Illinois appeals court has denied a petition to lessen Peterson's $20 million bail.

http://www.ktuu.com/Global/story.asp?S=10489356

Attorney Joel Brodsky expressed disappointment in the ruling from the Illinois Third District Appellate Court in a statement late Friday.

Brodsky says there may be another chance to request a reduction in bail. He says what he calls "the weakness of the State's case" will become clear.


So the Appellate Court also refused to lower the bail.

Wonder what Mr Brodsky has up his sleeve now. Any guesses on what the 'another chance' might be?

Heh, heh......... Thank you Paintr, for that!

Perhaps he oughta try skooby-doo and a little soft-shoe.......

That's about all he's got left at this point.

Too bad, so sad........ but it's okay, DrEwwwww is handling jail just fine, just ask him, he'll tell ya.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!

Yessss!!!!

Methinks that Mr Brodsky is wishful thinking about a weakness in the case against Drew P. Maybe by trial time Stacy will have been found and there will be new charges against Drew.

BTW can the state hold off on charges in Stacy's case to see if Drew mnages to wiggle out of the charges in Kathleen's case? Then, if he walks as Mr Brodsky predicts, he can be charged in a whole new case. Is this possible?

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/06/07/Drew-Petersons-bail-will-not-be-lowered/UPI-13001244397222/

JOLIET, Ill., June 7 (UPI) -- The $20 million bail keeping accused killer Drew Peterson in police custody will not be lowered as requested by his lawyers, an Illinois appellate court says.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-drew-peterson-bond-appeal-dejun07,0,6865574.story

The 3rd District Appellate Court was not persuaded by arguments that Peterson's deep roots in Bolingbrook and lack of a criminal record called for a lower bail. The $20 million bail was set May 7, the day Peterson was arrested for the 2004 murder of Kathleen Savio. Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy, is missing.

Paintr said:

Methinks that Mr Brodsky is wishful thinking about a weakness in the case against Drew P. Maybe by trial time Stacy will have been found and there will be new charges against Drew.

Snipped

Click to expand...

How true Paintr, We still have not heard an ID on the findings of May 20th and 23rd.

I wonder how long that will take?

Paintr said:

Interesting article about this river and another case that is unresolved.







Eight cases since '68
The Hanging Man is one of eight unidentified cases dating back to 1968 for the coroner's office. O'Neil said deputy coroners have been working to get DNA from all of the skeletons, most of whom were homicide victims.
"They were found after the bodies had been exposed too long to provide any clue to their identity," he said. On May 20, a barge crew working on the Des Plaines River came across a man's remains near Channahon.

"He'll most likely be added to that list," O'Neil said.Anyone who may know the identity of The Hanging Man can call the coroner's office at 815-727-8455 or Will County Forest Preserve Police at 815-722-8359.

http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldnews/news/1604331,4_1_JO03_HANGMAN_S1-090603.article

Click to expand...

BBM (Bolded By Me)Okay, I brought Paintr's post over from the other thread because they do hit on the remains found on May 20, and the way it sounds here they had determined they are remains of a male and they were unable to identify who it was. Anyone?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,525021,00.html?test=latestnews

Judge Puts Leash on Media Hound Drew Peterson in Wife's Murder Case

BBM


The judge issued specific guidelines to Peterson's attorneys on pre-trial publicity and media interviews, asking that the lawyers inform the judge of any pre-arranged media interviews and supply him with copies of any press releases sent out on the case

I know this article is days old, but the headline made me laugh and I wanted to share. Maybe the judge would consider a muzzle also. LOL!

Paintr said:

Methinks that Mr Brodsky is wishful thinking about a weakness in the case against Drew P. Maybe by trial time Stacy will have been found and there will be new charges against Drew.

BTW can the state hold off on charges in Stacy's case to see if Drew mnages to wiggle out of the charges in Kathryn's case? Then, if he walks as Mr Brodsky predicts, he can be charged in a whole new case. Is this possible?

Click to expand...

Bold mine.

Yes, I believe this to be the case.

Thanks for the info. On another note...isn't it ironic how the one person (Stacy) who could be Drew's alibi on the night Kathleen was killed is missing?

Damn Drew. You should of thought of that before you killed Stacy too. You wouldn't be up Sh$$ creek without a paddle if you had. :behindbar

breanna said:

Thanks for the info. On another note...isn't it ironic how the one person (Stacy) who could be Drew's alibi on the night Kathleen was killed is missing?

Damn Drew. You should of thought of that before you killed Stacy too. You wouldn't be up Sh$$ creek without a paddle if you had. :behindbar

Click to expand...

Maybe that was one of the reasons that Stacy disappeared...perhaps she could give information about the night Kathleen died. Maybe that info would not have been at all helpful to Drew.

Drew will never be a free man again unless an awfully lot of things go his way.

While a lot of posters were looking for an indictment for Stacy's death soon after he was arrested for Kathleen's, I thought just the opposite. The reason is that the state knows that Drew is a murderer - probably a double-murderer - potentially a serial murderer.

He's where he needs to be.

There's no need to rush to a Stacy indictment because Drew is in jail; that's the goal - get him out of the public arena.

We really don't know the evidence in either case, but it looks to me like Stacy's case is somewhat weak. The longer she's "missing," the better for the state because without an iota of evidence that she's still alive, it's reasonable to assume that she's deceased, and that reasonableness becomes stronger with each passing day.

With Kathleen's case, there's a body; there's an autopsy that says the scene was staged to look like an accident; there's a slew of Kathleen's own writing that detailed Drew's behavior and wishes; there was a substantial financial incentive to be rid of Kathleen; and there's apparently a person willing to testify that Drew offered him $25,000 to kill her. AND, with the bond at $20,000,000 the judge must think the case is pretty strong.

Most of what they have for Kathleen's murder, they don't have for Stacy's. So, they have longer to build a case for Stacy's murder with the hope that her body may eventually be found. Most of us here firmly believe that Stacy is no longer alive and that Drew is responsible for that. Common sense based on what we do now says that he is the perpetrator. But, we must always remember proof beyond a reasonable doubt and I don't think that is really strong yet for Stacy.

breanna said:

Thanks for the info. On another note...isn't it ironic how the one person (Stacy) who could be Drew's alibi on the night Kathleen was killed is missing?

Damn Drew. You should of thought of that before you killed Stacy too. You wouldn't be up Sh$$ creek without a paddle if you had. :behindbar

Click to expand...

That was another reason Stacy had to go - she was in the driver's seat. If Stacy no longer loved Drew; she no longer had to protect him. Had Stacy lived, she would be a lot better off with Drew in jail. She would have all the assets and she wouldn't have to worry about Drew killing her.

SO, she had to go! Her knowledge of his involvement in Kathleen's murder is the key to her death. It wasn't a long marriage; she wasn't entitled to the financial assets that Kathleen was entitled to receive. Yes, there was some financial incentive to kill her, but the biggest incentive was that she knew he killed Kathleen. What Stacy did was a crime, but she would have been given immunity for testimony against Drew and I am certain that her knowledge is the biggest reason that she "went missing."

thesleuther said:

That was another reason Stacy had to go - she was in the driver's seat. If Stacy no longer loved Drew; she no longer had to protect him. Had Stacy lived, she would be a lot better off with Drew in jail. She would have all the assets and she wouldn't have to worry about Drew killing her.

SO, she had to go! Her knowledge of his involvement in Kathleen's murder is the key to her death. It wasn't a long marriage; she wasn't entitled to the financial assets that Kathleen was entitled to receive. Yes, there was some financial incentive to kill her, but the biggest incentive was that she knew he killed Kathleen. What Stacy did was a crime, but she would have been given immunity for testimony against Drew and I am certain that her knowledge is the biggest reason that she "went missing."

Click to expand...

You and Paintr are absolutely right. I'm always thinking Drew killed Stacy because she was going to divorce him and the money angle. But of course it's because she knew about Kathleen. Don't ask me what I was thinking :bang:

I wonder if that very thing came up during the argument the morning Stacy went missing. And that was the end for Stacy. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever know.

Paintr said:

Methinks that Mr Brodsky is wishful thinking about a weakness in the case against Drew P. Maybe by trial time Stacy will have been found and there will be new charges against Drew.

BTW can the state hold off on charges in Stacy's case to see if Drew mnages to wiggle out of the charges in Kathleen's case? Then, if he walks as Mr Brodsky predicts, he can be charged in a whole new case. Is this possible?

Click to expand...

I'm hoping the prosecution has a strong case against DP in Kathleen Savio's murder and DP will be convicted and sentenced to a long stretch in prison.

That would buy LE years to continue to investigate the disappearance of Stacy. And DP would be locked away in prison where he could do no further harm to anyone. The children could grow up without the influence of their father, and hopefully in a loving home on their mother's side of the family.

http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=10822

The wire service reports that both Peterson and his lawyer have given frequent interviews, in a case that has drawn media scrutiny nationwide. It was the prosecution that reportedly asked White to clamp down on the publicity to safeguard a fair trial.

I don't think that Stacy's case is necessarily weak. IIRC there are over 40,000 pages of documents that the state has, in her case. But, why charge Drew for her's at the same time. There is no rush, Drew is in jail, and meanwhile they may find Stacy and strengthen the case for her. At least Sharon, (neighbor), Morphey, Len & Paula, etc. are safe while Drew is incarcerated. And he can no longer be such an influence on the four younger children.

Rockin' good news. :aktion033: No Harley rides for Drew this fine season! Hope he never see's his hog again!

Paintr said:

http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=10822

The wire service reports that both Peterson and his lawyer have given frequent interviews, in a case that has drawn media scrutiny nationwide. It was the prosecution that reportedly asked White to clamp down on the publicity to safeguard a fair trial.

Click to expand...

You know, I wondered why the prosecution wanted Drew to shut up. This imbecile simply digs the hole a little deeper every time he opens his silly, inane mouth.

But, I think I figured it out - I think they're afraid he'll ask for a change of venue and get it. I don't think they want that, and for that particular reason, I think the case for Kathleen's death must be pretty strong.