Drew Peterson's Trial *THIRD WEEK*

[~n/t~]

In Session The witness identifies a rehab record from 11/09/01. It notes that for Savio “all actions guarded, and the patient avoids fast movements.” “So in November of 2001, she was progressing well under your treatment?” “Yes . . . she was being cautious in her movements. That’s what I was saying about cervical vertigo; the patients are very cautious.” The witness notes that he’s been practicing for 32 years. “Adavan [Lorazpam] is my go-to drug for sleep; Zoloft is my go-to drug for serotonin saving. They’re very safe. And I have never had a problem . . .” The defense objects, and the parties go to a sidebar.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The sidebar ends. The witness says he’s never had an experience with a patient having a problem with either drug. “By the time she left, she was doing much better . . . still cautious, but considerably better. The personality of this individual is going to be the same from when I saw her until the end of her life; people do not change their personality. Therefore, my feeling is she would not have changed suddenly after leaving me and become a different patient; people are true to themselves.” “The dosages you prescribed for Kathleen Savio, were they low, medium, or high?” “The Lorazepam, that was never more than two tables at bedtime. That’s on the low end. Zoloft . . . it’s a mid-range dose.” That concludes the redirect examination.


In Session Defense Attorney Greenberg begins his recross.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session “The last time you saw her, you actually increased her Zoloft dosage to 100 mgs?” “Yes.” “You have no idea about Miss Savio’s condition unless she tells you?” “Right.” “You said your personality doesn’t change?” “Right.” “But depending on who you talk to, your personality may be different?” Objection/Overruled. “Not if they want to be treated.” “So they may not present their true personality?” “I suppose . . . we’re pretty used to sorting that out . . . personality doesn’t change. If they want something, they may attempt to get it . . . your normal personality is what you return to when your chemicals are balanced again.”

 

[~n/t~]

In Session “You learned during your course of Miss Savio’s treatment that she had a history of irregular heartbeat?’ “She had a murmur that was not significant . . . she had palpitations.” “Would you agree she told a doctor that she had a history of an irregular heartbeat?:” “Yes, I would.” “One of the historical tests that have been done to diagnose muscular sclerosis is to put the patient in a hot bath?” “That’s how we used to do it.” “And you hear of a much higher percentage of people with multiple sclerosis drowning in a bathtub?” “Not like that.” “Whether someone had multiple sclerosis or not, when you take a hot bath, you vassal dilate?” Objection/Sustained. “That bath test has never been discredited, has it?” “No.” That concludes the recross, and the witness is excused.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The jurors have been excused from the courtroom. Judge: “There’s some issue with the next witness?” The attorneys approach for a sidebar.

 

[~n/t~]

In Session The sidebar ends. Brodsky addresses the judge, complains that the people in the gallery have occasionally given a response to testimony, such as a gasp or laughter. Judge: “There are some occasions that take place during a trial where something is said that’s humorous . . . but yesterday, there was an audible gasp from the audience in front of the jury, in response to a question from Mr. Meczyk that they obviously disapproved of. The same thing happened to a lesser extent today . . . in the future, if there should be any such reactions, the Court will have to take what it believes is appropriate action to make sure the jury is free of that sort of influence. If that involves removing individuals from the courtroom, that’s a sanction that I’ll take into consideration . . I’ll be forced to take some remedies that everybody may not be happy with.”

 

[Livingthedream]

Someone please help me here. I do not have any doubt that this jury will find that KS was murdered. That said, does anyone here think that the state has proven that DP did it?

I'm not saying logically and obviously, but beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[katydid23]

After Neri's lawyer joke, #DrewPeterson atty Brodsky asks judge to tell the court not to laugh or react to testimony.

Burmila says he's not experienced laughter adversly affecting a case, but asks galllery to "keep emotions in check."

judge: No more gasping or public demonstrations or people could be removed from courtroom.

judge says laughter is OK, if it's not mean-spirited. But he heard gasps yesterday, doesn't like it. Orders gallery to behave

Brodsky asking Burmila to remind court not to gasp. We didn't hear gasp. Instead: laughter during alcohol comment.

 

[katydid23]

Someone please help me here. I do not have any doubt that this jury will find that KS was murdered. That said, does anyone here think that the state has proven that DP did it?

I'm not saying logically and obviously, but beyond a reasonable doubt.

Maybe not yet, but they will, imo. They will attack his alibi and show he lied.

 

[LambChop]

Someone please help me here. I do not have any doubt that this jury will find that KS was murdered. That said, does anyone here think that the state has proven that DP did it?

I'm not saying logically and obviously, but beyond a reasonable doubt.

I see motive and opportunity, yes. jmo

 

[katydid23]

#DrewPeterson defense trying to prevent Stacy Peterson's friend Scott Rosetto from testifying, saying he changed his story

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Attorney Greenberg now addresses the upcoming testimony of prosecution witness Scott Rossetto. “I think Judge White found the events [Rossetto relates] to be unreliable . . . we’ve got different statements being attributed to Stacy, and different places the statement allegedly took place at, at different times . . . I think the unreliability finding has to be given more respect, more weight than some of the other statements . . . this is so unreliable that I don’t think it can pass the due process analysis.”

 

[AbbieNormal]

In Session The witness is asked about the fact that Savio may have been taking fat blasters, or herbal supplements. “Those could theoretically interfere with any prescription medication given to Ms. Savio by you or any other doctor?” “Yes.” “Do you agree that 10 to 20 percent of all patients who take Zoloft suffer nervous system side effects?” “There are a lot of factors involved.” Objection. The prosecution asks for a sidebar.

In Session The jurors have been excused from the courtroom. Judge: “There’s some issue with the next witness?” The attorneys approach for a sidebar.

Oh Em Gee, enough with the sidebars already. :banghead:

Is it me or shouldn't any issues w/ a witness be hashed out BEFORE a trial? Seems to me the CA trial had banged out a lot of stuff beforehand.

My friend across the street says "Well, that's Will county for ya'!"

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Prosecutor Glasgow responds: “[Pastor] Neil Schori does not know this individual, nor does Mr. Rossetto know Mr. Schori . . . [but] [Rossetto’s statement] is almost identical to the statement that one day later Mr. Schori comes forward with

 

[~n/t~]

In Session Judge: “Well, as I said previously in regards to the argument of a due process claim, it doesn’t appear from a legal perspective to me to be unreliable on its face . . . so the motion to prevent the witness [Scott Rossetto] from testifying is denied.”

 

[~n/t~]

uh oh...watch out folks. Another italian. :floorlaugh:

 

[TotallyObsessed]

ok - following this for the past few days...but must say with this testimony from the doctor, I think they have planted reasonable doubt. Just like "that other" case... meds that can (and did) make the victim drowsy enough to slip down stairs.

While I know in my heart DP did it, just like CA....I dunno. Here we go again I am afraid.

 

[katydid23]

Both men's testimony: Stacy Peterson told them #DrewPeterson told her to lie about his whereabouts the night Savio died, give false alibi======================


WOWZERS....we get to talk about STACEY now?

 

[katydid23]

ok - following this for the past few days...but must say with this testimony from the doctor, I think they have planted reasonable doubt. Just like "that other" case... meds that can (and did) make the victim drowsy enough to slip down stairs.

While I know in my heart DP did it, just like CA....I dunno. Here we go again I am afraid.

But that would not explain all of the other injuries. The head gash did not match anything in the immediate area and all of the fresh bruises...does not seem like a simple passout/fall scenario.

And when you add to it the upcoming testimony, that he asked STACEY to lie about his alibi.....:what:

 

[Cappuccino]

Both men's testimony: Stacy Peterson told them #DrewPeterson told her to lie about his whereabouts the night Savio died, give false alibi======================


WOWZERS....we get to talk about STACEY now?

They've always been allowed to talk about her, they just can't make any allegation that she's dead because there's no evidence for it. She can only be referred to as missing.