Drew Peterson trial – Closing arguments Part 2: Joseph Lopez for the Defense

UPDATE 01:31:

Lopez suggests “maybe she had a seizure…she had her tongue between her teeth”
Atty Lopez says Savio made up staircase incident in retaliation for a battery complaint filed against her.
Lopez talks about Savio boyfriend “I don’t want to get into their sex life but you know what happened”
“We’re almost to the end ladies and gentlemen” Lopez tells jurors.
Lopez: Why did Savio sister invite DP to post-funeral luncheon if she thought he’d killed her? “Does that make any sense?”
Lopez talks about Savio’s briefcase which Savio said had all info on her, sister had it and waited yrs to give to police.
Atty Lopez tells jury that Savio sister Susan Doman has a movie, book deal pending outcome of trial.
Atty Lopez says Drew Peterson “loved his children more than he hated his ex-wife.”
Lopez shoots down testimony of Savio friend saying “she didn’t even know Kathy was divorced”
Lopez on inconsistencies: “When something like this happens, all the rats come out of the wood pile and start spewing vermin”
Lopez describes state witness Pachter as “The sex-fiend who violated court orders.”
Atty Lopez says Stacy Peterson launched a rumor campaign. When Schori didn’t act on it, she turned to Savio divorce atty Smith
Meanwhile, people grumbling that Lopez is going long …
(I’m told that on IS discussion someone has given Lopez “the gong”)
Atty Lopez mocks Stacy telling pastor that DP killed own men in Army. “Really? Does Oliver North know that?” Lopez asks.
Lopez says H. Smith was laughing in court, “talking to the water pitcher like it’s Wilson from the Castaway movie.”
Atty Lopez offers his infamous line: “Framers of the constitution would barf on this evidence.”
Judge Burmila tells Lopez he has five minutes to finish up his closing argument.
Lopez tells jury that the state could rest with out rebuttal if they wanted to – if they thought their case was strong enough.
Atty Lopez says he never got the last word w/ his mom. And he won’t get the last word in this case either, prosecutors will.
Lopez ends closing with pic of a Cheshire cat and telling jury to think of Harry Smith’s laughing face as they look at guilty verdict.
Defense done. Brief recess.
Because Lopez went long, judge says prosecutors still have another hour and five minutes to argue.
Drew Peterson sitting stock still in courtroom, showing no reaction to closings.

UPDATE 01:06:

There’s another objection during Lopez closing arguments. Attorneys approach the bench.
“Look at the gash in the back of her head, it’s as big as the Grand Canyon. You can stick your fist in there!” Lopez says.
“Don’t you think that’d knock her out?”
Lopez pulls out portion of book that says a person can hit their head and not sustain brain injury.
Another “autopsy gone wild” reference from Lopez prompts a loud objection. The judge sustains it.
Lopez: “If she would have fallen and there was no water in that tub and she would have survived that, she definitely would have been in the hospital; she definitely would have had a lot of stitches in her head.”
DiMaio saw no evidence of injury or struggle. “He would know. He investigates war crimes,” Lopez says.
Lopez is showing slides of pictures and graphics to jurors (PowerPoint).
Lopez: Baden not reputable because his autopsy was performed with a Fox News Channel producer there. “What kind of autopsy is that?”

UPDATE 12:30:

Prosecution objected to Lopez using a record that was not submitted into evidence.
Judge sustains prosecution’s objection. Jury returning to courtroom.
Atty Lopez says Drew didn’t go into Savio house on the night that Savio was found because a court order barred him from home.
Atty Lopez tells jurors that both neighbors and police testified there was no sign of a struggle or forced entry in the house.
“You’ll see the photographs – there’s no signs of a struggle in the bedroom, bathroom. There is nothing! Absolutely nothing!”
Lopez: Savio’s fall wouldn’t topple bottles if the carpenter installed the tub correctly.
Lopez talks about blue towel that appears in picture of scene that witnesses said wasn’t originally there. “Looks like somebody used the towel to kneel on it.”
“If somebody put that towel there it certainly wasn’t Drew Peterson because he wasn’t there!”
Lopez calls Savio’s death a “weird” 1.6-in-1 million-people accident. “People win the lottery with higher odds than that.”
Atty Lopez says everyone at death scene classified it as an accident, “except the state wants you to believe it’s murder.”
Atty Lopez says Illinois State Police didn’t know DP so they had no reason to protect him or cut him any slack.
Lopez: No one asked DP if he killed his wife because everyone could see it was an accident.
“Two of the state’s witnesses (pathologists) contradict the other…that’s not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that’s nothing but doubt and we don’t convict people unless it’s proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Atty Lopez: If you think DP killed your sister “you don’t say it on Greta Van Susteren (3 yrs later) you say it right there.”
Lopez: “People slip and have household accidents all the time.”
Lopez says you don’t see blood all over the place in the bathroom because she hit her head, fell under the water and drowned
Lopez asks judge how he’s doing on time. Judge says Lopez has another hour left to argue.

UPDATE 12:08:

Lopez says police looked for evidence of foul play at death scene and couldn’t find any.
“Is this a massive conspiracy to protect Sgt Peterson? Absolutely not. This was an accident, The science ain’t there!”
Atty Lopez asks jury if they think “Tommy Peterson” would come in here and testify on his father’s behalf if Peterson killed his mom.
Lopez talks about condom found in Savio house, about Savio boyfriend, hints that bruises were caused by sex with him.
Lopez “The state can’t place Drew anywhere in that home when Savio died.
State objects to a statement about Neil Schori and what he says Stacy told him. Lopez withdraws it.
Lopez tells jurors to think about dropping a water balloon. “Back of your head. Same thing.”
Lopez: “We put Harry Smith on the stand!.we didn’t hide him, did he say some things that hurt us, yes but we didn’t hide it”
“He wasn’t a beneficiary..the kids were. No motive” Lopez says.
Atty Lopez refers to Baden autopsy as “autopsy gone wild” in apparent wink to barred Girls Gone Wild reference.
Lopez talks about Savio boyfriend Steve, that Steve never mentioned Savio kept a knife under her bed for protection.
Atty Lopez had compared Savio’s neighborhood to the “King of the Hill” neighborhood where everyone hangs out together.
Lopez says about day of Savio’s death “Everyone’s looking for Savio” Drew didn’t call her because “it’s a holiday weekend”
Jury is exiting courtroom because of objection during Lopez’s closing arguments.

UPDATE 11:33:

Court is in brief recess.
Jury was very attentive during closing arguments. Took a few took notes. Drew Peterson took notes and paid close attention.
Court is back in session.

Defense Attorney Joseph R. Lopez

Attorney Joe Lopez begins closing arguments for the defense.
“It’s been a grueling 5 weeks for all of you and we really appreciate it.”
Atty Lopez says the state’s burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt, not ‘are you kidding me?'” “trials are kinda like Monopoly games, there are rules.”
Lopez compares being on a jury to being in army: “You took an oath, and if you violate that oath, that’s like going AWOL.”
Lopez says to jurors “You have to have this little voice in your head that says Sgt Peterson is innocent”
Atty Lopez reminds jury that state violated trial rules several times. Says people who don’t follow the rules are “cheaters.”
Lopez refuting Koch’s closing: “Following your common sense doesn’t mean ignoring the evidence, either.”
“The judge is very important..and you are also important cuz you’re mini judges”
Atty Lopez describes hearsay testimony as “rumor, innuendo and water cooler talk.”
Lopez tells jurors “we know how hard that is” to avoid media reports “and we appreciate it”
“People say things because they’re mad, they want the advantage, they want sympathy from other people. They’ll blow their horn, and blow it until somebody sympathizes with them. It’s the same on both sides; there’s no such thing as a divorce without tears. But the State hasn’t proven anything in this case; this case is riddled with holes, like a piece of Swiss cheese . . . it’s all speculation. Speculation. You just heard Mr. Koch tell you he drowned her in the tub. How did he get in the house? How did he restrain her? . . . they can’t even prove how it happened. It’s speculation”
“You don’t have to like Sgt. Peterson. You’ve got to like America; in America we don’t convict people on speculation!”
Lopez says he will define “hearsay.” Then he can’t find the definition.
Lopez on reasonable doubt: “it’s something you feel in your heart.”
Lopez says state didn’t say when Savio died. “Was it daylight? Was it dark out? Were the dogs barking? None of that.”

Today the defense and prosecution attorneys will deliver their closing arguments to the jury.

Check out the comment thread for updates throughout the day.

Today we are following:

Ruth Ravve
Ben Bradley
BJ Lutz
Stacy St. Clair
In Session
Kara Oko
Dan Rozek

~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.~


125 thoughts on “Drew Peterson trial – Closing arguments Part 2: Joseph Lopez for the Defense

  1. The jurors are now present, and attorney Joseph Lopez begins the defense closing argument. “Five weeks, and we’re finally here. It’s been a grueling five weeks for all of you, and we really appreciate your service…”

    ‎”…you’re basically just a bunch of strangers, and we throw you in a room and you bond with each other. The United States of America is the only place where you have a jury system. It’s been going on for centuries . . . the only place in the world where you have people determine your fate . . . the standard is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ It’s not ‘are you kidding me?’ but ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ And you took an oath not to hold it against Drew Peterson that he didn’t testify . . . you are not to consider that in any way when you consider your verdict. If you do that, you’re turning your back on the American flag, and violating your oath. Trials are kind of like Monopoly games; there’s rules you have to follow . . . a trial has rules, and nobody can cheat. And you have to follow the judge’s instructions.”

  2. In Session
    “The other thing that’s very important with the presumption of innocence is you have to have this little voice in your head tell you, ‘Sgt. Peterson is innocent.’ That’s what you have to do, it’s the presumption of innocence. You have to weigh the evidence, and apply the standard ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ Those are the rules we live by . . . when you watch the Bears play football on the weekends, against the Packers, there’s rules: you can’t go off sides, out of bounds. There’s rules. There are rules . . . and we have to keep that in mind as we go through this process. It’s a tedious process . . . but you rely on your collective memories . . . you know why you’re here today? Because Sgt. Peterson exercised his right to a jury trial. That’s why you’re here today.”

  3. The United States of America is the only place where you have a jury system. It’s been going on for centuries . . . the only place in the world where you have people determine your fate . . . the standard is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ It’s not ‘are you kidding me?’ but ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’

    OK so British system upon which the American system is based must have thrown out the “jury system”….wtf??? Did i miss the memo on that one?

    And lets hope the jury is put off by this man’s condescending tone:
    . the standard is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ It’s not ‘are you kidding me?’

  4. In Session
    “The judge is a very important person, isn’t he? A distinguished jurist, important person; he’s got the robe on. That’s because he’s the judge of the rules. But the jury is just as important, because you’re mini-judges. You’re judges of the facts . . . you don’t have to believe any of it, not one word of it. Whatever comes out of that witness stand, you determine whether or not you’re going to believe it. Just because someone says something doesn’t mean it’s so . . . and let’s not forget that this case was a divorce case. I guess in a divorce case, everybody’s truthful, huh? People say things because they’re mad, they want the advantage, they want sympathy from other people. They’ll blow their horn, and blow it until somebody sympathizes with them. It’s the same on both sides; there’s no such thing as a divorce without tears. But the State hasn’t proven anything in this case; this case is riddled with holes, like a piece of Swiss cheese . . . it’s all speculation. Speculation. You just heard Mr. Koch tell you he drowned her in the tub. How did he get in the house? How did he restrain her? . . . they can’t even prove how it happened. It’s speculation . . . you don’t have to like Drew Peterson; you don’t have to like Sgt. Peterson at all. You know what you have to like? You have to like that flag, the principles that we live by in this great United States of America, no other country like it. We’re exercising through the Bill of Rights the U.S. Constitution.”

  5. The Herald-News ‏@Joliet_HN

    Lopez promises to define “hearsay.” Then he can’t find the definition. #DrewPeterson

  6. In Session
    “We asked you to serve, and we appreciate that. No matter what your verdict is, we appreciate that . . . we know how hard that is. Let’s talk about the case; I want to say a few things . . . one of the things the State told you is they want you to use your common sense to rely on hearsay. What is hearsay? The judge will define it for you . . . you heard about circumstantial evidence . . . if you leave a pie at home with your kids and tell them ‘don’t eat it,’ and you leave and come home and somebody’s in the pie, ‘the cat ate it,’ you look at the cat to see if he’s got any pie on his face. And then you realize the cat has pie on his neck. Does that mean the cat ate it, or the kids smeared pie on the cat, to make it look like he ate it. So it’s not that clear. Circumstantial evidence is not that clear.”

  7. IS updates are very sloooooow…

    Wanted to mention that Vinnie was kind of snickering at Lopez bringing up the flag and the constitution. He said that as a prosecutor, whenever the defense does that, it is a huge sign of weakness.

  8. I find Lopez’s attempt to shield Peterson with the American Flag astonishingly distasteful and crassly inappropriate…surely the rhetoric of a desperate defense team.

    I guess the bent cop, Drew Peterson, forgot to follow the Constitution when he inflicted Cruel and Unusual punishment on Kathy Savio…drowning her in her own toilet.

  9. In Session
    “Sometimes people go fishing and tell their friends. Before you know it, it’s a ten pound fish, instead of a two pound fish. You not only have to believe it beyond a reasonable doubt, but you have to believe that the person who said it said it accurately, didn’t put their own spin on it, or their interpretation of it. It’s dangerous. Circumstantial evidence is dangerous. That’s what this case is about, only this and nothing else. And that’s something you can’t forget. What are the charges here? Indictments aren’t convictions . . . all it is is a document, a piece of paper . . . they’re just accusations, and they’re not proof of anything. All they’re good for is a paper shredder, or to be put in a garbage bag . . . the State must prove guilt – GUILT – beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s something you feel, that’s what reasonable doubt it. When you look in the mirror, you have to be perfectly content with what you do in this case. It’s not like going to Walmart or Target; you can’t change your mind at the end of the case . . . once you ink it, it’s forever. It’s forever. The State has failed to prove Drew Peterson is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Let’s start with Dr. Mitchell, the poor dead guy . . . Kathy’s death was already ruled an accident. The death certificate says accident . . . and it says the date of injury is unknown. Has the State told you when she was supposedly killed by Sgt. Peterson? Absolutely not . . . not one micron of evidence, one hair, on follicle, one print, nothing. We don’t even know when it happened . . . when did it happen? Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard here. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And they haven’t even proved that. They’ve proved it was an accident, all right, they’ve proved that. Do you think Drew hated her so much that he would take her away from the mother of the children he loved? Absolutely not! Do you think Tommy Peterson would have come in here and testified as a defense witness? Tommy said Drew broke down . . . it breaks your heart . . . imagine how that must have felt? And Tommy picked up it. Kids pick up on all the things their parents do.”

  10. In Session
    “Is this a massive conspiracy between the FBI and the Illinois State Police to protect Sgt. Peterson? Of course not! It’s an accident. An accident!”

  11. omg now he’s talking down to the jury…using 3 letter words…maybe he thinks he Dr Seuss

    . if you leave a pie at home with your kids and tell them ‘don’t eat it,’ and you leave and come home and somebody’s in the pie, ‘the cat ate it,’ you look at the cat to see if he’s got any pie on his face. And then you realize the cat has pie on his neck. Does that mean the cat ate it, or the kids smeared pie on the cat, to make it look like he ate it. So it’s not that clear.

    Congrats…he’s now invoking the Tom and Jerry defense

  12. In Session
    “They can’t even tell you when she suffered these injuries . . . the science ain’t there! Dr. DiMaio is a renowned expert from around the world; he worked for the U.N. Think they just pulled up some quack to do that? Absolutely not!”

    “Sgt. Deel finds a condom upstairs. And Steve Maniaci says it was downstairs . . . how embarrassing; I hope I didn’t offend anybody, but it’s important . . . it’s part of the evidence, because of what Deel said. Did Steve forget he put it on downstairs, they went upstairs and he tossed it? Probably. Probably that’s how she got bruises. Nobody can say she got those bruises at the hands of Sgt. Peterson, not one person. They can’t even tell you how those bruises occurred. They can’t offer any evidence of how the injuries happened, except in a slip in a fall. Are you gong to tell me that no one’s suffered a slip and fall in the bathtub before? Why do you think they sell those rubber bath mats with the little suction cups?”

  13. “Let’s start with Dr. Mitchell, the poor dead guy”

    The Shark has a way with words…the “poor dead guy” is a heck of way to refer to a coroner.

  14. In Session
    “Steven Maniaci asked Kathy if she could come over; he wanted to order Chinese food and order a movie. And she said, ‘No, I have to study.’ And Mary Pontarelli said she was invited to a party, and Kathy told her, ‘No, I have to study.’ That was the last time anyone had physically seen her. Maniaci had a phone call at midnight, and they had a fight; you can understand how upset she must have been, looking at her ex-husband down the block with a new family. And here was this guy who didn’t want to marry her. And they can’t even prove that Ms. Savio was the victim of a homicide, because it was an accident. They wanted to make it a homicide, but it was an accident. They talk about, ‘Oh, Stacy told Schori’ . . . that she gave this falsie alibi, that he coached her for four hours. All we heard was that Drew told her, ‘We made bacon and eggs, or whatever it was.’ “ The prosecution then has an objection, and the parties go to a sidebar.

  15. In Session
    The sidebar ends, and attorney Lopez resumes his closing. “None of the State’s witnesses could tell you how she received the injury. What was it really? It was the bath tub, the curvature of the bath tub. What happens when you drop a water balloon? It explodes! The back of your head, same thing. Dr. DiMaio told you that . . . these experts can’t agree on anything, can they? Is the glass half full or half empty? That doesn’t’ meet the burden of reasonable doubt, it actually raises the level of reasonable doubt. They look at something, and they all see something different. That’s not beyond reasonable doubt, that IS doubt . . . that’s not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That IS doubt . . . and this case is nothing but reasonable doubt, about what happened.”

  16. In Session
    “We didn’t want to hide Harry Smith. We put him up there . . . the most important thing you should remember is how it is that they made an accident into what they tell you is a homicide. They can’t tell you when it happened, how it happened . . . what evidence do you have that Drew Peterson murdered his wife? None. NONE! ZERO! The State wants you to rely on hearsay evidence . . . they had this big motive . . . there was no motive . . . he agreed to extend the pension date in the bifurcated divorce case? He was not a beneficiary of the insurance police, the kids were . . . even the showbiz doctor came in here [Dr. Michael Baden], Autopsies Gone Wild.”

  17. Just because the jury wore the same colored clothes, does not mean to say their average IQ is the same as the temperature in the courtroom. He must surely be insulting their intelligence when he comes up with helpful comments such as:

    “It’s not like going to Walmart or Target; you can’t change your mind at the end of the case”

  18. In Session
    “How does Drew even know she’s home? She could be over at Maniaci’s house . . . she doesn’t discuss her plans with him . . . remember that show that used to be on Sunday nights, that cartoon show where the guy used to hang out in the back yard and drink with his neighbors? . . . King of the Hill . . . I used to love that show! The neighbors go over to Kathy’s, and tell her about this party . . . she goes to the Samba Room with Maniaci, they return home and have sex, and the condom is discarded. Remember Maniaci is the guy who slept in the bed with her, and he never says anything about this giant knife; wouldn’t he be the first to know?”

  19. In Session

    “Kathy and Steve had a midnight quarrel, and Kathy hung up on Steve . . . that’s around midnight [on Saturday]. We know the Pontarellis come home, in two different vehicles at two different times . . . they saw the light on from inside the bedroom. And Mary [Pontarelli] is her best friend . . . so Mary assumes she’s studying. That evening, no dogs bark, no neighbors overheard [anything]; the neighborhood is nice and quiet. Those houses are very close together, not a lot of side yard . . . but nobody hears anything coming out of that house. It’s peaceful and it’s quiet. Sunday, Drew and his family go to the Shedd Aquarium . . . he tries to return the kids on Sunday, but there’s nobody there. It’s a three day weekend, so that’s why there’s no attempt to call anybody; Tom Peterson agreed with that . . . you are the judges of the facts, you’re mini-judges, just like the judge. Sunday, Mary tries to contact Kathy to invite her over for spaghetti and meatballs; Nick also tries to contact Kathy in the afternoon. He went to the house, banged on the door, and didn’t see anything unusual. Steve Maniaci didn’t attempt to call her on Sunday, or on Monday, either. We don’t even know if she’s home when Nick goes over there. Maybe she already slipped and hit her head. Nobody knows if she’s in the house or out of the house. Nobody knows that. She’s not answering her phone; we don’t know where she’s at. The State doesn’t know where she’s at. And, again, Monday, Drew’s looking for Kathy again. He finally calls Kathy . . . everybody’s looking for Kathy . . . she doesn’t have to account for every move to her ex-husband; she can do whatever she wants. [But] no one can find her.”

    “They decided to call a locksmith. And it took Robert Akins, a trained locksmith, six minutes to open that door. And you now why Drew didn’t go in there? I’ll tell you why. It’s a divorce case; it’s a bifurcated divorce . . . the case could have been settled at any time; this case didn’t have to go to trial. Remember, there was issues about the pension, the house . . . remember Mr. Brodsky saying . . .” Objection. The parties go to a sidebar.

  20. The knife was hidden under the mattress…how could her lover possibly know about it? BTW its gone from a knife to a “giant knife” …wonder if she had a machete?

  21. In Session
    The jurors are now gone. Prosecutor Koch is objecting to the fact that an exhibit attorney Lopez is attempting to use in his closing was never actually entered into evidence. “It was never presented to be in evidence.” Attorney Lopez responds: “The only part of this order we’re using is the part about when all remaining issues are to be resolved.” Judge: “Was there a stipulation about this exhibit?” Koch: “There was a stipulation, but they still have to move it into evidence.” Lopez: “It was something that was shown to a witness . . . I’m only asking that I be allowed to refresh the jury’s memory.” Judge: “You can certainly refer the jury to the particular testimony without using the exhibit . . . the objection will be sustained.” He sends for the jury

  22. In Session
    The jurors are now back in the courtroom, and attorney Lopez continues his summation. “I told you something I forgot to follow up on. The reason Drew didn’t go into the house was because he wasn’t there on police business; he was following the divorce court order. On March 22, 2002 Kathy got exclusive possession of the marital home. His going in that house violated the court’s order! . . . this order was in effect until the property was distributed and there was a final decision. So that Monday when Drew was there, he was under a court order not to enter that house. Not because he knew that Kathy was upstairs in that bath tub, but because the court ordered him not to do it.”

  23. In Session
    “Drew can’t go in there without her permission. Nick and Tom [Pontarelli] are on the first floor, Steve [Carcerano] and Mary [Pontarelli] go upstairs . . . Nick sees orange juice and pills; he puts the orange juice away . . . Drew doesn’t have permission to go into the house. All of the lights are off. Mary doesn’t’ see anything unusual; the bed wasn’t made. There’s no signs of any struggle, any forced entry, absolutely nothing. Drew didn’t go in because he was ordered by the court not to do it. Steve goes into the bathroom; Mary goes into the bathroom and screams. Kathy is lying in the bath tub; everything else in the bathroom is intact. The State wants to tell you she didn’t fall in there because none of the bottles have moved. Well, that’s a framed-in tub, and they shouldn’t move if the contractor did it the right way . . . whoever put that tub in right, it would be solid, it would be anchored. The whole thing’s framed out around the tub. Why does Drew have to have his gun out? ‘What am I going to tell my kid?’ are the first words out of his mouth. It’s ridiculous! He didn’t do it. Because it’s an accident . . . it’s ridiculous! That’s a ridiculous theory. They’re trying to nail Jell-O to a tree. It’s an accident. Pure and simple.”

  24. In Session
    “The blue towel’s a fallacy. It’s a fallacy. It’s what in law enforcement is called a red herring, to get your eye off the ball . . . when Drew left, the towel wasn’t there. The house is secured and Drew’s outside; he can’t go back in . . . the last time anybody saw Drew upstairs, the towel wasn’t there . . . so if somebody put that towel up there, it certainly wasn’t Drew Peterson, because he wasn’t there. Is this another conspiracy? Did somebody put that towel up there because they were down on their hands and knees? I don’t know. They’re all outside while [Rob] Sudd secures the scene. Who knows who put it there? Somebody put it there, or it was there and everybody forgot it was there. Steve [Maniaci] arrives, and has some words with Drew; Drew denies having anything to do with it.”

    “They [the first responders] know it’s an accident . . . it is what it is, it’s an accident! It’s a weird accident, but it happens . . . people win the lottery with longer odds than that . . . they walk through the scene, and they see nothing.”

  25. In Session
    “They [the Illinois State Police] didn’t even know Sgt. Peterson. They didn’t have to protect him, didn’t have to do anything for him . . . they never asked him if he killed his wife! Do you want to know to know why? Because they knew it was an accident . . . they never returned to question him again. Collins knew it was an accident. They went to interview Stacy . . . that’s not proof of anything. Whatever was told to them they never went back and checked out. They were satisfied, because they knew it was an accident. Dr. Blum said that Dr. Mitchell said the mark on Kathy’s buttocks appeared to be healing. Even their own experts can’t agree if the glass is half empty or half full . . . that is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that is nothing but doubt! And their own experts can’t get it!. Dr. Blum stated that Dr. Mitchell did a sound job . . . the tongue was partially clenched between the teeth; that’s Blum, looking at Mitchell’s autopsy . . . he [Dr. Mitchell] still found it was an accident, that her death was related to an accident, and that she drowned. The cause of death is drowning. Not only did Dr. Mitchell do the autopsy, but he also photographed the autopsy. He’s the only one who actually saw how Kathy appeared shortly after she was found. He’s not in a conspiracy to protect Sgt. Peterson . . . he looked at it, and that’s how he came to his conclusion, based on all the evidence. The coroner’s inquest, Susan Doman testified, and never said anything about threats to kill her sister. Want to know why? Because they made it up later! The coroner said it was an accidental death, just like Dr. Mitchell.”

  26. In Session
    “Blum agrees the head injury could have occurred when the head comes into contact with a surface, with enough force . . . the doctors all say it could be stellar, up, down . . . Kathy had thick hair. Look at that photo; she’s got thick hair.”

  27. I cant see how Lopez is helping his client with this type of nonsense claim:

    “The reason Drew didn’t go into the house was because he wasn’t there on police business; he was following the divorce court order. On March 22, 2002 Kathy got exclusive possession of the marital home. His going in that house violated the court’s order!”

    But the jury knows the facts are he did go into the house…he was wearing police uniform…he was armed …he did order people out of the crime scene…he did contact the locksmith…he did report the crime directly to his superiors.

    And surely the fact that Kathy had JUST got exclusive possession of the home surely served to make Drew angrier and make him think his pension might be the next asset handed to Kathy.

  28. In Session
    “Dr. Blum also agreed with Dr. Mitchell: the heart stops pumping, and the blood stops flowing . . . if you heart stops, there’s no spatter . . . she hit her head, she was knocked unconscious, and she drowned . . . how many times have you hit your head on a cabinet, and you’re dazed, and your head hurts for ten minutes? . . . we don’t know if she was conscious or unconscious when she fell; we don’t know that, either . . . ‘slippery when wet,’ just like a bath tub. People slip and have household accidents all the time . . . at least 1.6 people out of a million die in the bath tub. And she was the one. And they want to make it a murder!” The State objects, and the parties go to a sidebar.

  29. Here’s yet another blatant lie from Lopez

    “The coroner’s inquest, Susan Doman testified, and never said anything about threats to kill her sister. Want to know why? Because they made it up later!”

    The letter Kathy wrote to the authorities includes reference to Drew’s threats to kill her and make it look like an accident.

  30. In Session
    The sidebar ends. “If there’s 300 million people in the United States, then about 300 people a year die in the bath tub, in the United States. Blum and Mitchell, according to Dr. Baden, missed the diaphragm . . . three of the State’s witnesses disagreeing among themselves . . . the State’s own witnesses contradict themselves. That’s not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. [Dr.] Mary Case, who doesn’t believe with anything unless she wrote it. You think she’s biased? She’s an expert in shaken baby syndrome . . . what’s her specialty? She examines brains. She didn’t even examine the brain here; why’d you hire her? . . . she didn’t do an examination of the brain, so that particular specialty she didn’t use in this case . . . she presumed Kathy was conscious when she fell, and then said the head injury wasn’t enough to cause a loss of consciousness . . . this book is in her library, but it’s wrong, because it wasn’t written by Dr. Mary Case? She disagrees with the book, because she didn’t write it. We got to her admit, though she didn’t want to, about a paper she wrote, in which she said there can be a head injury even from a padded surface . . . Dr. Jentzen explained it to you in step-by-step detail . . . look at this book, this is a real book! Written by Dr. [Jan] Leetsma, right here . . . look at the gash on the back of her head! It’s as big as the Grand Canyon! You could stick your fist in there! Don’t you think that knocked her out? Look at the photos! They’re confusing an accident with a homicide, just like this book says . . . the book that sits in the Mary Case library. Why does she have this book? Because it’s an authoritative treatise on the subject. Her opinion is not anymore authoritative than the opinion of any of the other forensic pathologists . . . she’s just as qualified as the others. If they can’t prove it’s a homicide, who cares what Schori says, what Anna Doman says, what Harry Smith says? If it’s an accident, it doesn’t matter anymore. It’s got to be a homicide. And they can’t prove that . . . all they’ve shown you is an accident.”

  31. Wonder if Lopez’s nose is getting bigger with the passing of each minute…he wont be able to get through the courthouse door if he keeps going for another sixty minutes!

    @Pearl…agree…Lopez is no Johnny Cochran

  32. In Session
    “If she would have fallen and there was no water in that tub and she would have survived that, she definitely would have been in the hospital; she definitely would have had a lot of stitches in her head.”

  33. But, but, but, if she fell and was bleeding into a tub full of water, then the blood would have dispersed into the water and not have trickled!

  34. He veers 180 degrees from sentence to sentence. One minute he’s telling the jury that Kathy’s head wound was gaping and would have knocked her unconscious…then he pulls out a book to show that her head injury wouldn’t necessarily cause a brain injury.

    Maybe he’s just trying to confuse the jury into throwing up their hands.

  35. In Session
    “Dr. DiMaio . . . he don’t [sic] work for FOX; he don’t {sic] use Steph Watts to film autopsies, for Girls Gone Wild.” Objection/Sustained. “He [DiMaio] goes to the U.N. . . . they chose him to look at victims of war crimes. They chose him! . . .you don’t need that much water to drown. She slipped down into the tub, which the water made even slicker.”

  36. And there was absolutely no sign of struggle in the house, but she slipped and fell in the tub…only there was nothing disturbed on the side of the tub…because it was so dang sturdy! WTF?

  37. I hate to say it, but he sounds like a blabbering idiot. And this closing was going to be one for the books? Its absolutely laughable

  38. Lopez has twice thrown out the stat that 300 people drown in the bath every year in the USA….ie a 1 in a million chance

    What he doesn’t mention is that the vast majority of the 300 are either under 5 or over 70.

    The number of healthy 40 years drowning is the bath is closer to zero out of 300 million.

  39. .DiMaio saw no evidence of injury or struggle. “He would know. He investigates war crimes,” Lopez says.

    War crimes? Like desertion or does he mean those mass shootings? Electrocution and waterboarding? Help??

  40. In Session
    “If you hit somebody when they are dead, you can get bleeding, even though the book says that you can’t . . . when the heart stops pumping, the blood stops pumping; it just stops. No defensive wounds . . . Dr. Jentzen talked about these little, tiny scratches. Kathy had a cat . . . he said they could be caused by a cat . . . Jentzen didn’t know Kathy had a cat; he just said that. Kathy was a feisty person . . . [but] there are house hold injuries . . . there’s nothing around her neck, it’s clean. Her hands are clean; she wasn’t bound. That’s because she slipped and fell and hit her head. He [Dr. DiMaio] knows what he’s looking for . . . and he says there’s no pattern of injuries or struggle.”

  41. He is playing psychology games with the jury. If you keep telling the same lie over and over again eventually they might begin to believe it. He is repeating himself over and over like a drunken rambling sailor. It is driving me nuts, and he is not even making sense. He is jumping from one thing to the next without any order.

  42. In Session
    “We’ve heard about the diaphragm . . . was it bruised, was it not bruised . . .” Lopez then stops, and asks the judge to approach the bench (“I just have to ask you a question”).

  43. Can anyone make any sense out of that post above?? Maybe it isn’t all coming over clear in the typed messages, but my head is spinning

  44. In Session
    The sidebar ends. “They never really were able to prove that that was a deep bruise, like they said it was. Dr. Baden videotaped the autopsy, with Steph Watts, the producer. He conducted it with the FOX News producer beside him, who wasn’t medically trained and took notes. That goes right to the credibility of his findings. And they didn’t call him as a witness until our experts had testified. Imagine you’re a doctor and you work for FOX . . . did he [Steph Watts] know how to spell all the words he was asked to take down, or did he have to write them phonetically?”

  45. well I guess he has to repeat himself and jump around, because “It was an accident and there is no evidence” just cannot fill up 1.5 hours

  46. His closing argument reminds me of reading a twitter feed…bouncing around, repetitive, full of platitudes, half truths, blatant lies and completely incoherent.

  47. Your guess is as good as mine LA. He goes from Hank Hill, to a cat and some pie. Then he jumps back to there is no conspiracy on the part of the FBI and ISP because it was just an accident, and there was a girls gone wild autopsy…


  48. BJ Lutz ‏@bjlutz

    Lopez: “We’re almost to the end, ladies and gentlemen.”
    Well Thank God for that!!

  49. In Session
    They are speculating about what happened . . . because it’s an accident, not a homicide! . . . if you’re going to fall like that, something’s going to get compressed, and it’s her toes; she’s longer than the tub. That’s what DiMaio told you; that’s what Jentzen told you. And more importantly, Jentzen and DiMaio know what to look for. And they said these are not defensive bruises . . . all we know at the end of the day is that it’s an accident.”

    “If it was a Sunday, it would make sense that she was found with her cross on; maybe she wanted to go to church . . . the State can’t tell you whether she had a seizure or not . . . while we’re throwing out speculation, like the State does, how do we know she didn’t have a seizure when she stood up? We know she would change her medication without their [her personal physicians] advice . . . remember Dr. Neri said he treated her for cervical vertigo? That was a State’s witness who told us that. She took aspirin, which could have continued to her passing out. Steve Maniaci said she bruised easily . . . and we talked about the orthostatic hypotension; your body is hot, and it’s trying to cool itself by dilating your blood vessels. So when you stand up, you feel dizzy or weak . . . that could be a contributing factor, along with a slick surface, which is the surface of the bath tub. A the end of the day, all we know is it’s an accident . . . Jentzen, DiMaio, and Spitz all said that it was an accident.”

  50. Am I wrong or has he constantly contradicted himself on whether or not bleeding would happen when an injury was incurred?

    I could be wrong but I think he has also proposed that she was standing up dead in the tub when she was hit in the head (by nothing) and therefore she did not bleed (although she received a gash big enough to put your fist in), but merely slid gracefully(already deceased) down the slippery sides of the tub in slow motion, therefore disturbing nothing and certainly not bruising or cutting herself because she did that earlier, when she was still alive by means of vigorous sex and cat scratches.

    Now I’m just annoyed.

    Make it stop!

  51. Its been a rambling tirade that certainly makes absolutely no sense. The jury must be scratching their heads by now. If closings help decide a case, they just lost it

  52. In Session
    “It must be proof beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest level of proof in a court in the United States of America . . . who were her two best friends? It was Mary [Pontarelli] and Steve {Maniaci] . . . not one word about threats. Basically, Kathy made it up after she got the summons . . . if Drew went into that house without her permission, all she had to do was call up Harry Smith and get Drew held in contempt of court for violation of a court order. That would be enough right there for the court to take action. Never happened. Because she made it up! That raises a reasonable doubt right there . . . Steve Maniaci, not one word; you saw Maniaci, you think he’d stand for that? Isn’t the person you tell you’re terrified the person you’re with all the time? He never said she kept a knife under the mattress; he was the person ON the mattress. . . . Steve loved her, he adored her. And she never told Steve once about this stuff? That’s ridiculous. She made it up . . . don’t you think if it happened she’d get on the phone to Mary and say, ‘That SOB just came over here, and you know what he did to me?’” Objection. The State asks for a sidebar.

  53. If Maniaci was so ignorant about Kathy’s fears, why is it that the first thing he did when he got to the house is ask Drew “Did you have anything to do with this?

  54. Wonder if Lopez will finish with a rousing rendition of the Star Spangled Banner while a pic is projected on to the courtroom wall of Drew embracing the flag surrounded by his kids?

  55. I am sitting here bewildered. I mean on Friday they did say it was going to be entertaining but 50 hours spent spewing this crap and expect somebody to believe it? If I was on the jury I would be like, seriously? Is this guy for real? Anything else he had to say I would be completely tuned out! He is repeating himself like a broken record, rambling off the wall, and making no sense at all. Then the stuff he is saying isn’t even factual, or believable. If the jury falls for this I am going to be totally thrown for a loop!

  56. Steve Maniaci was also interviewed about the staircase incident on July 18 2002 and he corroborated kathleen’s story at that time.

  57. @ Fac…lets hope the prosecution fact-checkers give Glasgow all the ammunition he needs for a quick but devastating rebuttal…

  58. In Session
    The sidebar ends. “Again, these are the people in the circle of trust. The hearsay instruction; basically it says the statement rests upon the credibility of the person who said it. The two most trusted people in the world you would have expected her to tell, she didn’t do it . . . that raises credibility right there . . . it’s an accident. This bath tub’s a hard surface; it’s not a marshmallow. Anna Doman says, ‘My sister told me a hundred and fifty million times her husband was going to kill her.’ So what does she do? She invites him over to the luncheon after the funeral. Does that make any sense? . . . isn’t that ridiculous? Preposterous? Does that make any sense to anyone? . . . she didn’t say one word, not one word . . . not one word! . . . not one word about any of this. She didn’t even know the specifics of the divorce. ‘Promise to take care of my boys’ . . . she didn’t do anything for those boys. Remember the brief case? According to her, Kathy said it would tell the world what happened to her. What does she do with it? She puts it in the garage, where it collects dust . . . you didn’t see one document out of that briefcase. It was empty! Susan Doman, she got the movie contract. She has a movie and a book in the works, pending the end of the trial . . . she gets to have the final say in this movie, and she gives the producers the right to make it more colorful. Well, you know what? It’s not going to be colorful, because the darn briefcase is empty! It’s got to be a juicy story. And an accident is not a juicy story. The only movies they make about accidents are airplane movies, or train movies . . . not about someone who slips and falls in a bath tub.”

  59. Oxy, me too. I’m guessing that if the rebuttal puts together a cohesive narrative as they did with the first closing argument that the jury will have to give it more weight than all this random BS tossing. Their poor brains will accept it as a soothing balm to the pain that Lopez just inflicted.

  60. Lopez just said “The hearsay instruction; basically it says the statement rests upon the credibility of the person who said it”

    Surely that is another own goal….who did Stacy tell Drew had murdered Kathy ….A PASTOR and an OFFICER of the COURT

  61. In Session
    “Drew said he wouldn’t kill the mother of his children. He loves his children more than he hates his ex-wife. Kristin Anderson, she was just dying to testify, wasn’t she? She couldn’t wait to get on that stand . . . she never saw Drew in the house. She was so close to Kathy she didn’t’ even go to her funeral, because she was too busy. She was so close to Kathy she didn’t even know that Kathy got divorced when she was living with Kathy, in October of 2002. She didn’t even know that Kathy was divorced.”

    I“All the ISP [Illinois State Police] reports are inaccurate? It’s all a big conspiracy to help Sgt. Peterson? When something like this happens, all the rats come out of the wood pile and start spewing vermin.”

  62. Oxy, I thought the same thing about the reason Drew could not go into the house. IMO, the defense has given the jurors more to think about for motive than the prosecution with the court order not to enter.
    Also, the blood splatter statements. Is it the defenses opinion that Kathy’s heart stopped before she hit her head?

  63. Lopez jut said “When something like this happens, all the rats come out of the wood pile and start spewing vermin.”

    That would be lopez, Greenberg and Brodsky — the 3 Blind Rats

  64. BJ Lutz‏@bjlutz

    By my calculation, Lopez’s closing argument has reached the two hour mark. We were told teams had one hour, 45 minutes.

  65. Mr. Lopez now ridicules the testimony of police officer James Coughlin. “We know in February this case was up only one time. This case was continued to 4/6/03, which is April. Coughlin says he remembers it because he looked at his calendar . . . well, you know what? It never happened. Here’s a court order that shows it.
    And Susan McCauley, at the bowling alley . . . who knows what was really said over there? And what different does it make? It’s an accident. Jeffrey Pachter, the sex fiend, deadbeat gambler . . . his story is nonsense, and he knows it. Nothing backs him up. It’s ridiculous to think that a police officer would recruit this guy to kill his wife when he sees him every day at work when nobody’s around? He can’t even pay his taxes, like the rest of us! He cheats his bookie, too, cheats Uncle Sam, cheats the urine test, cheats the employer. Nothing backs up his story, not one thing . . . [he] made it up. Is that the kind of testimony you can rely on beyond a reasonable doubt? We say no. Neil Schori, at Starbucks, brings a chaperone with him . . . something’s going on that nobody’s telling us about.” Objection/Sustained. “He didn’t take any notes; Stacy started a rumor campaign hoping something would happen. And when Schori wouldn’t do anything about it, she went to Smith. And he didn’t do anything. Nobody did anything about it, because they knew she was lying, because she wanted a divorce.” Objection. The State asks for a sidebar.

  66. In Session
    The sidebar ends. “She [Stacy] started a rumor campaign . . . she knew it was an accident, she knew it was investigated. What does she want to do with this information? She told him [Schori] that he [Drew] killed his own men in the Army. Really? Does Oliver North know that? He killed his own men in the Army! That’s ridiculous. That’s as ridiculous as saying that Drew killed Kathy, because it’s an accident. She’s lying, and he [Schori] knows that. And Harry Smith, remember him testifying? He thought it was a joke, because he knows it was an accident, and he can’t believe the State is prosecuting it! Objection/Sustained. “He’s laughing, laughing . . . laughing at the State’s case. Just laughing.”

  67. I think he may have lost some potential future business with this rambling closing. I think he just likes to hear himself talk

  68. So he means, “venom” right?

    Which rats don’t have. Because rats are “vermin”…they don’t spew it. Cobras spew venom. Rats don’t spew anything. They’re rodents.

    The heck?

  69. In Session
    “Stacy wanted to squeeze money out of Drew by spreading a rumor, or a campaign of rumors . . . when that all failed, she came up with, ‘Oh, I’ve got something on the Bolingbrook Police Department.’ Campaign of rumors, campaign of lies. Let’s twist it to make it a homicide. We don’t do that in America . . . put someone in a target and do everything they can to get him. You don’t have to like him. You can hate him. You have to like America . . . the Framers of the Constitution would barf at this evidence! There’s nothing but doubt in this case. Mary Parks completely contradicts Kristin Anderson . . . people get on the TV and lie, just like they do in this courtroom . . . people lie when it’s for their own agenda . . . it doesn’t matter what was said to poor Rev. Schori, who had to bring a chaperone . . . because if it’s not a homicide, it doesn’t matter . . .we suggest to you that it’s not credible.”

  70. Lopez says H. Smith was laughing in court, “talking to the water pitcher like it’s Wilson from the Castaway movie.”

    What’s he trying to say, that Harry Smith is insane?

    And now he’s mentioning barf.

    3 TV shows that I don’t watch so I didn’t get the references, rats, venom, Castaway (which I HAVE seen) and now barf.


  71. In Session
    “The State gets the last word, if they want. They don’t have to have a rebuttal, if they think their case is so great . . . they go last because they have the burden of proof . . . I just ask you to do one thing: growing up as a kid, I never got the last word in with my mother, never! But think what our response would be to their rebuttal . . . what would Lopez and the others say? That’s deliberations. You’re going to go back, and then you can start your deliberations. You don’t have to come back at 5:00. You can come back whenever you want to . . . but when you go back there, I want you to think of that, how that lawyer [Harry Smith] laughed in this courtroom. Think about that!” That ends the defense summation.

  72. Here they go again witness bashing! Everyone is a loser, a drug addict, a criminal, a pathological liar, and his client is the victim of conspiracy! Yep all these people who some have never each met each other just made all this stuff up and seem to have the same story? Hmm how can that be?

  73. The jury is now gone. The judge announces that he extended the time for each side’s closings from one hour, forty-five minutes to two hours, fifteen minutes. The defense took two hours, twenty minutes. So the State has one hour, five minutes [left].”

    The judge leaves the bench. The trial is in a brief recess.

  74. The Herald-News ‏@Joliet_HN

    I’m also told Lopez’s Power Point presentation was “riddled with misspellings.” #DrewPeterson
    Brodsky must have typed up the PP deck LOL

  75. Wow. Wonder what happened to the BIG SHOCKING SURPRISE he had for Harry Smith? I heard alot about cats, and rats, and barf and vermin (or venom) and Stacy wanting money (Good job for pointing that out Joe! Is that why she is no longer here?), and everyone is lying except for Drew!

    I don’t think he did much damage to the state. I thought the state did a good job, looking forward to their rebuttal.

    I have to leave for about an hour. Be back soon!

  76. Bet the jurors feel they’ve been transported to a parallel universe where the only good honest person is Drew Peterson and every other person is a rat spewing “vermin”…surely these twelve law-abiding citizens wont fall for such a complete misstatement of the truth.

  77. “All I know is this — I’m going to do the best I can,” he said. “It’s not going to be like any lawyer you’ve seen before. I break every rule in the book.”

    — I thought rule breaking was for cheaters?

  78. Thank goodness that madness is over! Now hopefully the State comes in and brings back their sanity, so they can think straight. Wow what a head whirl that was. I think it caused my vertigo to start acting up with all that twirling around. I felt like I was on a tilt a whirl for awhile there. I can’t believe he worked on that for 50 hours. 50 hours and that is what he came up with for a closing argument? It felt more like a purple micro dot trip from the 60’s! I was waiting for Magic Carpet ride to start playing in the background. Unbelievable! Well it’s over now and hopefully the State comes in and gives a great rebuttal and the jury is able to come up with a verdict sometime today.

  79. “Lopez ends closing with pic of a cheshire cat and telling jury to think of Harry Smith’s laughing face as they look at guilty verdict”

    WTF>>> is this the worst ever ending in defense history

    Hardly “if the glove doesn’t fit you must acquit.”

    To me telling the jury to think about Harry Smith as his parting words was doubling down on last week’s screw up…

    Wow…didn’t Smith …an officer of the Court …refer to the FACT that “Drew killed Kathy” and warn Stacy about concealing a homicide…lets hope that is indeed what the jury think about when they deliberate.

  80. Yeah to bad they can’t look at their laughing faces as they talk about two women’s demise out on the court yard lawn every day after court and make a joke, and a mockery of it all.

  81. Kara Oko ‏@KaraOko

    Glasgow begins rebuttal: ” I want to remind everyone that this trial is about the murder of Kathleen Savio.” #DrewPeterson
    Well said! Bring everyone back down to earth after the last two hours

Comments are closed.