Drew Peterson's Trial *SECOND WEEK*

[dog.gone.cute]

You know... I'm with CarolinaMoon on this one. I am seriously thinking that once the prosecution is over and the defense asks for a mistrial for lack of evidence, Burmilla could possibly grant it. And I would not be surprised.

:seeya: Oh, I hope NOT ! BUT I would NOT be surprised either if Burmila grants it ! :banghead:

I hope and pray this jury can clearly see through all the defense and defendant's :liar:

:waitasec: But then again, the jury may not even get the chance IF this were to happen ...

lease:

 

[Shelby1]

You back, NT?

 

[~n/t~]

BBM: This was totally uncalled for ! :banghead:

This judge needs to tell these defense :clown::clown: to STOP the prejudicial remarks !

These kind of remarks are totally inappropriate, unprofessional ... and somewhat racist, IMO !

Could you just imagine what would happen if the Prosecutors referred to Drew's ethnicity or race or whatever ? The defense :clown: :clown: would be screaming for a sidebar, or possibly a mistrial !

:moo:

I don't get where he's going with that line of questioning. So what she was Italian? Is he saying some Italian mobster killed Kathleen? I suppose he's throwing anything against the wall to see what sticks.

Too bad poor Kathleen wasn't feisty enough to put the in a casket instead. Just sayin.... :whistle:

 

[~n/t~]

You back, NT?

Not for long.....I have to get ready for my dinner date with my boys. LOL

It was my son's bday on the 8th and we're going out for dinner.

 

[LambChop]

You back, NT?

Yep....n/t is back. lol

 

[~n/t~]

In Session

Both sets of attorneys are now inside the courtroom. Judge Burmila returns to the bench. Prosecutor Connor says that the next witness will be Susan Doman. After Doman, we’ll hear from either Susan McCauley or Dominick DeFrancesco. The judge sends for the jurors.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session
The jury has returned to the courtroom. New witness Susan Doman takes the stand (questioned by prosecutor Connor). “How did you know Kathleen Savio?” “She’s my sister.” “Did you attend her wedding to Drew Peterson?” “No.” “Can you exp
lain why?” Objection/Sustained. “How long did ago did you meet him?” “They were married for ten years . . . so a little more than ten years.” She then identifies the defendant in the courtroom. “Did you have an occasion to be with him at family gatherings?” “Yes, the holidays. And also camping trips . . . my sister and I and the boys would go camping, and he would come.” “Who would go on these trips?” Objection/Overruled. “It would be myself, and Kathleen and her boys, and Drew.” ‘Did your husband go, too?” “No.” “Did you have occasion to see the defendant when he was happy?” “Yes.” ‘And also when he was not happy?” “Yes.”

 

[~n/t~]

In Session
During the course of Savio’s divorce, she was in contact with her. On a couple of occasions, she spent the night at Savio’s house. “Have any specific recollection of if your sister prepared for a bath?” Objection/Overruled. “Yes, I did.
” “Can you describe on those specific occasions what you saw your sister do?” Objection/Sustained. “The first time you spent the night at your sister’s residence, can you give us a rough idea of when that was?’ “It was around Christmas; I’m not sure what year.” “Could you describe what you saw?’ “I was downstairs with the boys, near the fireplace, playing video games. She came down, and had a robe on, and had her hair up, with maybe a comb or something holding up her hair.” “When was the second time you spent the night at her residence?” “I can’t give you a day or year; it was just a time we decided to get together . . . she was very frustrated that day, because . . .” Objection/Sustained. “What did you see that day as your sister got ready to take a bath; she was very frustrated . . .” Objection/Sustained. “Could you describe what you saw your sister do?” “She was walking past me in the kitchen area . . . she was talking to me as she was putting up her hair, and said she was going to take a bath; she had a hard day . . . it was in the evening.” The prior incident she described was also in the evening. “On either of those occasions, did you observe your sister when she was actually taking the bath?” “This was before she took a bath.”

 

[~n/t~]

In Session “I want to turn your attention to a conversation you had with your sister . . . can you tell the jury what she described?” Objection/Overruled. “She had told me that she was in the basement, and her husband Drew had a knife by her throat. And he said that he could kill her, and make it look like an accident . . . she was terrified.” “Can you tell the jury on how many occasions did your sister describe that incident to you?” “Several times.” “What were the circumstances under which she described that?” “I don’t remember.”

 

[~n/t~]

Getting very frustrating to read through the Drew defenders who have suddenly become more visable on IS threads. Having to weed through the cr@p :banghead:

 

[HauntsForHope]

Seems there is no such thing as a self draining tub, unless there was something wrong with the plug. .... Can't find anything about self draining jacuzzi tubs. The only self draining refers to the pumps and pipes underneath a jacuzzi tub that self drain into the main drain when the plug is pulled. http://www.luxuryspasinc.com/store/product265.html

http://www.luxuryspasinc.com/store/product265.html

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The witness is asked about the week prior to Savio’s death. “Did she make a phone call to you?” “Yes.” “Can you describe what she asked you to do?” Objection. The attorneys approach for a sidebar.

In Session The sidebar ends. The judge asks the bailiff to remove the jury.

 

[~n/t~]

Be back in a few...Shelby can you take over?

 

[Shelby1]

Seems there is no such thing as a self draining tub, unless there was something wrong with the plug. .... Can't find anything about self draining jacuzzi tubs. The only self draining refers to the pumps and pipes underneath a jacuzzi tub that self drain into the main drain when the plug is pulled.

http://www.luxuryspasinc.com/store/product265.html

I didn't find anything either. Nice lie, Drew....a self-draining tub, eh?

 

[Shelby1]

Be back in a few...Shelby can you take over?

I can for a bit

 

[lonetraveler]

I didn't find anything either. Nice lie, Drew....a self-draining tub, eh?

Yep, tub was "him" self-draining!

 

[LambChop]

In Session The witness is asked about the week prior to Savio’s death. “Did she make a phone call to you?” “Yes.” “Can you describe what she asked you to do?” Objection. The attorneys approach for a sidebar.

In Session The sidebar ends. The judge asks the bailiff to remove the jury.

That one lasted, what 20 minutes????

 

[Shelby1]

In Session The jurors are now gone. Attorney Greenberg objects to the statements the prosecution is trying to elicit from this witness. “This witness, there were certain statements originally ruled inadmissible by Judge White . . . we took that to mean additional statements would not be admissible.” Connor responds: “I thought we had addressed this with Kristin Anderson . . . I thought at that point Your Honor had made a ruling, and we did not need to argue additionally.” Judge: “If the defendant’s arguments are the same, my ruling will be the same.” Greenberg continues to object. Judge: “We argued this just two days ago . . . you’re making a different argument now? . . . you have me at a loss.” There is a pause while both sides of attorneys scramble to find a transcript of the earlier occasion upon which this issue was discussed.

 

[Shelby1]

In Session Judge Burmila decides to call a brief recess, until the transcript can be located. But before anyone leaves the room, attorney Joe Lopez comes up with it. So the judge remains on the bench, and is handed the transcript.

 

[Shelby1]

In Session The judge has now finished reading the transcript. Judge: “OK, I’m familiar with this.” Brodsky continues to argue against the admissibility of the statement in question. Judge: “We had a hearing; it was in the context of the facial reliability. I made a ruling; I made a distinction . . . I’ll note a continuing defense objection to each and every one of those, that I was incorrect when I said they were not the law of the case. So the record is clear on that.” The judge then sends for the jury and the witness.