Drew Peterson's Trial *FIFTH WEEK* part one

Status
Not open for further replies.
dissonance he must have to deal with on a daily basis. There isn't any way that he could proceed to function normally if he believed that his father murdered his mother and is responsible for the "disappearance" of his step mother as well.
The mind can only take on so much.....he was very young.....I believe that in time he will think differently.

Craig Wall ‏@craigrwall
Brodsky: Tom Peterson "1000% sure his dad is innocent of any wrongdoing in his mom's death" he's the oldest son of
 
In Session Brodsky says the defense has just received some new material this morning from the State. He asks for a few minutes to study this new material. The judge grants this request, and so the trial is now in recess.
 
BJ Lutz ‏@bjlutz
There's apparently a May 2012 statement from #DrewPeterson's son, Tom, that Glasgow thought was submitted to court but wasn't.
 
I don't have any idea why they cast him in that role.
He did have to wear heavy makeup to change his appearance, but even with that, he doesn't look like the putrid Drew except for the grey hair.



It's called Untouchable. I don't have cable and don't want to shell out the $14.95 amazon wants for it so I haven't seen it. OT but they should have gotten a homelier actor to play Drew. Like maybe Dennis Franz with a weave. Drew has more bags under his eyes than a supermarket check out counter. And he is NOT handsome. It must have pumped his already inflated ego that they cast Rob Lowe to play him. He is so creepy looking. Every time I see a pic of him and his smarmy smirk I feel the need to shower.
 
I'm still on last week catching up, but reading here as well. I have to wonder if the prosecutors really DID want that testimony to come in. Even though the jury won't hear that Stacy disappeared 2 days after the call, they all probably know she disappeared.

This would mean that by saying Stacy was considering blackmail against Drew to get a better divorce settlement using what she knew about Kathleen's death, Stacy might not come out smelling like a rose (metaphorically speaking), but would show that Peterson disappeared her to stop her from telling, making Kathleen's murder more likely.

I don't believe it would discredit Stacy's other statements, but bolster them. Not nice, but leads to DP's desire for all the $$$. She was just conniving, never considering her own future.
 
IMO, I think Lopez is dressed in the same colors as his wife, more so then the colors the jury is wearing.

Ruth Ravve‏@RuthRavve

@orlandomicki The Lopez's (husband and wife lawyers on the defense team) wear matching shirts. If they matched jurors I'd be concerned
 
I'm still on last week catching up, but reading here as well. I have to wonder if the prosecutors really DID want that testimony to come in. Even though the jury won't hear that Stacy disappeared 2 days after the call, they all probably know she disappeared.

This would mean that by saying Stacy was considering blackmail against Drew to get a better divorce settlement using what she knew about Kathleen's death, Stacy might not come out smelling like a rose (metaphorically speaking), but would show that Peterson disappeared her to stop her from telling, making Kathleen's murder more likely.

I don't believe it would discredit Stacy's other statements, but bolster them. Not nice, but leads to DP's desire for all the $$$. She was just conniving, never considering her own future.


The problem even if they know about Stacy's disappearance they can't take that into the deliberation room so Smith testifying that Drew overheard the conversation is useless, imo. I'm not so sure it would help the prosecution considering Stacy asked if she would get more money. :banghead:
 
Case Archive for the trial:

http://s296.photobucket.com/albums/mm166/crankycrankerson/Stacy%20Peterson%20-%20Kathleen%20Savio%20%20-IL-/Murder%20Trial%20-%20The%20Kathleen%20Savio%20Case/


Does anyone know the complete witness list for Mon and Tues?

Here's what I have, but I need a fill-in and cannot find anything:

Monday 8/27: Mary Pontarelli, Bryan Falat, Joseph Steadman, Joseph Basile, Darrin Devine, and who am I missing? _____ _____.

Tuesday 8/28: Jeffrey Jentzen, Vincent DiMaio, Robin Queen, and who am I missing? ____ ____ and ____ ____ and ____ ____.

If you want to just list them here, or PM or email me, please and TYVM.
 
The problem even if they know about Stacy's disappearance they can't take that into the deliberation room so Smith testifying that Drew overheard the conversation is useless, imo. I'm not so sure it would help the prosecution considering Stacy asked if she would get more money. :banghead:

Correct! However, even if not discussed, it will be in their memory. In showing how DP controlled Stacy during the interview last week (Falat), the jury can draw comparisons to tie together DP's modus operendi with his women.

Stacy, a much younger woman literally formed by Peterson since age 16, was using methods that he probably used in his "job"... blackmail. Perhaps she thought lightning wouldn't strike twice, so to speak.
 
Craig Wall ‏@craigrwall
Defense atty in overflow courtroom: today is either going to go really well or it's going to go really south in #DrewPeterson.
 
The problem even if they know about Stacy's disappearance they can't take that into the deliberation room so Smith testifying that Drew overheard the conversation is useless, imo. I'm not so sure it would help the prosecution considering Stacy asked if she would get more money. :banghead:

I think it may help the prosecution. The jurors don't need to commit juror misconduct and bring Stacy's disappearance into deliberations, their knowledge that she is missing should lead to them to contemplate the idea that just because she was planning to use the info for blackmail purposes, doesn't mean the info wasn't true.

If Stacy were here to testify, the knowledge that she tried to use her testimony as leverage to get money out of the defendant would probably successfully discredit her. But with Stacy conspicuously absent, that particular attempt at impeachment could easily backfire.
 
Ruth Ravve‏@RuthRavve

@orlandomicki The Lopez's (husband and wife lawyers on the defense team) wear matching shirts. If they matched jurors I'd be concerned

The fact that the Lopez's are playing the same game as the jury makes me very nervous - like signaling 'we are on the same page'.

Don't think this is appropriate in any way. :twocents:
 
I think it may help the prosecution. The jurors don't need to commit juror misconduct and bring Stacy's disappearance into deliberations, their knowledge that she is missing should lead to them to contemplate the idea that just because she was planning to use the info for blackmail purposes, doesn't mean the info wasn't true.

If Stacy were here to testify, the knowledge that she tried to use her testimony as leverage to get money out of the defendant would probably successfully discredit her. But with Stacy conspicuously absent, that particular attempt at impeachment could easily backfire.

Hope you and CarolinaMoon are right!!
 
oh for pete's sake! How long does it take to review a document??? :waiting:
 
Kara Oko ‏@KaraOko
Court is back in session; Brodsky has one more issue he would like to address before the jury is brought in #DrewPeterson


Of course he does. :waiting:
 
In Session ‏@InSession
#drewpeterson Judge back on the bench, Brodsky claims pros. committed discovery violationi re: next def. witness, Thomas Kristopher.
 
I think, but not 100% sure, but the Lopez team started wearing matching colors first, and then the jury started later on in the trial.

I listened to InSession last week where the artist was talking about how the alternates in the John Edwards trial all wore matching colors, but the jury didn't.

A lot of discussion went on about the jury wearing the same colors, and some believe they just want it to be known that they are there in the courtroom despite the numerous times they are taken out of the courtroom.

IMO, if the court or any of the attorneys had a problem with what the jury is doing, they would put an immediate stop to it.
 
In Session Judge Burmila is back on the bench. Attorney Brodsky addresses the Court about what he claims is a prosecution discovery violation relating to upcoming defense witness Thomas Peterson.
 
Did DP attend college anywhere?


Answering my own question lol.


He briefly attended College of DuPage in Glen Ellyn, IL. Looks to me like their colors are green and white.
 
In Session Prosecutor Connor responds, concedes that the report was indeed turned over belatedly to the defense. The report pertains to an interview of Thomas Peterson that was done in Pennsylvania at one point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
107
Guests online
785
Total visitors
892

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,767
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top