Websleuths
Go Back   Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community > Crimes and Trials > Trials > Recently Sentenced and Beyond > Kathleen Savio

Notices

Kathleen Savio The trial of Drew Peterson in the death of his third wife Kathleen while his fourth wife Stacy remains missing.


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old 08-07-2012, 05:43 PM
Cubby Cubby is offline
50K reward, Bob Harrod-Missing: Call Det. Radomski 714-993-8176
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 71,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~n/t~ View Post
In Session
“When you did a diagram of the tub... the tub that you used wasn’t at all the same size or shape of the tub at the Savio residence, correct?” “I didn’t actually complete that diagram. I did a sketch at the scene, a rough sketch that was t
urned into a field sketch. Someone in Springfield actually did that finished sketch that’s in your hand... that finished diagram was done by somebody who was never at the scene.” “And it appears to be a long, rectangular bathtub?” “Well, you’re holding it, and I’m not.” “You didn’t make any change to that, to reflect the actual bathtub that was at the scene?” Objection/Overruled. “The body is correct, and the measurements are correct... the measurements and locations reflected on the diagram are correct.” “But it makes it appear that there’s a lot of bathtub on either side, doesn’t it?” “I wouldn’t argue with you there.”


In Session The witness repeats that he saw no signs of a struggle. “You don’t know what happened prior to that drowning, do you?” “No.” “Ever take into consideration that a person can be overcome without a struggle?” Objection/Sustained.
BBM. Was this the witness that stated someone in Springfield finished the sketch?
__________________
~JMO~

A grandfather is someone with silver in his hair and gold in his heart. ~Author Unknown


Long Lost Love - Discovery ID - Disappeared - Bob Harrod Case

You can now purchase Mr. Harrod's Disappeared episode through Amazon, iTunes or YouTube.


Websleuths Resource Center

Call Kurtis - Psychics and the Missing
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to Cubby For This Useful Post:
  #202  
Old 08-07-2012, 05:48 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubby View Post
BBM. Was this the witness that stated someone in Springfield finished the sketch?
Later he says it was a computer generated sketch based on his measurements.

But still not a sketch of the actual oval shaped tub!!
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #203  
Old 08-07-2012, 05:51 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
In Session In February, 2004, he was at the Will County Courthouse and saw the defendant there.. Objection/Sustained. “It was approximately mid-February.” “What floor are you talking about?” “The third floor . . . near the elevators . . . mid-day, just before the lunch break . . . Drew and a couple of other gentlemen approached us. We exchanged pleasantries, such as ‘Hey, Drew, what’s up?’ . . . the two gentlemen behind Drew were having a conversation with some laughter, and Ofc. Treece (?) said they appeared to be happy. “Drew said, ‘They should be, they’re getting all my money . . . my life would be easier if she was just dead or died . . . I don’t recall which word at this time. He was very irritated.” “How do you remember this?” “Because it was a couple of weeks later that Kathleen turned up deceased.” He reported the incident later, but never spoke to anyone about it again. “Was the defendant in uniform?” “Plain clothes that day.” This ends his direct examination.


In Session Before the defense starts its cross, the parties approach the bench for a sidebar.

ETA: Not sure who this witness was.

Last edited by CA Lady; 08-07-2012 at 05:54 PM. Reason: Clarifcation
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #204  
Old 08-07-2012, 05:52 PM
Cubby Cubby is offline
50K reward, Bob Harrod-Missing: Call Det. Radomski 714-993-8176
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 71,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbieNormal View Post
Guess we know now who is 'running the show'.

(Was there ever any doubt?)

Can't stand DP and his atty, who incidently has the same initials as Jose Baez.
Ugh.
that's why I always type out Brodsky. JB is kind of exclusive to Baez these days. back to catching up.
__________________
~JMO~

A grandfather is someone with silver in his hair and gold in his heart. ~Author Unknown


Long Lost Love - Discovery ID - Disappeared - Bob Harrod Case

You can now purchase Mr. Harrod's Disappeared episode through Amazon, iTunes or YouTube.


Websleuths Resource Center

Call Kurtis - Psychics and the Missing
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Cubby For This Useful Post:
  #205  
Old 08-07-2012, 05:53 PM
-MD- -MD- is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 80
Just to add to CA Lady's post, ^

This is whom is being questioned, and who is doing the questioning.

"The prosecution now calls its next witness: Lieutenant James Coughlin. He is a lieutenant with the Bolingbrook Police Department. He is being questioned by prosecutor Kathy Patton. “Did you know an officer named Drew Peterson?” “Yes, I did.” He identifies the defendant in the courtroom.
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to -MD- For This Useful Post:
  #206  
Old 08-07-2012, 05:56 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
In Session The sidebar ends, and attorney Joel Brodsky begins his cross. The witness says he’s known Peterson since 1978. He also knew Kathy Savio (“I only knew her as Kathy Peterson”). On the day in question, he was at the courthouse because of a traffic court case (“I don’t know what case”). “You were on the third floor of this building?” “Most of my trials are on the third floor . . . it was the third floor.” “You remember seeing Drew by the elevators?” “Correct.” “He came up to by the elevators?” “Yes.” “These two people were behind him?” “Yes, two gentlemen.” “How close was Drew to these gentlemen?” “Four feet.” “And they were laughing?” “Having a good time.” “What’d you say to Drew?” “Officer Treese (?) said they appeared to be having a good conversation.” “Did you know if those two guys laughing had anything to do with Drew?” “No . . . I didn’t know who the gentlemen were.” “You still don’t know?” “Correct.” “And Drew’s response was, ‘Well, they’re happy because they’re getting all my money?” “Yes.” “Not Kathy, but ‘THEY”RE getting all my money’?” “Yes.”


In Session “Remember testifying before the grand jury, on July 17, 2008?” “If you say so.” “It was in 2008?” “Yes.” “You were sworn to tell the truth?” “Yes.” “Recall a long question and a long answer . . . ‘I’d like you to tell the story of coming to court that day and what you remember’ . . . you answered, ‘I believe we were on the second floor’ . . . remember that?” “Yes, the second floor was a misstatement.” “And there’s no mention of the elevator, either, is there?’ “We were by the elevator; he came out of a side room.” “You don’t say that here?:” “If it’s not in there, right.”
The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #207  
Old 08-07-2012, 05:59 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
In Session
“Also, you testified that you talked to the Illinois State Police, after you found out that Kathy had passed away?” “Yes.” The witness is then asked again about his July 17, 2008 grand jury testimony. “You said you weren’t interviewed by
the Illinois State Police in 2004?’ “They did not interview me. I went and met with them in our investigations room . . . it was not a formal investigation . . . they didn’t ask me any questions; I offered them what happened.” “So were you misleading the grand jury?” Objection/Overruled. “No, Sir. I did not consider that an interview.” “So telling the police of your suspicions in a homicide, in a death investigation, was not an interview?” “It was a piece of information that, in light of the time frame, I believed they needed to know.”

In Session
Recall back in 2008 being interviewed by an agent from the Federal Bureau of Investigation about this case?” “Yes.” “You can’t lie to an FBI agent, right? It’s a crime?” Objection/Overruled. “Correct.” Brodsky then reads from the FBI
agent’s report. In the report, it says that the witness “peeked into the courtroom.” “So you’re telling the FBI it wasn’t by the elevator, and you peeked into the courtroom?” “That’s inaccurate.” “The FBI report is inaccurate?” “Yes.” “You’ve never told that to the FBI agent?” “No.” “But you know that’s what the report says?” “Yes, I do.”
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #208  
Old 08-07-2012, 05:59 PM
Cubby Cubby is offline
50K reward, Bob Harrod-Missing: Call Det. Radomski 714-993-8176
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 71,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Lady View Post
In Session “If you look at the position of the body, and the feet of that person . . . are the feet you drew on that drawing the same position as you saw in that tub?” “I didn’t draw that drawing . . . somebody in Springfield did that, based on my measurements . . . it’s a computer-generated diagram, and I don’t have control over the icons or whatever you call them that can be placed into them . . . it’s merely to show the size of the room, and the placement of things in the room.” “So they didn’t depict what was really in the room?” Objection/Sustained.

In Session “You didn’t show Dr. Mitchell any photographs at the autopsy?” “There were no photographs at that time to show, no.” This concludes the redirect examination.

17 minutes ago · 2.

In Session Attorney Brodsky begins his recross. “I’m going to show you this diagram that was prepared in Springfield . . . see in the lower left hand corner . . . what does that say?” “That this diagram is not in scale . . . it was never intended as such.” “The dimensions are correct?” “Yes.”

17 minutes ago · 2.

In Session “Are you the one who did the test of water draining out of that tub?” “No, someone else did it.” “That floor was grouted?” “Yes.” “That would make blood very easy to see?” “Yes.” “You looked for blood, and you didn’t see any?” “No.” “You know the difference between blood and purge?” “Yes.” “Purged blood has a different texture, a different look?” “Yes.” “And the blood in the bottom of the tub when you got there was purged blood?” “Yes.”

.




In Session Deel didn’t do a full examination of the house “because that’s the job of investigators.” “This was the position you’d expect a body to be in this tub?” “Yes.” “Because of the interior of the tub?” “Knowing that the most common type of household accident is a slip and fall injury, and then to see the position of her body in that tub, I believe that’s consistent with somebody slipping and dropping down . . . there’s only so much room in the tub to land.” “Your friend, Dr. Mitchell . . . he said maybe this should be classified as undetermined?” “Yes.” “Did he also say at the same time that Kathy Savio’s death was still not a homicide?” “Yes.” That concludes the testimony of this witness, and he is excused

Two questions. how long after the time of death would someone purge blood? and if the tub was full of water with the drain closed, why wouldn't the purged blood be diluted by the water in the tub? I'm still questioning the pattern in which the blood drained from the tub - especially if the tub was full of water when Kathleen allegedly fell.

Also, can he be asked about the footing position in other slip and fall injury deaths? Can he be asked how many slip and fall injury deaths he has been at the scene?
__________________
~JMO~

A grandfather is someone with silver in his hair and gold in his heart. ~Author Unknown


Long Lost Love - Discovery ID - Disappeared - Bob Harrod Case

You can now purchase Mr. Harrod's Disappeared episode through Amazon, iTunes or YouTube.


Websleuths Resource Center

Call Kurtis - Psychics and the Missing
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Cubby For This Useful Post:
  #209  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:05 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
In Session “Assuming you heard this from Mr. Peterson, that he actually said that . . .” Objection/Sustained. “you didn’t think he was serious, did you?” “No.” “You wouldn’t think that he’d be serious about saying something like that?” “Correct.” “You never told the FBI that you spoke to the Illinois State Police?” “If it’s not in there, I didn’t discuss it with him.”

In Session The witness is shown two court orders pertaining to the Savio/Peterson report. The prosecution objects, and the defense asks for a sidebar.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #210  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:13 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubby View Post
Two questions. how long after the time of death would someone purge blood? and if the tub was full of water with the drain closed, why wouldn't the purged blood be diluted by the water in the tub? I'm still questioning the pattern in which the blood drained from the tub - especially if the tub was full of water when Kathleen allegedly fell.

Also, can he be asked about the footing position in other slip and fall injury deaths? Can he be asked how many slip and fall injury deaths he has been at the scene?
I don't now how long it would take for purging but I don't think very long. What it says to me is that there was no water in the tub or there would have been more signs of blood in the tub besides just the purge. Also with all the blood in the hair there should have been some evidence of that in the tub, like a ring or something.

I guess the prosecutor didn't want to push too many more questions since the defense was objecting to everything. It probably wasn't important enough in her mind.
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #211  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:13 PM
Cubby Cubby is offline
50K reward, Bob Harrod-Missing: Call Det. Radomski 714-993-8176
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 71,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA Lady View Post
In Session Judge Burmila makes his ruling: “I’m with you [the State] about 95% .. . I agree it’s admissible that the defendant asked for a professional courtesy and wanted to sit in with his wife . . we don’t know if she subsequently lied, just that he asked her to lie. Her statement to the police at this point is inadmissible. If the defendant testifies and it becomes relevant, we’ll revisit it.” Connor then asks the defense to look at some phone records he’d like to introduce through the next witness. Judge: “How long will this next witness be?” Connor: “At least 45 minutes on direct.” The judge suggests that everyone stay late tonight to finish the direct of Pat Collins . . . but after a conference with the other prosecutors, Connor reports that “we have a shorter witness we could put on.” With that, the judge sends for the jurors.

I'm a little confused here. Does this mean Drew now has no alibi for the night Kathleen was found deceased in the tub? If the evidence does not come in, then neither side can say Drew's where abouts were known? So the jury does not know if he had an alibi or not? Is that how this works?
__________________
~JMO~

A grandfather is someone with silver in his hair and gold in his heart. ~Author Unknown


Long Lost Love - Discovery ID - Disappeared - Bob Harrod Case

You can now purchase Mr. Harrod's Disappeared episode through Amazon, iTunes or YouTube.


Websleuths Resource Center

Call Kurtis - Psychics and the Missing
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Cubby For This Useful Post:
  #212  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:15 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
In Session The sidebar ends. The judge asks the jurors to leave the room. Patton objects to the defense questioning regarding the court orders; Brodsky says the prosecution can address the matter in redirect. Judge Burmila: “If Mr. Peterson calls the FBI agent, the jury will have to decide for itself whether it believes the FBI agent or this witness [Lt. Coughlin] . . . the implication from the witness was that the defendant made this apparently damning statement, and they’ve cross-examined him with a statement he’s allegedly made to an FBI hearing. So the State’s objection is overruled, and the defense is going to be able to ask the officer about this. If the State chooses to redirect, they certainly will have a right to do that.” The judge then sends for the jury.

In Session The witness and the jurors are now back in the courtroom. Brodsky continues his cross-examination of Lt. Coughlin. “You were in the Will County Courthouse that February day . . . Drew was there because of his divorce?” “That was my perception, based on what Drew had told me.” “And these were lawyers?” “From what he said to Ofc. Treese (?), I assume so.” “The two lawyers were laughing . . . in one version, you see them coming out of a side room?” “I don’t remember if it was a side room or a courtroom.” “Well, according to the FBI report, you peeked into a courtroom.” “That’s not accurate.”
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #213  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:20 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
In Session
Brodsky asks the witness to look at the two court orders. “Those are court orders in the case of Drew Peterson v. Kathleen Peterson?” “Yes.” Objection/Overruled. The first court order is projected, and says the case is continued until F
eb. 9, 2004. The second order is also projected, and says the case is continued from Feb. 9 to April 6, 2009. “So the only time the case is up in February is Feb. 9, 2004?” “Yes.” The parts of the order that say “Plaintiff Present” and “Defendant Present” are checked “No.” This ends the ctross-examination of Lt. Coughlin.

In Session
The witness acknowledges that he told the grand jury that he was in the courthouse hallway. “And there are elevators in the hallway?” “A bank of them.” “You just went into that room [with the State Police] to give them some information?”
“Yes.” “They didn’t ask you any questions?” “Correct.” “You assumed that’s why Drew Peterson was in the courthouse [for the divorce]?” “Yes.” “And that’s why you assumed he answered Ofc. Treese’s question that way?” “Yes.”

In Session The prosecution has ended its redirect. The defense asks for a brief sidebar.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #214  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:24 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
In Session
The sidebar ends. Brodsky: “Lieutenant, is it true that you told the FBI that you peeked into the courtroom . . .” Objection/Sustained. “Isn’t it true you never told the FBI agent . . .” Objection/Sustained. “You always said that when
Mr. Peterson told you this he was joking?” Objection/Sustained. Brodsky: “Then I guess I have nothing . . . when did you tell the State’s Attorney that the FBI report was inaccurate?” “The first time we reviewed it, before the hearsay hearing.” “More than two years ago?” “Yes.” “Who did you tell it to?” “I believe it was Miss Patton.” “Where?” Objection/Sustained. “How many times did you tell her that?” Objection/Sustained. That ends the testimony of this witness, and he is excused.
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #215  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:27 PM
Cubby Cubby is offline
50K reward, Bob Harrod-Missing: Call Det. Radomski 714-993-8176
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 71,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by -MD- View Post
Just to add to CA Lady's post, ^

This is whom is being questioned, and who is doing the questioning.

"The prosecution now calls its next witness: Lieutenant James Coughlin. He is a lieutenant with the Bolingbrook Police Department. He is being questioned by prosecutor Kathy Patton. “Did you know an officer named Drew Peterson?” “Yes, I did.” He identifies the defendant in the courtroom.

Thank you, -MD- and welcome to WS!
__________________
~JMO~

A grandfather is someone with silver in his hair and gold in his heart. ~Author Unknown


Long Lost Love - Discovery ID - Disappeared - Bob Harrod Case

You can now purchase Mr. Harrod's Disappeared episode through Amazon, iTunes or YouTube.


Websleuths Resource Center

Call Kurtis - Psychics and the Missing
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Cubby For This Useful Post:
  #216  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:27 PM
TallCoolOne TallCoolOne is offline
Registered Lurker
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: ChIllinois..........brrrrrrrr
Posts: 1,353
Quote:
Originally Posted by iluvmua View Post
as of now, If i were on the jury I would have to say Not Guilty.

it seems as if the pros really do not have anything on him.

I have a feeling that this is going to end up like the Casey trial.

where members of the jury say the Pros. could not prove murder.

JMO

DP could very strongly walk
Well if he does, I just hope we'd be so lucky that he'd walk directly in front of that big ole bus Cindy Anthony was driving.......
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to TallCoolOne For This Useful Post:
  #217  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:33 PM
CA Lady CA Lady is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: So CA
Posts: 132
In Session Judge Burmila has left the bench. The trial is in recess until 9:00 CT/10:00 ET Wednesday morning.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to CA Lady For This Useful Post:
  #218  
Old 08-07-2012, 06:53 PM
Cubby Cubby is offline
50K reward, Bob Harrod-Missing: Call Det. Radomski 714-993-8176
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 71,625
Was anyone besides me a little lost on the purpose of the BB (abbv for Bolingbrook) lieutenants testimony?

It didn't really impress upon me one way or another, other than there were parts of Drew and Kathleen's divorce not yet complete.
__________________
~JMO~

A grandfather is someone with silver in his hair and gold in his heart. ~Author Unknown


Long Lost Love - Discovery ID - Disappeared - Bob Harrod Case

You can now purchase Mr. Harrod's Disappeared episode through Amazon, iTunes or YouTube.


Websleuths Resource Center

Call Kurtis - Psychics and the Missing
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Cubby For This Useful Post:
  #219  
Old 08-07-2012, 07:06 PM
jevipo74's Avatar
jevipo74 jevipo74 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbbieNormal View Post
Guess we know now who is 'running the show'.

(Was there ever any doubt?)

Can't stand DP and his atty, who incidently has the same initials as Jose Baez.
Ugh.


I hear you. Brodsky is pretty much a low rent version of Mark Geragos.
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to jevipo74 For This Useful Post:
  #220  
Old 08-07-2012, 08:24 PM
~n/t~'s Avatar
~n/t~ ~n/t~ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 17,131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cubby View Post
Was anyone besides me a little lost on the purpose of the BB (abbv for Bolingbrook) lieutenants testimony?

It didn't really impress upon me one way or another, other than there were parts of Drew and Kathleen's divorce not yet complete.
They let this in.....

Quote:
Drew said, ‘They should be, they’re getting all my money . . . my life would be easier if she was just dead or died . . .

Another witness testifying about his wishes to have Kathleen dead!
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to ~n/t~ For This Useful Post:
  #221  
Old 08-07-2012, 08:25 PM
~n/t~'s Avatar
~n/t~ ~n/t~ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 17,131
Thanks for filling in CA Lady.
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to ~n/t~ For This Useful Post:
  #222  
Old 08-07-2012, 08:37 PM
katydid23's Avatar
katydid23 katydid23 is offline
Verified Juanette
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 24,852
So Brodsky seems to be trying to make the jury believe that nobody said anything about these threats against her until years later. Like he wants the jurors to believe that people are just saying this now because he is on trial, but there is no proof that she ever said this to anyone.

Is there any evidence that she told anyone these threats back then? I hope so.
__________________
“Every day that they don’t find something is good for me.“ Billie Dunn
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to katydid23 For This Useful Post:
  #223  
Old 08-07-2012, 09:26 PM
LaLaw2000's Avatar
LaLaw2000 LaLaw2000 is online now
Justice for all victims!
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 10,816
What's with the defense and all of their sidebars???? Heck, just move the defense table up by the judge since they are all so friendly with each other.

Oh, how I wish there was a more aggressive prosecution team. They are missing the opportunity to ask so many questions. I don't have a good feeling about the outcome of this trial. I wish I did.

Thanks for all the great updates!!!
__________________
**May God Watch Over All Missing and Abused Children**
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to LaLaw2000 For This Useful Post:
  #224  
Old 08-07-2012, 10:26 PM
Cubby Cubby is offline
50K reward, Bob Harrod-Missing: Call Det. Radomski 714-993-8176
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago burbs
Posts: 71,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~n/t~ View Post
They let this in.....


Drew said, ‘They should be, they’re getting all my money . . . my life would be easier if she was just dead or died . . .



Another witness testifying about his wishes to have Kathleen dead!

I don't know how I missed that..... I missed the second half: "... my life would be easier if she was just dead or died".
__________________
~JMO~

A grandfather is someone with silver in his hair and gold in his heart. ~Author Unknown


Long Lost Love - Discovery ID - Disappeared - Bob Harrod Case

You can now purchase Mr. Harrod's Disappeared episode through Amazon, iTunes or YouTube.


Websleuths Resource Center

Call Kurtis - Psychics and the Missing
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Cubby For This Useful Post:
  #225  
Old 08-08-2012, 02:02 AM
AngelWings444's Avatar
AngelWings444 AngelWings444 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 4,120
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~n/t~ View Post
Peterson's attorney: My client wasn't abusive
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~n/t~ View Post

Watch the video to see In Session correspondent Beth Karas interview Drew Peterson's defense attorney, Steve Greenberg, about evidence that may indicate that Peterson was abusive to the women in his life.

http://www.hlntv.com/video/2012/08/07/steve-greenberg
1st Line Response: Nope, they just ended up dead/missing
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to AngelWings444 For This Useful Post:
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Drew Peterson's Trial *THIRD WEEK* Kimster Kathleen Savio 1683 08-21-2012 12:38 AM
Drew Peterson's Trial *FIRST WEEK* Kimster Kathleen Savio 812 08-07-2012 12:28 AM
Drew Peterson heads to trial. Jury selection begins Monday July 23 Cubby Kathleen Savio 133 07-30-2012 11:26 PM
Drew Peterson murder trial delayed Paintr Kathleen Savio 40 06-27-2010 10:02 PM


© Copyright Websleuths 1999-2012 New To Site? Need Help?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:57 AM.

Advertisements

Pre-Order Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony today!