Sidebar #1 in Kathleen Savio's forum

New search for Stacy - apparently in a location that's already been searched - near where her cellphone was last used when she disappeared. IS just had Greenberg on via phone and when they suggested people were coming forward now that DP was in jail, first Greenberg said Drew's been in jail awaiting trial for years (yeah, but that's not permanently in jail and people are smart enough to know that even without having the benefit of your legal expertise).

Then he said "There's no suggestion that he threatened anyone in any way, shape or form...."

Seriously? Did he attend the same trial I watched?
 
From a Chicago Sun Times article: http://www.suntimes.com/news/156915...il-briefly-to-see-mother-in-funeral-home.html

“I straightened him out. Drew knows I’m not going to lie to him,” said Brodsky, who filed his own motion Thursday seeking to boot Carroll off the case.

For his part, Carroll acknowledged urging Peterson to dump Brodsky as his attorney.

“I said to him, ‘you’re drowning and you’re holding a stone. I said, ‘let go of the stone and I’ll save you.’” Carroll recounted.


Irony?

(ETA: bbm & gbm)

Is that just a new way of saying, "Out of the frying pan into the fire"
icon5.gif
icon4.gif
 
Lolol! That is hilarious! I could see Drew going both ways!

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Well, Mama-cita -- that one did it!!! I'm still chuckling!!! I love the way you think!! LOL

Drew knows he must cover all the bases, doesn't he?? He IS quite the charmer, eh?

(You really don't like this guy, huh??!!):furious:

:great:

still LOL...
icon10.gif
 
Drew has all these people trying to save him and give him good advice, someone should have schooled him on how he treats women.
 
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...on-attorney-joel-brodsky-peterson-and-brodsky

"I think we had a rogue defense attorney," said Peterson attorney Steve Greenberg, who stated that he "vehemently objected" to Brodsky's decision to call the witness, Savio's divorce attorney Harry Smith.

After a public feud with Greenberg, Brodsky was pressured to withdraw from the case last month. In a motion filed Friday, Peterson's defense attorneys asked Will County Judge Edward Burmila to take the highly unusual step of either overturning the jury's guilty verdict or granting Peterson a new trial.
 
Defense attorneys were given until Dec. 14 to file their post-trial motions, with prosecutors given until Jan. 9 to respond. Burmila is scheduled a day later to set a court date for an evidentiary hearing on the issues Peterson raised in his motion — a hearing at which Brodsky may be called to testify, defense attorneys said.

If Burmila denies the post-trial motions — as is typically the case — Peterson would then be sentenced and his attorneys would appeal to the appellate court in Ottawa.

from the same link above
 
I have no doubt that DP was all behind Brodsky until it went south, now it's all Brodsky's fault. Those two deserve to be behind bars together, imo. Still, legal experts are saying they don't feel the appeals stand a chance. Hopefully that is true.
 
Well, well, well -- I just have to laff. :floorlaugh: It was bound to happen. Maybe this is the cherry on top of the spoiled milk shake-up. Maybe not.

Complete with rotating attorneys...If it's Tuesday, Greenberg is the lawyer of the day. Brodsky on Monday and Howdy Doody on Wednesday, Alfred E. Neuman on Thursday, and so on... Is Baez on his way up north? He could be here by Friday... Dayam. :twocents: <smh -- again>
 
Legally, I am appalled. Is there no end to the lengths these attorneys will stoop to get their clients off?
 
So do I understand correctly then that he will not be getting sentenced today alongside fellow murderer Chris Vaughn?
 
I have comfort in knowing Drew is spending his night's in the same proximity to like minded males.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
83
Guests online
3,420
Total visitors
3,503

Forum statistics

Threads
592,492
Messages
17,969,829
Members
228,789
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top