Drew Peterson's Trial *SECOND WEEK*

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
-MD- said:
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.
Click to expand...

Wow, just when I think DP could not possibly be more of a disgusting toad, he goes and outdoes himself! Strike that, to call him a toad is an insult to toads! I hope he goes away forever!!!!!
 
In Session The witness is handed the report, and reads it silently to himself. “Is your memory now refreshed, independent of what I just showed you?” “Yes.” “You told the police that it was your mother who thought it was unusual that she was still awake at the time?” “I remember that we both basically made the comment at the same time.” “True you told them that your mother made the comment and not you?” “I don’t recall.” Once again, the witness is shown the document in question. “This is a document prepared by the police that says your mother made the comment, and not you . . . it’s true you told them that your mother said it was unusual, and not you?” “Yes.” “When the police came to your home on Dec. 10, 2004, they were interviewing you and your mother and father?” Objection/Sustained. “There came a time on Dec. 10, 2007, they came to your home and your parents’ home?” “Yes.” “They asked you to do your best to remember what happened three years earlier?” “Yes.” “You grew up in a very, very traditional Italian home?” “Yes.” “Your extended family lived there?” “Yes.” “The police asked the family if they could remember anything at all?” “Yes.” “And everyone was part of that discussion?” “Yes.” “It was part of a group discussion?” “Yes.’ “And people were having a hard time remembering?” “I don’t remember people having a hard time remembering.” “Growing up in a traditional Italian household, if your mother was wrong about something, you wouldn’t correct her in front of strangers, because it would be disrespectful?” “Yes.” “You would not have corrected her?” Objection/Overruled
 
In Session “The police came to your home three years after you saw the light on in Ms. Savio’s window?” “Yes.” “And you told the police she was like an older sister to her?” “Yes.” “And you said today that you thought it was unusual for her to have the light on?” “At that hour.” “And her porch light was off, and you were concerned and troubled by that?” “At that time, no.” “But after she was found dead, you didn’t tell anyone in law enforcement, did you?” “No.” Objection/Sustained. “You were interviewed a second time the next day, at state police headquarters, a second time?” “Yes.” “And they asked you what you saw?” “Yes.” “And they asked you why you didn’t tell anyone for three years?” “Yes.” “And you told them that you didn’t want to interfere with a police investigation?” “Yes.” “This was a person you considered to be like an older sister, like family?” “Yes.” “For three years, you knew about this claim . . . but you didn’t’ say anything for three years?” “No.” “You didn’t contact any law enforcement agency, did you?” “No.” “It’s only when they came to you in December of 2007 that you said anything?” “Yes.” “And they kept pressing you about what you saw?” “No, I wouldn’t say that.” “They wanted to know if you had a sexual relationship with Ms. Savio, didn’t they?” “Yes.” “And they even asked you to take a lie detector test, didn’t they?” Objection. The attorneys go to a sidebar.
 
In Session The sidebar has now ended. The witness and the jurors are excused from the courtroom. Prosecutor Patton objects to the question about the lie detector. Judge: “This is cross-examination . . . it’s appropriate cross-examination . . . a device for testing truthfulness.” The judge then sends for the witness and the jury.
 
In Session The witness and the jurors have returned to the courtroom. “You were at the state police station, alone in a room with the officers?” “Yes.” “And they asked about a relationship they thought you might have had with Ms. Savio?” “Yes.” “And that interrogation lasted several hours, didn’t it?” “I don’t recall it lasting several hours.” “You didn’t have a lawyer present, did you?” “No.” “At some point, they asked you for fingerprints?” “I don’t remember that.” Objection. The attorneys had to yet another sidebar.
 
~n/t~ said:
In Session The sidebar ends. As the witness took a photograph of Kathy from the house, Steve Maniaci was there with her (as was Drew). Drew told her that he found a will “between the floor boards. “What did he say about your family?” “We wouldn’t get anything.” “Was your sister Anna present at that time?” “No.” “Did there come a time after the funeral where you drove to the defendant’s residence to see the children?” “Yes.” Objection. This leads to another sidebar.

OMG!! This is ridiculous! Imagine what the jurors must be thinking!
Click to expand...

If I was a juror, I'd probably be getting very frustrated! I'd also be wondering what it was that the defense team was trying to keep me from hearing.
 
In Session The sidebar ends. The witness is shown a copy of the police report in question. “Is your memory now jogged?” “Yes.” “They did ask you to provide fingerprints, didn’t they?” “Yes.” “And they asked you to take a polygraph test?” “Yes.” “And at that point, you were so sick and tired of them that you would just about say anything to get out of there?” “No.” Objection/Sustained. “When the police came to you three years later, a light suddenly came on in your head, pun intended?” “No, I always remembered that that happened.” “But you didn’t say anything for 1095 days?” Objection/Sustained. That ends the cross-examination of this witness. FYI – the attorney doing the cross was Ralph Meczyk.
 
In Session Patton begins her redirect. The witness denies again that he had a sexual relationship with Kathleen Savio. “When you went to the police department, you freely cooperated and answered all their questions?” “Yes.” “And you offered to provide the police with fingerprints, polygraph, and everything they asked?” “Yes.” “You told the police you were reluctant to come forward because you were afraid to contradict the police?” “Yes.” That ends the redirect. There is no recross, and the witness is excused.
 
In Session That ends the testimony for today. Judge: “Everyone have a very good weekend. We’ll see you Tuesday.” The judge leaves the bench, and the trial is in recess until 9:00 CT/10:00 ET Tuesday morning.
 
~n/t~ said:
So Drew finds the will between the floor boards? How did he know it was there? :what:
Click to expand...

My best guess is that when he planned on killing Kathleen, he spent some time in locating that will, so that he could remove it quickly before her family found it. It's a shame that Kathleen didn't keep that will in a safety deposit box at her bank, or somewhere other than her home.
 
Leila said:
My best guess is that when he planned on killing Kathleen, he spent some time in locating that will, so that he could remove it quickly before her family found it. It's a shame that Kathleen didn't keep that will in a safety deposit box at her bank, or somewhere other than her home.
Click to expand...

Her attorney's office would have a copy of the will. So even if she hid it they still had a copy. jmo
 
~n/t~ said:
In Session The sidebar ends. The jurors have now left the courtroom. Judge: “The defendant is objecting to the statement that the witness and her family wouldn’t get anything under the will, and that the defendant went to visit the children. Mr. Connor, why would the family have to get anything out of the will?” Connor: “The statement of the defendant was about this will that was made in a tight time frame.” Judge to Brodsky: “Did they give you in discovery that the defendant said they wouldn’t get anything out of the will?” Brodsky: “Just that they found a will.” Connor takes a moment, searches the case file for proof that the defense was put on notice about this testimony. Connor: “We found the transcript.” Judge: “OK, then that portion of the statement is allowed . . . it’s a statement of the defendant.” Greenberg: “But it paints him as a mean-spirited person . . . none of it should be allowed in; none of it has anything to do with anything . . . I think all of it’s irrelevant . . . it wouldn’t do anything other than to paint him in a bad light; it’s inadmissible character evidence. It’s prejudicial . . . and it’s just not fair.” Connor responds, say this is not only appropriate but it’s already been litigated. Judge: “This statement could be taken more than one way . . . I understand the defendant’s objection, but I believe that it is probative. The inferences that will be drawn from it will be determined by the jury.”
Click to expand...

OMG - Greenberg sounds like a 4-year-old throwing a tantrum!

Yes, it paints Drew Peterson as a mean-spirited person, because he IS a mean-spirited and so much more! :banghead:
 
dog.gone.cute said:
BBM: I totally agree !

JMO ... but I think it was another one of DP's warnings -- like the "bullet in the driveway" of the neighbor's house ...

What a :silenced:

:moo:
Click to expand...

Or...could he have actually been looking for the will, thinking perhaps she had it locked away there? This, of course, before that questionable hand written will he conviently produced. (So nice to have place to think outloud!)
 
I cannot even put into words how much disgust I have for DP's attorneys..

Now i do know its their job to defend him but I think they are so out of line with most that they say.. and their interviews with the press.. uggggg.
 
Thanks to everyone posting the updates! I cannot find them when I go to that link, guess I need a Facebook account to see them? (Not going to happen if that's the case.)

You guys really believe Drew found the will in the floorboards???!!! Pssshhhh... Come on, you know he's lying. Wasn't it the bag in the car with all of her other important papers? Or, in the locked box he had the key for?
 
21merc7 said:
Thanks to everyone posting the updates! I cannot find them when I go to that link, guess I need a Facebook account to see them? (Not going to happen if that's the case.)

You guys really believe Drew found the will in the floorboards???!!! Pssshhhh... Come on, you know he's lying. Wasn't it the bag in the car with all of her other important papers? Or, in the locked box he had the key for?
Click to expand...

Drew is such a drama queen.
Hole in the floor boards? Come on....
 
his natural light but it is okay to say that Kathleen is a hell cat, angry, feisty, and "Italian blooded".........It is perfectly acceptable for the defense to say horrible things about Kathleen but if they are said about Drew he is somehow victimized?!

Leila said:
OMG - Greenberg sounds like a 4-year-old throwing a tantrum!

Yes, it paints Drew Peterson as a mean-spirited person, because he IS a mean-spirited and so much more! :banghead:
Click to expand...
 
I am catching up today......I took a break after the cross exam by Joe the Shark of Kathleen's boyfriend. It made me very angry....it must have been humiliating for her boyfriend to be talking about such personal details and extremely uncomfortable for her father to hear. It was really crude and low.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 119 more.
Total: 4,450 (members: 120, guests: 4,330)

Online statistics

Members online
120
Guests online
4,330
Total visitors
4,450
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,487
Messages
17,969,700
Members
228,788
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top