Drew Peterson's Trial *FOURTH WEEK*

[Livingthedream]

Judge B overrules the prosecution again? What new?

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The sidebar ends. The judge asks to have the jury excused from the courtroom.

In Session The jurors are now gone, and the witness leaves the stand. Connor then withdraws his objection, so the jury and the witness return to the courtroom.

:rollercoaster:

 

[katydid23]

State withdraws objection, jury brought back in ...
[ I sure hope the closing by the state is not anti-climactic...]

 

[AbbieNormal]

Well, I should be ok. I'm not 15.

:goodpost:

:floorlaugh:

abbie

 

[Pita]

I've never heard a judge give an opinion about a victim's injuries ever. Is he a medical doctor?

This was a shocker to me too...this judge is unreal

 

[katydid23]

Jury back. Greenberg continues cross.

: And last, a certificate of completion for completing a course in evidence handling & intro of forensic techniques in 1981

 

[katydid23]

Hafner cannot say if DP ever processed a crime scene while an evidence technician or even as to how long DP was an evidence technician.

trial witness Lt. Hafner says he doesn't think digital cameras or DNA evidence was taught in 1988.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Greenberg: “In 1988, you were not yet a police officer?” “I was not.” “You don’t know what crime evidence classes were like necessarily in 1988?” “I do not.” In 1991, when you went to the police academy, did they teach you about using a digital camera?” Objection/Sustained. “How about in 1988?” “I don’t even know if they were around then.” “How about the 1981 course; how long was that?” “I don’t think I can you from this certificate . . . I have no idea what they taught in that class . . . I would not know . . . I’m sure they taught something, but I would not know.” (LAUGHTER) “So all you can tell us is he’s got a certificate?’ “That’s correct.” “And in 1984, he got appointed as an evidence tech?” “That’s correct.” “Can you tell us if he ever processed a crime scene?” “I could not answer that . . . I do not know where he was in the department in 1984. I know he was appointed on Jan. 6, 1984; that’s all I can tell you.” “You don’t know if he paid attention to the courses he took?” “I do not know.”

In Session “You actually worked with Sgt. Peterson, didn’t you?” Objection. The parties go to a sidebar.

In Session The sidebar ends. “Are you aware of any scene Sgt. Peterson ever processed?” “No.” Once again, the parties go to a sidebar.

In Session The sidebar ends. The jury and the witness are excused from the courtroom.

 

[katydid23]

I’m sure they taught something, but I would not know (what)," Hafner said.

[ wow...great closing witness...]

 

[fifteen89]

[snipped by me]
Greenberg points out that Peterson took this training in 1981. “I think a lot of things have changed . . . it’s sort of like saying, ‘Gee, he has a driver’s license, so he must be a good driver’ . . . they just want to say he once had this training and then somehow argue that 25 years later that he would somehow know how an evidence technician would come in . . . he’s a wonderful evidence technician, but Sgt. Deel is a terrible evidence technician?”

Good point Greenberg. DP had continuous on-the-job training since receiving the certificate in 1981.

Ya know, every time they argue to try and keep stuff out, they point out more things that prove to me that DP is guilty.

 

[katydid23]

jury, Hafner coming back. Defense will end its cross-examination.

Greenberg has no further questions for Hafner. Hafner steps down.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The jurors are now gone. Ofc. Hafner is still present, and Greenberg makes an offer of proof. “Do a lot of officers take courses similar to the short course Mr. Peterson took in 1988?” “Usually officers that are being groomed to become evidence techncians will begin with a class like that.” That ends the offer of proof, and the witness is excused from the courtroom. The judge sustains the prosecution’s objection to this line of testimony.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The jurors and the witness are now back inside the courtroom. “Do you know if in either of those courses they taught detection?” “Again, I can’t testify as to anything that they taught in the 80s.” “How to stage a crime scene?” “Same answer.” “How to clean up?” “I don’t know what they taught in that class.” The ends the cross-examination of this witness; there is no redirect, so he is excused.


In Session The State asks for a sidebar.

 

[AbbieNormal]

This was a shocker to me too...this judge is unreal

Yes indeed, the Judge is one of a kind. Thank God. I hope to never follow another trial where he is presiding. This trial has been a trip so far. I plan to write a letter when it's over.


abbie:moo:

 

[~n/t~]

The Herald-News ‏@Joliet_HN
Prosecutors want to call Cassandra Cales next, Stacy Peterson's sister. #DrewPeterson

 

[~n/t~]

BBS....just going for a 5 minute recess.

 

[fifteen89]

The Herald-News ‏@Joliet_HN
Prosecutors want to call Cassandra Cales next, Stacy Peterson's sister. #DrewPeterson

[crossing fingers]

Here comes the bang!

[hopefully]

 

[AbbieNormal]

based on the interactions between the judge and the defense team, i feel as if the judge thinks the state does not have a case. If this were a bench trial, he would find dp not guilty.

ita, ltd.

 

[WindyCityGirl]

In Session The sidebar ends. The jurors are now gone. Connor says that the next potential witness is Stacy Peterson’s sister, to identify which phone number Stacy used. Greenberg objects to this witness, insisting that it’s hearsay. Judge: “I don’t believe it is . . . how would that be hearsay?” Greenberg: “How come we got a list of people last night, and now we’re getting different people?” Judge: “That I can’t answer.” The judge calls another recess at this time, so that the defense and prosecution can discuss upcoming witneses.
6 minutes ago

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The sidebar ends. The jurors are now gone. Connor says that the next potential witness is Stacy Peterson’s sister, to identify which phone number Stacy used. Greenberg objects to this witness, insisting that it’s hearsay. Judge: “I don’t believe it is . . . how would that be hearsay?” Greenberg: “How come we got a list of people last night, and now we’re getting different people?” Judge: “That I can’t answer.” The judge calls another recess at this time, so that the defense and prosecution can discuss upcoming witneses.

In Session The judge leaves the bench. The trial is in recess, pending another witness.