2009.05.08: Drew Peterson's Arraignment Hearing

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

bogeygal said:
Agreed Joe.

Happened to see a news show today that showed an older interview with DP. He basically was telling the interviewer that he has a sort of gift for humor. He was trying to explain away his attitude about laughing too much.

Anywho, I don't think anyone in jail will find him funny at all!
Click to expand...

If you watch the video, he actually looked like a crazy person during his perp walk. I'm sure he thinks he's funny, but he looked like a crazed lunatic.
 
Does anyone know what time the hearing tomorrow is scheduled? TIA.
 
SuziQ said:
Does anyone know what time the hearing tomorrow is scheduled? TIA.
Click to expand...

I think it is at 9AM Central, but no cameras in Illinois courtrooms. Selig and Brodsky will have a press conference right afterwards. :blowkiss:
 
mitzi said:
I think it is at 9AM Central, but no cameras in Illinois courtrooms. Selig and Brodsky will have a press conference right afterwards. :blowkiss:
Click to expand...

Thanks! I was beginning to think it was some super secret covert hearing with the media not stating the time. Heck, some articles go on and on about him possibly bailing out at this hearing, but don't even name the day or date. :waitasec:
 
I just heard that Brodsky entered a Not Guilty plea for DR. Am waiting to hear more details.
 
Peterson has been jailed since May 7. His attorney Joel Brodsky is expected to ask a judge to reduce Peterson's bond, which is now $20 million.

The state attorney filed a motion to ask for a new judge, but did not immediately give specifics about why.

Brodsky told FOX News Monday morning before Peterson's court appearance they would ask for the bond to be $500,000 or less.

"Drew is simply not a flight risk," Brodsky said Monday morning on FOX and Friends, adding Peterson would never leave his kids. "He's been under investigation for the past 18 months and has been to Florida, New York, California, and he had a passport with him ... he's not going to flee."
Click to expand...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,520482,00.html

I REALLY doubt they reduce his bond from $20million to under $500,000.
 
From googling the judge, I get the impression that he's a bit soft on criminals. The case below is one of them.

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2009/04/naperville-arsonist-knapp.html

(snip)
A convicted Naperville arsonist who sparked nearly $1 million in damage avoided prison today after he agreed to move out of the neighborhood where he wreaked havoc during an 18-month crime spree, the Daily Herald reports.
An apologetic Richard J. Knapp blamed his bad behavior on his alcoholism due to stress and depression. He faced probation or three to seven years in prison.
In a ruling that angered victims, Will County Circuit Judge Richard C. Schoenstedt sentenced Knapp to 180 days in jail. He is eligible for day-to-day credit.
 
The prosecution has already had their battles with this judge regarding Drew. I can understand why the prosecution wants this judge off. Especially with the new hearesay law that needs to be tested.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455129,00.html
(snip)
Schoenstedt warned prosecutors that if they did not hand over the documents, he could dismiss the charges. Will County prosecutor John Connor refused, telling the judge he understood the consequences but saying such a move would open a "flood gate" for future cases.
"We don't want to subject every prosecutor in the country to have to turn over internal documents," he said.
Peterson and attorney Joel Brodsky said they were pleased.
"I love these guys," Peterson said, hugging his attorneys. "It's a big relief. It's a happy day."
 
Well other than the tit for tat in the Drew gun charge case, I'm not seeing anything overly negative about this judge. He's had a few major cases fall apart in his courtroom because of bad detective work. Maybe he's just super careful? IDK....
 
SuziQ said:
Well other than the tit for tat in the Drew gun charge case, I'm not seeing anything overly negative about this judge. He's had a few major cases fall apart in his courtroom because of bad detective work. Maybe he's just super careful? IDK....
Click to expand...

Hi SuzieQ, So do you know if Judge S left the courtroom and another judge was called in to hold the hearing? xox
 
Well, I'm not totally up to speed on this, but it appears the DA has more going for it than a gun charge on Peterson. Maybe they'll hold back on that until or IF they can get him in prison for Kathleen's murder.:behindbar

Maybe Peterson portrayed he was happy, but I bet he wasn't. It wasn't about the gun charge. It was about the murder charge, IMO. The def wants to know EVERYTHING the DA has on DP. Those documents probably reveal a little too much of the murder investigation.

JMHO
fran
 
SuziQ said:
The prosecution has already had their battles with this judge regarding Drew. I can understand why the prosecution wants this judge off. Especially with the new hearesay law that needs to be tested.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,455129,00.html
(snip)
Schoenstedt warned prosecutors that if they did not hand over the documents, he could dismiss the charges. Will County prosecutor John Connor refused, telling the judge he understood the consequences but saying such a move would open a "flood gate" for future cases.
"We don't want to subject every prosecutor in the country to have to turn over internal documents," he said.
Peterson and attorney Joel Brodsky said they were pleased.
"I love these guys," Peterson said, hugging his attorneys. "It's a big relief. It's a happy day."
Click to expand...
Not trying to speak for SuziQ, but the quoted story is an old one. This was to show the history prosecutors have with the judge on a previous charge (gun related) back whenever that charge was brought. This quote has nothing to do with the current charge. I know I was a bit confused, too, when I first read it.
 
closeobserver said:
Not trying to speak for SuziQ, but the quoted story is an old one. This was to show the history prosecutors have with the judge on a previous charge (gun related) back whenever that charge was brought. This quote has nothing to do with the current charge. I know I was a bit confused, too, when I first read it.
Click to expand...

Ooops, sorry. I should have made that more clear.
 
scandi said:
Hi SuzieQ, So do you know if Judge S left the courtroom and another judge was called in to hold the hearing? xox
Click to expand...

I haven't checked this afternoon, but the reports were unclear earlier as to who sat in today.
 
scandi said:
Hi SuzieQ, So do you know if Judge S left the courtroom and another judge was called in to hold the hearing? xox
Click to expand...

I don't know but from the way I am reading it, it looks like they first heard DrewP's plea and then the state asked for the judge to remove himself. And that stopped everything else because they didn't even hear the bond reduction motion.

Interesting about the request for the judge to remove himself. The state can request it, but the judge is not bound to grant it. IE the state could have asked, and if the judge felt he was impartial then he could have denied the motion and remained on the case. Of course the state could have then asked for an appeal, and at that time they would have had to offer proof that the judge wasn't impartial toward them.

Apparently the judge either agreed that he wasn't impartial, felt he would lose at appeal, or just didn't want to mess with the trial. I would love to know what went on behind the scenes at the previous trial.
 
Prosecutors to get new judge to preside over Peterson's trial

By The Associated Press | Thursday, May 21, 2009 |

JOLIET | Prosecutors in the murder case against former police officer Drew Peterson got their wish when a new judge was appointed, but Peterson's defense attorney says he'll ask that that new judge be replaced, too.

The Will County state's attorney earlier this week had asked that Will County Judge Richard Schoenstedt be removed from the case against Peterson, who's charged with killing his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Will County Chief Judge Gerald Kinney on Thursday agreed to remove Schoensted, but defense attorney Joel Brodsky immediately promised to file a motion asking that the new judge be removed as well.

Brodsky didn't give a reason for his request. He'd challenged the prosecution's efforts to get Schoensted taken off the case.

*snipped*


http://nwitimes.com/articles/2009/05/21//updates/breaking_news/doc4a153e07a9e3b966181006.txt
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 84 more.
Total: 260 (members: 85, guests: 175)

Online statistics

Members online
85
Guests online
175
Total visitors
260
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,395
Messages
18,253,636
Members
234,649
Latest member
sharag
Back
Top