CLOSING ARGUMENTS (Tues 09/04/2012)

[ohiogirl]

In Session “Sometimes people go fishing and tell their friends. Before you know it, it’s a ten pound fish, instead of a two pound fish. You not only have to believe it beyond a reasonable doubt, but you have to believe that the person who said it said it accurately, didn’t put their own spin on it, or their interpretation of it. It’s dangerous. Circumstantial evidence is dangerous. That’s what this case is about, only this and nothing else. And that’s something you can’t forget. What are the charges here? Indictments aren’t convictions . . . all it is is a document, a piece of paper . . . they’re just accusations, and they’re not proof of anything. All they’re good for is a paper shredder, or to be put in a garbage bag . . . the State must prove guilt – GUILT – beyond a reasonable doubt. It’s something you feel, that’s what reasonable doubt it. When you look in the mirror, you have to be perfectly content with what you do in this case. It’s not like going to Walmart or Target; you can’t change your mind at the end of the case . . . once you ink it, it’s forever. It’s forever. The State has failed to prove Drew Peterson is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Let’s start with Dr. Mitchell, the poor dead guy . . . Kathy’s death was already ruled an accident. The death certificate says accident . . . and it says the date of injury is unknown. Has the State told you when she was supposedly killed by Sgt. Peterson? Absolutely not . . . not one micron of evidence, one hair, on follicle, one print, nothing. We don’t even know when it happened . . . when did it happen? Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard here. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And they haven’t even proved that. They’ve proved it was an accident, all right, they’ve proved that. Do you think Drew hated her so much that he would take her away from the mother of the children he loved? Absolutely not! Do you think Tommy Peterson would have come in here and testified as a defense witness? Tommy said Drew broke down . . . it breaks your heart . . . imagine how that must have felt? And Tommy picked up it. Kids pick up on all the things their parents do.”

Dr. Mitchell didn't have the final say on the "accident". It was the coroner's jury, right?

 

[WindyCityGirl]

In Session “They decided to call a locksmith. And it took Robert Akins, a trained locksmith, six minutes to open that door. And you now why Drew didn’t go in there? I’ll tell you why. It’s a divorce case; it’s a bifurcated divorce . . . the case could have been settled at any time; this case didn’t have to go to trial. Remember, there was issues about the pension, the house . . . remember Mr. Brodsky saying . . .” Objection. The parties go to a sidebar.

 

[lonetraveler]

You make fine arguments, but I still have unanswered questions and that makes me have doubts about this case. I see so many loose ends that the prosecution has failed to tie up. I'm still playing devil's advocate and waiting until after the closings are finished. One thing though. Either DP was a smart cop able to make a murder look like an accident or he was just stupid. He can't be both and that's the impression I'm getting.

IMO, the only thing Drew had to do is get "professional courtesy" from his buddies to assure that a real investigation was not carried out.

 

[katydid23]

prosecution objecting as Lopez says there is no evidence Savio would get part of DP pension. Jury being taken out of room...:rollercoaster:

 

[Cubby]

wish there was more about the woman's clothes. What were they? What happened to them after they were washed? Why would he be washing them just to have to dispose of them afterward anyway. Doesn't make sense.......

I'm still not caught up, but in response to why Drew washed the clothing. Because he knew the victim? If Kathleen were a stranger to him he wouldn't worry about his dna being found on her clothing. I'm sure he was worried about just that.

He's one sick :censored: to have murdered his childrens mother.

I'm ecstatic with the closing I read from the PT. Excellent job!

Back to catching up, and hopefully will be done so before having to run out again today.

 

[WindyCityGirl]

In Session ‏@InSession
Lopez: "You know why Drew didn’t go in there? I’ll tell you why. It’s a divorce case; it’s a bifurcated divorce."

 

[Cubby]

Koch pointed at #DrewPeterson five times during his argument. Drew took lots of notes. Jury apparently did not, but was paying attention.

BBM. Uh oh.

 

[tsitra01]

I don't see the connection between all this and bringing blood stained clothing home from a crime scene to wash.

He could have walked to her house in dark clothes. He may have had no choice but to bring the clothes home washing them immediately and may have mixed them in with SP clothes till he had time to get rid of them.

 

[Wishbone]

WB, believe me when I tell you that if the dots did not connect here, no matter how I felt about the person on trial, I could not find him/her guilty.

I just think that there is so much threatening history in all of DP'S relationships, you really have to have your head in the sand (generally speaking) to not conclude he did it.

I also think Lopez is doing a decent job is his closing and if I were on the jury, I could see some of his points. That said, at this point, I can't see it going DP'S way come verdict time.

However, it would also not totally stun me if he walks. We have plenty of past cases where most thought the defendant was going down only to be shocked at the verdict that was handed down later.

My impression is he most likely did kill KS and disappear SP. He is an obnoxious person to begin with and his arrogance is too much. But now I have to decide if the PT has proven him guilty beyond a resonable doubt. As I said before, I don't know why Josh powell was never arrested. All I can figure, is because LE didn't think they had enough evidence to convict him. IMO they had more evidence on JP than they do on DP.

 

[WindyCityGirl]

:waiting:

 

[katydid23]

Objection by prosecution sustained, Jury brought back

StacyStClair: #DrewPeterson judge says defense can mention court order, but must introduce the order via the witness who testified to it.

 

[katydid23]

Lopez continues "The reason Drew didn't go into (Savio) house..he would've violated court order" giving home solely to Savio...

 

[Cubby]

In Session ‏@InSession
Lopez: "You have to have this little voice in your head tell you, ‘Sgt. Peterson is innocent.’"

Right now the little voice in my head is saying, "Weak Lopez, weak".

Still catching up.

 

[ohiogirl]

My impression is he most likely did kill KS and disappear SP. He is an obnoxious person to begin with and his arrogance is too much. But now I have to decide if the PT has proven him guilty beyond a resonable doubt. As I said before, I don't know why Josh powell was never arrested. All I can figure, is because LE didn't think they had enough evidence to convict him. IMO they had more evidence on JP than they do on DP.

Fubar?

 

[katydid23]

Lopez says #DrewPeterson didn't enter the house bc he was under court order not to, not bc he knew Kathy's body was upstairs in the tub.

"you'll see the photographs - there's no signs of a struggle in the bedroom, bathroom. There is nothing! Absolutely nothing!"

 

[rpgman]

Right now the little voice in my head is saying, "Weak Lopez, weak".

Still catching up.

lol funny

 

[Cubby]

In Session “We asked you to serve, and we appreciate that. No matter what your verdict is, we appreciate that . . . we know how hard that is. Let’s talk about the case; I want to say a few things . . . one of the things the State told you is they want you to use your common sense to rely on hearsay. What is hearsay? The judge will define it for you . . . you heard about circumstantial evidence . . . if you leave a pie at home with your kids and tell them ‘don’t eat it,’ and you leave and come home and somebody’s in the pie, ‘the cat ate it,’ you look at the cat to see if he’s got any pie on his face. And then you realize the cat has pie on his neck. Does that mean the cat ate it, or the kids smeared pie on the cat, to make it look like he ate it. So it’s not that clear. Circumstantial evidence is not that clear.”

I can't believe Lopez really said that. The cat ate the pie? OMG. Wow, does the DT think they lost the case? Because this closing thus far, awful.

 

[WindyCityGirl]

:waiting:

 

[katydid23]

Lopez goes over details of neighbors finding Savio's body in the tub, "It was a big tub"

atty Lopez says Savio tub is a "framed-in tub" and that bottles wouldn't move if someone fell in it because it's so solid.

opez: Savio's fall wouldn't topple bottles if the carpenter installed the tub correctly

What am I going to tell my children?" Lopez quotes Drew as saying after finding Savio dead

Lopez: "They're trying to nail Jell-O to a tree. It's an accident, pure and simple."

Lopez: "The blue towel's a fallacy." Looks like somebody used the towel to kneel on it.

"If somebody put that towel there it certainly wasn't Drew Peterson because he wasn't there!" Lopez says

Lopez: "Did someone kneel on the towel? Put it there when they were searching on their hands and knees? I don't know."

 

[Cubby]

It was sickening watching the defense trash Stacey this morning in their pre-trial press conference.

One thing I haven't heard anybody mention yet is why Stacey might have sat on that information about Drew killing Kathy, and the way I see it is she was still married to him and scared to death. So when she gets up enough courage to get a divorce she goes to the attorney who most likely can fight for her as he did for Kathy. And she feels that at least she has somebody who can be on her side. As far as her asking if she could use that against Drew, why not? He apparently had law enforcement on his side, she needed to use everything she could get.

All you have to do is read the anonymous letter sent to Kathleen telling her about Drew's affair with Stacey. The writer warns Kathy that even the top brass were aware of what he was doing and it would be a waste of time, if not dangerous, to try to get any support or help from them.

I can't even begin to imagine what terrors these women endured at the hands of this monster.

Perhaps she felt she had to protect both her own children and Kathleen's children. Was it ever made public what date she adopted Kathleen's boys? If so, how long was it after adopting Kathleen's boys that she went missing?

Food for thought.....