Drew Peterson's Trial *SECOND WEEK*

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
In Session The witness and the jurors return to the courtroom, and Connor continues his direct examination. “Susan, I was asking you about a phone call you had with your sister about a week before her death?” “She said for me to take care of her boys.” “Did you also discuss getting together that weekend?” “Yes, we had plans . . . we were going to the movies, and possibly dinner afterwards.” “Did you discuss which day you were possibly going to do that?” “Saturday.” ‘Did those plans actually work out?” “No . . . she had to study.” “Did she have finals approaching?” “Yes, she did.” “Did she indicate whether she was planning on seeing the children on Monday?” Objection. The attorneys go to a sidebar.
 
Thanks Shelby, I can take over for now, if you want. I'll have to leave in a bit also.

I can't handle anymore of these sidebars!!! Good gawd.
 
In Session At the house, Drew was carrying a laundry basket. “He said that he needed to gather things for the boys . . . he went upstairs.” “Did there come a time when you saw the defendant near the tub in the master bathroom?” “Yes, I did . . . I was afraid to go into the bathroom, and he went ahead, and said he would take care of it. He was just wiping the blood.” “Did you discover a locked box in your sister’s house that day?’ “Yes, I found a metal container under my sister’s bed. Drew said if I wanted to open it he could open it. And he pulled out a key out of his pocket, and he opened it. And it was empty.”
 
~n/t~ said:
In Session On Saturday morning, the 28th, they woke up, got dressed, and went to breakfast at Steak ‘n Shake in Bolingbrook. After breakfast, he took her back home, and they discussed what they might do later that day. “During the time you were with her on Friday and Saturday, did you ever see her fall down?” “NO.” “Ever see her bump into anything?” “No.” ‘She ever complain of any injuries?” “No, other than a little soreness from working out.” The witness says he had a band practice Saturday afternoon (“a rock band”) and he said she might want to come over to his house. “She said she’d think about it.” He subsequently went to band practice, which lasted “about three hours.” “What happened after band practice?’ “We quit, and right after we stopped she called me.” Objection/Overruled. “What did you say to her?” “I asked her if she was at my house, and she was not.” “Was there a discussion of whether you were going to see each other?’ “Yes, she asked me if I was coming over, and I said no, I was too tired . . . I went home . . . I think it was roughly 9:30.” “What did you do the rest of Saturday night?” “I went to bed . . . I got a phone call at midnight . . . it was Kathy . . . it was almost straight up midnight.” “How long was the conversation?” “Less than a minute . . . she was venting; she was upset with me for not coming over. I said ‘I’m sleeping, can we talk about it tomorrow?’.” “Was she upset with you?:” “Yes, for not coming over. I asked, ‘Please, can we talk about it tomorrow?’ . . . and I went back to sleep.”


In Session On Sunday morning, Feb. 29, he woke up around 8:00. “It was unusually warm . . . I went to my shop, got my motorcycle, and drove it to my father’s. We went out for lunch, or breakfast . . . I went for a little ride, took the motorcycle back to my shop, and went home. I don’t remember what I did that Sunday night.” He went to bed “probably at 10:00 or 11:00,” but isn’t sure. “Did you try to contact Kathy that day?” “No, I didn’t . . . I thought I’d give it a day.”

In Session On Monday, March 1, he went to work. When he returned home, “I discovered that somebody had broken into my house.” Objection. The attorneys go to a sidebar.
Click to expand...

This is very strange...............too much to be a coincidence that Steve's house had been broken into on the same day that his girlfriend's dead body would be found in the bathtub at her home later that day.
 
Shelby1 said:
Wow. Ryan Smith is quitting IS to be on HLN.
Click to expand...

He's already on HLN doing his own show with Clark Howard and another Aisha (sorry don't recall her name). British girl. :waitasec:
 
In Session At some point, this witness picked out clothes for Savio to wear for her burial. “I went to Kathy’s home . .. at the time I arrived, no one was there. I waited in the driveway.” “Who arrived?” “Drew Peterson.” “Where did you go?” “In her bedroom.” “Did you ask the defendant anything as you were picking out the clothing for your sister? . . . Did you ask him if he knew what had happened to your sister?” “I did ask him that . . .” Objection/Sustained. The defense asks for a sidebar.
 
In Session The sidebar ends. The witness says her daughter and the daughter’s boyfriend were also present at the time. “I said, ‘What do you think happened to my sister?’ And he said he didn’t know, he would have to wait for the coroner’s report.” “At some time after that conversation, did you have occasion to be back at that house, looking through your sister’s items?” “Yes.” “Were you given any items of your sister’s by the defendant?’ “I was not given; I just went to the house and took things.” “What items did you take out of the residence that day?” “I took several garbage bags of clothing, pictures, things that were on the floor.” “He said to tell your sister Anna, ‘Ha ha . . . I got the will.’” Objection. The parties go to a sidebar.
 
In Session The sidebar ends. As the witness took a photograph of Kathy from the house, Steve Maniaci was there with her (as was Drew). Drew told her that he found a will “between the floor boards. “What did he say about your family?” “We wouldn’t get anything.” “Was your sister Anna present at that time?” “No.” “Did there come a time after the funeral where you drove to the defendant’s residence to see the children?” “Yes.” Objection. This leads to another sidebar.

OMG!! This is ridiculous! Imagine what the jurors must be thinking!
 
So Drew finds the will between the floor boards? How did he know it was there? :what:
 
In Session The sidebar ends. The jurors have now left the courtroom. Judge: “The defendant is objecting to the statement that the witness and her family wouldn’t get anything under the will, and that the defendant went to visit the children. Mr. Connor, why would the family have to get anything out of the will?” Connor: “The statement of the defendant was about this will that was made in a tight time frame.” Judge to Brodsky: “Did they give you in discovery that the defendant said they wouldn’t get anything out of the will?” Brodsky: “Just that they found a will.” Connor takes a moment, searches the case file for proof that the defense was put on notice about this testimony. Connor: “We found the transcript.” Judge: “OK, then that portion of the statement is allowed . . . it’s a statement of the defendant.” Greenberg: “But it paints him as a mean-spirited person . . . none of it should be allowed in; none of it has anything to do with anything . . . I think all of it’s irrelevant . . . it wouldn’t do anything other than to paint him in a bad light; it’s inadmissible character evidence. It’s prejudicial . . . and it’s just not fair.” Connor responds, say this is not only appropriate but it’s already been litigated. Judge: “This statement could be taken more than one way . . . I understand the defendant’s objection, but I believe that it is probative. The inferences that will be drawn from it will be determined by the jury.”
 
I can personally say that when the jury is sent from the courtroom they are definitely sitting there thinking about what they just heard and wondering why it caused a "sidebar".
 
In Session The defense asks that the jury be instructed that Peterson did not get anything in the will. The judge says that he’ll consider that if it’s brought up during the charge conference, but he’s not going to give it now. Connor argues that Drew said that only Susan could see the children, because Anna Doman was involved in the probate fight. However, the judge decides that this portion of the defense objection will be sustained, and the Prosecution will not be allowed to go into the issue of whether or not Susan Doman was allowed to see the children. The final issue the State brings up is “the witness would be testifying as to a May 7 phone call, with the defendant, after the inquest.” The defense doesn’t want this to be allowed in, but the judge says he will permit it. “She’ll be able to testify to that.” The judge sends for the witness and the jury.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 140 more.
Total: 402 (members: 141, guests: 261)

Online statistics

Members online
141
Guests online
261
Total visitors
402
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,145
Messages
18,250,111
Members
234,549
Latest member
raymehay
Back
Top