Drew Peterson heads to trial. Jury selection begins Monday July 23

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Heard on IS that Drew is his own Jury Consultant

fwiw
 
Also just heard that this Jury pool was selected 2 years ago!!!!

The've had plenty of time to research this case IMO

I don't know if that's good or bad
 
fran said:
Before jury selection in Peterson case, judge deals potential blow to prosecution

In a potential blow to the prosecution’s case, Judge Edward Burmila during a brief hearing before jurors entered the courtroom denied a motion to admit each of the hearsay statements against Peterson, saying he would let stand a prior judge's ruling that found eight of the statements were too unreliable to be heard in court.

full article at link ..............http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...updates-july-23-2012-20120723,0,5745862.story
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the Illinois Supreme Court had ruled on this and the hearsay was coming in.
 
Cassandra Cales, sister of Stacy Peterson, left the courtroom shortly after the first set of prospective jurors was sworn in.

“I just wanted to see that this was going to move on, so he can be convicted,” Cales said as she left the courthouse, adding that she intends to return for opening statements next week and to attend each day of the trial. “It feels good to actually see something being done.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...updates-july-23-2012-20120723,0,5745862.story
 
My understanding of the hearsay stuff, is that some was ruled out. I think, the way I am hearing it, the prosecution wants the judge to say yes info will be admitted now, before the trial starts.

How I interepreted what I heard on AM 780 WBBM radio was the judge will make the decision as to whether certain hearsay information will be admissable as the prosecution presents it during trial.

I could sware I heard the newscaster on 'BBM say earlier this afternoon (paraphrased from memory) the judge said the prosecution could bring it in but the defense could still object.

anyone else listening to 'BBM? What are they hearing?
 
Cubby said:
My understanding of the hearsay stuff, is that some was ruled out. I think, the way I am hearing it, the prosecution wants the judge to say yes info will be admitted now, before the trial starts.

How I interepreted what I heard on AM 780 WBBM radio was the judge will make the decision as to whether certain hearsay information will be admissable as the prosecution presents it during trial.

I could sware I heard the newscaster on 'BBM say earlier this afternoon (paraphrased from memory) the judge said the prosecution could bring it in but the defense could still object.

anyone else listening to 'BBM? What are they hearing?
Click to expand...
Yes Cubby, that is the way I remember it also, that some was going to be allowed but some was not.

As far as cameras and Illinois, they are allowed I know as there is a local murder trial that they are allowing cameras (Nicolas Sheeley trial) and I want to say this was the first Illinois trial that they are allowing them. I know they are allowing them, just not certain that it's the first Illinois trial.

Please please please, let's get this creeper convicted and settled into a really nice Illinois prison. I want to see that smugly grin wiped off his chin.
 
I don't know if I can deal with this trial right now. I have a bad feeling about it for some reason. :eek:
 
Before jury selection began Monday, Will County Judge Edward Burmila refused prosecutors' request to give them blanket approval to admit eight key hearsay statements. Burmila said he will make a final ruling on the admissibility of each statement only as they come up at trial.

Neither Burmila nor the attorneys spoke in any detail about the substance of the eight statements.


Source: http://www.nbcchicago.com/feature/d...l-jury-selection-163458756.html#ixzz21UP0zVW9

The above best describes what I heard on 'BBM AM 780 radio earlier today. ​
 
LaLaw2000 said:
There is no low this dispicable team won't go. This infuriates me.
Click to expand...


I don't expect anything less than a circus from Drew and Brodsky. In fact I expect more of a circus from the two of them than I did from Jose Baez and his client CA.
 
Cubby said:
My understanding of the hearsay stuff, is that some was ruled out. I think, the way I am hearing it, the prosecution wants the judge to say yes info will be admitted now, before the trial starts.

How I interepreted what I heard on AM 780 WBBM radio was the judge will make the decision as to whether certain hearsay information will be admissable as the prosecution presents it during trial.

I could sware I heard the newscaster on 'BBM say earlier this afternoon (paraphrased from memory) the judge said the prosecution could bring it in but the defense could still object.

anyone else listening to 'BBM? What are they hearing?
Click to expand...

Thanks Cubby for the clarification. I read the article posted and thought that the judge had outright disallowed the hearsay. I understand from your post that it will likely be on an individual basis what hearsay comes in and what doesn't.

Hopefully the prosecution will be allowed to present the key pieces of hearsay, particularly the testimony of Pastor Neil Schori. I expect the defense to object to each piece of hearsay the prosecution tries to bring in.
 
LaLaw2000 said:
There is no low this dispicable team won't go. This infuriates me.
Click to expand...

I so agree! I expect that when Stacy is called to the stand and doesn't show up, the defense will ask for her to be cited for contempt of court. :banghead:
 
Jury selection begins in Drew Peterson trial

Peterson, his trademark mustache shaved off, stood and spoke to some 40 potential jurors as jury selection began Monday.

"Good morning ladies and gentlemen, I'm Mr. Peterson," he said in a steady voice.

http://www.freep.com/usatoday/article/56430820?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p


Is that normal protocol for a defendant to introduce themselves to potential jurors?
 
Coldpizza said:
Jury selection begins in Drew Peterson trial

Peterson, his trademark mustache shaved off, stood and spoke to some 40 potential jurors as jury selection began Monday.

"Good morning ladies and gentlemen, I'm Mr. Peterson," he said in a steady voice.

http://www.freep.com/usatoday/article/56430820?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p


Is that normal protocol for a defendant to introduce themselves to potential jurors?
Click to expand...

BBM:

I have never heard of a defendant introducing himself/herself to potential jurors. It's just that, well, don't you know how 'special' Peterson is?

It really scares me how much I genuinely despise this unusual person.
 
LaLaw2000 said:
BBM:

I have never heard of a defendant introducing himself/herself to potential jurors. It's just that, well, don't you know how 'special' Peterson is?

It really scares me how much I genuinely despise this unusual person.
Click to expand...

I wonder if by declaring himself " Jury Consultant" if that gives him the right to address the jury pool?

If that's the case I'm pretty appalled as it allows him a certain interaction on a way too familiar level. kwim?

bbm I hear ya on that one
 
Cubby said:
I don't expect anything less than a circus from Drew and Brodsky. In fact I expect more of a circus from the two of them than I did from Jose Baez and his client CA.
Click to expand...

True that! While Jose and CA may have been raving narcissists, I do believe they at least made an effort, after their own fashion, to keep it in check.

Drew, on the other hand, has NOTHING going for him in life EXCEPT a desperate clinging to his cherished sick delusion that he is "cute". The delusion used to be "cute AND powerful" but I'd say his few years behind bars have stripped the "power" part from his sick mind, all in my opinion, of course.

I hope the spirit of all those who died or suffered at his hands visit him in the prison of his mind behind bars while he does the long wait for his own death, which WILL happen.

Will this walking-talking deadman do any inward spiritual work before he is taken from this earth?
 
I already served my jury time for awhile, so I didn't get called on this one. They wouldn't have wanted me anyway, during jury questioning I would have declared I think he's guilty of this crime as well as Stacy's disappearance. Then they would have shoved me over to civil court.

This is one time I would have liked to see the cameras in the courtrooms here in Illinois.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 84 more.
Total: 3,273 (members: 85, guests: 3,188)

Online statistics

Members online
85
Guests online
3,188
Total visitors
3,273
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,529
Messages
17,953,954
Members
228,522
Latest member
Cabinsleuth
Back
Top