http://cbs2chicago.com/westsuburbanbureau/drew.peterson.court.2.612298.html
Judge denies return of guns/cars.
Judge denies return of guns/cars.
Stacy Ann Peterson, Bolingbrook IL #11
- Thread starter CW
- Start date
- Status
They're not returning the cars either.
Right, that's why I'm wondering why they weren't. It's ok with me though. I hope there's something there LE needs.
robthomaseyes
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
- Messages
- 707
- Reaction score
- 0
Didn't Stacy's car get a hit from the cadaver dogs? And Drew's SUV has those blue scrapes. So both cars would be of interest and maybe they don't want to have any evidence erased.
Having both cars as suspect is really odd. Did he take her somewhere in her car, and then use his to dispose of evidence? Very, very odd.
Having both cars as suspect is really odd. Did he take her somewhere in her car, and then use his to dispose of evidence? Very, very odd.
TGIRecovered
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2006
- Messages
- 5,887
- Reaction score
- 13,212
Well, we know that shortly after (alledgedly 
) killing Stacy, he drove both vehicles either to dispose of things or just moving the cars to try to make their location fit with the stories he was telling. If there was evidence on Drew or his clothing or shoes (a classicly overlooked item by perps) it could have transferred to either vehicle. LE won't know which particles and other trace evidence is significant until Stacy's body or other evidence is found.
Susan
) killing Stacy, he drove both vehicles either to dispose of things or just moving the cars to try to make their location fit with the stories he was telling. If there was evidence on Drew or his clothing or shoes (a classicly overlooked item by perps) it could have transferred to either vehicle. LE won't know which particles and other trace evidence is significant until Stacy's body or other evidence is found.Susan
curiositycat
The one thing that doesn't abide by majority rule
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,948
- Reaction score
- 12
With all the attention this case has gotten it would not surprise me if the judge goes down on DP extra hard.
If you think judges in this country are "fair" spend some time in court and listen to cases.
Judges seem to have a God complex, IMHO. They can and usually do anything that they darn well please.
I don't think it means they actually need the cars. It's more like they don't want to give them to him.
In "THIS" case I am glad to see them sticking it to him...IF, IF, IF that's the case.
If you think judges in this country are "fair" spend some time in court and listen to cases.
Judges seem to have a God complex, IMHO. They can and usually do anything that they darn well please.
I don't think it means they actually need the cars. It's more like they don't want to give them to him.
In "THIS" case I am glad to see them sticking it to him...IF, IF, IF that's the case.
fran
Former Member
http://gretawire.foxnews.com/
December 17th, 2007 11:42 AM Eastern
JUST IN - JUDGE RULES IN SGT. PETERSON CASE
by Greta Van Susteren
Judge Won’t Let Ex-Cop Drew Peterson Get Guns, Cars Back
Monday , December 17, 2007
A judge ruled against former police officer Drew Peterson’s request Monday to get his 11 guns, two cars and computers back after investigators seized them in connection to this disappearance of his wife.
Peterson, a suspect in the disappearance of his 23-year-old wife Stacy, wants his 11 guns, two cars, children’s computers and other items returned.
Stacy was reported missing on Oct. 29 after she failed to show up at a friend’s house. Drew Peterson has denied any involvement in her disappearance, but police have named him a suspect.
Peterson will get his iPod and music CDs back on Jan. 1. Another hearing to review the return of more items is scheduled for Jan. 21.
December 17th, 2007 11:42 AM Eastern
JUST IN - JUDGE RULES IN SGT. PETERSON CASE
by Greta Van Susteren
Judge Won’t Let Ex-Cop Drew Peterson Get Guns, Cars Back
Monday , December 17, 2007
A judge ruled against former police officer Drew Peterson’s request Monday to get his 11 guns, two cars and computers back after investigators seized them in connection to this disappearance of his wife.
Peterson, a suspect in the disappearance of his 23-year-old wife Stacy, wants his 11 guns, two cars, children’s computers and other items returned.
Stacy was reported missing on Oct. 29 after she failed to show up at a friend’s house. Drew Peterson has denied any involvement in her disappearance, but police have named him a suspect.
Peterson will get his iPod and music CDs back on Jan. 1. Another hearing to review the return of more items is scheduled for Jan. 21.
panthera
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2006
- Messages
- 26,408
- Reaction score
- 85
And I will completely agree with you! I think LE does too since a Judge ruled not to release his cars. I'm suspecting there may be more in them than just scrapes off a blue container.
mysteriew
A diamond in process
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Messages
- 23,811
- Reaction score
- 816
Here is my thinking on the cars. The fact that they are holding the vehicles may worry DrewP. But he is also using them as a reason to stay angry at the 'system'. How many people don't know friends/relatives who could lend them a car in an emergency? And DrewP has the resources to rent a vehicle. Instead he doesn't appear to have any vehicle since Stacy's Dad took his motorcycle back. So DrewP is using the confiscated vehicles to keep up the Poor Me image of himself.
Though I do have to wonder. I have read somewhere that DrewP had his own motorcycle, and that the cycle hasn't been seen since shortly after Stacy's disappearance. Which to me says it is stashed somewhere. So who is to say that he doesn't have a rental car stashed somewhere?
Though I do have to wonder. I have read somewhere that DrewP had his own motorcycle, and that the cycle hasn't been seen since shortly after Stacy's disappearance. Which to me says it is stashed somewhere. So who is to say that he doesn't have a rental car stashed somewhere?
mysteriew
A diamond in process
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Messages
- 23,811
- Reaction score
- 816
There has been one leak that I am aware of. DrewP allegedly took the 5th in the Grand Jury.
Initially, Drew Peterson was using a car loaned to him by a friend.
Currently, he is using a rental car.
He was riding Stacy's motorcycle, NOT her father's motorcycle. The whereabouts of Drew's motorcycle is unknown.
SeriouslySearching
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2007
- Messages
- 35,527
- Reaction score
- 262
The minivan Drew had been driving was a rental. I think Drew needs to go buy a new vehicle if he is that worried about his children. After all, he DOES have the money for it! Oh, wait...maybe he will need Steve to make the purchase for him since much of his available cash mysteriously ended up in his account. : )
thesleuther
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2007
- Messages
- 318
- Reaction score
- 1
He should simply buy a car and put it in Steve's name. That will protect it from being seized and he won't have to pay the $350 per week. This is certainly an inconvenience, but after all, HE BROUGHT IT ON HIMSELF!!!!!
DeltaDawn
Inactive
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2007
- Messages
- 3,826
- Reaction score
- 32
And if he is arrested he isn't getting those cars back for a very long time if ever. Those cars probably contain key evidence, so they don't have to release them once he is arrested. And if convicted he won't see those cars again anyway. So why not buy another vehicle and stop whining already Drew.
Schmerty_Jones
________________ Even if you're on the right
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,793
- Reaction score
- 7
YES!!! Best friend you're slipping!. HurryUp already.!!:razz:
Niner
Long time Websleuther
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 86,703
- Reaction score
- 291,892
didn't know where else to post this - but this seems like a good place as any...
I was reading an article from the Chicago Tribune that someone posted earlier (link: http://www.chicagotribune.come/news/local/chi-peterson 14dec14,0,5459334.story? ) -hope that works! anyway...
quote from article:
Mims said his contract with the National Enquirer prohibited him from commenting about the article. "I can't say anything. If I say anything, the Enquirer is going to sue me. I cannot confirm or deny anything that was in it."
hmmm.... Interesting comment about the Natl Enquirer - NEVER heard that before!! LOL! and I'm sure Jams would have used that excuse!!
I was reading an article from the Chicago Tribune that someone posted earlier (link: http://www.chicagotribune.come/news/local/chi-peterson 14dec14,0,5459334.story? ) -hope that works! anyway...
quote from article:
Mims said his contract with the National Enquirer prohibited him from commenting about the article. "I can't say anything. If I say anything, the Enquirer is going to sue me. I cannot confirm or deny anything that was in it."
hmmm.... Interesting comment about the Natl Enquirer - NEVER heard that before!! LOL! and I'm sure Jams would have used that excuse!!
panthera
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2006
- Messages
- 26,408
- Reaction score
- 85
I wonder if they made him sign something regarding this, when they paid him for the story?didn't know where else to post this - but this seems like a good place as any...
I was reading an article from the Chicago Tribune that someone posted earlier (link: http://www.chicagotribune.come/news/local/chi-peterson 14dec14,0,5459334.story? ) -hope that works! anyway...
quote from article:
Mims said his contract with the National Enquirer prohibited him from commenting about the article. "I can't say anything. If I say anything, the Enquirer is going to sue me. I cannot confirm or deny anything that was in it."
hmmm.... Interesting comment about the Natl Enquirer - NEVER heard that before!! LOL! and I'm sure Jams would have used that excuse!!
- Status