Drew Peterson's Trial *SECOND WEEK*

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
In Session “You also said that when you saw your sister take a bath, she put her hair up in a bun?” “Yes.” “You can put your hair up in a bun with bobby pins?” “Not with her hair; her hair was really long and curly.” “She could do it with a pony tail . . . or with a towel?” “I never saw her use a towel.” “You don’t know when it was, what time of day . . . or if anyone else was there?” “No.” “You were informed of her death at night?” “Yes.” “And you didn’t go to the house that night?” “I was informed that I couldn’t go.” “You had a key to that house?” “Yes.” The witness repeats that Peterson banged on the front door of the house while the Savio family was there. “At no time while you were sitting inside did the garage door open and Drew Peterson walked in?” “Not at the beginning, no.” “At the time Drew entered the residence, you knew that both he and Kathy owned that property?” “Yes.” “And the property disbursement had not yet been settled?” “Yes.” “You asked Drew if he killed your sister?” “Yes.” “And he told you no, that he wouldn’t kill the mother of his children.” “So no matter how much he hated your sister, he loved his children more?” “No.
 
In Session The witness repeats that on the day she and Drew were to pick out Savio’s burial clothes, she didn’t think it was proper for her to go in first by herself. “My daughter and her boyfriend came along with me.” “Did you go upstairs, to the master bedroom?” “Yes, we did.” “And you asked Drew what had happened with your sister?” “Not at that moment.” “And he said he didn’t know, that you’d have to wait for the inquest?” “Yes.” “So you knew there would be some sort of coroner’s inquest?” “Yes.” “When did you learn you were going to be testifying at the inquest?” “Right when we got there . . . my older sister said she thought it would be proper if I did it [testify at the inquest].” “And you did it?” “Yes.”
 
Ha I knew a sidebar was due with the fourth post, or so, lol.


In Session “You also testified about Drew marrying a younger woman?” “I don’t remember if I said it.” The witness is shown a copy of the inquest transcript, then agrees she mentioned Drew’s marrying a younger woman. “I told the truth.” “You were able to tell them all of the things that your sister had told you, right?” Objection. The parties approach for a sidebar.
 
In Session The sidebar ends. “Has production of the movie started yet?” “No.” “Has the screenplay been written yet?” “No.” “It’s your understanding that nothing’s going to happen until this case is over?” “Yes.” That concludes the cross-examination of this witness, and the judge calls a ten minute recess.
 
Shelby1 said:
Because of his house being broken into.

Yeah, it could have been random...but my gut tells me that it's not. Too much of a coinky-dink.
Click to expand...

I agree...............it was because his house was broken into.

Steve said he tried to call Kathleen 6 time that day. Obviously, the little argument they had on the phone Saturday night was over with and he was anxious to re-connect with Kathleen.

As I said in another post, I think it way too strange that Steve's house was broken into on the same day that his girlfriend's dead body would be discovered in her home later that night.

I wish the prosecution would have been able to probe this issue more. What led Steve to conclude that his house had been broken into? Was anything taken? If so, what items were taken? Did he make a police report of the incident?
 
In Session The witness has stepped down, and the jurors have left the courtroom. Judge Burmila leaves the bench. The trial is in recess until 3:15 CT/4:15 ET.
 
In Session Judge Burmila is back on the stand. He sends for the witness and the jurors.
 
Susan Doman, Savio's sister, is on the witness stand being questioned by prosecutor Connor.


In Session
The witness and the jurors are now back in the courtroom. Prosecutor Connor begins his redirect examination. “You were asked a number of questions about this rights agreement . . . did you have an attorney with you when you signed this?”
“No.” “Have you ever dealt with the entertainment industry before?” “No.” “Have you made any money off this contract?” “No.” “And when you signed this contract in 2009, it was supposed to last for two years?” “Yes.” “If there was an advance of any sort, how much of that went to you?” “Nothing.” “So only if something is sold and produced successfully . . .” Objection/Sustained. “At the time in 2009 when you signed this contract, had you already spoken to the state police and gone before the grand jury?” “I believe so.” “So what you told the jury today are the same things you told long before this contract?” Objection/Overruled. “Yes.”
 
In Session “Recall how long the coroner’s inquest happened?” “About two hours, I believe.” “How long did you actually speak to them?” Objection/Sustained. “You were asked questions about the word ‘colorful’ in the contract. What did that mean to you?” Objection/Overruled. “The truth, the positive side, I thought.” “When you signed this contract giving the other party the right to portray you and your sister in a positive light, what were you trying to do?” “I was trying to give my sister a voice.” “When your sister spoke to you about the day that the defendant had broken in and held her at knifepoint, what was it that he said?” Objection/Sustained. That ends the redirect examination.
 
I have a feeling this might be it for the day, and back in court on Tuesday.

EDIT: Rumors going around Defense is arguing for another mistrial, and it has already been denied.
 
Looks like it was true.





In Session The jurors are excused from the courtroom. Attorney Greenberg addresses the court, asks once again for a mistrial, based on the Prosecution’s questioning of Susan Doman. There is a pause while the court reporter attempts to locate a portion of the court record that is in contention. Judge: “The mistrial motion is denied. The objection regarding the scope of the cross-examination . . .why should the State be allowed to be go into this again?” Connor: “Her credibility was questioned.” Judge: “Well, it is beyond the scope of the cross.” He sends for the jury.
 
In Session The witness and jurors return to the courtroom. Attorney Joe Lopez begins his recross. “When the State asked you about this word ‘colorful,’ you said it would be positive and the truth?’ “Yes.” “Didn’t you mean it would be entertaining, and they would embellish the facts?” “No.” “They’d only tell Kathy’s story, and not Drew’s?” “It is a domestic violence issue. It’s about her life . . . that’s what I told him that I wanted it to be.” Objection/Sustained. “This contract, when you read it, you didn’t tell him, ‘Hey, there’s nothing about domestic violence in here’?” “No.” “They can make this story more colorful?” “Yeah, they could . . . but I would have the last say; I wouldn’t let them do that . . . elaborate on lies.” “In this contract, you waived your rights, didn’t you?” “Yes.” “So they can write pretty much whatever they want?” “Pretty much.” “They can fictionalize the story to protect you, protect your sister, or make it more colorful?” Objection/Sustained.
 
In Session “This contract is still pending, because the trial isn’t over?” “No.” That ends the testimony of this witness, and she is excused.
 
The next witness is Dominick DeFrancesco (questioned by Kathy Patton)


Seems like more would proceed this transcript, hmmmm.




He moved to Pheasant Chase Drive in 1997 (with his extended family). “Did you know Kathleen Savio Peterson?” “Yes.” Mary Pontarelli is his sister. “How did you know the Petersons?” “They moved next door to us . . . December, 1999, I believe, or 2000.
” He says the Peterson home was directly next door to the home where he lived. “Did you come to know the Petersons when they moved to that residence?” “Yes.” “Do you know if the defendant was living in that house in 2004?” “He was not . . . I believe he was living down the block, on Pheasant Chase Street.” “Did you see Kathleen frequently?” “Yes.” “What was the last time you saw Kathleen Savio Peterson?’ “That Saturday, Feb. 29 . .. I had just gotten back from the grocery store with my sister. We pulled into the driveway, and she pulled up to her house, too.” Objection/Sustained. “We met midway on the sidewalk, after we had both pulled into the driveway . . . 11:30 [am].” “Did you have a conversation with her at that time?” “Yes, it was a short conversation; we had just gotten back from vacation in Florida the night before, and she asked how the trip was.”
 
In Session That night, he drove his parents to a family party, leaving around 5:00 pm and returning about 2:00 am. He parked outside, in the driveway. “I pulled straight in, facing the garage . . . I noticed that her bedroom light was on, and I remarked to my parents that it was kind of odd that her lights were still on at that hour of the morning.”
 
In Session “Did you see any exterior lights on?” “No, that was the only light that was on.” “Was there a car in Kathleen’s driveway?” “No.” “Did you see or speak to Kathleen Savio on Sunday?” “No . . . that evening, around 6:00, I went back to my vehicle to retrieve something from my glove compartment. And I noticed that none of her lights were on. It was completely dark.” This ends the direct examination of this witness.
 
Found this on another site, looks like InSession missed some stuff or I missed it, this was prior to Dominick DeFrancesco ^


UPDATE 04:00:

State calls Susan McCauley to the stand
McCauley said Peterson said “they’ll be fine – she was crazy” when she asked if the kids were okay [after Savio's death].
“I still don’t understand – how did she die in a dry bathtub? Drew Peterson said it was a newer tub, in drains in X amount of time”
“He said that she was taking anti-depressants and that she had been drinking, there was a wine glass in the tub.”
“I thought what he said was cold.”
Defense finishes cross. State has nothing further.
 
dog.gone.cute said:
BBM: This was totally uncalled for ! :banghead:

This judge needs to tell these defense :clown::clown: to STOP the prejudicial remarks !

These kind of remarks are totally inappropriate, unprofessional ... and somewhat racist, IMO !

Could you just imagine what would happen if the Prosecutors referred to Drew's ethnicity or race or whatever ? The defense :clown: :clown: would be screaming for a sidebar, or possibly a mistrial !

:moo:
Click to expand...

I totally agree! To say Kathleen was sometimes feisty and then to make the comment that she was half Italian, is a very racist remark! I suppose the defense prefers to characterize everyone by their ethnicity! That's totally wrong!
 
In Session The defense begins its cross-examination (I can’t tell who this attorney is). “Fair to say that you’ve driven away from your home hundreds of times?” “Yes.” “Shades are up, shades are down; light are on, lights are off?” “Yes.” “And you literally came from your home back and forth, winter, summer, thousands of times?” “Yes.” “Lights are on some times, and lights are off some times in the neighborhood?” “Yes.” “Did there come a time when police officers came to your home, in 2007?” “Yes.” “Two officers, a male and a female, from the Illinois State Police?” “Yes.” “They came to your home?” “I had just driven into the driveway, and they were outside. And they approached me, to come in and talk to my parents.” “This was approximately three years after you claim you saw the light on in Savio’s bedroom?” “Yes.” “While you speaking, they were taking notes?” “Yes.” “Contemporaneously?” “Yes.” “As you were in your driveway, you told them you saw the light on?” “Yes.” “And this afternoon, you told His Honor and the jurors that you thought it was unusual for the light to be on?” “Yes.” “But back when you talked to the officers, you said it was your mother who thought it was unusual, didn’t you?” “I don’t remember.” The witness is asked if looking at the police report would help, and he responds that it would.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 251 more.
Total: 4,135 (members: 252, guests: 3,883)

Online statistics

Members online
252
Guests online
3,883
Total visitors
4,135
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,559
Messages
17,955,083
Members
228,536
Latest member
morbidlittlemind
Back
Top