Drew Peterson's Trial *FOURTH WEEK*

[katydid23]

Case using laser pointer to show jury where Savio had bruising. They're looking at photos of inside Savio's chest.

In Session The jurors and the witness are back in the courtroom. Once again, prosecutor Glasgow resumes his direct examination of neuropathologist Dr. Mary Case. “Did you have an opportunity to review the testimony of Dr. Vinod Motiani and Dr. Gene Neri?” Objection/Overruled “Yes, I did . . . Dr. Motiani is an internist and was the primary care [giver], going back to 1992 for Kathleen Savio. He treated her on a number of occasions . . . in 1995, he detected a heart murmur . . . [but] the heart was perfectly normal. The heart was normal at the autopsy . . . Dr. Neri is a neurologist, and he’d seen Kathleen Savio until February of ’02. I reviewed his records and his testimony . . . he was treating her for severe muscle spasm of the neck.” Objection/Sustained. “Have any comment on the cervical vertigo?” Objection/Sustained. “What is cervical vertigo?” “The sensation of things spinning around you . . . the neck muscles are in spasm, and it disorients the head.” “Is there any danger with that condition?” “There is no danger; it’s painful.”

 

[Peliman]

So could that account for the fluid and blood that was in her lungs????

Wondering myself, I saw edema was mentioned or swelling. I believe it's natural for fluids to rush to an area experience swelling. I don't know if a choke hold would cause that damage but I'm seeing snippets of others injuries.

I hope choke holds are explained more clearly.

Gotta run, off to work.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Case also said if Savio would have fallen in tub the gash to her head would have been vertical. It was horizontal instead. #DrewPeterson

RBBM: Anyone have knowledge of these types of injuries : vertical vs. horizontal ?

So since it was horizontal, DP would have hit Kathleen standing like on the side of her ? when she was face down ? and swung the object he used to hit her horiztonally ...

Do I have that right ? :waitasec: I am trying to visualize the description given by Dr. Case.

TIA !

 

[katydid23]

Dr. Case, shown computer-general model of chest, shows locations of hemorrhaging. She says they're caused by "blunt force impact."

Dr. Case testified that she wouldn't expect the amount of force from a fall in the tub to have caused a loss of consciousness

Case: motor vehicle accidents produce injuries similar to the bruises on Savio's chest

Dr. Case testified that she wouldn't expect the amount of force from a fall in the tub to have caused a loss of consciousness..,

 

[katydid23]

In Session “There was no evidence she had a seizure disorder . . . or any kind of neurological disorder.”
7 minutes ago · Like · 5

In Session “Did you have a chance to see in the autopsy photos bruising in her upper chest?” “From the first autopsy, you can see bruising inside the chest . . . it’s not visible externally. So we’re going to look internally . . .” The defense objects, and requests a sidebar.

 

[katydid23]

In Session The sidebar ends. “Do you recognize that exhibit?” “I do . . . it is the inside of the chest before the bones are opened.” The photograph is projected. “The hemorrhages are located on the right side of the chest, on the midline, and over to the left . . . this is a result of blunt trauma that has struck the body, causing the tearing of soft tissue, a deep contusion . . . there are lots of nerve endings there.” Objection/Overruled.

 

[katydid23]

Case: "I don't see anywhere in the tub that would cause that head injury."

 

[katydid23]

jury leaving courtroom again after defense objects to case saying that there was no place on tub to cause Savio head injury

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Case: "I don't see anywhere in the tub that would cause that head injury."

:rocker: Yes !

Ah, I see the DT objected ... I should have known ...

But the jury heard it !

 

[rpgman]

jury leaving courtroom again after defense objects to case saying that there was no place on tub to cause Savio head injury

oh Lord :banghead:

 

[LEFT-COASTER]

jezz.. this is soo hard to follow.. If its this stressful for us.. imagine poor kathleen's family.

and Her kids.. I know its horrible but I hope they get to hear some of this so they know that their father has been feeding them a line of bull for all this time.

 

[LambChop]

jury leaving courtroom again after defense objects to case saying that there was no place on tub to cause Savio head injury

OMG. It's her opinion and didn't Dr. Blum say the same thing. jmo

 

[katydid23]

atty Goldberg saying Case is testifying to things that weren't disclosed, asking for her entire testimony to be stricken

 

[katydid23]

Defense was objection to Dr. Case's assertion that someone would have to fall in the tub 3 times to have injuries like Savio's.

Burmila will order that portion of Case's testimony stricken from record.

Defense: Case was rebuting defense, not proving the state's case. Burmila denies defense motion to strike Case's testimony.

 

[katydid23]

With jurors back, Dr. Case is defining, describing rigor mortis.

[ thank goodness we got past that hurdle, once again...]

 

[katydid23]

[ If the DT keeps asking for witnesses to have their 'entire testimony' to be stricken, it will just become like 'the boy who cried wolf,' imo]

 

[katydid23]

judge won't strike witness, but says pay no attention to testimony that multiple falls to cause bruises.Judge...LET THE SUNSHINE IN!

Case: No healing to abrasion on Savio's buttocks. It's "very fresh."

My opinion is that it is a homicide ... It is not a suicide or an accident." - Case

defense setting up for cross-examination of Case.

RUH-ROH......

 

[vickij222]

It seems to be going pretty well, so far. Dr. Case has been able to make several good points. It's good that she was able to state that a fall in the tub couldn't have caused the injury Kathleen had.

This is the first time for me following a current case. How on earth do you guys handle all of the waiting while there's sidebars? I'm having a heck of a time!

 

[katydid23]

In Session The witness and the jurors are now gone. The judge asks the court reporter to read back the last question (and the witness’ partial response). Attorney Goldberg then addresses the Court, complains that the witness’ report says “nothing whatsoever about three falls . . . we are surprised by this. It’s improper for her to attempt to rebut what the defense believes is going to be the State’s theory in this case . . . they’re trying to do this negative inference, this attack on our case preemptively. It’s improper, and we’re asking that her testimony be stricken.” Prosecutor Glasgow: “She’s drawing reasonable inferences . . . [and] we went to great lengths to make sure that we turned everything over.” Goldberg: “She’s a neuropathologist, not a crime scene reconstructionist . . . it’s outside her realm of expertise.” Judge: “The motion to strike the testimony of the doctor in her entirety is denied. The last answer, about three falls, that portion of her testimony will be stricken.” The judge then sends for the witness and the jury.

 

[katydid23]

n Session The witness and the jurors are now back in the courtroom. Judge to jury: “The doctor’s testimony that it would take multiple falls to cause those injuries is to be stricken.” Prosecutor Glasgow continues his direct. “What is rigor mortis?” “A chemical reaction that takes place in the muscles . . . it begins to be noticeable about four hours after death . . . it’s stiff. After about 12 hours, the rigor will stay for about 24 hours, and then it begins to go away. After 36 and 48 hours following death, it will be totally gone. It’s a type of parameter we use in a very loose way to determine how long someone’s been dead.” “At room temperature, how long does it last? “Somewhere between 36 and 48 hours, it will be gone.” The defense then asks for a sidebar.
9 minutes ago · Like · 6

In Session The sidebar ends. “The age of the abrasion is that it appears very fresh. There’s no appearance of healing to it. So it’s very fresh.”