The Hearsay Law

New Posts

I have the feeling that a lot hinges on this bill. I don't think we're going to see a grand jury indictment until after this bill is signed by the governor.

I think that once that bill is signed, the indictment will soon follow.
 
mysteriew said:
ClassZ no one is saying anything specific to this case. But the Will County attorney is the one pushing this bill.

No it probably won't be retroactive. But as long as it passes before DrewP is charged the law should apply.

The law passed the House and the Senate, but one side amended the law and now the other side needs to vote on it again. Hopefully they will do that soon.
Click to expand...

Great, thanks for the explanation. :)
 
Wouldn't it be great to hear two indictments?

1 for DP

1 for CS

IMO, this bill is SO IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Littledeer said:
Wouldn't it be great to hear two indictments?

1 for DP

1 for CS

IMO, this bill is SO IMPORTANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
According the the Illinois General Assembly website, they don't reconvene until November 12. That means nothing is likely to happen until the end of the year with this legislation, unless there is something I don't know about or understand.

http://www.ilga.gov/contact.asp

This would suck
 
I am delighted. :) I don't see the Prosecution having a problem charging him with premeditated Murder 1.
 
Peculiar Petunia said:
The governor can convene a special session, if he wants to.
Click to expand...

And he may do just that because the budget that they passed isn't balanced. So he may give them a brief vacation and then call them back to revamp the budget and also pass this revision of this bill. That should go uncontested.
 
philamena said:
First degree as in premeditated?
I have a feeling DP planned Stacey's demise. I don't think he killed her in a fit of anger. Surely that would qualify as premeditated.
Click to expand...

I think it was premeditated, too. In fact, I think that's why her body hasn't been found. I have felt for a long time and have posted before that I believe it's possible Drew planned to kill her if necessary. By that I mean that he probably loved her (in his own sick way), and probably hoped that she would stay and not divorce him. Therefore, he had a plan.

With all his years in law enforcement, he had to have seen a lot of criminal activity along with cover-up attempts.....some good, some not so good. I believe he may have had a grave already prepared just in case. I think he killed her on a day that wasn't planned and was able to dispose of the body quickly - that's why it hasn't been found. Throwing a body in a hole and covering it up isn't nearly as time consuming as having to dig it. It sounds so awful, but I think Drew is capable of anything. After all, he couldn't take a chance on another bathtub slip and fall.

Think of all the possible places of do this - it's mind boggling. But I do think it's first degree and I think that he won't be arrested until this law is in place and also if a body isn't found, until she has been gone a full year. Reasonable people assume that a devoted mother wouldn't miss birthdays, Christmases, Easters, etc., etc., etc. It just strengthens the case to wait unless the body is found. JMO
 
I would say that both Kathleen's murder and Stacy's were very much premeditated.
 
I think Kathleen's was premeditated. I am not completely sure about Stacy. I would think if that was premeditated no blue barrel would have needed to be moved out of the house. The timeline still is a mystery to me. From what we know of it so far it sounds more like a rage killing. IMHO
 
The timing of her murder may not have been planned, but I think they can show with the bullet going into the garage after he requested she be there to get him a soda...there was forethought of her eminent demise.
 
curiositycat said:
I think Kathleen's was premeditated. I am not completely sure about Stacy. I would think if that was premeditated no blue barrel would have needed to be moved out of the house. The timeline still is a mystery to me. From what we know of it so far it sounds more like a rage killing. IMHO
Click to expand...

Curiositycat...............I think Kathleen's murder was premeditated too. With Stacy, I think DP may have thought about killing her, especially if he knew she was planning on a divorce and if she knew that he had killed Kathleen. But, I think that even if he had thought about it, he had not thought out all the details yet.

I think Stacy's death happened in a fit of rage because of the circumstances of her death. If premeditated, he wouldn't have chosen a Sunday morning with all the children in the house, and neighbors home. He would have chosen a weekday when the two oldest were in school and when many of his neighbors would be at work. I don't think he would have killed her in the house either. He would have made an excuse to get Stacy out of the house alone.
 
Leila said:
Curiositycat...............I think Kathleen's murder was premeditated too. With Stacy, I think DP may have thought about killing her, especially if he knew she was planning on a divorce and if she knew that he had killed Kathleen. But, I think that even if he had thought about it, he had not thought out all the details yet.

I think Stacy's death happened in a fit of rage because of the circumstances of her death. If premeditated, he wouldn't have chosen a Sunday morning with all the children in the house, and neighbors home. He would have chosen a weekday when the two oldest were in school and when many of his neighbors would be at work. I don't think he would have killed her in the house either. He would have made an excuse to get Stacy out of the house alone.
Click to expand...

I agree that Stacy's death happened in a fit of rage..but yet it was premeditated to the point of him knowing if she left or tried to leave him, he had to kill her with the knowledge she had of Kathleen's death. I truly believe that Drew already had a plan and the rage just kicked in that morning. I don't think that he meant to do it at that time..but that he was planning on it eventually. Meaning he may have already figured a body disposal method. LE has not been successful to date in finding her body. This tells me he already had some parts of the plan determined.
 
The U.S. Supreme Court made a ruling on a California case, upheld by the California Supreme Court, involving a murder case where the suspect was convicted in part by hearsay testimony. It ruled that the case violated the defendant's 6th amendmant rights. The California Supreme Courts upholding of the conviction is "vacated and remanded" by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The U.S. Supreme Court did give some instruction on how they can interpret the 6th amendment and prosecute in a means that is constitutional. I think it will take a while for all the legal experts to figure out how hearsay laws can be passed that don't violate the constitution.

This doesn't necessarily mean that Hearsay laws won't pass, but I think it is a set-back....for now. I'm sure more will come in the news in the days following.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-6053.ZS.html
 
I read about the Supreme Court decision regarding the California hearsay law, and I think this will have major ramifications on the passage of the Illinois hearsay law.

It's my understanding that the Illinois hearsay law is patterned after the California law. I suspect the Illinois law-makers will either vote the law down or will send it back for revision. It could be a long time before the law would come up for approval, since the Illinois Legislature is going to be on break until November.

In any case, I don't think the grand jury will be able to wait for the passage of the hearsay law, as it may not happen. They will have to indict DP on what they have.
 
I hope that somehow in some way all states are able to come up with some version of the heresay law. It does not seem fair that a person can record their situation and perceived threats and that the law has to ignore it. Especially when other evidence also points to the suspect. And it esp. seems unfair if that suspect is thought to have killed to prevent the person from being a witness to another crime.
 
mysteriew said:
I hope that somehow in some way all states are able to come up with some version of the heresay law. It does not seem fair that a person can record their situation and perceived threats and that the law has to ignore it. Especially when other evidence also points to the suspect. And it esp. seems unfair if that suspect is thought to have killed to prevent the person from being a witness to another crime.
Click to expand...

I agree. It would seem to me that the person is not available to be confronted by the defendant because the defendant has already confronted them and it ended in death.

I think that when women try to contact the LE over and over again and express they are in harm's way, as in Kathleen's case, then that should still be allowed to be presented.
 
Per the article that Fran posted in media, the hearsay law has now passed and is only waiting on the Govenor's signature.
 
mysteriew said:
Per the article that Fran posted in media, the hearsay law has now passed and is only waiting on the Govenor's signature.
Click to expand...

This is great news! I hope the governor signs it asap! And I hope the grand jury follows it with an indictment! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 45 more.
Total: 4,259 (members: 46, guests: 4,213)

Online statistics

Members online
46
Guests online
4,213
Total visitors
4,259
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,490
Messages
17,969,787
Members
228,789
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top