the reasons authorities want to exhume Savio’s body, prosecutors said a review of evidence in the case “is consistent with the ‘staging’ of an accident to conceal a homicide.”

    The one-inch gash in the back of Kathleen Savio’s head did not render her unconscious, which would have been necessary for her to accidentally drown in the bathtub,” the petition stated.

    So far as I’ve seen, it will be only the defense that is prepared to take on the task of saying that head gash rendered her unconscious.

    Blum said the position of Savio’s body in the tub — facedown with both feet pressed hard against the tub wall, her toes hyperextended — made it “highly, highly unlikely” she drowned accidentally.

    Judging from the flow of blood, it appeared a 1-inch gash on the back of her head was inflicted after her body settled in the tub, Blum said.

    He said he also reviewed 43 cases of bathtub fatalities in Illinois and that Savio’s death “falls so far out of the pattern for accidental.”

    Blum testified the alleged murder scene was “pristine” with little blood, no splashed water and nothing around the tub knocked over, but he could not say whether the scene was staged.

  55. This high profile Whitney Houston case highlights the fact that her death, after being found dead in a bath tub, was as a result of booze and drugs. It is not unreasonable to believe her drinking and doping contributed to her death. Mixing of drugs and alcohol can be lethal. She could have lost her ability to gasp for air, thus, winding up with water in her lungs.

    Kathleen Savio’s autopsy toxicology results indicate there was NO alcohol NOR drugs in her body. She was trying to breathe, since she had water in her sinuses.

    Think people will sit up and take notice about Whitney Houston’s untimely death in a bath tub, and hear the facts and details over and over? That’s not good for the Peterson defense, IMO, is it?

  56. AAMOF, Brodsky made a big hissy deal about the Lifetime movie being full of inaccuracies and Hollywood embellishments.

    If I were him, I’d be sweating out this Whitney Houston fiasco now that the world is going to get a complete education about how a person could have drowned in a bath tub without gasping for air or trying to fight to live by getting one’s head out of the water in order to breathe. Tsk, tsk.

  57. Also – Did you see pictures of the bathroom Whitney Houston died in ?

    There was mess everywhere, clothes and junk on the floor, half eaten food, you name it, yet her death was very tidy in comparison to Kathleens horrible death in her sanitized bathroom with a head injury to boot……..

  58. When you mix Xanex with booze it puts you out in a deep sleep. You can pass out easy with that combination! I can see what happened to Whitney and no questions about it. She passed out in the tub, and drowned.
    The comparison between Kathleen, and Whitney is a totally different situation as stated above. IMO If Kathleen fell backwards and hit the back of her head like they are trying to say, she would be on her back with her feet above the tub.
    Their story doesn’t add up with the way she was found or laying on her side. If she was able to move, she would of been holding her head from pain. She would of been face down, or on her back end of story!
    Think about it you bang your head, what’s your first instinct? You grab your head, and you bend forward. You fall backwards hit your head, your on your butt, or back. Joel’s version of accounts will never hold up to a jury, as to how she was found, or all the injuries on her body supposedly caused by a fall in a bathtub

  59. Wow!

    First courtroom photos shot under pilot program
    Created: Friday, February 24, 2012 3:35 p.m. CST

    MORRISON – Photos have been shot for the first time at a high-profile case inside a state courtroom since the Illinois Supreme Court announced its historic decision last month to experiment with cameras in courts.

    The judge presiding over alleged spree killer Nicholas Sheley’s trial in northwestern Illinois surprised reporters Friday by allowing them to take still photographs at a pretrial hearing.

    Attending media hadn’t brought photographers along because Judge Jeffrey O’Connor said earlier that cameras would be barred.

    So reporters, including from The Associated Press, took out cell phones to photograph the courtroom scene, including the shackled defendant.

    The hearing’s main business was to decide if cameras would be permitted at the trial itself. O’Connor said they would.

    Sheley is accused of killing eight people in Illinois and Missouri in 2008.

  60. One of Drew’s lawyers making some noise about potential grounds for a mistrial in a trial that hasn’t happened yet.

    Mr. Brodsky said he may ask the court to require jurors to disclose information, such as Twitter handles, to make sure jurors aren’t “researching, tweeting or Facebooking” about the case. “That would be ripe grounds for a mistrial, for throwing out a conviction or an acquittal, and we’d have to go through the process all over again,” he said. “It would be horrible.”

  61. Dosen’t J.B. know the judge always instructs the jurors, not to use internet, etc. during the trial? Just as judge Perry did in the Anthony trial.

  62. And of course during “voir dire” they will be asked all those ‘have you, do you’ questions…Brodsky is just making waves to hear himself talk and keep his name in the papers…Egotist that he is…I dont know who’s worse…Drew or him…

  63. Little bit more information on this issue: Brodsky seems to “worry” a lot. In January, he was all worried about the Lifetime movie. Good to see he’s got a new focus of worry. What next? Does he EVER worry about what evidence might be presented against his client? Guess not.

    BTW, any juror who posts on Twitter or Facebook, openly admitting they’re a juror hearing the case, doesn’t need to provide his/her IP# and Twitter nic. Any hairbrain monitoring the Peterson case would be able to figure out that nifty little violation without prying into the private posts of people because Brodsky decides that’s his latest idea. I thought lawyers, especially defense lawyers, were all about peoples’ rights? Except if you’re the target of one of Brodsky’s ridiculous ideas. Is he the nitwit that is relegated to searching the Internet for dirt, while his co-counsel use their legal skills to defend Peterson?

    JOLIET, Ill. (CBS) — Attorneys for accused killer Drew Peterson are trying to find ways to make sure their case does not get sabotaged by jurors using the Internet.

    As WBBM Newsradio’s Bernie Tafoya reports, Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, is mainly worried about jurors using the Internet to look up information Peterson that is not admitted during the trial, and then use that to form an opinion on a verdict.

    He is also worried about jurors posting comments on Twitter and Facebook during the trial.

    For that reason, the Peterson defense team is trying to come up with ways to prevent or monitor Internet and social media use by jurors.

    Brodsky said possible ways include “asking jurors who are picked for their IP addresses, what their Internet provider is, what their Facebook page is, what their Twitter handle is.”

    One information technology professional told Brodsky that cookies could be put on the jurors’ computers and smart phones to squeal on them electronically if they break the rules. But Brodsky admits such a measure would be extreme.

    Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, has been held since May 2009 on charges that he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in a dry bathtub in March 2004.

    Savio’s death was originally ruled an accidental drowning by the Will County Coroner’s office. But after Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy, disappeared in October 2007, Savio’s body was exhumed and her death was reclassified as a homicide.

    Peterson has not been charged in Stacy’s disappearance, but Illinois State Police believe she is dead, and have named Peterson a person of interest.

  64. I saw that too, Rescue, and thought it was pretty funny. Geez, if a court was that worried about a juror using a social network to post or going online to research, wouldn’t they just sequester the whole jury and not allow laptops or cellphones in their possession?

    Maybe Joel should just worry about providing a good defense for his client and deal with any juror issues if and when they happen.

  65. Kind of makes you wonder though, what the point was of all the media appearances made by the defendant and his lawyer. I mean, if they didn’t mean for the jury to be tainted by non-admissible evidence then surely they wouldn’t want to try to bias them with the dozens of radio and TV appearances (not to mention the book) they did proclaiming Drew’s innocence and detailing his version of timelines and events.

    Of course, I’m being sarcastic.

  66. @Facs – absolutely right!!! What was the purpose of parading around Peterson to all the media outlets if not to make an impact on potential jurors? AAMOF, it was Brodsky himself who admitted online that he was using his theory of white noise to help ensure a favorable outcome should his client be arrested and charged. Right? He said it worked for Robert Blake. He said he was going against conventional wisdom, but he is a good lawyer. Isn’t it interesting that he only wants people now that live in caves and lack any technical computer abilities to be on the jury?

  67. Supreme Court has approved cameras for Kankakee County criminal cases:

    The 21st Circuit becomes the second circuit in Illinois approved by the Court for cameras in the courtroom and will join the 14th Judicial Circuit where extended media coverage has already been implemented un-der the experimental program.

    “I am very pleased that Chief Judge Elliott has applied and has been approved by the Supreme Court to take part in the project,” said Chief Justice Kilbride. “I’m informed that the Chief Judge has met with stakeholders in the courtrooms and that they, too, have expressed not only their interest but their enthu-siasm for the program.

    “The pilot program has been proceeding in the Quad Cities area with the cooperation of the media, judges, courtroom and county personnel for more than a month,” said Chief Justice Kilbride.”This will be another step to see if we can carefully balance the goals of greater openness and access with the guaranteed rights of defendants and parties to have fair proceedings.”,0,6139181.story?track=rss

  68. Eh. This babble in Sneed’s column is just more of the same nonsense. Wow. Four strangers who support Peterson. Guess his friends (what friends?) and family will have to take a back seat to this newsworthy b.s.

    The Peterson file . . .

    Accused wife murderer Drew Peterson now has four supporters depositing money into an account he can use to buy soda pop and treats while he awaits trial in the Will County Jail in the murder of third wife, Kathleen Savio.

    ◆ The supporter tally: Two men from Texas and two people from Illinois — one of whom is a woman. “They are all pitching in $50 to $100 bucks at a time,” said a Peterson source, who claims Peterson now has a relationship with a dozen pen-pals.

  69. Yeah, he better watch that snacking stuff, or it will undo all the push ups and exercise he’s been doing to get back into fighting shape, heh? Leave it to some moron to pass this along to Sneed yet again. Times are tough for attention.

  70. just curious, why does he kill his wives at the end of the month? 28th of Feb, last anyone heard of Kathleen, 28th of Oct, last anyone heard of Stacy. coincidence? I pray Stacy is found – soon.

  71. also notice that there was only one time there was a real reaction from drew in regards to finding Stacy, when he got angry and said he wasn’t going to kick over some bushes, but around the same time he joked that he’d been doing some landscaping. I know, old news, but it always bugged me. Maybe he’ll get life in prison for Kathleen and give up Stacy’s whereabouts in an exchange for lesser time.

  72. Ask The Times: Drew Peterson
    03/16/2012, 7:31 pm

    Q. What is the status of the Drew Peterson case?

    A. Former Bolingbrook police officer Drew Peterson is currently in a Will County jail awaiting trial in the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. He also is the prime suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

    Last November, the Illinois Supreme Court ordered the Appellate Court in Ottawa to take another look at whether disputed evidence can be used against Peterson when his murder case begins.

    The ruling stalled Peterson’s already delayed trial and leaves open — at least for a while — the issue of how much hearsay testimony can be presented when the ex-cop stands before a jury on charges he drowned Savio in a bathroom of their Bolingbrook home in 2004.

    Peterson, now 57, has remained jailed in the Will County Adult Detention Center in Joliet since his 2009 arrest.

    The case made headlines again in January with the airing of a Lifetime network movie. Rob Lowe played Peterson.

    It is not known when the Appellate Court will announce its decision.

  73. ♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣♣

    ♣♣♣♣ HAPPY ST. PATRICK’S DAY ♣♣♣♣


  74. …When Drew Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio, was found drowned in a dry bathtub in March 2004, state police crime scene investigator Robert Deel was so convinced she died accidentally he didn’t bother to collect any crime scene evidence.

    Three years later, when Christopher Vaughn’s wife and children were found shot to death on the Interstate 55 frontage road outside Channahon and near Shorewood, Deel tried to convince his colleagues that it was Vaughn’s wife, Kimberly, who shot everyone and then herself, but they just wouldn’t listen, according to an article in the Chicago Tribune.

    Deel is no longer a crime scene investigator, the article said, because “prosecutors faulted his work on another murder case,” and that would be the case of Peterson, which is proceeding as a murder prosecution, despite the work of Deel…

  75. Isn’t it unfortunate that this inept crime scene investigator was the one that happened upon the Savio crime scene and made his ultimate decision not to process any evidence, due to his “call” that her death was a freak accident. I would have a hard time being convinced that anything this guy testifies to should be considered in rendering an intelligent and fair verdict. He seems to conjure up ideas in his head that defy logic, and expects everyone around him to believe it’s his way or no way. I don’t think this guy understands the concept, among other things, that his theories are subject to the same scrutiny that the opposing side faces. Sounds like he’s got a big ego and a big head to carry around on those shoulders of his.

  76. Deel has been faulted for failing to recover any evidence while investigating the 2004 death of Drew Peterson’s ex-wife Kathleen Savio in her dry Bolingbrook bathtub, prosecutors have said. Peterson was charged with Savio’s murder after her body was exhumed years later.

    Will County prosecutors asked that Deel never process another crime scene in their county again. Deel has since been assigned to patrol, officials said.

    I wouldn’t trust Deel’s opinion on anything crime-related.

  77. Deel was not portrayed as the crack CSI he thinks he is when the Savio case became active again. He gives me the impression he’s a disgruntled man who would do whatever it takes to stir the pot of controversy. He seems to expect those around him to drop at his feet when he makes one of his divine revelations about how certain victims met their demise. Shouldn’t he have meticulously collected all of the evidence involved in these cases and let the forensic doctors and experts duke it out? Why is he the one trying to make the ultimate decisions on what occurred? Which, by the way, is just what he did regarding Kathleen Savio’s death, without regard for the collection of any possible evidence to rule in or rule out someone else being involved. He just decided she drowned her own self and that was it.

    He’s a moron and I wouldn’t want him investigating a squashed bug!

  78. Curious how recent unsealed evidence in Susan Powell case might relate to Kathleen Savio case. Susan left note in her safe deposit box saying even if her death may seem like an accident to look at her husband.

    No wonder Drew is still in jail.

  79. Aww, isn’t that special about Carcerano? Doesn’t anyone that goof, Peterson, kept around know how it is to live life without trying to beat the crap out of someone? Geesh!

  80. 1500 views of the mugshot.

    Speaking of karma, I saw in the news po’ ol’ OJ’s daughter has been squandering his $25,000 an month pension, but not keeping up the payments on his Florida mansion. Oh, dear.

  81. Hiya Rescue! I went back to the mugshots and note that the other pictures there are getting 1,000 + views. I find that a bit startling. Are there people out there browsing mugshots for a laugh?

  82. Haha, just when you think it’s too quiet from the Peterson camp, along comes the bs spewer to liven things up. Wonder who’s behind this little tidbit???? 😉

    Jailers find stuff in Drew Peterson cell

    By MICHAEL SNEED April 6, 2012

    The Peterson file . . .

    Hunt & Hound: Sneed is told the guards at Will County Jail “flipped” accused wife murderer Drew Peterson’s cell last week searching for possible contraband.

    ◆ The upshot: They found stuff all right. One too many plastic spoons and an extra cereal bowl.

    ◆ Backshot: Peterson, who is still the prime suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson — has been in prison for nearly three years awaiting trial for the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

  83. Peterson Pal Picked Up By Naperville Police

    The friend that Drew Peterson sent into his third wife’s house to find her dead body was recently arrested by the Naperville police.

    By Joseph Hosey

    Drew Peterson’s pal Steve Carcerano got picked up by the Naperville police.
    Steve Carcerano found Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio, dead in her bathtub.

    The man who found Drew Peterson’s third wife drowned in her dry bathtub was arrested by the Naperville police in connection with battering his brother.

    Steve Carcerano, 44, of Bolingbrook was taken into custody March 27 in connection with an incident three weeks earlier near the intersection of Freedom Drive and Warrenville Road.

    Carcerano and his brother were together in a vehicle at the time of the reported battery, said Naperville police Sgt. Gregg Bell.

    “He put his brother out of the car,” Bell said.

    Witnesses called police to report the matter and Naperville officers secured a warrant for Carcerano’s arrest.

    Carcerano is due back in DuPage County court on May 2.

    Bell said Carcerano’s brother did not suffer any serious injuries in the alleged attack.

    Carcerano could not be reached for comment.

    The Naperville arrest was his second in that town in less than four years. He was arrested on a drunken driving charge in 2008 and eventually pleaded guilty, according to court records.

    Carcerano’s ties to Peterson

    Carcerano was a neighbor of Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio. In March 2004, Peterson told Carcerano to go into Savio’s home after he had failed to contact her in several days. Peterson waited outside while Carcerano went in and upstairs.

    Carcerano found Savio’s body laying dead in her bathtub. After he made the grisly discovery, Carcerano said Peterson rushed up the stairs after him and called out, “Oh, my God!”

    Three and a half years later, following the mysterious disappearance of Peterson’s next wife, Stacy Peterson, Carcerano and Drew Peterson made the Bolingbrook social scene, regularly showing up in some of the town’s hottest night spots, such as Tailgater’s.

    In my 2008 nonfiction book Fatal Vows: The Tragic Wives of Sergeant Drew Peterson, Carcerano explained “it was important for him to accompany Peterson to a bar or restaurant so that he could be ‘the eyes’ in case ‘somebody tries to stick a knife in Drew’s neck.’”

    Carcerano was also instrumental in brokering a sit-down between Drew Peterson and a Las Vegas “talent” representative so the two could discuss plans for a reality show, according to two sources.

    Peterson and the representative met in Las Vegas just months before Peterson was arrested and charged with murdering Savio. Peterson remains in the Will County jail while he awaits the start of his murder trial.

    Carcerano was also the go-between when Drew Peterson made the acquaintance of 22-year-old tanning salon worker Kim Matuska. Matuska later spent the night at the home of Drew Peterson, a disgraced Bolingbrook cop 32-years her senior.

    Carcerano knew Matuska from frequenting her tanning salon and introduced her to Peterson, whose wife had been missing for seven months at that point.

  84. Happy Easter and Happy Passover to all of our friends and readers!
    When I was here last, I swear it said ‘Comments closed.’ I’m glad to see they are not, and appreciate all of your hard work to keep us up to date on all things Peterson.
    Poor Steve. ;> )

  85. Just saw a blip on a news report that skeletal remains were found at I-55 (Stevenson) and LaGrange. That is a VERY interesting location, and something to watch, which I will.

  86. Updated: Tuesday, 10 Apr 2012, 10:20 PM CDT
    Published : Tuesday, 10 Apr 2012, 10:20 PM CDT

    Sun-Times Media Wire

    Hodgkins, Ill. – State Police are investigating human skeletal remains found Tuesday afternoon in a grassy area beside the Stevenson Expressway near southwest suburban Hodgkins.

    A telecommunications technician working in the area discovered the skeletal remains in a grassy area south of the expressway (I-55) just north of La Grange Road about 2:40 p.m. and immediately notified State Police, spokeswoman Monique Bond said in an e-mail.

    The remains appear to be human but have not yet been identified, according to the Cook County Medical Examiner’s office. An autopsy is scheduled for Wednesday.

    State Police continue to investigate, Bond said.

  87. *Update*
    The remains should be identified in the coming days, and whether it is someone missing from this area.

    Human Remains Found Off I-55 and LaGrange Road in Hodgkins

    Updated: Wednesday, 11 Apr 2012, 7:40 AM CDT
    Published : Tuesday, 10 Apr 2012, 10:20 PM CDT

    FOX Chicago News

    Hodgkins, Ill. – State police have confirmed the skeletal remains found near the Stevenson Expressway to be human.

    The remains were discovered Tuesday off I-55 near LaGrange Road.

    A telecommunications technician working in the area discovered the remains around 2:40 p.m. and notified state police.

    An autopsy is scheduled for later Wednesday. State police are investigating.

Comments are closed.