SIDEBAR to the Drew Peterson trial

[ChickenPants]

I am having a delayed reaction over here, WS crew.....the whole DT assertion that it was "rough sex" that caused those injuries to Kathleen that resulted in internal bleeding is so enraging !!!!! What did that monster put that poor woman through?
They didn't ask Steve if they engaged in really rough sex, but they could have but they didn't because they knew that the answer would be NO. They had normal sexual activity that I can't even believe they had her boyfriend discuss.
They did ask Dr. Blum if Kathleen could have had rough sex and he did say it was a possibility, but he didn't say that it would have resulted in those injuries!!!!!!!!!

I have read that the defense team is going to have 3 doctors testify....I am speculating that we are going to hear about her multiple physical ailments, her mental health issues, and her "fat blaster" pills. I don't think that I can take it....I wonder who these doctors are and if they are well regarded. I am sickened by all of this.
Two women are dead and gone.....children are without their mother.....and we have a team of sleazy attorneys fighting for the freedom of a killer.
\\bbm

If you can't take it, chances are the jury is having trouble "taking it" too.
If you think the team of attorneys are sleazy (and obnoxious), why shouldn't the jury get the same impression? They also know Kathleen was a wife and a mother and they have enough unsaid information to piece together that Stacey is (was) a wife and mother, too. If I was sitting on that jury, all of the above plus their continual interruptions, lack of professionalism in the courtroom, posturing, joking, and what we've all gathered will probably be an all out attempt at trashing witnesses and dishonoring the deceased must affect the jury, too. Perhaps the reason they are dressing up in color-coordinated clothing is their only way of dealing with the stress, the frustration and the terrible decisions they are going to have to make.

 

[LambChop]

Kathy had a cut on the upper right hand portion of her head but was found lying on her left side. If she fell and banged her head on the tub it would have been on the side she was found on. Plus the fact that the injury would have been lower on her head not up closer to the top of her head. Doesn't matter if she fell at the speed of light, IMI, the location of her injury is not consistent with a fall. I believe that is what the ME was trying to tell us. Anyone want to talk about the displacement of water once you fall in a tub. It flies everywhere and would have surely knocked over most of those tubes and some of the bottles. jmo

 

[ChickenPants]

I just got done watching Jeanine Pirro's show about this case. She is very strong about the prosecution not being able to present some vital information.

Here's hoping that the jurors can piece it all together and see what really happened. Only then will Drew get what he deserves - a guilty verdict!

Point being they are not ALLOWED to present vital information. The jury is hearing parts of some of it and watching the DT leap up and carry on and cause sidebars and one delay after another. Again, my feeling is this must be frustrating for the jury and I'd be pretty disgusted with the defense. I'd be thinking: Discovery - both sides had it...so why put on this show now? Why wasn't this all handled pre-trial? What are they trying to hide? Do they think we (jury) are all so stupid that we can't hear information and make informed judgments? I'd be very angry at DT.

 

[Mama-cita]

If you can't take it, chances are the jury is having trouble "taking it" too.
If you think the team of attorneys are sleazy (and obnoxious), why shouldn't the jury get the same impression? They also know Kathleen was a wife and a mother and they have enough unsaid information to piece together that Stacey is (was) a wife and mother, too. If I was sitting on that jury, all of the above plus their continual interruptions, lack of professionalism in the courtroom, posturing, joking, and what we've all gathered will probably be an all out attempt at trashing witnesses and dishonoring the deceased must affect the jury, too. Perhaps the reason they are dressing up in color-coordinated clothing is their only way of dealing with the stress, the frustration and the terrible decisions they are going to have to make.

I hope you are right Chicken Pants. But I am jaded because I thought for sure the jury in the Casey Anthony case would see Jose Baez <modsnip>, but it turns out they respected him MORE because he said HELLO to them in the mornings! Barf! This defense team seriously makes me want to blow chunks and I hope the jury agrees. But I am reticent to assume. The Pinellas 12 will haunt me forever. They lessened my faith in humanity.

 

[Mama-cita]

Kathy had a cut on the upper right hand portion of her head but was found lying on her left side. If she fell and banged her head on the tub it would have been on the side she was found on. Plus the fact that the injury would have been lower on her head not up closer to the top of her head. Doesn't matter if she fell at the speed of light, IMI, the location of her injury is not consistent with a fall. I believe that is what the ME was trying to tell us. Anyone want to talk about the displacement of water once you fall in a tub. It flies everywhere and would have surely knocked over most of those tubes and some of the bottles. jmo

Great post. Not to mention since there was no bath mat, all that water would have been stagnant on a tile floor.

 

[ChickenPants]

Kathy had a cut on the upper right hand portion of her head but was found lying on her left side. If she fell and banged her head on the tub it would have been on the side she was found on. Plus the fact that the injury would have been lower on her head not up closer to the top of her head. Doesn't matter if she fell at the speed of light, IMI, the location of her injury is not consistent with a fall. I believe that is what the ME was trying to tell us. Anyone want to talk about the displacement of water once you fall in a tub. It flies everywhere and would have surely knocked over most of those tubes and some of the bottles. jmo

You don't fall on the back of your head and twist yourself around to land in a fetal position on your side. That tub was so small she was literally packed into it like a sardine. No part of that tub could have caused a gash like that. The only other scenario would be she was walking around nude, suddenly fell and then just climbed into the tub and curled up. If she fell outside of the tub there would have to be blood where she hit her head and it would have dripped or spurted everywhere. She certainly didn't smash her head in and then clean it up herself. If she fell into a tub full of water, that water would have soaked out all of the blood on her head, it would not have coagulated on her skull. And I don't care when I take a bath, unless I unplug the tub it does NOT drain out by itself, not in hours.

If she planned on bathing she would have removed her clothes most logically in the bathroom before stepping into the tub (and keeling over). Or she would have stripped down in her bedroom and left the clothes on the floor, on the bed, whatever. No clothes found at the scene. Did she decide "I'll just go take a bath, walk around naked, get out of the tub with no robe and saunter into the bedroom, rifle through my drawers and take my time choosing what to put on? No, she would have had clothes laid out. Unbelievable.

 

[Mama-cita]

You don't fall on the back of your head and twist yourself around to land in a fetal position on your side. That tub was so small she was literally packed into it like a sardine. No part of that tub could have caused a gash like that. The only other scenario would be she was walking around nude, suddenly fell and then just climbed into the tub and curled up. If she fell outside of the tub there would have to be blood where she hit her head and it would have dripped or spurted everywhere. She certainly didn't smash her head in and then clean it up herself. If she fell into a tub full of water, that water would have soaked out all of the blood on her head, it would not have coagulated on her skull. And I don't care when I take a bath, unless I unplug the tub it does NOT drain out by itself, not in hours.

If she planned on bathing she would have removed her clothes most logically in the bathroom before stepping into the tub (and keeling over). Or she would have stripped down in her bedroom and left the clothes on the floor, on the bed, whatever. No clothes found at the scene. Did she decide "I'll just go take a bath, walk around naked, get out of the tub with no robe and saunter into the bedroom, rifle through my drawers and take my time choosing what to put on? No, she would have had clothes laid out. Unbelievable.

Post of the day!!!!

 

[ChickenPants]

I hope you are right Chicken Pants. But I am jaded because I thought for sure the jury in the Casey Anthony case would see Jose Baez <modsnip>, but it turns out they respected him MORE because he said HELLO to them in the mornings! Barf! This defense team seriously makes me want to blow chunks and I hope the jury agrees. But I am reticent to assume. The Pinellas 12 will haunt me forever. They lessened my faith in humanity.

The jury on the CA trial acquitted because they felt the evidence of drowning (pictures of Caylee standing by sliding glass door and eager to get swimming), testimony that she woke grandpa up early every morning to swim, Cindy Anthony trying to alert LE that the ladder had been left up, etc., was more compelling as to cause of death than the chloroform (which could not be found in the house, etc.), inaccurate computer reports, scanty hairs in trunk, various witnesses who disagreed to decomposition, and other. They disregarded her lying and subsequent behavior because they said they had to base the verdict on the cause and manner of death, period. The post-verdict interviews are frustrating for disappointed people to listen to. If you listen to them carefully, the jurors state very clearly that they could not convict because there was reasonable doubt. Period. Like it or not, it is what it is.

I hope members here will not get all fired up because of my comments above. I agree with the previous poster who is worried DP will walk because of the circumstantial nature of the case. It's frustrating to have to accept that the jurors are to decide based not so much on the "truth" but the "law" as it is presented with all of it's limitations and complications. In DP's case, we have very strong personal motive, a history of controlling and manipulative character, documented domestic violence, letters and statements by his ex-wives, threats, soliciting hit men. the issue of the boys in blue, the badly handled crime scene and so much more to go on.

Just MOO.

 

[ChickenPants]

As long as you fall onto something that would cause that type of injuy. The ME said there was nothing in the tub to do that. My guess is it was not just the cut they could see in the second autopsy but the bruise surrounding the cut as well. It was ruled she died from drowning. So if she hit her head and fell into the water and drowned how could she have had streams of undiluted blood running down her face if her face was under the water? How is that possible when the ME said the cut on her head would have never rendered her unconscious? Plus the wound wasn't in the correct place to have happened had she fallen. I guess you see things differently when you look at a scene as a potential crime having occurred instead of someone insisting it was just an accident. jmo

I have never, ever heard (nor can I picture) a person falling BACKWARDS onto/into a bathtub. Even if she was leaning over, she'd have to be leaning over backwards and practically turn a half somersault to get the "blunt force trauma" that occured on that portion of her skull.

I have never personally heard "blunt force trauma" used as a description other than in reference to that inflicted by a weapon. I have heard "blunt injury" without "force trauma". I think he whacked her in the head with the butt of his gun, since he always carried it around. Why he drowned her also is beyond my comprehension, unless he did it to try to stage that's how she died. Then why bother to knock her over the head unless he did that first and then shoved her face into the toilet or filled the tub with enough water to push her face in there while she was out of it and couldn't fight back. Once dead, he drains the tub, wipes down the area surrounding and puts her in there and she's already dead.

 

[katydid23]

If you can't take it, chances are the jury is having trouble "taking it" too.
If you think the team of attorneys are sleazy (and obnoxious), why shouldn't the jury get the same impression? They also know Kathleen was a wife and a mother and they have enough unsaid information to piece together that Stacey is (was) a wife and mother, too. If I was sitting on that jury, all of the above plus their continual interruptions, lack of professionalism in the courtroom, posturing, joking, and what we've all gathered will probably be an all out attempt at trashing witnesses and dishonoring the deceased must affect the jury, too. Perhaps the reason they are dressing up in color-coordinated clothing is their only way of dealing with the stress, the frustration and the terrible decisions they are going to have to make.

BBM

You would think so, but many of us got quite a shock when the Pinellas 12 LOVED Baez and took his word for everything.

 

[mitzi]

I recall reading somewhere ( here?) that the defense has some "dirt" on Pastor Schlori, and possibly will be calling him back, to testify and sling the mud his way.

Bold mine.

It's more likely that the defense has 'inuendo' about Pastor Schori, not anything real. The defense will go at him, and imply things.

Neil Schori is a very intelligent man...I doubt that the defense will be able to throw him off....and it won't look good to the jury, if they try.

BTW, I remember, sometime in the last 5 years, reading a posting from Pastor Schori's Dad (on some forum-not here), regarding him meeting Stacy in a Starbucks...it was just as we thought, to avoid any appearance of impropriaty. Neil Schori is a nice looking young man, and I think it was the smart thing to do.

I hope the defense doesn't try to discredit him. He is a wonderful Pastor.

 

[mitzi]

There were some tweets about that on the DP page. One private investigator who is very pro-defense has been saying that. Most of the other 'predictiions' he has made have been accurate, so I tend to believe him. His handle is 'crimeblotter' ...

Isn't he the one who dresses as a female nurse? LOL! I just don't think I could take him very seriously because of that! :floorlaugh:

 

[mitzi]

The bagged hands were mentioned on day one of the trial to which the DT said a loud OBJECTION!.....I never heard if they tested them or not.
It would stand to reason that they would have been tested or should have been.....I can't imagine that the PT didn't run some tests on them.....
there must have been some trace of something except that I am sure that Drew was wearing gloves......Kathleen said that he was wearing black gloves when he held a knife to her, so I bet that he didn't leave any trace there.
I imagine that the defense objected to them mentioning the bagged hands because for all their protestations of this being a scene of an accident......someone on that team must have seen that it was a crime scene......you don't bag hands of someone who died from an accident do you?


I don't understand some of the info that has been omitted from being presented at this trial. If Stacy said to Rev Schori that he had just commited the perfect crime, then WHY wasn't he able to say so?
It is too prejudicial to say anything that proves that he is guilty?
I really would like to know what happened to her bagged hands. :maddening:


They bagged her hands at the scene and later the coroners office stated her nails had nothing underneath them. I can envision Drew scrubbing her nails with a little nail brush...... scrubby scrubby scrubby......:bath:

abbie

[/quote]

My post is in RED.

Windy, I am pretty sure that one of Kathleen's sisters, Anna or Sue, has stated (and I'm not sure that it was in court or in an interview), that Kathleen always had long, lovely nails. If she was found in the tub with short nails, I can only think that "former evidence trainee" (ie. DP) *snort* probably cut her nails to remove any trace of his skin DNA OR any tears or rips to her fingernails. If she fought DP, (and I think she fought for her life), I'm sure that there would have been some damage to her nails.

 

[katydid23]

12/13/2007 (www.suntimes.com) "Drew: Stacy 'sexied up' for pastor"
"Drew Peterson said Wednesday that his missing wife, Stacy, had "a big crush" on the Naperville pastor who says she confided to him incriminating statements her husband made about a previous wife's death. "Every time she went to see him, she was all dolled up, all sexied up," Drew Peterson said of Stacy Peterson's visits to pastor Neil Schori. "All I know for sure is, Stacy had a big crush on him."
"Schori said earlier this week that Stacy Peterson told him in August that Drew Peterson confessed he had killed his ex-wife Kathleen Savio. Savio's March 2004 death was first ruled an accidental bathtub drowning, but authorities reopened the investigation after Stacy Peterson disappeared Oct. 28."
"Drew Peterson said he had no knowledge of his wife carrying on romantically with Schori, a subject broached by the former Bolingbrook police sergeant's lawyer, Joel Brodsky, during a Tuesday night interview on MSNBC. "I've heard rumors there was some connection there" between Stacy Peterson and Schori, Brodsky said, adding, "I don't know if there is any validity to it." :liar:
2007-12-13 Nancy Grace Show
December 13, 2007 Carcerano says Stacy on motorcycle and bikini top to see pastor ILL STEVE CARCERANO, FRIEND OF DREW PETERSON: "If I could say something, he told me about this about two weeks ago, that he thought that she had the hots for the minister. But to take it a step further. This is a 53-year-old man, Stacy is 23. To him he might feel that she`s getting all dolled up and sexed up. But as 23-year-olds today, you look at how they dress. They might just think that they look nice. So there`s a big difference in age here, which you know, people are taking that to the extreme. But again, that might be how he portrayed her going to see him. I do know on one occasion he did tell me that she drove a motorcycle with her bikini top to see him. Now that`s not appropriate." :liar:


From the AMAZING site:
http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_witness_schori.htm

 

[katydid23]

12/13/2007 (www.suntimes.com) "Drew: Stacy 'sexied up' for pastor"
"Drew Peterson said Wednesday that his missing wife, Stacy, had "a big crush" on the Naperville pastor who says she confided to him incriminating statements her husband made about a previous wife's death. "Every time she went to see him, she was all dolled up, all sexied up," Drew Peterson said of Stacy Peterson's visits to pastor Neil Schori. "All I know for sure is, Stacy had a big crush on him."
"Schori said earlier this week that Stacy Peterson told him in August that Drew Peterson confessed he had killed his ex-wife Kathleen Savio. Savio's March 2004 death was first ruled an accidental bathtub drowning, but authorities reopened the investigation after Stacy Peterson disappeared Oct. 28."
"Drew Peterson said he had no knowledge of his wife carrying on romantically with Schori, a subject broached by the former Bolingbrook police sergeant's lawyer, Joel Brodsky, during a Tuesday night interview on MSNBC. "I've heard rumors there was some connection there" between Stacy Peterson and Schori, Brodsky said, adding, "I don't know if there is any validity to it." :liar:
2007-12-13 Nancy Grace Show
December 13, 2007 Carcerano says Stacy on motorcycle and bikini top to see pastor ILL STEVE CARCERANO, FRIEND OF DREW PETERSON: "If I could say something, he told me about this about two weeks ago, that he thought that she had the hots for the minister. But to take it a step further. This is a 53-year-old man, Stacy is 23. To him he might feel that she`s getting all dolled up and sexed up. But as 23-year-olds today, you look at how they dress. They might just think that they look nice. So there`s a big difference in age here, which you know, people are taking that to the extreme. But again, that might be how he portrayed her going to see him. I do know on one occasion he did tell me that she drove a motorcycle with her bikini top to see him. Now that`s not appropriate." :liar:


From the AMAZING site:
http://www.acandyrose.com/stacy_peterson_witness_schori.htm

I so HOPE they try to say this krap in front of the jury. It will be so obviously a big fat LIE.

 

[mitzi]

I am having a delayed reaction over here, WS crew.....the whole DT assertion that it was "rough sex" that caused those injuries to Kathleen that resulted in internal bleeding is so enraging !!!!! What did that monster put that poor woman through?
They didn't ask Steve if they engaged in really rough sex, but they could have but they didn't because they knew that the answer would be NO. They had normal sexual activity that I can't even believe they had her boyfriend discuss.
They did ask Dr. Blum if Kathleen could have had rough sex and he did say it was a possibility, but he didn't say that it would have resulted in those injuries!!!!!!!!!

I have read that the defense team is going to have 3 doctors testify....I am speculating that we are going to hear about her multiple physical ailments, her mental health issues, and her "fat blaster" pills. I don't think that I can take it....I wonder who these doctors are and if they are well regarded. I am sickened by all of this.
Two women are dead and gone.....children are without their mother.....and we have a team of sleazy attorneys fighting for the freedom of a killer.
\\bbm

Bold mine.

I think one of them is Werner Spitz...you know the one who cracked Caylee Anthony's skull. :banghead:

 

[katydid23]

Isn't he the one who dresses as a female nurse? LOL! I just don't think I could take him very seriously because of that! :floorlaugh:

Now that is something I didn't know. LOL It does make it harder to take him seriously.

 

[Mama-cita]

I so HOPE they try to say this krap in front of the jury. It will be so obviously a big fat LIE.

Oh they will. They are that cocky and slimy. No scruples at all. But in doing so will they be opening the door to bringing in more Stacy stuff?

 

[LambChop]

The jury on the CA trial acquitted because they felt the evidence of drowning (pictures of Caylee standing by sliding glass door and eager to get swimming), testimony that she woke grandpa up early every morning to swim, Cindy Anthony trying to alert LE that the ladder had been left up, etc., was more compelling as to cause of death than the chloroform (which could not be found in the house, etc.), inaccurate computer reports, scanty hairs in trunk, various witnesses who disagreed to decomposition, and other. They disregarded her lying and subsequent behavior because they said they had to base the verdict on the cause and manner of death, period. The post-verdict interviews are frustrating for disappointed people to listen to. If you listen to them carefully, the jurors state very clearly that they could not convict because there was reasonable doubt. Period. Like it or not, it is what it is.

I hope members here will not get all fired up because of my comments above. I agree with the previous poster who is worried DP will walk because of the circumstantial nature of the case. It's frustrating to have to accept that the jurors are to decide based not so much on the "truth" but the "law" as it is presented with all of it's limitations and complications. In DP's case, we have very strong personal motive, a history of controlling and manipulative character, documented domestic violence, letters and statements by his ex-wives, threats, soliciting hit men. the issue of the boys in blue, the badly handled crime scene and so much more to go on.

Just MOO.

Plus it was the 1st of March in Chicagoland. It's not as if she were walking around in mid summer. No matter how well heated your home is in the north, it is still cold so I doubt she would have been walking around uncovered. Didn't her boyfriend say she had come down in her robe the night he was there? So her robe would have been there at the very least.

The only alibi he has is that he was home with Stacy that's why defense has to prove it was an accident. jmo

 

[WindyCityGirl]

sleeves were wet.


QUOTE=katydid23;8301264]BRAVO!!!! An Amazing video. Please watch. :rocker::great:[/QUOTE]