View Full Version : 2nd book "Drew Peterson Exposed"
09-22-2008, 04:20 AM
If I remember this correctly little Joey denied there was any book deal, right? Well this seems to be the deal, as DrewP allegedly gave hours of interview for this one. The press release mentions talking with DrewP but doesn't mention talking to anyone else. I wonder if Armstrong talked to Cass or Sharon or Tom?
CHICAGO, IL September 22, 2008 /24-7PressRelease/ — In a book to be released Oct 1, Drew Peterson reveals his timeline of events for October 28, 2007—the day his fourth wife Stacy Peterson disappeared. He disclosed his actions and whereabouts in full, exclusively to investigative writer Derek Armstrong, author of Drew Peterson Exposed (Kunati, Oct 1, 2008). The accounting is just one of five major revelations in the new book, embargoed until October 1, 2008
09-22-2008, 04:58 AM
How interesting considering the massive amounts of tapes the judge has to sift through in that part of the investigation. I wonder how many inconsistencies there will be between the tapes of DP talking with friends and what he says in this book.
DP is FINALLY going to give a public version of his Timeline of the day Stacy disappeared. Greta tried and tried to get DP on her show to reveal his Timeline through Brodsky.
LOL, just like another case I've been watching, the POI (the other case, he's not an 'official' POI), where they lawyer up AND continue to talk to LE with the aid of their attorney and 'other means' of communication, other than direct.
Either through MSM, affidavits, or published books, these suspects and NOT suspects continue to give LE ammunition AGAINST them. :bang:
Amazing! :waitasec: ....Truly AMAZING. :rolleyes:
09-22-2008, 03:03 PM
LOL, don't get your hopes up too high Fran. If you remember right at one point little Joey and DrewP were shopping for an author at one point, and were allegedly pretty specific about what what they wanted the author to say. I am presuming that this is the author they found since he allegedly spent hours interviewing DrewP. So I wouldn't rely on it too much for the facts. Though Chico is right, it will be interesting to compare this with anything he said on tape. LOL, looks like even though he did lawyer up LE now has two versions of DrewP's statements to compare with what they know and with what the evidence shows. The tapes and the book. And if I am not mistaken, this book should give the DA some idea of what the defense strategy will be.
So with the exception that DrewP will profit from the book, IMO it isn't all bad.
09-24-2008, 01:46 AM
His evasiveness with Greta regarding the timeline does make a lot more sense now. He was saving it all for his lovely book. What a creep. The case is not even half way solved yet and he's trying to profit again. He wants to talk about how his neighbors and former friends are supposedly only revealing information for profit. What exactly does he call this?
09-24-2008, 05:28 PM
Per the article that Chico posted in media thread, DrewP took two lie detector tests for the author. Why two? Did he not get the first one right, so he had a do over? Or was the second test to confirm the results of the first one?
LOL, no respect intended but somehow with this individual I wouldn't trust a lie detector test. A. We don't know the expertise of the person doing the test. B. There are ways to beat the test, and DrewP had time to practice. And being LE, he has probably been exposed to those ways anyway. C. Sociopaths have a known tendency to pass the LD tests.
ROFL, of course if he failed the test my opinion is probably going to change. But somehow I don't believe that if he failed the tests that little Joey would allow the results to be published.
Author says Drew Peterson took polygraphs for him
This is all I gotta say!
"Wonder how many practice tests he took before the 'final?'":eek:
How to Cheat a Polygraph Test (Lie Detector)
Learn how to Pass a Polygraph
Educate yourself. Before playing Russian roulette with your reputation, learn how to protect yourself against this invalid test. Download AntiPolygraph.org's free book:
09-29-2008, 12:04 PM
According to the report on the Early Show, in which they talked about the results of the polygraph which appear in the book, Drew was deceptive in three areas.
Was the last time you saw Stacy before you went to bed? Yes.
Do you know where Stacy is? No.
Did Stacy call you to tell you she was leaving? Yes.
Drew says he has no idea why the test showed deception in these questions. :rolleyes:
Joel did say that he himself does not believe in polygraph results and that they are not admissible in court.
He went on to say there was confusion on his part, and he thought Kathleen might have been giving him an extra day because it was a holiday.
Easter was April 11 in 2004. Possibly he was talking about their spring break?
But IMO it would have been clearly indicated who had the children for spring break. And there is no way he would have assumed this, considering how stormy their relationship was as far as being even minutes late when returning children.
09-29-2008, 04:04 PM
Thanks Noway, that book might be worth reading after all. Until this point, I hadn't thought so. Ok, so DrewP failed the test as far as questioning about Stacey. I wonder how he did on the questions about Kathleen?
I wonder who placed the first pre-order for the book? Possibly the prosecuting attorney?
Here is the Early Show link
DrewP said before that Stacey was on psychiatric medication. He is now saying that she was under psychiatric care. If he is telling the truth, why didn't he say that before? If he is telling the truth, there is one more witness into what was going on in Stacey's life before she disappeared.
And it looks as though he may have passed on the questions about Kathleen's death. Of course he has told that story over and over, he has answered questions on her death, and enough time has passed, he has thought that he got by with it for so long that he may have lost much of the physical/emotional response to those questions.
09-29-2008, 04:50 PM
Peterson's publicist says he's scheduled to appear Monday morning on CBS' "The Early Show," but the 54-year-old claims he's already tired of the book buzz.
"Actually, I'm bored with it all," he said in a telephone interview with the Tribune. "I'm waiting for the movie to come out."
Who would play him?
Peterson's attorney says he doesn't think polygraphs are reliable but that Peterson's show he hasn't done anything wrong.
09-29-2008, 05:10 PM
I don't believe I will be reading this book.
I saw this interview. IF I didn't know better, I'd almost believe him. :rolleyes:
But, then I think to myself, "It's taken Drew how long to get his story straight and sound some-what convincing?" :waitasec:
He's already made too many mis-steps in his previous interviews. Sorry, don't believe him.:behindbar
Cheat a Polygraph Test (Lie Detector
10-15-2008, 12:42 PM
I just read this article about the book, and I will not be buying it. A quote by the author:
I propose this theory after having spent a lot of time with this enigmatic man. He strikes me as a misunderstood man, a good father, a moral enigma, but not a killer. Is he a liar? Perhaps in areas that might affect the opinion of his children.
In Peterson's world, his children are everything.
Did Peterson distort the truth on these two key points of seeing Stacy and her calling to say she was leaving him because this truthful answer would be less appetizing to his children? I think this might be the case, but it's only my opinion. A plausible one, but not definitive.
10-15-2008, 09:31 PM
Yeah, if it is like that, I kinda lose interest too. I had thought the info on the time line might be good, but it sounds like the author did drink DrewP's koolaid. Evidently DrewP didn't talk to the author about his "women", both online and off. Or his toys either. Those always seemed to be what he talked to media about.
11-11-2008, 02:42 PM
I purchased this book a couple days ago not knowing what it was about. I have not been following the threads here about Stacy's case although I have been following the DP story. I wish I had read this thread before buying this book. It's horrible. Had I known, I never would have purchased it. As I started to read I thought, "This guy was found by DP to write something favorable to DP." Very weird. I would like someone here who is very familiar with the case to read the book, however, and rip it to shreds. Every person who has something to say pointing to DP's guilt is portrayed in an extremely negative light, sometimes with sensational claims that have nothing to do with the message they are giving such as "Cassandra Cales is an out lesbian", as if that has anything to do with what she has to say. Seems like tabloid journalism to me. Yuck.
11-12-2008, 01:36 PM
DP is a very weird sicko...........IMO serial killer.........an ERASER!
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.