Drew Peterson's Trial *SECOND WEEK*

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
does anyone have a link to a live streamed InSession
i have one that worked last week but it doesnt work this week :(
 
In Session Brodsky requests a few minutes prior to the next witness, so that the defendant can speak to all of his attorneys at the same time. “He has something about this witness he wants to tell us.” Judge: “OK.”
So the trial is on hold for a few minutes to allow the defendant to confer with his attorneys.
 
Judge Burmila is back on the stand.
Attorney Brodsky confirms that the defense had an appropriate chance to talk to the defendant, and the judge asks the prosecution to call its next witness (which will be Pat Collins). The judge also sends for the jury.
 
n Session The jurors are now back in the courtroom, and the prosecution calls its next witness: Patrick Collins (questioned by prosecutor Connor). “I’m unemployed right now. I’m retired from the Illinois State Police.” He works part time for a security company that transports state witnesses to hospital visits. He retired from the ISP at the rank of sergeant. He briefly goes over his history with that organization.
 
jevipo74 said:
I hear you. Brodsky is pretty much a low rent version of Mark Geragos.
Click to expand...


:floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: "low rent version" of MG ... this made me LOL !

JMO ... but these defense :clown::clown: have got to be one of the most arrogant and [ :silenced: some words I cannot use here ] group of attorneys I have ever seen ...

And THANKS to all of you for the updates here !

:seeya:
 
So, did the judge rule it was a Brady violation? I'm confused.
 
In Session By March 2004, he had been in general investigations for approximately three years. “Prior to March 1, 2004, how many homicide cases that were not traffic related had you investigated?” “Zero... those investigations were traffic-related. Or, at one time, there was a dead body found along the expressway; the victim had had a heart attack.” On March 1, 2004, “I received a call from my supervisor, who told me that it appeared that a police officer from Bolingbrook’s wife had been found in a bathtub. It appeared to be accidental.” “That evening, he used the term ‘accident’ when he talked to you?” “Yes... I went to the location, 392 Pheasant Chase Drive... I entered the house, and was greeted by two Bolingbrook commanders. They told me all the other state police personnel were up in the bathroom... it was crime scene investigator Bob Deel, and Troop Falat.” “Did you have command authority over Robert Deel?” “I had the ability to give him orders, but he was not under my command.”
 
Shelby1 said:
So, did the judge rule it was a Brady violation? I'm confused.
Click to expand...

It seems like he said it was, but the defense could call the FBI agent, so he would not sanction the Pros. for this. Not quite clear as a bell. jmo
 
In Session Deel “had arrived before I had arrived. So I was just getting a briefing from him... basically, Deel said it appeared to be an accidental situation.” This happened approximately ten minutes before the witness arrived on the scene. “What did you ask Mr. Deel to do with you during that discussion?” “After meeting Deel and getting a brief summary, I asked, 'Can we walk through the scene of the house, to see if there was any evidence there?'" It was also a learning experience for me. I asked Deel if there was any evidence that needed to be obtained, and he said no. I asked if there was any sign of a break-in, and Sgt. Deel said no.” The walk around the house lasted “five to seven minutes, walking slowly.”
 
In Session “At some point later, did you assist with the removal of the body out of the house?” “Yes... prior to me assisting removing the body, I went back in the bathroom to look at he body one more time. At which time I observed a gash on the back of her head. I asked Deel how did Kathleen Savio receive that gash, and he said possibly it was from a slip in the tub. That was a concern of mine. After that, the deputy coroner [and] Deel had placed the body in a body bag... I assisted in taking the body out of the building.” “Did you bounce the body against anything when you were taking the body out?” “No, I did not
 
In Session The witness says that he told the Bolingbrook police officers who were present that “eventually I’d have to talk to Drew. They said OK.” He then went to neighbor Steve Carcerano’s home, to conduct interviews. “I arrived at the house between 1:00 and 1:15 in the morning... they [the interviews] had to start approximately 2:00-ish in the morning.” “Those interviews took some length of time?” “Yes... to see if somebody knew something, or had possibly heard something.” Once the interviews were completed, “I went outside, and someone informed one of the commanders that we needed to speak to Drew at that time... the interview with Drew Peterson was at the Bolingbrook Police Department.” “And that began at approximately 6:00 in the morning?” “Yes.”
 
In Session The witness says he began the interview by asking Peterson if he knew why he was interviewed (he said yes). “I asked him how his relationship with Kathy was going; he said pretty good, despite the fact that they were in the final stages of their divorce... as part of his divorce at that time, the divorce would allow Drew to remarry, and Kathy to remarry.” “Did the defendant indicate anything to you about where the divorce was at?” “He said the divorce was going along fine despite the facts that the financial aspects of the divorce hadn’t been finalized.” “Did he explain anything to you about the house?” “I asked Drew, ‘Well, how would you benefit from the death of Kathy Savio?’” Drew responded that he and Kathy had joint custody of the house, which was paid off and worth about $300,000... he said he would received half. And then he said, ‘Oh, I guess now I’ll get the whole value of the house.’”
 
In Session “He stated he would not benefit from any insurance policy, because she had changed the paperwork and left that as a trust to the kids.” “So the insurance policy was going to the children?” “Yes, he did.” “Did you ask him about the last time he spoke to Kathy?” “The last time he picked up the kids, it was Friday, at about 5:00 pm.... Kathy indicated to Drew that she had made plans for the weekend, but didn’t indicate anything in particular.” “He indicated to you the last time he saw or spoke to her was on Friday?” “At 5:00, when he picked up the kids. He said she appeared to be fine physically, and also mentally.” “Did you ask him if Kathy might have contemplated suicide?” Objection/Overruled. “He said no way. He could never see her living without the kids.” "Did you ask about any medications?” “He informed me that she was on some kind of antidepressant... because of the stress of the divorce, because she had a feeling of being abandoned, and in her childhood she had incidents in which she was molested and physically abused.”
 
In Session “I asked Drew to describe the events of that particular weekend... Saturday was the day he hung out with the kids, and did normal family things. Just spent time around the house... nothing in particular.” “Did he indicate anything about Saturday night?” “Saturday night... I’d have to reflect back to my report on that one.” The witness is shown a copy of his report relating to his interview of the defendant. “Saturday night he was still with the kids... he just spent the day with the kids on Saturday.”
 
ohiogirl said:
In Session “He stated he would not benefit from any insurance policy, because she had changed the paperwork and left that as a trust to the kids.” “So the insurance policy was going to the children?” “Yes, he did.” “Did you ask him about the last time he spoke to Kathy?” “The last time he picked up the kids, it was Friday, at about 5:00 pm.... Kathy indicated to Drew that she had made plans for the weekend, but didn’t indicate anything in particular.” “He indicated to you the last time he saw or spoke to her was on Friday?” “At 5:00, when he picked up the kids. He said she appeared to be fine physically, and also mentally.” “Did you ask him if Kathy might have contemplated suicide?” Objection/Overruled. “He said no way. He could never see her living without the kids.” "Did you ask about any medications?” “He informed me that she was on some kind of antidepressant... because of the stress of the divorce, because she had a feeling of being abandoned, and in her childhood she had incidents in which she was molested and physically abused.”
Click to expand...

Not truthful, imo. He would benefit from the insurance if she died as he would be the guardian of the children. Me, thinking out loud.:waitasec:
 
In Session “On Sunday, Drew had told me they planned to go to the Shedd Aquarium. He went to Krispy Kreme; he returned home, and his wife [Stacy] made breakfast. At 11:00 they left, and headed to the Shedd Aquarium... Drew stated to me they returned at approximately 4:15 pm; he liked to be prepared for work by 5:00 pm. He didn’t have to go to work that day until 5:30... he arrived home, he attempted to take the kids back. He went to work at 5:30, and returned home around dinner time, at which time he attempted to return the kids. That led to negative results, because no one answered the bell or answered the phone. The kids rang the bell as he attempted to call on his phone... when he got no response, he returned home, returned the kids to his residence, and proceeded to go back to work.” According to this witness, Drew told him that he realized it was a three-day weekend, and he thought perhaps Kathy and her boyfriend had gone off for an extra day
 
In Session “On Monday, he woke up, and made several attempts to contact Kathy, with negative results.” “Did he indicate that at some point he went to one of Kathy’s neighbors?” “When he went down to the location, he went to a neighbor, Mary Pontarelli, and he asked Mary when was the last time she saw Kathy. She indicated she has saw [sic] Kath on Saturday afternoon.” “That’s information the defendant provided to you on the morning of March 2?” “Yes.” “Did he give you any time at which he went to Mary Pontarelli’s house?” “It was approximately 7:00 pm.” “What happened after that?” “He said he was somewhat concerned, and he was thinking about contacting a locksmith.” Once again, the witness asks to see a copy of his report, with which he is provided
 
In Session “He had mentioned to Mary that if he had not heard from Kathy by Tuesday, he would contact a locksmith. Then, at approximately 9:45 pm, Mary’s son had contacted Kathy’s boyfriend...“ Objection/Sustained. “When it was known that an individual had spoken to Kathy’s boyfriend, then Mary told Drew to call the locksmith... he contacted a locksmith, who arrived, gained entrance to the house, at which time the neighbors went into the house.” “Did the defendant tell you where he was?” “Drew indicated to me that he remained outside... Mary Pontarelli, Thomas Pontarelli, and Steve Carcerano entered the house. Several moments later, Drew said he heard a scream. He proceeded in the house, upstairs to the bathroom... he saw the body of his ex-wife, lifeless.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 168 more.
Total: 4,629 (members: 169, guests: 4,460)

Online statistics

Members online
169
Guests online
4,460
Total visitors
4,629
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,464
Messages
17,969,318
Members
228,774
Latest member
truecrime-hazeleyes
Back
Top