Drew Peterson's Trial *THIRD WEEK*

[katydid23]

atty Greenberg says Peterson doesn't feel like he should have to go through another trial after so many errors by the state.

 

[seattlechiquita]

@Glen Marshall

Jury has been sent home. Court in recess.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Judge: “What I was advised of was that it was all or nothing . . . give us the mistrial with prejudice, or forget it.” Greenberg: “Judge, the issue is first of all whether or not there should be a mistrial, with or without prejudice; that’s up to you. That is a decision you have to make. I suppose the issue that Mr. Brodsky was arguing is that Mr. Peterson does not feel that given what has transpired that he should have to go through this again. We feel we’ve been goaded through this repeatedly, and a mistrial with prejudice is the appropriate remedy. If you feel a mistrial is appropriate, but without prejudice, then perhaps we’d like to fashion a different remedy.” Judge: “I’m not going to come back here and say, ‘This is what I’m going to do, if it’s all right with Mr. Peterson. That’s not going to happen. If you want to withdraw your request for a mistrial, please feel free to do so . . . but to say the defendant can ask for one kind of a mistrial or not another, that’s not going to happen. I think I’ve heard enough from everyone . . . I’m going to take this under advisement until 9:00 tomorrow morning . . . I’ve already sent the jury home. We’re in recess.”

 

[panthera]

"You don't say to the court we only get a mistrial the way want the mistrial" -Judge Burmilla

A ray of hope for justice for Kathleen.........

 

[katydid23]

judge says he will rule on mistrial tomorrow morning.:what:

 

[panthera]

atty Greenberg says Peterson doesn't feel like he should have to go through another trial after so many errors by the state.

Huge mistake from what I'm reading of the Judge's comments.........

:what:

 

[Noway]

ABC 7 Chicago ‏@abc7chicago #DrewPeterson judge: No decision on mistrial; jury sent home. Court resumes tomorrow, 9 a.m.

 

[TxLady2]

IA; I don't know why he doesn't strike the question and just move on but he seems to just take his jollies from calling the state out. I get being pissy though since the state has made mistakes before but this doesn't seem too big of a deal.

Taken by itself... no. But together with the other mistakes, it may be a big deal to this judge. He can't let them keep doing these same things. How many times can they instruct the jury to disregard statements? Everybody knows that it's still out there, once it's said, it's remembered. You can't unring a bell.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session

15 seconds ago.


The Drew Peterson murder trial is in recess until 9:00 CT/10:00 ET Wednesday morning. At that time, Judge Burmila will presumably make his ruling on the mistrial request.

 

[katydid23]

suppose the issue that Mr. Brodsky was arguing is that Mr. Peterson does not feel that given what has transpired that he should have to go through this again. We feel we’ve been goaded through this repeatedly, and a mistrial with prejudice is the appropriate remedy.===========================================

Awwww...Poooor Drew. Has it been annoying for him to hear the TRUTH being said out loud in front of the jurors?

 

[Shelby1]

ACK! Now I get to worry all night.

 

[Noway]

I think the judge will make the right decision. I'm hoping so.

 

[WindyCityGirl]

Yes, it was a mistake by the prosecution but not earth shatteringly so.......this shouldn't be the cause of another disruption.
Honestly though.....the prosecution had THREE years to prepare for this trial. Things should be smooth sailing. Granted the defense is a royal pain in the arse, but that is to be expected.....the prosecution should not be messing up like this.
This is very frustrating and annoying:maddening:!

@Glen Marshall

Jury has been sent home. Court in recess.

 

[LaLaw2000]

ACK! Now I get to worry all night.

me too

 

[WindyCityGirl]

to Mr. Peterson....it is perfectly acceptable to run down the victim mercilessly and irrelevantly. Where is the just in justice? This is complete and utter bullshot

suppose the issue that Mr. Brodsky was arguing is that Mr. Peterson does not feel that given what has transpired that he should have to go through this again. We feel we’ve been goaded through this repeatedly, and a mistrial with prejudice is the appropriate remedy.===========================================

Awwww...Poooor Drew. Has it been annoying for him to hear the TRUTH being said out loud in front of the jurors?

 

[TxLady2]

In Session Judge: “What I was advised of was that it was all or nothing . . . give us the mistrial with prejudice, or forget it.” Greenberg: “Judge, the issue is first of all whether or not there should be a mistrial, with or without prejudice; that’s up to you. That is a decision you have to make. I suppose the issue that Mr. Brodsky was arguing is that Mr. Peterson does not feel that given what has transpired that he should have to go through this again. We feel we’ve been goaded through this repeatedly, and a mistrial with prejudice is the appropriate remedy. If you feel a mistrial is appropriate, but without prejudice, then perhaps we’d like to fashion a different remedy.” Judge: “I’m not going to come back here and say, ‘This is what I’m going to do, if it’s all right with Mr. Peterson. That’s not going to happen. If you want to withdraw your request for a mistrial, please feel free to do so . . . but to say the defendant can ask for one kind of a mistrial or not another, that’s not going to happen. I think I’ve heard enough from everyone . . . I’m going to take this under advisement until 9:00 tomorrow morning . . . I’ve already sent the jury home. We’re in recess.”

Good for him!! It should be the judge's decision whether a mistrial is granted, and with or without prejudice. Of COURSE DP doesn't want to have to go through another trial!! But it's not his decision... thank GOD!

 

[~n/t~]

Is it too late to have this Judge recuse himself? I guess so, eh? Wishful thinking on my part? There is an obvious conflict here. I honestly do not see this as being such a big deal. I really don't. It didn't cause the accused murderer to not have a fair trial. The evidence will convict him. Partial or impartial. The pros have to work with what they have to put this behind bars forever. So much evidence was surpressed and not allowed in, IMO it is very much understandable that there may be issues and those are always addressed. It's not a reason for a mistrial. Human error happens.

Move on. Enough drama. At this rate, the accused murderer is going to die of old age before he's sentenced.

 

[Cubby]

Idiots.

:banghead: :rollercoaster::bang:


If this becomes a mistrial with prejudice the pros has no one to blame but themselves.

damn.

 

[Cubby]

I have NO confidence that they can get it together, ever. They arrested him in 2009, wrote a new law to get him to trial, and still they cannot follow orders.

They seem to be doing this deliberately.

Which will piss me off to see the sunglasses win.

Oh no, and that just got me thinking about this DT team dancing around like the 86 bears did in the Superbowl Shuffle.

I think I've lost it.

 

[Cubby]

It has crossed my mind that they might be doing this deliberately just to be able to arrest him for Stacy.

But who knows.

I don't see that happening..... and I am no where near caught up, but at this point I am almost ready to say I am as certain that Drew is going to walk as I am the Cubs will not be going to the world series this year with 40 something wins. ARGH!