Drew Peterson's Trial *FOURTH WEEK*

[~n/t~]

In Session
Judge Burmila is back on the bench. The State says that there are some stipulations which may eliminate the need for any more prosecution witnesses. Regarding Cassandra Cales, Stacy’s sister, there will be a stipulation as to Stacy’s cell phone number in 2004. There are also some other phone records and four court orders that may Brodsky says he sees no relevance to. The judge asks to see these documents.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The judge examines the documents in question. Attorney Greenberg says that he has a discovery issue with at least one of them.

 

[my2sense]

I may have to eat my words, but I'm not convinced this judge is really on the DT side. He talks the talk, but he's still let a lot in that I would be pitching a fit about if I were on the other side. Isn't it already unusual that we have so much hearsay let in? Maybe he's trying to appear unbiased? Fingers crossed.

 

[AbbieNormal]

Drew was certified as an evidence technician in 1981. I kept waiting for them to ask if Drew had to take classes, either periodically or yearly, to learn things as technology and forensics changed. They never said anything like that. Seems like an obvious question to me. As a nurse, I have to complete a certain number of hours yearly of continuing education in nursing. I am also required to take some review type courses for a special certification I have that's above and beyond regular nursing CEU's.

Seems like A LOT would have been developed in forensics and crime scene investigation from 1981 till 2003-2004. DUH.

It was a basic course. Drew stated to fellow officers that it was "hard". Maybe Drew is a dumba$$. If that was the basic course and was the beginning course for people to become CSI's, would Drew have been able to understand anything beyond that basic course? Why did he not go further and take the courses that would have made him several pegs above just basic crime scene technician? I always wanted to go as far as I could with a "specialty", beyond basic courses. Maybe Drew was happy just being a dirty cop and did not want to be a crime scene INVESTIGATOR, maybe he was required to take the basic course, maybe he was content in just being certified as a TECHNICIAN.

:moo: and ????????

abbie

 

[WindyCityGirl]

I hope that the Defense begins their arguments today then. This has been long and drawn today. They just need to get with it. I dont know if the DT will have witnesses at the ready though

 

[WindyCityGirl]

testimony.....I was disappointed that he didn't allow Stacy's friend the Army Captain testify but we got in a lot of really good witnesses where there were questions if they were going to even be allowed to speak.
I do still think that the judge has appeared on more than a couple occasions to be short and/or rude to the PT, but he isn't necessarily against us. We shall see....he isn't the one who has to decide this thing in the end.

I may have to eat my words, but I'm not convinced this judge is really on the DT side. He talks the talk, but he's still let a lot in that I would be pitching a fit about if I were on the other side. Isn't it already unusual that we have so much hearsay let in? Maybe he's trying to appear unbiased? Fingers crossed.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Judge: “I’m troubled by [two paragraphs in one of the documents]. Because of that, I’m not inclined to admit it . . . the other question I have is, can this be presented in a vacuum?” He allows one of the documents, but says he’s “missing the connection” regarding a second one.

 

[Pita]

I may have to eat my words, but I'm not convinced this judge is really on the DT side. He talks the talk, but he's still let a lot in that I would be pitching a fit about if I were on the other side. Isn't it already unusual that we have so much hearsay let in? Maybe he's trying to appear unbiased? Fingers crossed.

The appeals court ruled it could come in...no thanks to the judge..

 

[Shelby1]

In Session
Judge Burmila is back on the bench. The State says that there are some stipulations which may eliminate the need for any more prosecution witnesses. Regarding Cassandra Cales, Stacy’s sister, there will be a stipulation as to Stacy’s cell phone number in 2004. There are also some other phone records and four court orders that may Brodsky says he sees no relevance to. The judge asks to see these documents.

Fabulous. We're not going out with a whimper...it's more like a quiet sigh. :tsktsk:

 

[WindyCityGirl]

The appeals court ruled it could come in...no thanks to the judge..

It is my understanding that the appellate is a long and very difficult process....why would they be coming in before the trial was through? Judge Burmilla has been very careful about what he has allowed to be admissable.

 

[~n/t~]

I may have to eat my words, but I'm not convinced this judge is really on the DT side. He talks the talk, but he's still let a lot in that I would be pitching a fit about if I were on the other side. Isn't it already unusual that we have so much hearsay let in? Maybe he's trying to appear unbiased? Fingers crossed.

The hearsay had nothing to do with THIS Judge, imo.

Illinois Appeals Court Allows Hearsay Evidence Against Drew Peterson

http://chicagoist.com/2012/04/12/appeals_court_allows_hearsay_eviden.php

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Judge Burmila denies the admissibility of the second document.

 

[~n/t~]

Stacy St. Clair ‏@StacyStClair
#drewpeterson judge does not allow state to present evidence that shows DP's child support was doubled shortly before alleged knife incident

 

[~n/t~]

Kara Oko ‏@KaraOko
Attys still haggling - court is in recess until 1:15 #DrewPeterson

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The judge asks if there is a transcript available of earlier witness Teresa Kernc. It doesn’t appear that there is one.

In Session The judge leaves the bench. The trial is in recess until 1:15 CT/2:15 ET.

 

[~n/t~]

Fabulous. We're not going out with a whimper...it's more like a quiet sigh. :tsktsk:

 

[Shelby1]

In Session The judge asks if there is a transcript available of earlier witness Teresa Kernc. It doesn’t appear that there is one.

In Session The judge leaves the bench. The trial is in recess until 1:15 CT/2:15 ET.

Another WTF?

She was the former police sergeant that just testified on Aug. 14th. How is there not a transcript???

 

[~n/t~]

I leave work in an hour so won't be posting updates this afternoon. Hopefully someone can take over. :seeya:

 

[rpgman]

Another WTF?

She was the former police sergeant that just testified on Aug. 14th. How is there not a transcript???

waiting for another transcipt?

I don't get this at all.

aren't these records computerized and searchable?

I remember it didn't take very long to get a transcript in the Anthony case if they needed one.

 

[fifteen89]

Fabulous. We're not going out with a whimper...it's more like a quiet sigh. :tsktsk:

So much for crossing my fingers. imo a stipulation isn't as effective as live testimony. Gotta wonder why the DT team was afraid of her being on the stand.......