SIDEBAR to the Drew Peterson trial

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sooner Fan#1 said:
Thanks for the info! Since I'm alone in the hospital, I even get to use my speakers instead of headphones! :woohoo:
Click to expand...

And we promise to be berry, berry quiet during the program. LOL Hope you are feeling better Sooner and get to return home soon.
 
I'm going to have the chat room for the radio show open pretty soon! The show will be starting in about 45 minutes!

:woohoo:
 
Noway said:
I believe Drew said the 25k was taken from the safe but will find source. (i think Drew later changed this story)

IIRC Drew offered 25k for safe return of Stacy.

Stacy threads
Stacy Peterson - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
Click to expand...

IIRC, this $25,000 figured into the scenario three times. First, it was the amount allegedly offered the hit-man to kill Kathleen. Second, it was the amount SP allegedly took off with when she disappeared. Third, it is the amount DP offered for her 'safe return'. In the second and third instances, DP appears to be contradicting himself unless he has another $25,000 to spare for her reward!

:waitasec:

MOO
 
[QUOTE=

Can someone post phone number or link for the show please as my view does not show any link or call in number!


As we say, link please!
 
FYI-SoonerFan#1 has had a bit of a set back and may not be here for a bit. She asked I let ya's all know. Some tests for a hernia ( I believe Hiatal) and Morphine for now. We will keep her in our thoughts and Prayers for a speedy recovery and from this setback as well :rose:
 
Cubby said:
No tv here. If there is a transcript for this show I would love to read it when it's available online, if anyone can find it.

tia!
Click to expand...

Hello Cubby, got the transcript....


This transcript is automatically generated

She was murdered by someone who said he loved her by a police sergeant sworn to protect her.

Her story told to us from the grave.

Kathleen Savio, mother of two young boys with in the prime of her life when one man and one man alone decided that she should die.

Before her death she lived in constant fear terrorized by the man who literally drilled a hole through the wall -- her home together again.

Like so many she pounded on the doors of justice cried for help got a restraining order did everything she was supposed to.

But there was no protection.

From the man who told her he would kill her and make it look like an accident.

She knew the end was coming.

She buys dead bolts she arranged her affairs even asked her sisters to raise her sons she knew.

She couldn't keep him out.

Yes there is no physical evidence no DNA no fingerprints no why witness it would be the perfect crime.

Except the fourth wife vanishes.

But circumstantial evidence is even stronger than eyewitness.

Imagine you're on a desert island and you think that there is someone else there.

Because in the full light you see what your very own -- a campfire.

And -- hands over the fire.

You don't approach.

The next morning you see what just thought with a fire it was a piece of metal that reflected the moonlight.

What you thought were hands nothing more than the branch or leaf.

What you think use so law was really nothing more than an illusion.

And why is there no evidence.

There's no evidence because the fellow police officer either inept incompetent or corrupt.

Made a decision within minutes to call it an accident and call it a day.

He directed that no evidence be collected.

And Peterson was given the professional courtesy of being present while his fourth wife tells police he was with her on the night in question.

But it was the second autopsy that identified the thirteen fresh -- and abrasions the deep symmetrical bruising under the collar bone. The severe bruising under the diaphragm it's self consistent with the bear hug.

The laceration to the head with only skin deep.

And would never have helped a woman with no drugs no alcohol and no disease to lose consciousness and drown.

It is not one fact.

But many facts taken together it's a connected hole which lead us to such convincing proof of guilt that were unable to escape that.

Two months before she died Drew Peterson wearing his weapon takes a convict for a ride in his police car. Offering 25000 dollars to kill his third wife.

He only wants to know what it's gonna happen so he can create an alibi.

Four months before she dies Kathleen tell the tenant that her husband dressed in black swat uniform snuck into our home held a knife to her throat. Told her he could kill her and make it look like an accident.

Three months before her death he again sneaks into our home chokes her leaving physical marks and asked why she doesn't just die. He tells her he'll get the kids and all the money.

Fact: within six weeks of her death a lieutenant overheard Peterson saying her lawyers are getting all my money and that his life would be easier if she just died.

Fact: drew his fourth wife tells her preacher. That she goes to bed with him the night before Kathleen is found dead and she wakes up and he was gone, not answering his cell.

At dawn she finds him in the laundry room dressed in black -- washing another woman's clothing.

He grills her telling her that she will provide his alibi.

The fourth wife even tells a divorce lawyer that drew told her he killed Kathleen.

And Peterson's pension records are subpoenaed. By Savio's divorce lawyer days before she died.

Now these people have nothing in common a reverend a police lieutenant nursing student a convict a teacher a sister.

They are not all lying.

They don't even know each other this is not taken.

Parents -- So what really happened.

Peterson picks up his kids for visitation.

He knows Kathleen is alone for the weekend.

He leaves home in the middle of the night.

After his fourth wife falls asleep.

He enters her home.

Using either her sons missing key.

Or the pre programmed garage door opener that Kathleen wrote about to the State's attorney.

Dressed in black he surprises Kathleen with a choke Or a stranglehold.

Just like he did in the front yard when he arrested her in front of our own kids.

He is highly trained in submission holds on the martial arts.

Once she's down he forces her head into the toilet.

Explaining the deep symmetrical bruising under her collar bone. He then drags her on her left side from the toilet to the top explaining the abrasions on the left side of her body.

And the one Linear abrasion literally mimics that the grout line on the floor.

She's already dead he throws her in the tub then he hits her on her head and forces her legs down her feet pressed against the side of the top.

But he forgets to put the towel there he forgets to replace for the bath -- his hands too big to open the small clasp on the necklace around her neck.

He knows from his police training his DNA might be found on her clothing so he take them to launder them.

And when he returns the next day with the a locksmith and a neighbor before he enters the house.

Now he knows his alibi.

He doesn't call fellow police officers civilians are better in a situation like this.

And she screams in the dark house where there might be an intruder he doesn't run with his gun drawn as all police are trained to do.

He stays at the front door.

When he does approach her body he starts cleaning up the blood allegedly to keep the children from seeing it but really to explain why his DNA might be present.

And after neighboring asked why there's no towel if she's really taking a bath one miraculously appears.

The evidence is there it is circumstantial.

And it is strong.

Motive means opportunity.

Each truth connected.

Leads us to the whole truth.

Kathleen Savio has spoken to us from her grave.

Her statements repeatedly voiced by the witnesses who swore to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the true.

Her voice is everywhere it is clear -- sites and on target.

It's deafening.

Can't you hear her.

Thanks for joining us.

Email us your comments justice Fox News stack.

video.foxnews.com/v/1819007204001/judge-jeanine-sums-up-the-drew-peterson-trial
 
Automatic translator has missed some words... not bad though for an automatic text generator.
 
Sooner Fan#1 said:
Yup, old age is made better through chemistry! :floorlaugh:
Click to expand...

LOL! My grandson had a onesie that said "Made with Love...and Chemistry"...Cute!

Sooner, so sorry to hear you are in the hospital again. Wishing you the best and keeping you in my prayers. Hugs.
 
Bravo said:
FYI-SoonerFan#1 has had a bit of a set back and may not be here for a bit. She asked I let ya's all know. Some tests for a hernia ( I believe Hiatal) and Morphine for now. We will keep her in our thoughts and Prayers for a speedy recovery and from this setback as well :rose:
Click to expand...

Please tell Sooner Fan #1 that she is loved and thoughts and prayers are with her.

:please:


*just catching up, as usual
 
In the CA trial, I heard 'beyond every reasonable doubt from Mason and Baez until I wanted to scream! I had always heard 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. That defense team said the word 'every' with such emphasis. I know they can use that word rather than a, but it just seems to be a much stronger word. Does anyone know what I am talking about?

The one real consolation for me is that the prosecution can have the first word and the last word at closing. The defense doesn't want them to, lol. The defense wants the jurors to go into deliberations with their last words ringing in their ears.

I want to thank ACandyrose for her great site. I spent several hours over there today and learned a few things I didn't know about this case. What a great, factual site that is for victims!

Is Tuesday ever going to get here? I simply cannot wait to hear the closing arguments!

MOO
 
LaLaw2000 said:
In the CA trial, I heard 'beyond every reasonable doubt from Mason and Baez until I wanted to scream! I had always heard 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. That defense team said the word 'every' with such emphasis. I know they can use that word rather than a, but it just seems to be a much stronger word. Does anyone know what I am talking about?

The one real consolation for me is that the prosecution can have the first word and the last word at closing. The defense doesn't want them to, lol. The defense wants the jurors to go into deliberations with their last words ringing in their ears.

I want to thank ACandyrose for her great site. I spent several hours over there today and learned a few things I didn't know about this case. What a great, factual site that is for victims!

Is Tuesday ever going to get here? I simply cannot wait to hear the closing arguments!

MOO
Click to expand...

Thank you LaLaw2000, that's quite a compliment !! :)

In a way I guess it's a good thing they didn't have camera's in the court room, after the Caylee case, I don't think I could have handled six weeks of watching Drew Peterson sitting there smirking to himself as he listened to testimony, much less to watch his six ring circus defense team in court. Wonder how long it will take Brodsky's "ship mates" to jump ship?

And don't even get me started on the judge! :banghead:

What is difficult for myself and I'm sure many others, is that we have learned so much about Stacy's case from day one, and then Kathleen story following, and then to realize only a very small percent of information, of what we know, is allowed to reach the jury's ears. How is this justice for the victims?

We're just bystanders but the family of these victims are angry and frustrated.

Judge Pirro was right, Kathleen knew it was coming. :-(

I just hope that when Drew was sitting there listening to Pastor Neil and Harry Smith that he also knew it was coming for him, because those two brought Stacy and Kathleen into that courtroom, front and center, and their voices were loud and clear.

ACR
 
shotgun09 said:
I am somewhat confused on what exactly the jury can discuss regarding Stacy. She was brought up during trial, her name mentioned, and hearsay testimony was allowed in. Will this jury be able to ask and discuss "where is Stacy Peterson?"
Click to expand...

It just occurred to me that with all of their desperate antics, sidebars and trying to stonewall the prosecution in the jury instructions, DT never thought of this. Unless I missed something, there was no request for an instruction telling the jury that the fact that Stacey was not a witness should not be interpreted as any kind of evidence, or however it may have been worded.
 
ohiogirl said:
Well, here we are. Hearsay evidence is all that is powering this case.
We shall see.:seeya:
Click to expand...

I very respectfully disagree. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence and everything in the so-called "circumstances" points toward a homicide, which was the decision following the second autopsy.

Minus the presence of Stacey Peterson or any information about her other than hearsay, more than one jury member may ask: WHY WAS THERE A SECOND AUTOPSY ANYWAY? I don't recall that this question was ever addressed in the trial (please correct me if I am wrong)l.

The fact that the judge ALLOWED the hearsay about SP in is a powerful validation that the evidence is pertinent. Otherwise he would have denied it and ruled it irrelevant.

The fact that he was so "hard" on the prosecution in the beginning of the trial and admonished them in the jury's presence, BUT allowed this in, says to me as a juror that he feels strongly it is important.

And many other things, such as the defendant's demeanor, joking around and flirting with women in the courtroom, and I am sure more than one juror saw this. They are human beings and I feel the case is powerful even without that crucial hearsay evidence. The totality of everything points toward guilt, IMO.

The decision was that KS death was a homocide, validated by Dr. Baden, and there are no other suspects and there was nobody else that had a motive, and as a matter of fact, LE never investigated anybody except DP.

Just my thoughts. Thanks.
 
Excellent thoughts ChickenPants. I tried to find something to support but could not. I believe i did read that when DP did his disgusting display of Courtroom flirting it was when the Jury was not present. I hope i am wrong. Speaks volumes. Anyone remember?
 
ACandyRose said:
<snipped by me>
What is difficult for myself and I'm sure many others, is that we have learned so much about Stacy's case from day one, and then Kathleen story following, and then to realize only a very small percent of information, of what we know, is allowed to reach the jury's ears. How is this justice for the victims?

<snipped by me>
Click to expand...

This trial has me thinking they should change the oath witnesses swear to when they take the witness stand. How about:

"Do you solemnly swear or affirm that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, or the redacted truth and wording as haggled out and agreed upon by the DT and the Judge, and nothing but the truth, so help you god?"

Schori was told what words he could and couldn't use - instead of allowing him to testify to exactly what Stacy had told him. Hearsay is one thing. Having someone else change the words is another.

And then there's all the dancing around Stacy the PT and their witnesses had to do. imo DP shouldn't be able to use him making her vanish to his advantage but that's exactly what happened in this trial.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 69 more.
Total: 3,950 (members: 70, guests: 3,880)

Online statistics

Members online
70
Guests online
3,880
Total visitors
3,950
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
594,229
Messages
18,000,651
Members
229,342
Latest member
Findhim
Back
Top