Appeal denied. Court upholds Drew Peterson’s murder conviction

Almost two years after it was filed, and six months after it was argued,three appellate court justices decided unanimously to deny Drew Peterson’s appeal of his 2012 conviction for the murder of Kathleen Savio.

The justices, led by Justice Robert L. Carter, stated in their 87-page opinion that there were no errors made during Peterson’s trial, that the physical and circumstantial evidence was sufficient for conviction and that Joel Brodsky’s media agreement with Peterson did not constitute a conflict of interest.

State’s Attorney James Glasgow, the target of Peterson’s current murder-for-hire case, states to CBS that “this is the ultimate vindication of this eight-year journey we’ve been on.”

Victims of domestic abuse advocate and sister of Kathleen, Sue Savio says, “He is where he is and I hope he knows he’s never getting out.

Peterson’s attorney, Steven Greenberg has stated both that he will appeal the conviction again and that he will need to talk to his client before deciding what step to take next.

As for former Peterson lead attorney, Joel Brodsky – he sees the denial as a personal victory.


I’m not sure I agree with his assessment of complete vindication. The court didn’t determine whether or not Brodsky had committed an ethical violation. That’s a matter for the ARDC. Rather, they opined only that his questionable media contract with Peterson didn’t fall under the definition of a per se conflict of interest, stating:

Simply put, the alleged conflict created by the media contract in this case does not fall into one of the categories of per se conflicts established by our supreme court. See id. at 143-44. Regardless of whether Brodsky entering into the contract constituted a violation of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, that relationship did not give rise to a per se conflict of interest.

Meanwhile, Peterson’s trial for conspiracy to commit murder is scheduled to begin in February.


7 thoughts on “Appeal denied. Court upholds Drew Peterson’s murder conviction

  1. Brodsky has turned to his old pal Glenn Selig for a press release calling the denial of Peterson’s appeal a victory for himself. But mostly, he uses the opportuity to throw shade at Greenberg. Some things never change.

    The Peterson appeal was the third recent high profile loss for attorney Steve Greenberg. He was defeated in the Brian Dugan death penalty case, the last death penalty case in Illinois history. And he lost a civil rights case for a client who he alleged was wrongfully convicted, when the jury sided with the police officers who had arrested his client.

    Since the Drew Peterson case, Attorney Joel A. Brodsky has had a string of victories, including a recent win before the Appellate Court in a case that combined criminal and probate law; the exoneration of a client in a decision by the Illinois Torture Inquiry and Relief Commission; and several not guilty verdicts in criminal trials.


    The defense counsel for Drew Peterson has used its last timeout.
    During a case management conference Tuesday, Randolph County Circuit Court Judge Richard A. Brown denied a motion to continue the case once again, theoretically pushing the trial date back to a late spring start.
    Peterson’s trial on murder-for-hire charges is now confirmed for late February. Jury selection will begin Feb. 26 at 9 a.m., with the trial to commence on Feb. 29 at 9 a.m.

    Next case management date set for February 8.


    Lawyers for Drew Peterson appeal his murder conviction
    POSTED 7:18 AM, JANUARY 20, 2016,
    CHICAGO — Lawyers for Drew Peterson have asked the Illinois Supreme Court to toss out his conviction for the murder of his third wife.
    An Illinois appellate court in November affirmed the former Bolingbrook police officer’s murder conviction and sentence in the 2004 death of Kathleen Savio, whose body was found in her suburban Chicago home’s bathtub. The court upheld Peterson’s 38-year sentence, meaning he won’t be paroled until 2047.
    In their appeal filed Tuesday, Peterson’s lawyers argue he was denied a fair trial due to the use of so-called hearsay statements, as well as other alleged critical errors, during court proceedings in Will County.
    Peterson is scheduled to stand trial on charges he solicited an inmate to kill Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow, who prosecuted the Savio case.

Comments are closed.