In Session Deel “had arrived before I had arrived. So I was just getting a briefing from him... basically, Deel said it appeared to be an accidental situation.” This happened approximately ten minutes before the witness arrived on the scene. “What did you ask Mr. Deel to do with you during that discussion?” “After meeting Deel and getting a brief summary, I asked, 'Can we walk through the scene of the house, to see if there was any evidence there?'" It was also a learning experience for me. I asked Deel if there was any evidence that needed to be obtained, and he said no. I asked if there was any sign of a break-in, and Sgt. Deel said no.” The walk around the house lasted “five to seven minutes, walking slowly.”
In Session “At some point later, did you assist with the removal of the body out of the house?” “Yes... prior to me assisting removing the body, I went back in the bathroom to look at he body one more time. At which time I observed a gash on the back of her head. I asked Deel how did Kathleen Savio receive that gash, and he said possibly it was from a slip in the tub. That was a concern of mine. After that, the deputy coroner [and] Deel had placed the body in a body bag... I assisted in taking the body out of the building.” “Did you bounce the body against anything when you were taking the body out?” “No, I did not
In Session The witness says that he told the Bolingbrook police officers who were present that “eventually I’d have to talk to Drew. They said OK.” He then went to neighbor Steve Carcerano’s home, to conduct interviews. “I arrived at the house between 1:00 and 1:15 in the morning... they [the interviews] had to start approximately 2:00-ish in the morning.” “Those interviews took some length of time?” “Yes... to see if somebody knew something, or had possibly heard something.” Once the interviews were completed, “I went outside, and someone informed one of the commanders that we needed to speak to Drew at that time... the interview with Drew Peterson was at the Bolingbrook Police Department.” “And that began at approximately 6:00 in the morning?” “Yes.”
In Session The witness says he began the interview by asking Peterson if he knew why he was interviewed (he said yes). “I asked him how his relationship with Kathy was going; he said pretty good, despite the fact that they were in the final stages of their divorce... as part of his divorce at that time, the divorce would allow Drew to remarry, and Kathy to remarry.” “Did the defendant indicate anything to you about where the divorce was at?” “He said the divorce was going along fine despite the facts that the financial aspects of the divorce hadn’t been finalized.” “Did he explain anything to you about the house?” “I asked Drew, ‘Well, how would you benefit from the death of Kathy Savio?’” Drew responded that he and Kathy had joint custody of the house, which was paid off and worth about $300,000... he said he would received half. And then he said, ‘Oh, I guess now I’ll get the whole value of the house.’”
In Session “He stated he would not benefit from any insurance policy, because she had changed the paperwork and left that as a trust to the kids.” “So the insurance policy was going to the children?” “Yes, he did.” “Did you ask him about the last time he spoke to Kathy?” “The last time he picked up the kids, it was Friday, at about 5:00 pm.... Kathy indicated to Drew that she had made plans for the weekend, but didn’t indicate anything in particular.” “He indicated to you the last time he saw or spoke to her was on Friday?” “At 5:00, when he picked up the kids. He said she appeared to be fine physically, and also mentally.” “Did you ask him if Kathy might have contemplated suicide?” Objection/Overruled. “He said no way. He could never see her living without the kids.” "Did you ask about any medications?” “He informed me that she was on some kind of antidepressant... because of the stress of the divorce, because she had a feeling of being abandoned, and in her childhood she had incidents in which she was molested and physically abused.”
In Session “I asked Drew to describe the events of that particular weekend... Saturday was the day he hung out with the kids, and did normal family things. Just spent time around the house... nothing in particular.” “Did he indicate anything about Saturday night?” “Saturday night... I’d have to reflect back to my report on that one.” The witness is shown a copy of his report relating to his interview of the defendant. “Saturday night he was still with the kids... he just spent the day with the kids on Saturday.”
In Session “On Sunday, Drew had told me they planned to go to the Shedd Aquarium. He went to Krispy Kreme; he returned home, and his wife [Stacy] made breakfast. At 11:00 they left, and headed to the Shedd Aquarium... Drew stated to me they returned at approximately 4:15 pm; he liked to be prepared for work by 5:00 pm. He didn’t have to go to work that day until 5:30... he arrived home, he attempted to take the kids back. He went to work at 5:30, and returned home around dinner time, at which time he attempted to return the kids. That led to negative results, because no one answered the bell or answered the phone. The kids rang the bell as he attempted to call on his phone... when he got no response, he returned home, returned the kids to his residence, and proceeded to go back to work.” According to this witness, Drew told him that he realized it was a three-day weekend, and he thought perhaps Kathy and her boyfriend had gone off for an extra day
In Session “On Monday, he woke up, and made several attempts to contact Kathy, with negative results.” “Did he indicate that at some point he went to one of Kathy’s neighbors?” “When he went down to the location, he went to a neighbor, Mary Pontarelli, and he asked Mary when was the last time she saw Kathy. She indicated she has saw [sic] Kath on Saturday afternoon.” “That’s information the defendant provided to you on the morning of March 2?” “Yes.” “Did he give you any time at which he went to Mary Pontarelli’s house?” “It was approximately 7:00 pm.” “What happened after that?” “He said he was somewhat concerned, and he was thinking about contacting a locksmith.” Once again, the witness asks to see a copy of his report, with which he is provided
In Session “He had mentioned to Mary that if he had not heard from Kathy by Tuesday, he would contact a locksmith. Then, at approximately 9:45 pm, Mary’s son had contacted Kathy’s boyfriend...“ Objection/Sustained. “When it was known that an individual had spoken to Kathy’s boyfriend, then Mary told Drew to call the locksmith... he contacted a locksmith, who arrived, gained entrance to the house, at which time the neighbors went into the house.” “Did the defendant tell you where he was?” “Drew indicated to me that he remained outside... Mary Pontarelli, Thomas Pontarelli, and Steve Carcerano entered the house. Several moments later, Drew said he heard a scream. He proceeded in the house, upstairs to the bathroom... he saw the body of his ex-wife, lifeless.”
In Session “Drew advised me that at that time he panicked.” “Did he indicate how long he remained on the scene, or what he did after that?” “No.” “Was there ever an occasion when you spoke to him again?” “Yes, I advised Drew that we would have to speak to his wife.” “After you spoke to him at Bolingbrook that morning?” “Can’t recall.” “What did he indicate?’ “He just said contact him and let him know.” “Did you subsequently make arrangements to speak to Stacy Peterson after that?” “Yes... I contacted Mr. Drew Peterson, asked him what would be a good time to talk to his wife. We agreed on a time, and I went to his residence.” “So that took place in a house, not in a police station?” “Yes, yes.” “When you went to that residence, could you describe what happened when you arrived?’ “I went to the residence, at 6 Pheasant Chase Drive, rang the bell. The door was opened by Mr. Drew Peterson... he knew what he was there for... then Drew instructed one of the older kids to take the kids, because he had to take care of some business. Drew directed us down to the basement. On our way down, Drew asked me personally, said Stacy was real nervous, and asked me if he could sit in on the interview, as a professional courtesy.” “He made that request to you. Was that in Trooper Falat’s presence?” “Trooper Falat should have been there... [but] that was more directed to me.”
In Session “His basement was finished; it was a pretty nice basement. He had set an area where four chairs were set up, to conduct the interview.” “What type of chairs were they?” “Card table chairs... myself and Trooper Falat were facing [the Petersons]; Stacy and Drew Peterson’s chairs were very close... he sat very close to Stacy as we proceeded to ask her questions.” “What did you observe of the defendant during the course of that interview?” “Drew was sitting very close to Stacy, as to be in a supportive mood... he had his hand on her leg, and his arm around her. I guessed that was to give her moral support.” “Did the defendant help answer any questions?” “There was one particular question when he did, when he had to refresh her memory... I asked the question...” Before Collins can continue, attorney Greenberg asks for a sidebar.
UGH, DP is such a controlling @ss.
In Session The sidebar ends. Connor: “Can you describe how the defendant helped answer her question?” “He leaned over and said, ‘You remember what you cooked for breakfast that morning’... [and started naming] what was prepared for breakfast... Drew had a mannerism, when you ask him a question he would kind of lean and kind of rub his eyes.” “Were there any other things you observed that the defendant did during the interview of Stacy Peterson?” “No, not as much as leaning over to her, kind of supportive.” “Allowing one witness to sit in on the interview of another, was that something you’d ever done in an investigation before that?” “No.” “Ever do it after that?” “Initially, no.” “What happened at the end of that interview?” “As it was being conducted, she became very upset, very shaken, and started to cry... after we got the information we wanted, we kind of shut the interview down.” “The more upset she got, the closer you got to finishing?” “Right.”
In Session In 2004, the witness was appointed to be a grand jury investigator in this case. In that capacity, he requested some phone records. “Which individuals did you receive phone records back from?” “Kathy Savio, and I can’t recall all of them... we subpoenaed everyone’s records.” “Did you receive any records back from Drew Peterson?’ “Some records we received late, yes.” “But did you ever receive any calls just relating to Drew Peterson’s cell phone or land line?” “I can’t recall.”
In Session ISP special agent Herb Hardy (?) conducted follow-up interviews of Savio’s neighbors. “Did he have anything else to do with the investigation, other than that neighborhood canvas?”“No.”
Vinnie is interviewing a lady that has been in the courtroom 4 days to watch the trial. He asked who, in her opinion, was winning. She said "THE DEFENSE". She said the defense has an answer for everything.
1st BBM: Now if I were on the jury, this would stick out like a big red flag -- and let's hope that the jury "gets this" : WHO calls a "locksmith" when the person is not answering their door, not answering their phone ? You call LE !
2nd BBM: No way did Mary tell Drew to call a locksmith !
And Thank You for the updates !
Remember the Scott Peterson trial? Everyone said the prosecution team was doing a LOUSY job and no way would Scott Peterson be convicted...no way!Vinnie is interviewing a lady that has been in the courtroom 4 days to watch the trial. He asked who, in her opinion, was winning. She said "THE DEFENSE". She said the defense has an answer for everything.
Asking anyone who is winning is like asking my cat to read tea leaves. Making pronouncements on day #4 of a murder trial is silly, if not irresponsible.
Debates are healthy; the exchange of varying opinions, valuable. Let freedom ring!
In Session “At some point during your investigation, was there a discussion of whether or not to speak to the defendant’s children?” “Yes... that discussion was brought up in the office.” Objection/Overruled. “That was a matter taken up with one of my supervisors, to inquire whether we should interview Drew Peterson’s kids. I was instructed to wait to see how the investigation was going before we had to get the kids involved.” “Did you obtain records from the Bolingbrook P.D. regarding dispatch calls?” “Yes.” “Did they reflect calls to the department from the defendant regarding visitation?” “I can’t remember every one that I reviewed.” The witness is shown the pertinent records to refresh his memory. “Do you recognize that document?” “Yes... it indicates a dispatch at 6:29 pm.” “And that refers to Kathleen Savio not releasing the children to him?” “Yes.” “What date is on that document, as to when the call was received?” “6/25/2002.”
In Session Another dispatch/call record is handed to the witness. “It was 7/11/2002, at 5:22 pm.” “And there’s an indication that it had to do with visitation?” “Yes.” Yet another record is given to the witness. “This call was received on 12/05/02, at 9:12 pm... ‘refused visitation,’ Kathy Peterson refused visitation. Drew Peterson is the caller.”
In Session “After the day you met with the defendant and Stacy Peterson, did you or Trooper Falat ever have occasion to interview Stacy Peterson again?” “No."