Drew Peterson's Trial *SECOND WEEK*

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
LambChop said:
Because he was not suppose to be there. They were investigating trying to rule out the possibility of a crime. They were 100% wrong in what they did. jmo
Click to expand...

Right again.......Drew's BFFs deliberately left the little important fact out of their report (that Drew was present during the questioning of Stacey) showing that they knew that he wasn't suppose to be present if they were pretending to conduct an investigation. This is one of the disgusting facts of this case.
 
LadyL said:
thank you to ohiogirl & carolinamoon for posting the tweets here - makes it easy to follow along with all our fellow WS'ers

merci beaucoup!
Click to expand...

Yes! I really, really appreciate all their hard work making it possible to read the "play by play" in this trial. Thanks.
 
Okay - I've counted up the Sidebars from the beginning of the trial, and will probably put up a "Sticky Thread" for it - but thought I'd share here first. Next I'm going to count all the "Objection/Sustained" and Objection/Overruled", just for the h#ll of it!! :rocker:

Sidebars:
Tuesday, July 31st - 1
Wednesday, August 1st - 2
Thursday, August 2nd - 2
Friday, August 3rd - 2

Tuesday, August 7th - 11
Wednesday, August 8th - 13

Total so far: 31

edited to add - sorry, changed my mind about counting ALL the Objections/Sustained and Overruled... too many words to search on those! LOL! But I shall keep counting the sidebars!!
 
Niner said:
Okay - I've counted up the Sidebars from the beginning of the trial, and will probably put up a "Sticky Thread" for it - but thought I'd share here first. Next I'm going to count all the "Objection/Sustained" and Objection/Overruled", just for the h#ll of it!! :rocker:

Sidebars:
Tuesday, July 31st - 1
Wednesday, August 1st - 2
Thursday, August 2nd - 2
Friday, August 3rd - 2

Tuesday, August 7th - 11
Wednesday, August 8th - 13

Total so far: 31

edited to add - sorry, changed my mind about counting ALL the Objections/Sustained and Overruled... too many words to search on those! LOL! But I shall keep counting the sidebars!!
Click to expand...

Can you call them by the party who initiates? Judge, prosecution, defense? I'm just curious.
 
WindyCityGirl said:
What do you think it going to be excluded? I thought that today was a big win for the prosecution, but more importantly for justice in general. I am very pleased and surprised that the judge permitted Kristen Anderson to give all of her testimony. :woohoo:
Did something happen that I missed?
Click to expand...

The witness, under cross examination, had to keep saying that she never told people about this happening until a couple of years later. And it made her look like she was possibly making it up because what she couldn't say to the jury was that she came forward with this after she heard about Stacey going missing.

And the defense kept pressing her about not saying anything earlier---and not writing a letter or e-mailing, when they KNEW that she could not tell them the real reason because it was not allowed to be heard by the jury.

So the state complained and said " Hey judge, they let it in by asking her all of those pointed questions"--- and the judge said ' YES, the did let it in, but I am still not going to allow it because it is too prejudicial. "

:banghead:
 
CarolinaMoon said:
In Session Prosecutor Griffin briefly responds. But as before, every time she makes an argument, Judge Burmila jumps in and challenges her.
Click to expand...

Wow. This Judge needs to step down immediately, imo! His disdain for the prosecuting team is so obvious. OMG! :what:
 
Mama-cita said:
Oh well that makes it SO much better!! So he only stormed in and held a knife to her throat threatening to kill her and make Iook like an accident only ONE time. He only did it ONCE. He's a real prince! Not!!!!!
Click to expand...

Yeah. I guess he needed to do it the third time in order for Kathleen to have reason to believe him. These defense lawyers are a yuck a minute.
 
CarolinaMoon said:
In Session “During your preparation for the prior hearing and this hearing, you met with the State’s Attorney, and read the reports yourself?” “Correct.” “When you had this interview with these two agents from the state police, your husband wasn’t there?’ “He was there; they interviewed us independently.” “And they were taking notes?” “I saw them taking notes. There were two of them.” “And they asked what you knew about Kathleen Savio and her relationship with Drew Peterson?” “They were asking me questions.” “And you observed these two officers writing things down on notepads?” “Correct.”
Click to expand...

BBM. Interesting new tactic they learned, eh?
 
CarolinaMoon said:
In Session “You weren’t present in that house at any time on the day that she passed away?” “No.” “Eventually, you called the Illinois State Police?” “Yes.” “After you talked to Mary Pontarelli?” “Yes.” “She gave you the numbers?” “No, I looked them up in the phone book.” “You just called the state police, because Mary told you they were investigating this case?” “No.” “How did you come to call?’ “Because my heart told me to . . . I was in shock about what had occurred.” “Any time any friend passes, that’s shocking, isn’t it?’ “But these circumstances are different.” “Did you feel responsible for her passing, because you moved out of the house?” “Not at all.” “Why? Your life is more important than hers?” Objection/Sustained. “Your family commitments were more important than checking up on her?” “That’s not true. I prayed for her every day.” The judge strikes this last response.
Click to expand...

Why did he strike the response? Also, why isn't the prosecution objecting? Isn't this badgering a witness for pete's sakes!! I give her a lot of credit for keeping her cool. I probably would get up and go slap him!
 
LambChop said:
He's trying to get her to say she never thought he would actually hurt her. Makes you wonder how some of these attorneys sleep at night. jmo
Click to expand...

I keep asking myself the same question. I think these defense attorneys are the most disgusting I've seen in years. Even Baez can't compare.
 
Shelby1 said:
Oh, this is heartbreaking.
Click to expand...


It broke my heart for her. BTDT so completely understand. After she got it out she sure did a fantastic job! Held her own with the :censored: Lopez
 
Sidebar, please.

:cheers: and :tyou: to CarolinaMoon, ohiogirl & ~n/t~ for doing all the good :eek:nline:work you have done for all of us. You guys are very fine & generous to do the In Session broadcasts!!!
icon14.gif

:cupcake::loveyou::balloons:
 
seattlechiquita said:
I am happy that Stacy has been mentioned through the day. I know this is Kathleen's trial, but Stacy is present :grouphug:
Click to expand...

You're right, caffeine-woman, pretty little Stacy is there. And I would think that those who love her are hanging onto every word in that courtroom because they know there will probably never be a trial for their Stacy.
icon8.gif
 
lonetraveler said:
Right again.......Drew's BFFs deliberately left the little important fact out of their report (that Drew was present during the questioning of Stacey) showing that they knew that he wasn't suppose to be present if they were pretending to conduct an investigation. This is one of the disgusting facts of this case.
Click to expand...

bbm
Yes, lonetraveler -- and the PT should include it in their closing remarks just as you have stated it.
 
WTF how many times will the judge state the Defense didn't open the door when they actually did!
 
In their investigation after Kathleens death I don't remember ever hearing they found a knife under her mattress. If it was there and they didn't even look? Or did Drew find it and remove it? Drew ran that investigation the way he wanted it to go, it is so obvious. Although the investigation was lame the fact is Drew is the one who needed to get rid of his wife not the investigators so he is ultimately responsible for his fate.
I doubt the wool is going to pulled over this juries eyes AND ears. I hope Drew is holding his breath listening to the witnesses and maybe he won't get another breath. This man is evil. Oh I wish they could find Stacy.
 
I am worried about this jury. I think there are 7 men and 5 women. I hope the men aren't laughing along with the defense and the judge. It seems that the giggles from the jury have been at the expense of the state so far.
 
giggles from the jury? I'm almost exclusively reading here (no sound on the computer and no tv), but I am not seeing that the jury is actually giggling.

Where are you seeing info about "giggles" from the jury?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 222 more.
Total: 2,461 (members: 223, guests: 2,238)

Online statistics

Members online
223
Guests online
2,238
Total visitors
2,461
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,233
Messages
17,965,562
Members
228,729
Latest member
PoignantEcho
Back
Top