Drew Peterson's Trial *SECOND WEEK*

[~n/t~]

OK others are asking about the thread that was started and disappeared. I guess it's not just me. lol

 

[~n/t~]

1m Craig Wall‏@craigrwall
Defense atty Steve Greenberg expects pathologist Larry Bloom to say Savio's death a homicide, but says it doesn't mean #DrewPeterson did it


Dan Rozek‏@DanRozek1
#DrewPeterson's attorney says Kristin Anderson's hearsay testimony "hurt" Peterson, but still doesn't prove he killed Kathy Savio

 

[~n/t~]

In Session

4 minutes ago.


Will County Coroner Pat O’Neil is expected to testify Thursday in the Drew Peterson murder trial about why he had Peterson's ex-wife exhumed three years after her death. Another witness who may take the stand on Thursday is Mary Parks, who was a nursing student with Kathleen Savio. In Session is live from Joliet, Illinois to bring you all the news from the trial.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session‏@InSession

#drewpeterson Glasgow's quote (about def. atty Greenberg) after a legal argument in court "he looked like he had to go to the bathroom,"

 

[~n/t~]

2m Craig Wall‏@craigrwall

#DrewPeterson atty Greenberg says yesterday's hearsay testimony from Kristen Anderson hurt and was a victory for prosecution

 

[~n/t~]

2m Craig Wall‏@craigrwall

#DrewPeterson witness update: Hearsay witness Mary Parks, Coroner Pat O'Neil and pathologist Larry Blum (not Bloom)


Dan Rozek‏@DanRozek1
#DrewPeterson witnesses today also expected to include Mary Parks, who has said Savio told her she was threatened by Peterson.


2m Craig Wall‏@craigrwall
Parks was nursing school friend of #Savio who she told about #DrewPeterson death threats. Arguments about what she can say expected 1st








In Session
32 seconds ago.


Watch this thread for live updates from the Drew Peterson murder trial!
Here are today’s expected witnesses. First up will be Mary Parks, who was a nursing student along with Kathleen Savio. After Parks, we should hear from coroner Pat O’Neil, and pathologist Larry Blum (who conducted Savio’s second autopsy).

 

[~n/t~]

In Session‏@InSession
#drewpeterson everyone is filing into the courtroom, appears we'll be starting soon.

 

[~n/t~]

The usual delay in getting started. :waiting:

 

[~n/t~]

WTF?


Dan Rozek‏@DanRozek1

#DrewPeterson judge got letter from prison inmate who says he can link this case to Abraham Lincoln assassination and George Zimmerman case.



1m Glenn Marshall‏@GMarshall_Jr
Judge received a letter from an inmate discussing a link btwn #DrewPeterson , Abraham Lincoln, and George Zimmerman case



36s Dan Rozek‏@DanRozek1
#DrewPeterson Judge Edward Burmila said he won't respond to the letter. "I won't be communicating with him," Burmila said to laughter.

 

[ohiogirl]

wtf?


Dan rozek‏@danrozek1

#drewpeterson judge got letter from prison inmate who says he can link this case to abraham lincoln assassination and george zimmerman case.



1m glenn marshall‏@gmarshall_jr
judge received a letter from an inmate discussing a link btwn #drewpeterson , abraham lincoln, and george zimmerman case



36s dan rozek‏@danrozek1
#drewpeterson judge edward burmila said he won't respond to the letter. "i won't be communicating with him," burmila said to laughter.

lmao!

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Judge Burmila has taken the bench. “Good morning, everyone . . . I received a letter yesterday from an inmate in the IL Dept. of Corrections that he has information linking this case with Abraham Lincoln’s assassination and the Zimmerman case. I won’t be communicating with him.”

 

[Shelby1]

WTF?


Dan Rozek‏@DanRozek1

#DrewPeterson judge got letter from prison inmate who says he can link this case to Abraham Lincoln assassination and George Zimmerman case.



1m Glenn Marshall‏@GMarshall_Jr
Judge received a letter from an inmate discussing a link btwn #DrewPeterson , Abraham Lincoln, and George Zimmerman case



36s Dan Rozek‏@DanRozek1
#DrewPeterson Judge Edward Burmila said he won't respond to the letter. "I won't be communicating with him," Burmila said to laughter.

Rofl! Sheesh there are some seriously screwed up people out there.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Attorney Greenberg addresses the court, says the defense has issues with the upcoming hearsay testimony of Mary Parks. However, the Prosecution claims that the statement in question was one that was approved by earlier judge Stephen White, and so Judge Burmila says that he will also allow it.



In Session Prosecutor Koch reads from Judge White’s decision. Parks’ statement apparently has to do with something Kathleen Savio told her about Drew Peterson “grabbing her by the throat.” There will also be a statement to the effect that Peterson “wanted everything [in the divorce], including the bar and the children.”

 

[21merc7]

There are looney tunes letters in every case.

I do hope the jurors are not present for the discussion of the letter though.

 

[~n/t~]

There are looney tunes letters in every case.

I do hope the jurors are not present for the discussion of the letter though.

No the jurors are not in yet. LOL

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Steve Greenberg responds: “She [Savio] felt because of Drew’s ego he would want everything, and they would be unable to work anything out . . . I believe those are Savio’s perceptions of the divorce proceedings, not anything Drew told her, and therefore not relevant . . . I don’t think any of it’s relevant.” Judge: “The defendant’s motion is denied in part, and granted in part. It’s granted at this time regarding whatever her sense or impression might be as to the property distribution. If you find something on that, you can approach the bench and I’ll revisit the ruling.”

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Koch: “We also have Dr. Baden’s motion, which I think we are ready to address.” Greenberg: “The motion is a discovery motion in many respects . . . the fact is we’ve got evidence that Dr. Baden formed his opinion before he ever did any autopsy; that is what Mark Furhman, of all people, said on TV the other day. Judge White said the prosecution was supposed to look into Dr. Baden’s interaction with FOX, and how that all came about. My understanding is he was paid to do this autopsy for FOX . . . at the risk of dispelling the notion that they are absolutely fair and balanced, my understanding is that a producer will say ‘We are doing a show about this, and we need somebody to take this angle.’ That seems to be what happened in this case.” In short, Greenberg is afraid that Dr. Blum’s findings might have been influenced by Dr. Baden.

In Session Colleen Griffin responds for the State. “I don’t know of any case where somebody’s been barred from testifying because they might be subject to cross-examination . . . additionally, just out of fairness, we believe two of the proposed experts that the defendant is going to have testify can be impeached by prior statements they have made . . . I just don’t think there’s any legal basis whatsoever for this motion, and we ask that it be denied.”

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Judge: “You don’t have any additional reports of Dr. Baden that you didn’t turn over, or any indication of the formulation of the opinion prior to the autopsy?” “Nothing other than what we’ve provided.” Greenberg: “They didn’t ask for it. That’s the problem.” Judge: “What proof do you have that any e-mails exist between Dr. Baden and Mr. Furhman?’ Greenberg: “I don’t know if they exist . . . but they have an obligation to inquire about the materials, and to produce those. We’ve asked them to make the inquiry . . . and they never asked.” Griffin: “Again, we do not have any materials.”


In Session Judge: “The question is not for the court to ask one side, ‘Did you do what the other side wants you to do?’ . . . you’re making an allegation that you really can’t support that these things are in existence. But if you have some good faith basis for that, when Dr. Baden gets here and you have this television program, it’s certainly fertile ground for cross-examination. And if you want to make an offer of proof before Dr. Baden testifies, we can always do it that way.”

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Both sides look at a proposed instruction regarding the testimony of upcoming witness Mary Parks. Joel Brodsky: “We would object to anything involving intent.” Judge: “I think [for] the appropriate instruction in the midst of a trial . . . I think it’s better that we use the word ‘conduct’ rather than words ‘intent’ or ‘motive’ “ This issue involves what Parks may or may not have told the police. Judge: “If there’s an error, I find it to be harmless, and the defendant’s motion is overruled.”

In Session Court is in a brief recess, waiting until the proposed instruction can be typed up. Judge: “Let me know as soon as that instruction is done.” He leaves the bench.

 

[fifteen89]

How old is Greenberg? 10? Why would he tell people his own parents were DP's parents???