Drew Peterson's Trial *THIRD WEEK*

[WindyCityGirl]

I haven't read anything about it yet, but it had been reported yesterday that he would discuss that today

 

[~n/t~]

Stacy St. Clair‏@StacyStClair

#DrewPeterson jurors dressed in black today, after wearing all blue yesterday and all red the day before that.

 

[TxLady2]

I guess I got tainted from watching the CA trial. No way did I think she would have gotten off completely free, not even child neglect charges. So, that being said, I will wait and watch what happens with DP because you never know what you’re gonna get with a jury……..

This is true. However, I think juries want to hear a motive, and they want to hear how a victim died, which is two things the jury never heard in Casey's trial. Here, they have a motive, means and opportunity. They know how she died, and they know he had every opportunity AND reason to kill her. And if they don't already know that his last wife is missing, they will know it before the trial is over. So....... I don't think he is going to get away with it. JMO.

 

[katydid23]

The jurors have to be aware that Stacy is missing. They're not sequestered, are they?

They were told, three years ago I believe, NOT to read or watch anything pertaining to Drew Peterson. So I guess the question is how diligent or strictly adherent are they?

From looking at the jury description, it is possible that a few of them have no idea about Stacey being missing. But I have to believe that several of the women KNOW about it. I wonder if it will be discussed by yhem during deliberations.

I mean if they talk about her and what she told others, then won't the jury wonder why she was not called to testify?

 

[~n/t~]

I haven't read anything about it yet, but it had been reported yesterday that he would discuss that today

Not yet. No updates about the hitman yet.

 

[katydid23]

Stacy St. Clair‏@StacyStClair

#DrewPeterson jurors dressed in black today, after wearing all blue yesterday and all red the day before that.

This really bothers me for some reason. What is up with that? Jurors are supposed to be of separate minds. They are individuals and not a 'one mind' kind of unit. So why this unity thing?

 

[WindyCityGirl]

:gthanks: You are a big help here on WS. I appreciate it.

Not yet. No updates about the hitman yet.

 

[Cappuccino]

They were told, three years ago I believe, NOT to read or watch anything pertaining to Drew Peterson. So I guess the question is how diligent or strictly adherent are they?

From looking at the jury description, it is possible that a few of them have no idea about Stacey being missing. But I have to believe that several of the women KNOW about it. I wonder if it will be discussed by yhem during deliberations.

I mean if they talk about her and what she told others, then won't the jury wonder why she was not called to testify?

BBM. I hope they don't discuss it during deliberations. If its been ruled inadmissable that would be grounds for a retrial in the event of a conviction, and I doubt Kathleen's family want to go through all this twice.

 

[panthera]

They were told, three years ago I believe, NOT to read or watch anything pertaining to Drew Peterson. So I guess the question is how diligent or strictly adherent are they?

From looking at the jury description, it is possible that a few of them have no idea about Stacey being missinl

I mean if they talk about her and what she told others, then won't the jury wonder why she was not called to testify?

Good afternoon! Even *if* the jurors know little or nothing regarding Stacy's disappearance, it does stand to reason if what she said to others is brought up during the trial that they would be curious why she is not testifying to this personally.

:waitasec:

 

[katydid23]

"Something very ironic (and irritating) about Joel Brodsky trying to invoke Marital Privilege for Stacy Peterson." =========================

I AGREE. UUGGHHHHHHHHHH. How sickening of them to try and invoke 'marital privilege' after what he did to Stacey. These guys are beyond evil, imo.

 

[~n/t~]

This really bothers me for some reason. What is up with that? Jurors are supposed to be of separate minds. They are individuals and not a 'one mind' kind of unit. So why this unity thing?

katy, I really think it's a message to the Judge. The in and out of the court room must be very frustrating. They can't discuss the trial. What else is there to talk about? They get maybe 3 hours of testimony a day?

 

[~n/t~]

Hope to be back before court resumes. See you all after lunch.:seeya:

 

[Cappuccino]

katy, I really think it's a message to the Judge. The in and out of the court room must be very frustrating. They can't discuss the trial. What else is there to talk about? They get maybe 3 hours of testimony a day?

I don't know what it means, but I don't like those kind of antics on the part of a jury.

 

[Cubby]

In Session The jurors enter the courtroom, and the prosecution calls its first witness: Dr. Gene Neri (questioned by prosecutor Connor). He is a neurologist, and goes over his educational and professional background. “Did you have an opportunity to treat Kathleen Savio Peterson?” “Yes” (between 1999 and 2002). “She came in, she was 35, and she had been referred by a pain specialist; she was having pains in her neck, shoulders, and some numbness and tingling in the arms, hands ,and feet.” He treated her for “cervical vertigo . . . it’s a feeling like you have the whirlies . . . the origin is the neck; it’s usually related to the neck muscles.” “What was it that you were doing to treat her?” “If it develops as a result of stress, as it was in her case, you have to get to the root of the problem. In her case, she was not sleeping . . . she was horribly sleep-deprived . . . your pulse rises, and your hands sweat . . . and commonly the muscles in your neck get very tight. It’s a very common place for your fight-or-flight chemicals to go.”

What are the whirlies? I don't recall hearing that term. (Whirlies as in room spinning or moving?, just want to clarify. tia).

Interesting he mentioned fight or flight chemicals. I think those are related to DV, not just usual stress.

 

[Cubby]

Wonder what the judges excuse for starting 1.5 hrs late today. Isn't court supposed to start at 9am? The everyday lateness shows me this judge is
"sloppy". I am beyond infuriated at this judge.

30 min late today. They started at about 9:30 central time.

It is getting very noticable they have not once started on time. Anyone else late for work 11 days in a row would be terminated.

 

[katydid23]

BBM. I hope they don't discuss it during deliberations. If its been ruled inadmissable that would be grounds for a retrial in the event of a conviction, and I doubt Kathleen's family want to go through all this twice.

OOPS. Right. It is so frustrating. They are going to wonder why they talked about her during the trial and what she said to others, but yet she never testified.

The thing is, even if it is inadmissable, the jury does not know that. So how could it be a retrial if they stumble into the discussion of it? She is on the witness list fgs.

If they are talking about 'hearsay' of hers, and her saying that DP asked her to lie, they are obviously going to wonder why she never came forward herself to say so. It is going to be asked during the deliberations by one of them, imo. And I don't think they have been told not to discuss her, because they ARE discussing her during the trial.

 

[katydid23]

The judge will allow Stacy Peterson's friend to testify that #DrewPeterson told her to lie.

 

[Cappuccino]

OOPS. Right. It is so frustrating. They are going to wonder why they talked about her during the trial and what she said to others, but yet she never testified.

The thing is, even if it is inadmissable, the jury does not know that. So how could it be a retrial if they stumble into the discussion of it? She is on the witness list fgs.

If they are talking about 'hearsay' of hers, and her saying that DP asked her to lie, they are obviously going to wonder why she never came forward herself to say so. It is going to be asked during the deliberations by one of them, imo. And I don't think they have been told not to discuss her, because they ARE discussing her during the trial.

We'll have to see what the judge's instructions are to the jury before they begin deliberations, but if they discuss something he's told them not to consider any guilty verdict won't stand up to appeal.

I don't like these antics of dressing in the same colour either, the jury has to be above reproach, otherwise an appeals court will look twice at their verdict.

 

[panthera]

The judge will allow Stacy Peterson's friend to testify that #DrewPeterson told her to lie.

That is bombshell news! Actually, really surprised he's allowing it thinking of previous rulings.

Now the jury may wonder why she isn't testifying in person..........

 

[Livingthedream]

The judge will allow Stacy Peterson's friend to testify that #DrewPeterson told her to lie.

Now that is a HUGE blow to DP there. It's actually a crusher!