Drew Peterson's Trial *THIRD WEEK*

[Cubby]

BBM
Thank goodness. I was having flashbacks to Jose's big board.

Jose's big board, :lol:

 

[mysteriew]

The most important testimony this morning was that Dr. Blum called KS's death a homicide. If the jurors believe him (and there's no reason they shouldn't), they now have to look at all the circumstances surrounding this. DP hated his ex-wife and had motive and opportunity.

I don't want to be a doubting Thomas, but that will be a big leap for the jury. The initial autopsy done while the remains were (in the defense's words) 'fresh', labeled the death an accidental drowning. Then many years later along comes another 'expert' and another autopsy that changes it to homicide. Dueling experts can be confusing as we all know.

I wish the prosecution had gone asked the witness if he had ever had occasion to go back and change manner of death before and what types of things might lead to that change.

The advantage here is the prosecutions though. The jury did not get to hear from the original pathologist to hear why he determined the death to be accidental. So (I think) maybe the jurors will give his report less attention than they will Blum's. They heard Blum's findings as well as recieved his report. They heard his explanations as well as his findings.

 

[AbbieNormal]

Jose's big board, :lol:

I know, right????

 

[WindyCityGirl]

testimony. I thought that the testimony of her nursing school student friend Mary, the friend who lived in her basement, Kristen, as well as the testimony of the former cop yesterday was solid and delivered convincing enough info to convict.....however, I really think that this autopsy discussion was WEAK.
He didn't describe *why* he came to those conclusions with enough conviction and confidence as well as information to make me think that he won the jury. I want an informed presentation of the evidence. It was dull and weak.
It was so boring to hear ":I dont know how that could happen" rather than "there isn't any way that could happen because........"



We have another autopsy expert though, right?
Also, the motion to have the testimony of the hit man, what has happened to that? To me, that would really push through a conviction.

I had been thinking that he killed her and put her body in the bath tub. I never thought that her death had been by drowning, but now that our expert is agreeing with the cause of death, I am very perplexed. (or very confused?--Am I right here that he said that she did indeed drown too?!)
I think that it was the blunt force trauma to her head and the subsequent blood loss that killed her.

If Glasgow blows this case, I hope that he loses the election. He is worthless if he didn't get the key testimony about the hit man on the stand and that he didn't have his autopsy witness deliver stronger testimony.
He wants to win this case.......so I don't think that they are going to adopt a fatalistic attitude. I am just feeling disappointed after feeling strong last week.

BBM:

:seeya: Just jumping off your post here :

This is why I wish this trial was being televised, then we would be able to see how the prosecution is performing by their mannerisms, tone, etc ... and ... we would be able to see that judge and how he is handling things ...

I am just wondering out loud here : MAYBE the prosecution already feels "defeated" ? The judge has ruled against the prosecution on just about everything they wanted to bring into evidence ... they can't even finish a question and the DT is hopping up and down objecting ... very tiresome and overkill by the DT IMO ...

And then, the DT :clown: :clown: have gotten their way on just about everything because the judge clearly favors the DT with his "biased" rulings ...

Again, maybe the prosecutors feel like they are now in a "no-win situation" ...

lease: Oh, but I hope I am WRONG and am over-speculating here ...

But it sure looks and sounds like the feel defeated ...

:moo:

 

[sfnelson67]

While I agree with most of your post, I differ on my interpetation of the struggle. He got in (through the garage, ruse like picking something up, or simply by knocking on the door at a time that she was sleeping soundly.) A knee to the abdomen would double her over, then a choke hold while dragging her upstairs. The blow to the abdomen would leave her struggling to breathe, and a choke hold is very difficult to escape.

I think he planned to drown her. But I think while he was trying to stopper the tub and run the water and hold her... she recovered enough to struggle. At that time he struck her in the head with something.

I believe there was some water in the bottom of the tub, but not enough to have drowned her unless she was unconcious. Thus the combo of the head injury and inhaling water caused the sinuses to be full... but positioning over the side of the tub and probably decreased respirations prevented water from making it to her lungs. In the time that elapsed between her death and her being found, some water would have most likely drained out. But not a full tub. So maybe an inch or so of water in the tub?

One of the strongest things that convinces me that DrewP was involved in her death was how she was found. When she wasn't available to get the boys, DrewP didn't contact family in search of her. To me, you would do that before you jump to the conclusion of something wrong in the home. And DrewP arranged for witnesses (not family) to be present when she was found. I really really hope that the prosecution points that out.

If DrewP had contacted family in search of her, the family are the ones who would have most likely found her. And DrewP wouldn't have an excuse to be present and controlling the scene.

Thinking back on it....Another snakey Peterson made family members suspicious when instead of calling around to see if anyone knew where his wife was, he made the crucial mistake of calling his mother-in-law and saying..."Laci is missing!" Normally most people (unless the already know where someone is cuz they killed them) will make several calls to friends, family, boyfriends, etc. and say "Hey I've got the kids...she was supposed to get them...yada, yada, yada...do you know where she is? Tell her to call ASAP" Human nature usually dictates in most normal circumstances that we seek out the simplest least threatening scenario when the whereabouts of a loved one is in question. Kinda seems like DP knew what was going to be found when he got neighbors, a locksmith, and police to meet him at the house. Also questionable that he would hang back casually chatting with the locksmith. If I had gotten to the point of panic to involve all of those people for a welfare check on my loved one I would get in the door as fast as I could going all over the house yelling that family member's name until I found them..Thats just me..What about the rest of you guys?
Sfnelson67

 

[Bravo]

Anyone catch Beth and Dr. Perper on IS? Beth said she saw photos of K. Her chest area covered in lividity. Dr Perper responds she had to have died laying on her stomach. Anyone catch that?

 

[AbbieNormal]

Determining the Age of a Bruise by its Color

Color of Bruise/ Age of Bruise
Red (swollen, tender) 0-2 days
Blue, Purple 2-5 days
Green 5-7 days
Yellow 7-10 days
Brown 10-14 days
No further evidence of bruising: 2-4 weeks

Maybe this will help some. If one ME says the bruises were "old" and one says "within an hr of her death", that's a pretty big discrepancy, IMO.

Hopefully some brilliant mind points this out in the courtroom, lest the jurors missed that.

"Brilliant minds" leaves the DT out.

jmo

 

[WindyCityGirl]

when I saw the photo on the projector in person.
Our expert said that was a natural progression post mortem, so this info from Dr. Perper is *very interesting*

Anyone catch Beth and Dr. Perper on IS? Beth said she saw photos of K. Her chest area covered in lividity. Dr Perper responds she had to have died laying in her stomach. Anyone catch that?

 

[Madeleine74]

We're not able to see the tenor and cadence and mannerisms of witnesses. We're seeing snippets of testimony as filtered through someone posting for I.S. Pathologist testimony is often dry and clinical...they are scientists. A witness cannot stand up and proclaim loudly, "And THAT is why I can say, with scientific certainty that Ms. Savio's death was the result of a homicideeeee.!!!111!!!"

It's not a TV drama. This is the meat & potatoes of trials, day in and out. Some of the information is technical and boring and seems altogether underwhelming.

 

[AbbieNormal]

Anyone catch Beth and Dr. Perper on IS? Beth said she saw photos of K. Her chest area covered in lividity. Dr Perper responds she had to have died laying in her stomach. Anyone catch that?

Wow. Why would DP have left her on her stomach for so long? Lividity takes
time. I envisioned DP dragging her down a few steps (knees, left elbow and her buttocks, the areas of prominence that would have made contact w/ carpet on stairs.) BTW I think the poster that described her being dragged down the steps by DP as she was scrambling to get upstairs to the safety of her bedroom w/ the deadlock... jmo

Maybe DP killed her in the morning (tea and OJ) and went back that night to get her clothing, which is when Stacey woke up and described him stuffing clothing (women's) into the wash.

Why would DP have staged the scene w/ the towel, which was not in the original death scene photos of the bathroom, knowing that the cops took pics of the scene prior to him staging it? If he was going to stage it, why did he not put a wineglass in the bathroom while he was at it?

All :moo:

(gotta go take my grandson for ice cream, hope to catch up later...)

 

[21merc7]

Autopsy report says:

The lungs combined weigh 900 g.

http://www.acandyrose.com/2004-03-01-SavioAutopsyReport-(pg03).jpg

So that is the lungs as removed from the body on March 1, 2004.

 

[Madeleine74]

If she didn't die on her stomach, she was soon placed in a position where blood would pool in that direction-of her chest, to cause lividity there.

 

[ohiogirl]

Just a guess but maybe the pros decided it best to let the defense do their own work to demonstrate how desperate and ridiculous they look.

just a guess though.

If so, that would be a bad move on their part as the defense has just stated in front of the jury that this witness has given biased information to the state before. jmo

 

[ohiogirl]

We're not able to see the tenor and cadence and mannerisms of witnesses. We're seeing snippets of testimony as filtered through someone posting for I.S. Pathologist testimony is often dry and clinical...they are scientists. A witness cannot stand up and proclaim loudly, "And THAT is why I can say, with scientific certainty that Ms. Savio's death was the result of a homicideeeee.!!!111!!!"

It's not a TV drama. This is the meat & potatoes of trials, day in and out. Some of the information is technical and boring and seems altogether underwhelming.

I just want someone to clear up the amount of fluid in her lungs. That is all I ask at this point. jmo :waitasec:

 

[Madeleine74]

To me the details of body placement, etc. is not as compelling as the fact that 2 pathologists (Blum & Baden) separately declared KS's death a homicide. Everything else is a list of reasons why they came to their conclusions. A lay person isn't going to have a particular reason to argue facts of what 2 pathologists saw.

As for the first path, the late Dr. Mitchell, well...he's dead and isn't able to testify about the report he wrote.

 

[Madeleine74]

I just want someone to clear up the amount of fluid in her lungs. That is all I ask at this point. jmo :waitasec:

No worries, Ohio. I was responding to the "OMG!!111!!! the PT is blowing it and all is lost and hopeless and terrible and the world might be ending..." type posts, not the ones asking for clarification on the autopsy details.

 

[panthera]

To me the details of body placement, etc. is not as compelling as the fact that 2 pathologists (Blum & Baden) separately declared KS's death a homicide. Everything else is a list of reasons why they came to their conclusions. A lay person isn't going to have a particular reason to argue facts of what 2 pathologists saw.

As for the first path, the late Dr. Mitchell, well...he's dead and isn't able to testify about the report he wrote.

This wouldn't be the first case either when a death is ruled one way initially then upon further investigation it is determined otherwise. I do expect the defense to make an issue of Dr. Mitchell's report, however, the jury may just use common sense and go with what they hear from Dr. Blum and Baden.

MOO

 

[passionflower]

If this were a dispatched call to a residence with someone other than his ex-wife involved would he have called a locksmith? Is calling a locksmith to get into someone's home normal police protocol? Is it also normal protocol to not check other avenues because someone isn't home? Isn't this the very reason there usually is a waiting period before an adult can be reported missing?

This further confirms, and always has in my opinion, that he knew Kathleen was upstairs in the bathtub - dead.



MOO

Here in PA, personal experience.
My grandma called for a wellness check,
my dad was to pick her up for Sat. night mass.
She never heard from him
When police came and noted his car in garage,
no lights on etc, they just had equipment to
get in.
My dad was dead in the house.......
natural causes.
No locksmith...........

 

[Bravo]

If interested a good article on lividity

http://www.forensicpathologyonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=54&Itemid=116l

 

[dog.gone.cute]

OK, I really don't get why the 2007 autopsy report is allowed to be admitted into evidence, but the jury can't look at it. What, what?

BBM: The jury can't READ IT or LOOK AT IT ? OMG, seriously :banghead:

Now, I haven't read the entire thread yet, but this is just outrageous if this is the case ...

And if this is true, there is something really wrong here ... really wrong !

:moo: