Was Christina Raines dating her current fiancé while “engaged” to Drew Peterson?

Christina Raines and Randy Dicharia in April of this year

Back in February of 2009, Drew Peterson‘s young fiancée, Christina Raines, moved out of Peterson’s Bolingbrook house and told the news media that their engagement had been a stunt masterminded by attorney Joel Brodsky so that Drew could remain “in the media”.

One week later she had moved back in, and a week after that, MSNBC aired a segment on the couple in which Raines purred about her intended, “He’s nice. He has a good heart. He’s very caring and I don’t think he’ll ever hurt me or anyone else.” Drew and Chrissy said that they were making plans to marry in June or July (if Peterson could divorce his missing wife, Stacy Cales Peterson). When Peterson was arrested three months later, she was still living at his house with her two small children. But was Chrissy really engaged to Drew again or was the stunt still in play?

During Drew Peterson’s long detention in advance of his trial for murder, Raines was reported to have visited Drew from time to time, but last May Peterson announced in letters to both the Sun-Times‘ Michael Sneed and to WGN news producer, Aline Wessel, that Raines had informed him that their relationship was over. Peterson gave a number of reasons for this. In one letter he claimed that he hadn’t seen Chrissy for a year because “she got spooked by the press“. In another letter he wrote rather petulantly that “she moved on two weeks after I came here.”

Some Facebook postings would suggest that Christina Raines had moved on even before Peterson’s arrest. That is, if there was ever really an engagement to move on from.

Christina Raines has been seeing Her current beau, Randy DiCharia for quite a while. As of this Spring DiCharia posted a Facebook status stating, “I love my future wife she’s the best love you baby”. On a photo dated from March of this year Chrissy gushes, “We make a great couple. 3 years together & loven it.”

(click to enlarge)

Three years together? That would put the beginning of their relationship at March 2009, two months before Drew Peterson’s arrest, while Raines was still living with Drew in the house that he had shared with Stacy.

Well, maybe Raines is just not good with facts and numbers. She does seem to be awfully unclear on whether or not she was ever engaged to Drew. Or maybe, as it seemed back in the Winter of 2009, she was a willing pawn in the Peterson/Brodsky/Selig media stunt game.

One thing is clear, she doesn’t seem to have moved on from her penchant for “bad boys”.

(click to enlarge)

~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.~


15 thoughts on “Was Christina Raines dating her current fiancé while “engaged” to Drew Peterson?

  1. Well, Facs, if she follows Drew’s rulebook, she can be engaged/married to lots of people at the same time. As long as she doesn’t try to erase any of them.

  2. Savio Family Fumes That Drew Treated Like V-I-Peterson While In Custody

    The sister and brother-in-law of Drew Peterson’s slain third wife are upset over the perceived preferential treatment the accused killer gets from county personnel.
    By Joseph Hosey

    Does Drew Peterson get special treatment from county staff? The family of his slain third wife, Kathleen Savio, thinks so.
    Sheriff Paul Kaupas says that’s not the case. Attorney Joseph “Shark” Lopez also said Peterson does not get special treatment.

    Drew Peterson might be a lonely guy while he’s locked away by himself in the county jail, but he has plenty of people to talk to every time he goes to court. And the family of the disgraced ex-cop’s slain third wife isn’t happy about that at all.

    “He’s getting preferential treatment,” said Mitch Doman, the brother-in-law of Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio.

    Prosecutors say Peterson drowned Savio in March 2004 and staged her death scene to make it look like she perished in a freak bathtub accident. He wasn’t charged with her murder until May 2009, and is still awaiting trial.

    During Peterson’s numerous court appearances in the past three years, Savio’s sister, Sue Doman and her husband Mitch have taken offense to the companionable way courthouse personnel treat Peterson, especially compared to other inmates.

    “Does he get preferential treatment because he’s an ex-cop?” Mitch Doman wondered. “It’s not right.”

    And Mitch Doman went so far as to point his finger at Sheriff Paul Kaupas for being what he feels is too chummy with the accused wife-killer.

    “The sheriff’s yakety-yaking with him,” Doman said of Kaupas, who worked as an undercover drug agent with Peterson in the Metropolitan Area Narcotics Squad in the 1980s.

    While working undercover on the special team, Peterson was fired from his cop job and indicted on charges of official misconduct and failure to report a bribe.

    The criminal charges were eventually dropped and Peterson ended up getting his job back. Sources have said the special prosecutor assigned to the case blew the speedy trial term.

    But Kaupas said this history he shares with Peterson has nothing to do with the conversations they have in court when his old colleague is brought over for hearings leading up to his July 23 murder trial.

    “Drew’s not the only inmate I talk to in that place,” the sheriff said, pointing out that when he takes tours of the county jail he will “talk to all the inmates. Ain’t nothing wrong with that.”

    But Sue Doman finds quite a bit wrong with it. While she confided that the friendly relationship Peterson seems to have with courthouse personnel upsets her, she declined to discuss it since she will be called as a witness at the murder trial.

    But that hasn’t stopped her husband from speaking up.

    “The fact that he gets preferential treatment is, pardon my French, s—,” said Mitch Doman, who pointed out that it is hard for his wife to have to watch the man accused of murdering her sister laughing and talking in court.

    “I see it with my own eyes,” Mitch Doman said. “He’s, ‘Blah blah blah’ with the bailiffs and ‘blah blah blah’ with the deputies. I don’t care if he’s friends with the sheriff. It’s ridiculous.”

    And Joliet resident Mike Ferguson, who was locked up at the county jail along with Peterson for three months in 2010, also said the former cop was treated differently than other inmates.

    “Any time Drew Peterson had any type of movement, the whole jail would go on lockdown,” said Ferguson, telling how jail staff acted as if they were transporting Hannibal Lecter or the Count of Monte Cristo when Peterson had to be taken someplace.

    Peterson’s attorney, Joseph “Shark” Lopez, disputed the Domans’ claims that his client was being handled with kid gloves by the county.

    “That’s a figment of their imagination,” Lopez said, noting that he does not understand why the Domans are so upset.

    “I don’t know what to tell them—they should be upset maybe because Kathy married him,” Lopez said, insisting that Peterson gets treated no better than anybody else brought over to court from the county jail.

    “I have other clients in custody there and it’s the same thing,” Lopez said. “The deputies are just nice. There’s no rule that says deputies have to be mean. It’s not like they’re going to Starbucks and getting him apple fritters and grande lattes.”


  3. I understand why they are upset. It was same way her sister’s murder was looked at and its the reason Drew thinks he is special.

  4. Sherriff Kaupas has been known to chat with Drew during his visits to court, but he doesn’t seem to be sympathetic to Peterson — at least not in this interview.

    Paul Kaupas joins Roe & Roeper

    Will County Sheriff Paul Kaupas & Professor Leonard L. Cavise debate on The Roe Conn Show with Richard Roeper whether or not Drew Peterson should be released.


    Sherriff Kaupas points out that it’s not unusual for people to be detained up to 4-5 years awaiting trial and that what came out in the hearsay hearings is enough to keep Drew in jail.

    He also explains that Will County doesn’t do home arrests at this time (only ankle bracelet for those on probation) so it wouldn’t even be an option for Drew.

    Warning: Professor Cavise is particularly obnoxious. He keeps saying that the court has to show the evidence keeping Drew in jail and of course they don’t. He also says that Kathy’s death determination of accidental death was in place for ten years before a new pathologist determined she was a victim of homicide. In reality, the coroner completed her death certificate in May of 2004 and her body was exhumed in November of 2007 – a little over three years.

  5. This is from a Tribune story earlier this month:

    …After Wednesday’s hearing, Mitchell Doman, Savio’s brother-in-law, complained Peterson was getting “Joe Hollywood” treatment in court. He noted Peterson was joking with Sheriff Paul Kaupas before the hearing and said he saw Peterson handcuff himself after it was over.


    I really hope they aren’t letting Peterson handcuff himself. That’s wrong.

  6. I’ve never seen this show. I probably won’t watch since it features Joel Brodsky. I think I’ve heard everything he has to say already.

    Jeanine Pirro ‏@JudgeJeanine
    This weekend,we have a special ed. of “Justice”: all about the Drew Peterson case. We have all-star panel-& I go one on one w/ Joel Brodsky

  7. I don’t think so, Charmed.

    …anyone associated with the case, including Peterson, his defense lawyers and prosecutors, must notify the judge before conducting any media interviews.

    Are we to imagine then that Joel notified Judge Burmila beforehand? I guess he could have.

  8. LOL@charmed.

    Come to think of it, if Mitch Doman is correct in what he saw, Peterson handcuffing himself is disgusting.

    Time to get this circus show moving. Enough with the defense snipes and barbs. They all treat this as a laughing matter. Bah.

  9. This is apropos of nothing but I wish someone had transcripts of all the interviews Peterson gave and a bot to sort out all the lies. The man changed his tune an AWFUL lot.

    Remember when Tom Morphey testified that Drew took him to rent a storage locker (under Morphey’s name) so that he could store a body in it (in an air-tight container) but backed down after it required a little more paperwork than Drew was comfortable with?

    In a radio interview on WIND-AM Drew said, ” I was gonna put tires in there. It wasn’t something that I deliberately had to get done right away. But I wanted to clean my garage up a little bit.”


    But when Morphey was on the stand during the hearsay hearings, George Lenard said that “Peterson just wanted to rent the storage locker so he could hide things in it before Stacy filed for divorce.”


    As they say, the truth is easy to remember. It’s the lies that are hard to keep track of.

    Why is it that Drew has never been able to give us a quote of exactly where Stacy said she was going when she supposedly called him on 10/2807? All he seems to remember was the “snotty” tone of her voice as she said that she either found someone or was leaving him or was going on a vacation or on a trip or going to be gone for a little while. It’s such obvious lying.

  10. More events in preparation for trial:

    06/27/2012 Copies & Cert. Copies
    06/29/2012 Copies & Cert. Copies
    06/29/2012 Copies & Cert. Copies
    06/29/2012 Impounded Document-Agreed Order signed and dated
    06/29/2012 Notice of Motion
    06/29/2012 Impounded Document:MOTION IN LIMINE
    06/29/2012 Notice of Filing
    06/29/2012 Impounded Document- RESPONSE TO MOTION AND EXHIBITS

  11. Tonight @ 8 pm central on Fox news, Judge Jeanine is doing some special about the Drew Peterson case. I am not sure who is on there, or what not. I just seen it real quick while walking through.

  12. It’s the show I linked to upthread.

    I thought Cassandra and Sharon did a great job. I’m not a big Fuhrman fan but he did very well and presented the facts perfectly. The others on the panel With Judge P were not as well informed. As for the Judge, she was totally out of the loop.

    Brodsky looked unsure of himself and ceded that the hearsay evidence was a big threat to his defense.

Comments are closed.