The VERDICT! He's....GUILTY!!!

[WindyCityGirl]

with her father, Henry Savio? I would be interested to know if they were close prior to her marriage to Drew and what their relationship was like while married to Drew.
According to their son, he never met Henry Savio until his mother's funeral. He also claims that his aunts weren't part of his life either, which is not consistent with how Kathleen's sisters describe it. Kathleen's sister Anna describes being present and hearing Drew making degrading comments to Kathleen (vulgar comments like the b word and worse, plus nasty demoralizing remarks about her weight)
I only ask this not of idle curiosity, but I am wondering if Mr. Savio was a victim of familial alienation which is often the case in homes with domestic violence.
Sure, Kathleen may simply not have had a relationship with her father, but coming from family that seemed tight knit that surprised me.
I also wonder if the aunts were kept from the boys after Kathleen's death and if they were too young to remember their aunts being around when they were younger? (or if they were not allowed around the kids?)

I just wonder how much the sisters knew when she was alive and what they did with the information. I wonder how much the father knew while she was alive and what he did with the information.
I am not blaming or calling them out.......please don't misunderstand me.
I am just seeking to understand the dynamics of abuse.

Thomas made the comment that if they knew and didn't do anything about it then it is their fault. Should Rev. Schori have done something with the info that he knew? What did the aunts do about the info that they knew about the abuse of Kathleen? What did the sister of Stacy do?
I just am pondering all of this because I wonder just how powerless or not these people were.....what is the best course of action in a situation like that? IT is a tough call.

I also am wondering how many people that we know and love could be suffering in miserable and potentially dangerous situations and we don't have a clue about it.
I would like to learn from this so that we can empower others as well as ourselves to do more for people. Watching the episode on Nightline last night left me feeling very sad and frustrated........

 

[Livingthedream]

Respectfully, I disagree. Drew was a cop, who had successfully (at that time) got away with the murder of Kathleen. IMOO he certainly would never hint, in a truthful way as to where Stacy might be. His words were leading away from the truth. The media, and everyone else in Drew's eyes at that time, were 'puppets' and he was the master.

I could see that as well. If you had to guess, what do you think he did?

 

[WindyCityGirl]

believes that Drew killed Stacy too.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/104799216/Drew-Peterson-Trial-Divorce-Lawyer-Harry-Smith-Examination

I just now read this. It is pretty damning. He uses the words "the fact that he killed Kathy" and then they go into a sidebar after that and the jury is left to ponder upon the fact that he killed Kathy.

I can't understand what they were thinking in the DT.

 

[shotgun09]

I could see that as well. If you had to guess, what do you think he did?

I really don't have a theory, other than whatever and however he disposed of Stacy was thought through by Drew. He had lots of background knowledge being a cop, and his three day ride to "clear his head" only adds to my theory that whatever he did was able to be completed, with probably not a bit of evidence left. Burned? Acid? Buried? or Water?

 

[Bravo]

with her father, Henry Savio? I would be interested to know if they were close prior to her marriage to Drew and what their relationship was like while married to Drew.
According to their son, he never met Henry Savio until his mother's funeral. He also claims that his aunts weren't part of his life either, which is not consistent with how Kathleen's sisters describe it. Kathleen's sister Anna describes being present and hearing Drew making degrading comments to Kathleen (vulgar comments like the b word and worse, plus nasty demoralizing remarks about her weight)
I only ask this not of idle curiosity, but I am wondering if Mr. Savio was a victim of familial alienation which is often the case in homes with domestic violence.
Sure, Kathleen may simply not have had a relationship with her father, but coming from family that seemed tight knit that surprised me.
I also wonder if the aunts were kept from the boys after Kathleen's death and if they were too young to remember their aunts being around when they were younger? (or if they were not allowed around the kids?)

I just wonder how much the sisters knew when she was alive and what they did with the information. I wonder how much the father knew while she was alive and what he did with the information.
I am not blaming or calling them out.......please don't misunderstand me.
I am just seeking to understand the dynamics of abuse.

Thomas made the comment that if they knew and didn't do anything about it then it is their fault. Should Rev. Schori have done something with the info that he knew? What did the aunts do about the info that they knew about the abuse of Kathleen? What did the sister of Stacy do?
I just am pondering all of this because I wonder just how powerless or not these people were.....what is the best course of action in a situation like that? IT is a tough call.

I also am wondering how many people that we know and love could be suffering in miserable and potentially dangerous situations and we don't have a clue about it.
I would like to learn from this so that we can empower others as well as ourselves to do more for people. Watching the episode on Nightline last night left me feeling very sad and frustrated........

I haven't read anything but I can see Drew skewing the facts to his Children and that's his recall. I wonder if Kathleen kept Family contact away from her home as the abuse escalated. I dont doubt DP has brainwashed those kids and coached them on what to say. In order to save him. He is all they had left:moo: I hope all their denial doesn't take them down. I wish them well.

 

[Clio]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/104799216/Drew-Peterson-Trial-Divorce-Lawyer-Harry-Smith-Examination

I just now read this. It is pretty damning. He uses the words "the fact that he killed Kathy" and then they go into a sidebar after that and the jury is left to ponder upon the fact that he killed Kathy.

I can't understand what they were thinking in the DT.

This article suggests that it wasn't the whole DT who wanted to put HS on the stand.

Brodsky decided to call Smith against the rest of the defense team's advice. Defense attorney Steve Greenberg was overheard yelling at Brodsky in a courthouse hallway before Smith's appearance, pleading with Brodsky not to do it.

The debate ended when Peterson sided with Brodsky, sources said.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-drew-peterson-defense-20120909,0,5562621.story

I think Brodsky had spent too much time with DP and had lost his objectivity imho.

 

[katydid23]

This article suggests that it wasn't the whole DT who wanted to put HS on the stand.



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-drew-peterson-defense-20120909,0,5562621.story

I think Brodsky had spent too much time with DP and had lost his objectivity imho.

I love that one part, where ' the debate ended when Peterson sided with Brodsky. :dance: :dance: :dance:

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I still think Schori's testimony (SP'S words) would have been enough. Bringing Smith to the stand was just the final nail in the old coffin.

Does anyone know if the jury was asked why they wanted the cell records and if it played a big role in their verdict?

I really think the jury used both hearsay witnesses to determine guilt. They mentioned that both of them were what convinced them.

Some may have not wanted to take the word of just one person saying this. So having two hearsay witnesses saying basically the same thing bolstered each others testimony.

So I do think Smith was the main witness that sealed the verdict.

IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

This article suggests that it wasn't the whole DT who wanted to put HS on the stand.



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-drew-peterson-defense-20120909,0,5562621.story

I think Brodsky had spent too much time with DP and had lost his objectivity imho.

I think everyone on the defense team didnt want Smith testifying but dumb *advertiser censored* Brodsky did and he was the lead attorney.

It was obvious the other defense attorneys didnt want him on the stand. Greenberg had filed 84 motions successfully to keep him off the stand. The state didnt even want to call Smith. No one wanted this but Brodsky and I doubt he will ever get a client again since he made the blunder of the century and was the main contributor of putting his own client in prison.

In fact he should be barred from trying cases. It is evident he is not a good trial attorney.

Of course Im personally elated he made his blunder. If not DP might be a free man today.

IMO

 

[Cubby]

Just a quick comment about the hearsay. In this particular law (the so-called "Drew's Law") hearsay is NOT just a he-said, she-said matter.

From what I understand (listening to Judge White's explanation), hearsay CAN be allowed when the witness is deceased BECAUSE the defendant is suspected to have killed the witness. In other words, the law gives weight to the probability that that in all likelihood the person WOULD testify but was silenced by the defendant.

It was determined then, that in all probability, Stacey Peterson would have willingly testified to her own conversations with Schori and Smith (as well as other testimony), but that right was denied her because Drew got rid of her.

This is a most beautiful law when you look at it as showing the highest respect for these victims. The fact that they are literally able to testify from beyond the grave. I would think it would also give pause to criminals who want to kill prospective witnesses, at least in the State of Illinois. Once again, this defense has twisted it around and whined about how unfair it is, but I don't see how they would be able to appeal it. The judge would not have ruled on such a monumental "constitutional" issue as he did if he thought it could get appealed!

AMEN!

And I am going to use this post as a spring board to let everyone know I started a thread in Stacy's forum for possible no body murder charges against Drew. I haven't been following this thread closely since the verdict, however since this forum is dedicated to Kathleen's case, I started the thread in Stacy's forum hoping to not get too sidetracked down here and to get some fresh activity in Stacy's forum.

here it is:


[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=184098"]No Body murder charges in Stacy's case? - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[fifteen89]

<snipped by me>
I also am wondering how many people that we know and love could be suffering in miserable and potentially dangerous situations and we don't have a clue about it.

I would like to learn from this so that we can empower others as well as ourselves to do more for people. Watching the episode on Nightline last night left me feeling very sad and frustrated........

I just said the same thing other day. It is so sad that it ends in murder before something can be done to get the abuser. If I thought someone I know was in an abusive relationship, I would do something about it. Or at least try.

I know the abuse victim tries to hide it, but I hope stories like Kathleen's and Stacy's and all the other victims help us all learn we MUST speak to someone before it's too late. It is so sad when they lose their life in the end and the only solace is if they spoke to someone that can come forward to speak for them about what happened. Or they documented the abuse for someone to find after their death. (Just think how sad that would be??? I just can't fathom writing the words "if I'm found dead....")

I honestly don't know what the answer is. More funding for women's shelters so their message is more prominent? But even if that keeps the abuser and victim separated, it doesn't prevent the abuser from abusing someone else. More education of our children (and their parents) before they can become abusers?

Sunny Hostin said on IS the other day something about the early incident(s) of abuse need to result in jail time - and she meant a year, not just 30 days - because the abuse escalates over time and whatever they just got caught for doing will be worse when they get out. I'd add to that my thought that the abuse victim needs to be given assistance during that period of time to change her name, relocate, learn how to protect herself in the future, etc. Sort of a WPP for abuse victims. Maybe someone like Jeff Ruby can get his wealthy friends together to put some of their money towards starting a program like this nationwide, as opposed to coming to the courthouse after the woman is murdered.

I don't know. jtol

 

[fifteen89]

I really don't have a theory, other than whatever and however he disposed of Stacy was thought through by Drew. He had lots of background knowledge being a cop, and his three day ride to "clear his head" only adds to my theory that whatever he did was able to be completed, with probably not a bit of evidence left. Burned? Acid? Buried? or Water?

A start would be to find that blue barrel because we all know it exists. Finding it sealed with traces of acid would be great. Just finding it buried somewhere would be suspicious to me - why bury a barrel? (Say that 5 times fast!)

 

[fifteen89]

This article suggests that it wasn't the whole DT who wanted to put HS on the stand.



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-drew-peterson-defense-20120909,0,5562621.story

I think Brodsky had spent too much time with DP and had lost his objectivity imho.

I'd throw Greenberg in there too since he says DP is the most loyal person he's ever met. I'll give him that he's loyal TO HIMSELF, but not to others, not to the Mothers of his children, and DP is certainly not the good father that Brodsky professes him to be.

 

[fifteen89]

As some of you know, they replayed the interview with DP from 5 years ago on Dateline last night. When Hoda Kotb asked him: "where do you think SP is?", he replied: "I would probably be looking on the beach"

There is meaning (IMO) behind that answer and not because DP was REALLY suggesting she ran away. It involves ocean/lake as where he dumped her (IMO).

My favorite part is when Hoda asks he why he's coming forward to do the interview and he says 'because no one is coming forward saying i'm a nice guy'.

Gee. I wonder why, Drew. Most people who have met him know exactly what and who he is. So I guess you can't intimidate people into thinking you're a great guy.

 

[Madeleine74]

Thank you Chicken Pants for bringing up the Hearsay law. For some reason people think that anything goes and any hearsay can be brought up at trial. And that has never been the case and isn't the case in IL or in any other state that has exceptions to a hearsay law.

It's a case-by-case determination and, within that, a witness-by-witness determination made by a judge.

It's legal! There are laws specifying how the hearsay exclusion can be used. If the judge interprets the law correctly and applies it correctly then there's no problem. Judges are given some discretion as well. Just because a defense team appeals a ruling, it doesn't mean the ruling was incorrect or that the appellate level will overturn that ruling.

Some hearsay evidence is totally fine, based on the way the law is written in that jurisdiction.

In other words... no worries!!

 

[Cappuccino]

Unless the Illinois hearsay law is vulnerable to a Sixth Amendment challenge in SCOTUS.

 

[atthelake]

I haven't read anything but I can see Drew skewing the facts to his Children and that's his recall. I wonder if Kathleen kept Family contact away from her home as the abuse escalated. I dont doubt DP has brainwashed those kids and coached them on what to say. In order to save him. He is all they had left:moo: I hope all their denial doesn't take them down. I wish them well.

Sounds familiar, as with the Anthony case they lied....perhaps...much disagree..ment..that they lied through thir teeth to have her not get the death penalty

 

[Madeleine74]

These defense attorneys are laughable. Would ANY of them be hanging out with Drew Peterson socially if they werent' his lawyers? (No way.). Would they be buddies with Drew? (No way.) Would they go fishing together or whatever? (Nope).

They are full of hot air. They advocate for Drew because they are paid to do so (paid = either with $$$ or publicity). They aren't friends with Drew and wouldn't be in any other capacity.

 

[Bravo]

My favorite part is when Hoda asks he why he's coming forward to do the interview and he says 'because no one is coming forward saying i'm a nice guy'.

Gee. I wonder why, Drew. Most people who have met him know exactly what and who he is. So I guess you can't intimidate people into thinking you're a great guy.

That truly was a gem. Typical of a Sociopath. I could see CA doing the same thing. Only diff is she had Mummy and Daddy to do it for her. And she was incarcerated. Otherwise I think she may have been more vocal. The dynamics of a Sociopath are indeed very interesting :what:

 

[Madeleine74]

Unless the Illinois hearsay law is vulnerable to a Sixth Amendment challenge in SCOTUS.

I wouldn't bet anything valuable on it. The SCOTUS only takes on a few cases a year and other states have hearsay laws that haven't been overturned. It will be a very long road *if* the SCOTUS even looks at this case. I'd say the odds are extremely slim. And remember the case has to wind it's way through the State of IL court system first -- 2 more levels.