728 users online (75 members and 653 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 32 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 479
  1. #1

    SIDEBAR to the Drew Peterson trial

    WEEKEND SIDEBAR THREAD! May justice prevail for Kathleen Savio!




    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_dXhGBxK7-z...io+reports.jpg
    Last edited by Kimster; 08-26-2012 at 01:03 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2,350


    DEFENSE TEAM


    WEBSLEUTHERS


    poor PROSECUTORS

    DREW
    ALSO DREW

    WEBSLEUTHERS

    Rest in Peace, Robbi 1980-2012

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth. Buddha
    Posts
    22,083
    Jeff Ruby is going to be my guest on True Crime Radio this Sunday August 26th 8 PM Eastern.

    CLICK HERE to listen.

    Jeff Ruby is the colorful guy who mouthed a few choice words to Drew Peterson as Peterson tried to stare him down in court.

    Peterson whined like a baby to the court officers and Jeff Ruby was very quickly removed from the court room.

    You do not want to miss this show. If you watched Tru TV this week you probably saw Jeff Ruby and you know how interesting he is.

    Sunday 8 PM Eastern. Pass the word along

    Thank you,
    Tricia






    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Websleuths is TEMPORARILY accepting donations.

    CLICK HERE
    to visit our GoFundMe page

    OR










  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Riga, Latvia
    Posts
    12,688

    Smile

    Well... I'm still reading up on the trial and still counting Sidebars...

    I got a late start today, as had to go out to dinner with the Huz for our 22nd Anniversary!!

    I'm at lunch time now, so will continue in the morning. I'll have all the totals for the week and totals for the trial.

    So, off to...


    ~~Life isn't about waiting for the storms to pass... It's about learning to dance in the rain!~~
    ~~We are not human beings having a spiritual experience, we are spiritual beings having a human experience!~~
    ~~Veni, Vidi, Velcro! I came, I saw, I stuck around!~~

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    7,109
    Thinking out of the box of what the Black and White meant by the jury? A stereotypical Priest wears black with a white collar. Did they show solidarity to the Priest that testified the day before?

    Did they were other colors of witnesses? Has anyone inside the court room notated what color they were wearing? Just a thought.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    17,673
    Quote Originally Posted by Lera213 View Post
    Thinking out of the box of what the Black and White meant by the jury? A stereotypical Priest wears black with a white collar. Did they show solidarity to the Priest that testified the day before?

    Did they were other colors of witnesses? Has anyone inside the court room notated what color they were wearing? Just a thought.
    I'd like to know who planted this stupid idea to the jury. Most jurors in murder cases take their jobs very seriously. The fact that they're all participating in this silliness makes me wonder if someone planted the idea and told them it would be ok and they wouldn't get into trouble or it wouldn't effect the outcome of the trial, etc.

    Why would they want to bring attention to themselves? Is it to distract the court proceedings? Intimidate the witnesses? I don't like this game at all!!!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    1,635
    Quote Originally Posted by Tricia View Post
    Jeff Ruby is going to be my guest on True Crime Radio this Sunday August 26th 8 PM Eastern.

    CLICK HERE to listen.

    Jeff Ruby is the colorful guy who mouthed a few choice words to Drew Peterson as Peterson tried to stare him down in court.

    Peterson whined like a baby to the court officers and Jeff Ruby was very quickly removed from the court room.

    You do not want to miss this show. If you watched Tru TV this week you probably saw Jeff Ruby and you know how interesting he is.

    Sunday 8 PM Eastern. Pass the word along

    Thank you,
    Tricia






    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Awesome

    Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    58
    I do not visit this board much, as it usually ends up turning me off. In just about every case I've looked at on the board, everyone seems VERY pro-prosecution, convicting the defendants in your own court of public opinion, without ANY weighing of the evidence. It does not seem to be very useful, seems to get most of you wound up, without much objective thought and considering the case from both sides. I do not know why this is. Maybe people who think about cases from the defendant's side quit coming to your board.

    With that said, I think he will walk. I am sure he is guilty, but the evidence is weak as hell. The who, what, when, where, and how have not been proven by the evidence shown. No physical evidence to place him there, we do not know what he did to her. The when? We probably do know that... as well as the where. The how is left to pure speculation. Even though I know he's guilty, I would not feel comfortable convicting him based on the evidence presented. Thats the way the ball bounces!!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    21,160
    Most people who commit crimes do not do so in front of a camera so that leaves us with circumstancial evidence. Defense is trying to prove it was an accident so there for he is innocent. <modsnip> believe, here, that there has been enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that DP killed his third wife.<modsnip>have read all the reports released from the trial and believe he killed Kathy. DP had the means, motive and opportunity. You don't always need who, what, when, where and how to convict.

    He could very well walk. Everyone is pro prosecution because this is a crime board and we support the victims of crime. Defendants in this forum convict themselves in most of the discussions on this board through the doumentation and information released by the State and sometimes even their own defense attorneys let damning information out. The weight we use is from that information that is released because we are not sent back into the jury room and excluded from what the judge decides is just TOO prejudicial for the jury to hear.

    I believe we have seen enough evidence against DP to convict him. Everyone of us is could end up on a jury tomorrow. jmo
    Last edited by Salem; 08-25-2012 at 01:32 PM. Reason: All opinions are WELCOME and please don't speak for others.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    9,980
    Quote Originally Posted by Lera213 View Post
    Thinking out of the box of what the Black and White meant by the jury? A stereotypical Priest wears black with a white collar. Did they show solidarity to the Priest that testified the day before?

    Did they were other colors of witnesses? Has anyone inside the court room notated what color they were wearing? Just a thought.
    There was an article upthread I believe and was in a couple of online newpqper links what they did each day.

    Number four option of why back and white is a zebra, who does not change his stripes.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    769
    I respectfully disagree......you know he is guilty but you would send him home, not guilty so he can end another's life in the future. In this case, he told KS that she would not make it to their court date and she didn't. He also abused her on many occasions but was never arrested. He had her arrested twice. Fortunately she was not charged with anything because there was no evidence she did anything wrong. His wife SP was living in fear of him and let several people know and she disappeared. Each piece of evidence on its own was not strong but put them together and it does tell a story.

    Two young women in this nice neighborhood are gone and both were wives of Drew Peterson. No coincidence to me.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    9,980
    Quote Originally Posted by WindyCityGirl View Post
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...,1753311.story

    I haven't been alarmed about it as many of us here on WS have been, but after reading this article I do feel uncomfortable. I think that it shows a lack of appropriate dignity here.......this is a murder trial, not a game show.
    (though the Defense Team are making into into one)

    I think that Judge Burmilla should say something to them (if he hasn't already)

    Sam Adam jr, one of Blago's team of lawyers said that he thinks it is a good sign for the defense. I like Sam Adam, but I think (or hope) that he is wrong here
    This article states the colors were red, bkack/blue, green...then this week I believe brown then black white. Is that right? We heard rumors of a grey day, but IIRC correctly that did not happen. (To answer question upthread)

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,394
    Quote Originally Posted by mattfz View Post
    I do not visit this board much, as it usually ends up turning me off. In just about every case I've looked at on the board, everyone seems VERY pro-prosecution, convicting the defendants in your own court of public opinion, without ANY weighing of the evidence. It does not seem to be very useful, seems to get most of you wound up, without much objective thought and considering the case from both sides. I do not know why this is. Maybe people who think about cases from the defendant's side quit coming to your board.

    With that said, I think he will walk. I am sure he is guilty, but the evidence is weak as hell. The who, what, when, where, and how have not been proven by the evidence shown. No physical evidence to place him there, we do not know what he did to her. The when? We probably do know that... as well as the where. The how is left to pure speculation. Even though I know he's guilty, I would not feel comfortable convicting him based on the evidence presented. Thats the way the ball bounces!!
    Technically I do agree with you from a purely legal standpoint. One thing we have seen is that the defense has pulled out all stops manipulating the system, getting away with "murder" as they say because the judge sustains their objections and makes pro-defense rulings. The jury is also told to disregard this or that ... I don't think that is possible in the larger context. They can't convict on something they are ordered to disregard, but it can percolate in their consciousness as part of the big picture.

    The jury is charged to listen to the evidence and come to a conclusion beyond any reasonable doubt. I think the key word is "reasonable". IMO they can convict him on the preponderance of circumstantial evidence by common sense deductions, including the same "lack of evidence" that proves she drowned because of AN ACCIDENT. The crime scene (even if not processed by CSI) lacks evidence to prove she was planning on bathing or bathing (where were her discarded clothes?) and the so-called medical history is sketchy and unconvincing.

    Put that together with the threats, the letters, the conversation with the pastor, those not being just random occurrences. The elephant in the room: The 4th wife who can't testify herself because either nobody can find her or she doesn't want to be found might not stand on it's own but it's like the pinch of yeast in the dough, without it the bread falls flat.

    We have an idea of WHO did it, but the defense is fighting to keep out the WHY. This is the next piece jury might be struggling to fit into that puzzle, BUT by virtue of the fact that the defense CONSTANTLY objects to every potential witness or piece of evidence, I, as a juror am thinking: What's the problem? Let ME listen to this and decide. Otherwise you are trying to hide something you don't want me to hear. My next logical thought would be to figure this hidden information fits into all of the above.

    The sticking point is proving where, how and when this happened. Surely the first autopsy revealed approximate time of death, etc. She drowned. Well it's difficult to drown in a dry bathtub and you can deduce approximate times by her hair being wet with blood that is still coagulating. Dried blood has had time to dry and wet blood indicating it would have been sooner.

    I am hoping the prosecution will put their theory of the murder itself out in their closing argument. As a juror, I am convinced that DP did it, I just want to know how....but I don't need to know. Because I know that woman did not end up curled up in a round bathtub on her own and she was not taking a bath, and I think it's more than a coincidence that a fourth wife is not around to tell us why SHE was anxious to leave this monster, as well...
    Last edited by ChickenPants; 08-25-2012 at 09:08 AM.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,394
    Quote Originally Posted by LambChop View Post
    Most people who commit crimes do not do so in front of a camera so that leaves us with circumstancial evidence. Defense is trying to prove it was an accident so there for he is innocent. We believe, here, that there has been enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that DP killed his third wife. Most of us here have read all the reports released from the trial and believe he killed Kathy. DP had the means, motive and opportunity. You don't always need who, what, when, where and how to convict.

    He could very well walk. Everyone is pro prosecution because this is a crime board and we support the victims of crime. Defendants in this forum convict themselves in most of the discussions on this board through the doumentation and information released by the State and sometimes even their own defense attorneys let damning information out. The weight we use is from that information that is released because we are not sent back into the jury room and excluded from what the judge decides is just TOO prejudicial for the jury to hear.

    I believe we have seen enough evidence against DP to convict him. Everyone of us is could end up on a jury tomorrow. jmo

    BBM; I think this is a great explanation.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,394
    Quote Originally Posted by tsitra01 View Post
    I respectfully disagree......you know he is guilty but you would send him home, not guilty so he can end another's life in the future. In this case, he told KS that she would not make it to their court date and she didn't. He also abused her on many occasions but was never arrested. He had her arrested twice. Fortunately she was not charged with anything because there was no evidence she did anything wrong. His wife SP was living in fear of him and let several people know and she disappeared. Each piece of evidence on its own was not strong but put them together and it does tell a story.

    Two young women in this nice neighborhood are gone and both were wives of Drew Peterson. No coincidence to me.
    I was just thinking about this yesterday. How manipulative and arrogant is this? He's a police officer but he has his own wife arrested during what - an argument? I'm convinced he did that not only to terrorize her - prove that he, as part of the blue squad, had the upper hand - and to get it on the record just like he kept those receipts. To me, this is part of that beautiful word PREMEDITATION. There is apparently nothing he has done that has not been premeditated. It's beyond sad that TWO of his wives feared him because of violence and threats, and put that in writing, and told others, almost like they were making Last Will and Testaments. It would be like knowing the mafia had a hit on you being with him.

Page 1 of 32 1 2 3 11 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Will Drew Peterson get a new trial?
    By concernedmother in forum Kathleen Savio
    Replies: 135
    Last Post: 09-23-2017, 01:00 AM
  2. Drew Peterson's Trial *THIRD WEEK*
    By Kimster in forum Kathleen Savio
    Replies: 1683
    Last Post: 08-21-2012, 12:38 AM
  3. Drew Peterson's Trial *SECOND WEEK*
    By CarolinaMoon in forum Kathleen Savio
    Replies: 1059
    Last Post: 08-14-2012, 09:56 AM
  4. Drew Peterson's Trial *FIRST WEEK*
    By Kimster in forum Kathleen Savio
    Replies: 812
    Last Post: 08-07-2012, 12:28 AM
  5. Drew Peterson murder trial delayed
    By Paintr in forum Kathleen Savio
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 07-15-2010, 09:01 AM