Drew Peterson's Trial *THIRD WEEK*

[ohiogirl]

Same here.

BTW, I had to look it up to see how many milliliters were equal to one gram. Because ml is a measure of liquid, and grams is a measure of mass. Anyway
according to what I looked up, 1ml=1gram. So 2000 ml of water in her lungs? That IS an extraordinary amount, IMO.

So for a point a reference, I used a regular 20 fl oz bottle of Glaceau vitamin water (sorry, its all I had). That contains 591ml (or cc's) (ml and cc are the same) of liquid. So about 4 of those bottles equals 2000ml. Actually it's about 40cc/ml more than 2000 ml. OR a little less than 5 pints. That's a pretty good amount of water.

JMO

Thanks for that. I don't know where that info was in the report, because I couldn't find it. :seeya:

 

[AbbieNormal]

In Session Before the jurors and witness can come back to the courtroom, the defense asks for a moment. Judge: “They need a moment. We’ll let them have their moment.”

OMG why doesn't the judge just come down from his chair and kiss everyone on the defense team on the lips???? "Lets let them have their moment..." Ugh. Also, :yuck:

Makes me wanna :slapfight:

 

[Patty G]

While I agree with most of your post, I differ on my interpetation of the struggle. He got in (through the garage, ruse like picking something up, or simply by knocking on the door at a time that she was sleeping soundly.) A knee to the abdomen would double her over, then a choke hold while dragging her upstairs. The blow to the abdomen would leave her struggling to breathe, and a choke hold is very difficult to escape.

I think he planned to drown her. But I think while he was trying to stopper the tub and run the water and hold her... she recovered enough to struggle. At that time he struck her in the head with something.

I believe there was some water in the bottom of the tub, but not enough to have drowned her unless she was unconcious. Thus the combo of the head injury and inhaling water caused the sinuses to be full... but positioning over the side of the tub and probably decreased respirations prevented water from making it to her lungs. In the time that elapsed between her death and her being found, some water would have most likely drained out. But not a full tub. So maybe an inch or so of water in the tub?

One of the strongest things that convinces me that DrewP was involved in her death was how she was found. When she wasn't available to get the boys, DrewP didn't contact family in search of her. To me, you would do that before you jump to the conclusion of something wrong in the home. And DrewP arranged for witnesses (not family) to be present when she was found. I really really hope that the prosecution points that out.

If DrewP had contacted family in search of her, the family are the ones who would have most likely found her. And DrewP wouldn't have an excuse to be present and controlling the scene.

What always has baffled me, is that he called a locksmith and his neighbors to do a wellness check, when the average person would call 911 and let the cops do the wellness check. Very big red flag for me.

 

[ohiogirl]

What always has baffled me, is that he called a locksmith and his neighbors to do a wellness check, when the average person would call 911 and let the cops do the wellness check. Very big red flag for me.

Or call other members of her family to see if they know where she is.

 

[ohiogirl]

In Session The media has just been informed that Judge Burmila is on his way back to the courtroom from his chambers. So we should be resuming momentarily.

In Session According to defense attorney Steve Greenberg, the piece of equipment the defense has been installing in the courtroom is a “projection microscope.”

 

[Cubby]

I still say he drowned her in the toilet. That's why there were no clothes, bathmats, rugs, etc. I have searched high and low and have never seen anything about luminol being used in the bathroom after she was exhumed and they decided it was a homicide. I know that it can still be effectively years after the crime and blood residue can withstand many scrubbings and bleachings and in some cases paint.

Sfnelson67

IDK. I can't make the drowning in the toilet work. Not with only the incision/mark on the back of her head.

I think there were no clothes because Drew removed them and took them with him to dispose of......


ETA: Never mind. I posted before reading the amount of liquid in Kathleens lungs.

 

[ohiogirl]

In Session Judge Burmila is back on the bench. He sends for the witness and the jury.

In Session The witness and jurors are now back in the courtroom. Prosecutor Glasgow announces that he has no further questions.

 

[ohiogirl]

In Session Defense attorney Ralph Meczyk begins his cross-examination of Dr. Blum. The witness confirms that Will County, Illinois is still under the coroner system. Objection. The parties go to a sidebar.

 

[ohiogirl]

In Session The sidebar ends. The witness confirms that it’s discretionary in Will County whether or not the coroner wants to empanel a coroner’s inquest. “You were also hired by Mr. Glasgow, besides the coroner of this county?” “I have submitted bills to both.” Objection/Sustained. “You were hired by the State’s Attorney of Will County?” Objection/Overruled. “I don’t know what ‘hired’ means.” “You spoke to Mr. Glasgow before undertaking this task of examining Kathleen Savio’s body?” Objection/Sustained.

 

[WindyCityGirl]

I really thought that the discussion of the autopsy would leave me feeling that the case for the prosecution was stronger......

In Session Judge Burmila is back on the bench. He sends for the witness and the jury.

In Session The witness and jurors are now back in the courtroom. Prosecutor Glasgow announces that he has no further questions.

 

[ohiogirl]

In Session “There did come a time when you spoke to Mr. Glasgow about this case?” “That’s correct. “And he told you that he wanted you to reexamine the death of Kathleen Savio.” Objection/Sustained. The judge asks the jurors to leave the courtroom (even though the defense attorney attempts to withdraw his question).

 

[fifteen89]

Just watched the DT in the Hemy Neuman trial. Wow. Reminded of what a big difference it is from them to the DT in Drew's case. And yes, different in a good way. Two very professional lawyers. No slime. No snark. No arrogance. No cockiness. No sunglasses. No matching suits. Oh, and I don't need a shower after seeing/hearing them. That's a HUGE plus.

 

[ohiogirl]

In Session The jurors and witness are now gone. Judge: “Mr. Meczyk, you’ve now told the witness that he had a conversation with Mr. Glasgow. Do you have some way of impeaching the witness if he now denies that conversation?” “Yes . . . let me make an offer of proof, if I may.” Meczyk produces a transcript from the hearsay hearing, and points out a specific passage to the prosecution. There is a lengthy pause while the prosecution team examines the passage in question. Meczyk then points out the same passage to the judge, who also reads it.

 

[ohiogirl]

In Session Judge Burmila has now read the pertinent portion of the hearsay hearing transcript. Judge: “State, do you have the information now?” Glasgow: “We’re ready, Judge . . . all I asked for is foundation.” Judge: “That portion of the objection is overruled. He then asks that the witness and jury be brought back.

 

[AbbieNormal]

because it shows her to be a religiously devout Catholic woman and not the hell cat that they would like to make her out to be.
The more they can dehumanize or vilify her the better for DP -its their MO.

Just b/c she had a rosary in her hand as she lay in the coffin doesn't necessairly convey a devotedly religious person. I have had tons of patients who were catholic "in name only"...and a rosary was placed in their hands in the casket. In fact, many funeral directors will ask a family of a catholic person if they want a rosary. So if the family wants it, it's put in with the deceased. So I don't think an accurate assessment can be drawn from the fact that she did have a rosary in her hands after death, in the casket. She could still be catholic and a hell cat. She could have been non-religious and NOT been a hell cat. Depends on whether you really believe the DT to be honest when they say she was a "hell cat".

So lets say you think she might have been a 'hell cat' as the DT says. The fact that she had a fear of Drew (yet was supposedly a hell cat) shows that Drew must have been a REAL SOB to have scared a woman who was a hell cat and 'feisty'.

All JMO

 

[Cubby]

In Session The sidebar ends. The witness says that Dr. Mitchell’s autopsy protocol did not contain a manner of death. He then describes what happens when someone drowns. “If the patient if conscious, there will be a voluntary breath holding . . . then the body will force them to take a breath. That causes the throat to spasm up and close off, because of the water hitting the back of the throat. That spasm will close off the airway until there’s not enough oxygen in the blood to maintain that reflex. The patient at this time is generally unconscious . . . and then the throat relaxes, a breath is taken, and water rushes into the lungs . . . it goes into the bloodstream, and causes problems. Unless that person has gotten out of the water within three or four minutes, the brain has been without oxygen for too long.” According to Dr. Blum, very few people can survive for more than five minutes under these circumstances. In Savio’s case, 2000 grams of water were found in her lungs, which is a very large amount.

BBM. My apologies if the following has already been posted.

2000 grams converts to 70.54792 ounces
2000 grams converts to 4.409 pounds

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&output...pw.r_qf.&fp=dc835c07362cbb1a&biw=1024&bih=571

 

[ohiogirl]

In Session The witness and jurors have returned to the courtroom, and attorney Meczyk resumes his cross-examination. “I’d like you to assist me with the prosecutors in laying what’s known as the foundation . . . did there come a time, Sir, in 2010, do you recall the date you met with the prosecutors?” “I do not recall; my memory’s exhausted on the date.” “Is it fair to say you did, in fact, meet with the coroner and Mr. Glasgow at some point, asking you to revisit the Savio matter?’ “I was asked by the coroner to perform an autopsy, a second autopsy, on Miss Savio . . . I do not recall specifically any conversations with Mr. Glasgow prior to the autopsy. I’m not saying that I didn’t talk to him; I’m just saying I can’t recall any conversations I may have had with him.” “This is not the first time you testified about this matter?’ “Yes, you are correct.” “In February of 2010, you came to a courtroom in this building?” “I don’t recall the exact date.” “You came to give testimony?” “That is correct.” “You were put under oath?” Objection/Overruled. “Yes, I was under oath.” “You gave your solemn word that you would tell the truth?” “That is true.” “And you took the same oath yesterday as you did back then in 2010?” Objection/Overruled. “Yes.”

 

[ohiogirl]

In Session Meczyk shows the witness a document. “While you were in this very courthouse, the subject came up about when you were contacted to handle, to revisit the Savio matter?” “Yes.” In that previous testimony, the witness said that he was contacted by the coroner and the State’s Attorney. “Did I read that correctly?” “Correct.” “Those are your words, and not mine?” “Why would you testify to two different things under oath?” Objection/Sustained. “Mr. Glasgow asked you to review everything, correct?” “I don’t recall any specific, because of the time lapse. I don’t recall what Mr. Glasgow said or didn’t say prior to the examination. It was the coroner, however, who called me to do this autopsy, not the State’s Attorney.” “Mr. Glasgow told you he wanted you to examine everything, and come to an unbiased opinion?” “Yes . . . that is correct.” “Because Mr. Glasgow knew that in the past you’d given him biased opinions, what he wanted to hear, isn’t that true?” “I cannot read his mind.” “You have, in fact, assisted Mr. Glasgow in the past?” “I have.” “You’re assisting Mr. Glasgow right now, in another trial?” “If you’re referring to the [Christopher] Vaughn case, yes . . . he did request me to assist in that case, yes.” Objection/Sustained.

 

[Cubby]

the medicine cabinet or something like that and that the bruises in the front were here falling forward after having hit her head? This makes no sense to me. His statement : "I just didn't see how that could happen" isn't very compelling.....it isn't strong enough. We need to know WHY that wouldn't have happened. Thus far from what I am reading today I think that his testimony is weak and disappointing. There were a couple of statements made yesterday that were good.....the dried blood on her face comes to mind.
However, if DP drown her in the commode why would she have dried blood on her face. I thought that the whole point of the dried blood on her face ruled out a death by drowning.

I am all over the place with this, but I don't think that this testimony is cohesive and instructive enough.

The amount of water in the lungs leads me to believe it is much more possible he drowned her in the toilet.

Possible scenario: He hit her in the back of the head with the handle of his flashlight which caused the bleeding and then finished her off by drowning her in the toilet.

How horrific. How terrifying Kathleen's final minutes must have been. I HATED typing the above.....

 

[AbbieNormal]

And I bet nobody ever collected Drew's baton and flashlight and whatever else he may have had to test it for blood/hair/ etc, right?

jmo