Drew Peterson's Trial *FOURTH WEEK*

[LaLaw2000]

By the way, I'm reading other comments on IS and the Chicago Tribune is reporting that all of the jurors wore green today. Various shades of it, but all green.

Thanks for that information, Shelby1.

*I don't like that they all wear the same colors. I can't explain why I don't like it, but I don't. It just doesn't seem right to me.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

By the way, I'm reading other comments on IS and the Chicago Tribune is reporting that all of the jurors wore green today. Various shades of it, but all green.

GBBM: WTH ? This is NO coincidence ... and NOT good, IMO ...

They should be paying attention to the trial and testimony ... NOT thinking about their wardrobe !

:moo:

 

[Shelby1]

In Session Dr. Case is tendered as an expert in the field of neuro-pathology (without objection). “Were you contacted in 2010 to review an autopsy investigation into the death of Kathleen Savio Peterson?” ‘Yes, I did . . . I reviewed a large number of items, including the autopsy and scene investigation. In this case, there were three autopsies; I had all of those records. I had microscopic slides from the second and third autopsies. I had depositional testimony of the three doctors that were involved, as well as testimony from a large number of individuals . . . I also have testimony from a number of police individuals . . .” In the middle of this testimony, the attorneys suddenly go to a sidebar.
a few seconds ago

In Session The sidebar ends. The judge excuses the jury and the witness.

 

[Shelby1]

I don't like them wearing the same colors, either. It seems childish to me and unprofessional.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

***off topic:

UGH, Casey A. gets off probation this Friday.

OMG !

:waitasec: Well, if DP 'walks', hook these 2 :silenced: up and let them go at each other !

:moo:

 

[seattlechiquita]

Apparently Burmilla got his undies in a knot because the Dr.:

@StacyStClair #drewpeterson trial halted as Chase references testimony she has reviewed from people who won't testify. Apparently this is a big deal

 

[Cubby]

Are we waiting for the judge again?????

LOL, the first thing I thought of when I woke up this morning is the judge is never on time for Drew Petersons trial! really. :lol:

still catching up reading.

 

[Shelby1]

Apparently Burmilla got his undies in a knot because the Dr.:

@StacyStClair #drewpeterson trial halted as Chase references testimony she has reviewed from people who won't testify. Apparently this is a big deal

Oh for GOD'S SAKE!

 

[LambChop]

I don't like them wearing the same colors, either. It seems childish to me and unprofessional.

And disrespectful of the fact that they are sitting on a jury and not suppose to be playing games, nor sending a message which is clearly what they are doing. jmo

 

[seattlechiquita]

Oh for GOD'S SAKE!

I know right?

 

[Shelby1]

In Session The jurors and witness are now gone. Judge: “The doctor has now advised the jury that she’s reviewed the sworn testimony of people that this jury will never hear from . . . what are we going to do about that now?” Glasgow: “With all due respect, I apologize to the Court.” Judge: “Are all those people testifying? I’m assuming the State won’t call them all.” Goldberg points out that some of the people mention have already been excused as witnesses earlier in the proceedings. “We don’t have any obligation to call any witnesses . . . and Dr. Mitchell’s grand jury testimony wasn’t subject to cross-examination. That certainly crosses the line . . . it would be highly inappropriate for her to comment on any of those things.” Glasgow: “Judge, if we could have a short break, we have case law we looked at previously.” Judge: “I don’t believe that any such case law exists. But if you’ve got it, I’d like to see it.” The judge leaves the bench, and the trial is in a brief recess.

 

[Livingthedream]

Never.
Have.
Seen.
Anything.
Like.
This.
Judge.

 

[seattlechiquita]

WAIT. Was this ANOTHER prosecution blunder????? REALLY??? Someone pass me the salts, I might faint.

 

[LaLaw2000]

I don't like them wearing the same colors, either. It seems childish to me and unprofessional.

Yes, I guess that's it. It makes it seem that they are not professional. Why doesn't this hard-azz judge say something to them in the jury room? Or someone talk to them, at least.

I wonder if anyone on the defense team has green on? If they do, then I am emailing the judge myself.

I will be careful. I don't want to wind up in :jail: myself!

MOO

 

[LambChop]

I think it's ironic that people and the State is getting into trouble because their witnesses are trying to testify to the truth. If all this evidence is prejudicial than obviously he must be guilty. Please tell me the jury can't see this????? jmo

 

[dog.gone.cute]

In Session The jurors and witness are now gone.

Judge: “The doctor has now advised the jury that she’s reviewed the sworn testimony of people that this jury will never hear from . . . what are we going to do about that now?”

Glasgow: “With all due respect, I apologize to the Court.”

Judge: “Are all those people testifying? I’m assuming the State won’t call them all.”

Goldberg points out that some of the people mention have already been excused as witnesses earlier in the proceedings. “We don’t have any obligation to call any witnesses . . . and Dr. Mitchell’s grand jury testimony wasn’t subject to cross-examination. That certainly crosses the line . . . it would be highly inappropriate for her to comment on any of those things.”

Glasgow: “Judge, if we could have a short break, we have case law we looked at previously.” Judge: “I don’t believe that any such case law exists. But if you’ve got it, I’d like to see it.” The judge leaves the bench, and the trial is in a brief recess.

RBBM: Well, judge, you are NOT allowing any testimony in ... WTH do you expect a witness to do when NOTHING is allowed in !

I mean how in the hello can a witness testify in this kangaroo court ?

:banghead:

:moo:

 

[LaLaw2000]

Apparently Burmilla got his undies in a knot because the Dr.:

@StacyStClair #drewpeterson trial halted as Chase references testimony she has reviewed from people who won't testify. Apparently this is a big deal

NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

I can't take this!!

 

[TallCoolOne]

Now hold the phone, Decon....... didn't the judge allow the defense in questioning Dr. Blum in what three other renowned pathologists opinions were, in that they disagreed with Dr. Blums' opinion that Kathleen died as a result of homicide and not accidental???? This is total BS. I call BS on this lame excuse for a judge. It's also BS that he is appointed and not elected. That's a pity to the extreme as he can make any lame rulings that he wants and doesn't have to fear being ousted. BS BS BS!!!

Sorry for the tantrum....... had to get it out of my system though.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Yes, I guess that's it. It makes it seem that they are not professional. Why doesn't this hard-azz judge say something to them in the jury room? Or someone talk to them, at least.

I wonder if anyone on the defense team has green on? If they do, then I am emailing the judge myself.

I will be careful. I don't want to wind up in :jail: myself!

MOO

:seeya: And we'll come get you OUT if you do ! LOL ! :rocker:

Seriously though ... I am NOT liking this "matching wardrobe" that this jury seems to have going on ...

It's just NOT good ... which tells me that "someone" is "influencing" this ...

:moo:

 

[Cubby]

Why doesn't the judge just come out and say: "The evidence is potenitally too strong and thus would make it very likely the defendant would be convicted. Because of that, I am not going to allow it into evidence".

:floorlaugh:

:lol: I was thinking along the same lines. Something like the judge just saying he doesn't care if it is probative, it's still too prejudicial so he's just not letting it in. :lol: