Drew Peterson's Trial *THIRD WEEK*

[katydid23]

#drewpeterson atty blasts expert for noting a prosecutor in report. Expert says ASA stood for chem compound, not asst state's atty. Oops.

 

[WindyCityGirl]

incompetent for them not to have their papers ready.......they knew that this was the first witness and have had a THREE day weekend to prepare. Pathetic!

SOP for this defense. Ask questions, but don't have your references handy. This judge is way to patient with this boloney, imo!

 

[ohiogirl]

#drewpeterson atty blasts expert for noting a prosecutor in report. Expert says ASA stood for chem compound, not asst state's atty. Oops.

lmao!

 

[Shelby1]

In Session The witness and the jury are now back in the courtroom, and attorney Goldberg resumes his cross-examination. He shows the witness a document, and asks him to review it. “See that highlighted portion on the very bottom, ‘Comment ASA’ . . . doesn’t that mean comment to the prosecutor as soon as possible?” “No, Sir . . . it means [a chemical].” The witness is then shown another document. “You recognize this as a letter you prepared on or about June 18, 2010?’ “Yes, Sir.” “It’s addressed to Mr. Connor?” “Yes, Sir.” Goldberg reads the letter.

In Session “You did, in fact, not do a single test in this case?” “That’s correct; the staff did.” “As a director of the lab, you sign your name to the reports?” “Yes, Sir.” “And you just made an assumption that the tests were done correctly?’ “Well, I don’t know that I’d call it an assumption, but I agree with you.” “And you assume that the machinery was performing correctly?” “Yes, Sir.”

 

[Shelby1]

In Session A graph is projected for the jurors. At the same time, the defendant is given a hard copy. “This is a work sheet about what was tested, and the results of those tests?” “Yes, Sir.” “It suggests that liver tissue was tested in this case, and it was diluted four times before it was tested?” “Yes..” “And then it’s extracted to perform those tests?” “Yes.” “Based upon the gas chromatography test used in your lab that suggests the things that were there?” “Suggests.” The witness is then shown another document that lists several prescription medications. “Zoloft is an anti-depressant medication?” “Right.” “So when you said there were no anti-depressants in the tissue you tested, that wasn’t exactly true, was it?” “No, that is true . . . ‘suggests.’” “You never did confirmatory testing to see if that was an accurate readout?’ “We did not do confirmatory testing.”

 

[katydid23]

Toxicology expert in #drewpeterson case growing annoyed with defense questioning.

"Long sounds bored as Goldberg continues with cross. Goldberg “Zoloft is an anti-depressant medication?” “Right
“So when u said no anti-depressants in the tissue u tested, that wasn’t exactly true, was it?” “No, that's true, ‘suggests.’”

Goldberg “You never did confirmatory testing to see if that was an accurate readout?’ “We did not do confirmatory testing."

Goldberg: test "suggests" presence of Zoloft, but no confirmatory test was performed? Long: that is correct.

When expert said he is unaware of celebrex side effects, #drewpeterson atty asks if he's never seen an infomercial. Objection sustained

Defense crosses Long, Long's staff did the test, he did not do any of the tests

 

[seattlechiquita]

morning everyone. Feeling a tad :sick: today

 

[katydid23]

InSession: #drewpeterson witness no testing for #Lipitor or #celebrex. He says when tests are done years later, it's possible to get false positives.

 

[Shelby1]

In Session “Methadone is a powerful opiate?” “Yes.” “So you did a test to make sure it was not there?” “Yes.” “Lipitor is a drug that would not show up in your tests?” “That’s correct.” “The same thing goes for Celebrex?” “That’s right . . . it could be there.” “And Celebrex has side effects?” “Yes.” Objection/Overruled. “There have been lawsuits about the lethal effects of Celebrex?” “I am not aware of that . . . I’m sure there have been lawsuits with every drug.” “And a side effect of Lipitor can be muscle aches and pains?” “Yes.” “And Yasmin, the birth control drug, has side effects, too?” “We did not have picked that up . . . and I may have misspoken about Celebrex; we may pick that up.” “You have no exact knowledge of where the tissue for the 2007 testing came from?” “From the liver.” “But if it was sitting in embalming fluid in Ms. Savio’s fluid, it would be somewhat be preserved?” “Yes.” “Or in a jar of formaldehyde, at the coroner’s office, that would be preserved, too?” “Yes.” “But chemicals can leach out?” “Yes.” “So when you test things years later, you often get false positives?” “It can happen . . . yes.”

 

[katydid23]

Expert in #drewpeterson case said toxicology reports would not have shown any herbal "fat blaster" pills Savio may have been taking.
defense has no further questions for this witness; state begins re-direct.

 

[Shelby1]

In Session The witness is shown a document, which he reads silently to himself. “Is your memory now refreshed about the questions you were asked at that deposition?” “Not really.” “And you swore to tell the truth, just as you did today?” “Yes.” “And you were asked specifically about tissue that had been stored in embalming fluid?” “Brain tissue . . . you get different results with brain than with liver.” “But chemicals can leach out?” “It can.” “There are other compounds, such as herbs that are not picked up in your testing?” “That is correct.” “For example, you understand that many people take fat blaster pills?” “I’ve heard of them.” ‘If she told doctors she was taking fat blaster medications, that is something that wouldn’t be picked up by you?” “It would depend on what it was . . . [but] probably not.” That concludes the cross-examination of this witness.

 

[katydid23]

They must be feeling desperate. " Fat Blasting' pills. The defense wanted to pint out that she might have been talking fat blasters? So what. Do they make people pass out and die?

 

[Shelby1]

In Session Prosecutor Connor begins his redirect. ”You were asked a number of questions about embalming fluid. Was there any embalming fluid on the tissues that you tested in 2004?” Objection/Overruled. “No, Sir, there wasn’t.” “And when you did the 2007 testing, you were already aware of the 2004 results?” Oh, absolutely.”
In Session The witness explains how some of his lab machinery works. “It’s a very prolonged process . . . in doing the testing for aspirin, we know the decomposition will give us false positives. The 2004 was negative, in a fresh sample. So unless they started taking aspirin in the coffin, it ain’t gonna be there.” The attorneys then approach for a sidebar.

 

[Shelby1]

In Session The sidebar ends. Once again, shown a document, the witness explains a notation to “ASA” on a report. “It doesn’t refer to an Assistant State’s Attorney . . . it refers to our testing process.”

In Session The witness defends the employees at his lab. “Our people are certified by both the States of Missouri and Illinois. Each individual person is certified.” He also notes that his lab equipment is easily worth more than $1.5 million. “This is a system of checks and balances; if one person makes a mistake, they don’t have the opportunity to correct it. Another person will catch it, and correct it. So there’s no way that people can cover up things.”

 

[21merc7]

Found this so far on Fat Blaster:

http://www.thedietpillreview.com/buy-online-liproxenol.php

 

[Shelby1]

In Session According to Long, “the test for salicylates goes back to probably before I was born.” The witness then explains why there was not more testing for some substances in 2007, based on the fact that the 2044 testing had already been done. “You have to interpret the results. Just because a computer kicks something out doesn’t make it real . . . we tested the samples in 2004; It’s not there at the beginning, it can’t be there at the end.”

In Session “Can you explain how you ensure in the lab that the equipment is working properly?” “We run standards and controls . . . all the data is reviewed, and re-reviewed, and re-reviewed.”

In Session “How does decomposition account for your results?” Objection/Sustained.

 

[Shelby1]

In Session This ends the redirect, and Goldberg begins his recross. The witness repeats that he had “a block” of liver tissue to work with in this case, which would help avoid the defense-alleged leaching problem in 2007. “You like to be neutral an accurate?” “Yes, Sir.” “You didn’t do any of these tests?:” “No.” “So you don’t know who double-checked the machines and the data?” “Well, I double-checked the data.” “But you’re assuming the information that comes out of these machines is accurate?” “Yes, Sir.” “Those tests, let’s talk about Xanax . . .” “The closer she took it to death, the greater the possibility of detecting it.” That ends the testimony of this witness, and he is excused.

 

[Shelby1]

The jurors have been excused from the courtroom. Judge: “There’s a matter we have to address before the next witness?” Prosecutor Kathy Patton says that the next witness may be Bolingbrook police officer Teresa Kernc.

 

[Shelby1]

In Session Prosecutor Kathy Patton says that the next witness may be Bolingbrook police officer Teresa Kernc. “At the hearsay hearing, Judge White allowed her testimony in a redacted form . . . he admitted the July 5th statement without the redacted portion. . . in his opinion, the judge did allow the redacted written statement . . . the State allowed the witness to testify for the reason Kathleen Savio crossed out the words about the knife, and she told her why . . . Judge White said in his holding on that day, ‘No, no, you want me to let in more hearsay, why Kathleen Savio scratched out . . .why she scratched it out, that’s hearsay.’ That was before the decision of the appellate court. The State, subsequent to that decision, filed our motion in limine requesting additional hearsay statements, and asked for the complete statement. We explained in that motion the reasons we need to go into that.” Judge: “Her testimony will be that she saw her [Savio] write the word ‘knife,’ and then saw her scratch it out?” Patton: “We’re asking her to be allowed to put in what she [Savio] told her . . . I have advised the witness not to talk about any other things that could be construed as bad acts, only to talk about the July 5 incident.”.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

#drewpeterson atty blasts expert for noting a prosecutor in report. Expert says ASA stood for chem compound, not asst state's atty. Oops.

:floorlaugh:

I'm super multi-taksing today. Watching Andrea Schneiderman, reading her when I can, and helping get a 60 foot red oak cut up into firewood. Oh, that's all one big headache!