Drew Peterson's Trial *FIFTH WEEK* part two

[AbbieNormal]

Still reading and pages behind. Caught this on Fox News Channel website

Stacy Peterson died after a struggle, pathologist says

http://www.foxnews.com/

It's been up there for hours now. If I could I'd take a screen shot but can't so this is the best I can do. Heckuva typo or freudian slip or somethin....

I got a screen shot if anybody happens to want it, but its still avail to look at at your link.

Thanks for the link BTW.

abbie

 

[Bravo]

Still reading and pages behind. Caught this on Fox News Channel website

Stacy Peterson died after a struggle, pathologist says

http://www.foxnews.com/

It's been up there for hours now. If I could I'd take a screen shot but can't so this is the best I can do. Heckuva typo or freudian slip or somethin....

Wowsers that is quite a slip. However i dont doubt Stacy struggled too :maddening:

 

[Cubby]

One quick question. I seemed during my multi-state trip this last week to miss an important piece of information. Was the gash on Kathleen's head horizontal or vertical?

IIRC, it was horizontal. That is what I recall.

 

[Cubby]

Still reading and pages behind. Caught this on Fox News Channel website

Stacy Peterson died after a struggle, pathologist says

http://www.foxnews.com/

It's been up there for hours now. If I could I'd take a screen shot but can't so this is the best I can do. Heckuva typo or freudian slip or somethin....

Phew, for a second there I thought Fox was reporting the pathologist accidently said Stacy instead of Kathleen. I see though, that Fox inadvertently put the name Stacy into the headline. Phew, I thought that would have been grounds for a mistrial? IDK, but glad it is Fox's mistake and not something the jurors heard.

freaked me out there for a minute.

 

[Bravo]

It's been one heck of a ride and cant believe we are only days away from Closing. Thanks to all who posted thru out the Trial. There were days i didn't think we would see this thru without a mistrial. Cant imagine what it has been like for KS's Friends and Family. And Stacy's too.

 

[wishinuall]

I had posted what suddenly became crystal clear yesterdy evening, & for sure I haven't been able to read everything on this new thread yet, but I need y'all to help me out!! Not to be reduntant, but have we heard anything in testimony about the things that were out of place in or around the bathtub? For instance, washcloth, body soap, razor, shave gell etc? The DT has been adamant about how nothing was out of place , but I don't remember anything about the kinds of things you'll always find askew when most of us bathe! Thank you all sooooo much for working so hard to keep us up on the trial! I also havta' say how much I appreciate all of your views, opinions & KOOKINESS when things get so stressful in that circus of a courtroom!! I really like it here, lol!!!

 

[Peazzzer]

wishinuall, I love that question! I knock things over in my tub just getting a shower half the time! I would imagine that falling hard enough to affect my brain in what only happens in car accidents would leave one heck of a mess, unless it was picked up for me? Tisk, tisk Drew, murderers always mess up something. Always...

 

[wishinuall]

In Session
Judge Burmila is back on the bench. Attorney Goldberg addresses the Court about the fact that the prosecution wants to recall Dr. Mary Case at this time.

In Session Goldberg says the he’s reviewed Case’s direct examination, and she’s already discussed the possibility of axonal shearing in this case, “which is exactly what she’s supposed to talk about this afternoon. . . . it’s just not appropriate rebuttal-type evidence.” Prosecutor Glasgow responds: “There are only two issues we’re recalling Dr. Case on. One is where Dr. Jentzen testified about her specialty being shaken babies . . . that’s just flat-out incorrect; it’s simply a falsehood. And with regard to the issue that Mr. Goldberg just raised . . . that’s a misstatement of what she said . . . they completely altered what she said, and I think that’s something she has a right to address. Her testimony will be brief.” Judge Burmila makes his ruling, says the State will be allowed to call Dr. Case. He then calls for the jury.

In Session Before the jury enters, the attorneys ask for a moment.

And this has been has been one of my most aggravating things about this defense! They have consistently implied all of these ridiculous, outrageous 'falsehoods', knowing the objections would be sustained, but putting them in the mind of the jurors to wonder about! Did the judge ever admonish them?! :maddening: Ok, thanks again! Just had to vent some more! :truce:

 

[wishinuall]

In Session The witness identifies some notes from a seminar she has given. “I don’t know if I say that [thin smears] in my notes . . . Sir, that is not a paper. That is a lecture note. I lecture, and then I say additional things, and I show photographs.” The witness is finished and excused, and leaves the bench. The prosecution asks for a sidebar.

Now that's some funny stuff, right there!!! :floorlaugh: :great:

 

[AbbieNormal]

Now that's some funny stuff, right there!!! :floorlaugh: :great:

Cubby has had me in stitches most of the day!

 

[ohiogirl]

Thanks for everyone's updates and comments throughout this frustrating trial. I will see you all back here on Tuesday for closings. I hope InSession will do a better job of posting what is actually said than they have been doing so far. But, between the Tweets and recaps, I think we can get the jist of the testimony. I will be very glad not to have to be exposed to these defense attorneys much longer. I am pretty glad that this was not televised, I don't think I could take it.
Have a good holiday everyone.

 

[TxLady2]

It would make things go smoother during closings if the judge warned both sides that there will not be constant frivolous objections. We cannot let this judge be the sole person in charge of this because of bias - but this jury has been through enough. So bored that the only thing they can discuss is their wardrobe? They have taken notes, will hear the closings, and then (I pray) do their job.

When I was a juror in a malpractice case, much of the testimony was so technical I would find my mind wandering and feared not listening closely enough. Cyril Wecht gave a loooong detailed review of the autopsy. Luckily, we had been provided enough other info to reach our decision. In this case, I found myself skimming over much of what the experts said as I just don't understand much of it. I know it is important but how many posters here except for those with nursing experience understood? Maybe I'm just too dumb.

I can relate to how you feel! I don't understand a lot of the expert testimony either. I've had a little medical background, but it was mostly just things I learned by rote... working with and talking to nurses. Also I've got several nurses in the family, and one doctor. But forensics and all that?? nope, I know very little.
I have heard that a lot of experts will base their opinion on whichever side has hired them. They can direct the attorneys on what questions to ask so that they can get the right answers in, and they can tell them which subjects to steer clear of. Every witness is always coached before they get on the stand, so they know what to expect. It's all pretty much scripted beforehand. I wouldn't say any of them would lie, exactly, but they do know how to word their answers to make the jury believe them. You could have 3 different forensic pathologists look at the same evidence and none of them would agree on everything. They all have their own opinions and interpretation of the facts and the evidence.
That's the way I see it, anyway.

 

[bogeygal]

Phew, for a second there I thought Fox was reporting the pathologist accidently said Stacy instead of Kathleen. I see though, that Fox inadvertently put the name Stacy into the headline. Phew, I thought that would have been grounds for a mistrial? IDK, but glad it is Fox's mistake and not something the jurors heard.

freaked me out there for a minute.

I felt the same way Cubby! Was scratching my head! :maddening:

 

[Nana46]

All of you are so very far ahead and up to speed than I am on this case,lol...can someone tell me where are DP's first two wives?
TIA
I appreciate all the hard work you guys have put into this case!!!

 

[passionflower]

All of you are so very far ahead and up to speed than I am on this case,lol...can someone tell me where are DP's first two wives?
TIA
I appreciate all the hard work you guys have put into this case!!!

Alive & well, away from him. Thank goodness!

 

[~n/t~]

All of you are so very far ahead and up to speed than I am on this case,lol...can someone tell me where are DP's first two wives?
TIA
I appreciate all the hard work you guys have put into this case!!!

Hoping and praying like the rest of us that he'll be behind bars forever.


Inside Drew Peterson's tangled love life

The first wife

Drew Peterson married his first wife and high school sweetheart, Carol Hamilton, in 1974. He was 20, and she was 17. During their marriage, Peterson had an alleged steady girlfriend for a year, and the constant womanizing and cheating led to their divorce in 1980. ABC's Good Morning America spoke with Hamilton, who now goes by her married name Brown, as she described her relationship with Peterson, calling it normal. She said he didn't like her going out to bars at night with her girlfriends.

The second wife

At 28, Peterson wed 23-year-old Victoria Rutkiewicz in 1982, two years after his divorce from Hamilton. Rutkiewicz described her relationship with Peterson to the Chicago Tribune as tumultuous. She testified under oath that Peterson had pulled a gun on her at least three times and threatened to kill her so it would look like an accident. Their marriage ended after nine years.

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/07/30/drew-petersons-complicated-love-life

 

[wishinuall]

wishinuall, I love that question! I knock things over in my tub just getting a shower half the time! I would imagine that falling hard enough to affect my brain in what only happens in car accidents would leave one heck of a mess, unless it was picked up for me? Tisk, tisk Drew, murderers always mess up something. Always...

And that is a another VERY good point, Peazzzer! Especially considering the DT doc's tried to explain a slip, turn, spin, bang, bang, bang impossible fall without knocking everything around the tub all over the place! Dear God I'm praying for a sensible, step by step PT close! I hope they point all of these things out, because nothing makes a lick of sense unless SOMEONE tidied everything up after her horrible death!

 

[Nana46]

Thank you passionflower and nt.......wow he is a piece of work isn't he,lol

 

[MrsPC]

IIRC, it was horizontal. That is what I recall.

it was a 1" horizontal linear laceration behind the left ear caused by something with "an edge"

 

[borndem]

All I can think of is the complaints from the defense that he kept looking at the prosecution table after being asked questions.

This guy has been in a courtroom more than a couple of times -- he may have been waiting to answer to make sure the PT didn't have an objection. He certainly didn't appear to be "in trouble" due to the questions, or panicking, or at a loss for what to say. Grrrrrrrrr.