I'm glad you started this new thread as I've wanted to post something that may be of importance, but didn't want to post it on the thread that was getting long and would probably be closed soon.
Anyway, Mark Jensen is on trial in Wisconsin for the murder of his wife Julie Jensen. What makes this compelling with reference to Kathleen Savio's murder is that the victim is being permitted to, in essence, testify from the grave, via a letter which she wrote stating her fears of her husband - that he was trying to kill her. She gave the letter to her neighbor and told her to give it to the police if anything happened to her.
An excerpt: "I pray I'm wrong and nothing happens, but I am suspicious of Mark's suspicious behaviors and fear for my early demise," the 40-year-old wrote."
Her husband wasn't arrested for 3 years after her death, and then there were five years of legal maneuvering through the courts in Wisconsin - all the way up to the Wisconsin Supreme Court. The Supreme Court basically rewrote case law by permitting the letter to be entered into evidence.
How does this affect the Kathleen Savio case?
First, I want to state that I am not a lawyer nor am I employed in the legal community in any way. But, based on what I've read and seen on the news, this could possibly spread from state to state and that it could very well go the same route in Illinois as in Wisconsin - that is the same kind of legal maneuvering all the way up to the Illinois Supreme Court.
If Mr Jensen is convicted, it most likely will be a basis for appeal and who knows, it may end up in the United States Supreme Court. They could choose to hear it or not.
Those on trial have a right to confront their accusers, and that's why we're constantly reminded that hearsay isn't admissible (although there are exceptions). This type of letter I think would normally fall under hearsay, but in Wisconsin it is going to be entered into evidence.
The chilling writings of Kathleen Savio along with the change to homicide as cause of death, along with the windfall inheritance Drew Peterson received as a result of her death, along with testimony from those wives and ex-girlfriends to whom he reportedly told that he could kill and make it look like an accident, would in combination probably be quite compelling evidence presented to a jury.
The link:
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=4137889&page=1
This murder happened in December 1998 so there are plenty of stories that can be found with a Google search.
We still don't know where LE is going with the Stacy disappearance or what evidence they have, but it looks like Kathleen's death might have more evidence than Stacy's.
I thought this might be interesting to ponder - I initially thought that lack of evidence might hinder Kathleen's investigation, but the possibility of her writings being admissible is somewhat tantalizing.