Suspect Drew Peterson #3

[SuziQ]

At the moment:
"Richardmims.com is down. It will be back at somepoint. 6 days ago Mr Mims commissioned me to create a website for him. Today I was interogated at work about things I know nothing about. I will have no further comment. Mr Mims will be taking over the domain and the content effective tomorrow.

Cheers"

http://www.richardmims.com/

Well. According to that statement alone, it appears LE went down the wrong path. WTF? I hope that's not their method of operation in this case.

 

[chicoliving]

I think that LE following up on a posting supposedly by Stacey had to be done especially from this particular blog. This bit about a warrant or arrest seems odd. A potential witness in a case and in this instance two cases made a poor choice to create a blog about it. All IMHO of course

 

[mysteriew]

From what is posted on Gretawire Scott was arrested for a traffic warrant- he says from something that happened last year. Not for the website comment.

Now I can see if the LE gets the tip on the comment that is alleged to be from Stacy, they do have to check it out. He said something like they said "if" they found out it came from Ric's or Scott's computer he would be arrested. Well, that makes sense, if they can prove that. DrewP and JAB have them working all over the world tracking down sightings. And they have to do it, because if they don't then it will come up at the trial with JAB saying "there were sightings but LE was so anxious to convict my client that LE didn't check them out" Remember their defense if that Stacy is alive. Ric was a friend of DrewP's, so of course they are going to be suspicious. And if they find out that Ric did post the comment they will probably arrest him. But the website was in Scott's name, so he is the one they brought in for questioning. So the way I heard it on Greta I am wondering if Ric didn't maybe exaggerate just a tiny bit? Like maybe they told him that Scott was arrested and threatened to arrest Ric if they found out it was him. And from there Ric became sure they were on their way to arrest him.

I'm thinking it was either DrewP, JAB, (that is based mainly on all the letters and photos they have come up with) or perhaps the infamous "Ashley" (if she really exists.) Or it could be Ric trying to get more attention, but somehow I don't think so. He went public with the info too soon.

But what I think will happen is they will track the message to an open wireless router. I don't think we will ever know who really made that comment.

 

[Wudge]

Actually Wudge in a civil deposition about all the attorney could do would be ask for the question to be rephrased, or if the question has been answered then the attorney would say my client has already answered that. But in a civil suit , especially the depostion, attorneys really have little say on rather their client answers or how they do answer.. They don't jump up and down objecting, or any histronics..the deposition is usually very straight forward. But I do realize we are talking Drew and JAB here..but still there will be some modicum of normal court proceedure kept.

You are very misguided as to what a competent attorney would do in a wrongful death suit that is positioned to precede a possible criminal trial. Drew's attorney could (and likely would) advise him to invoke his 5th Amendment right to certain questions.

 

[Wudge]

Sorry dear but I think this has been amended since 1924.

Wrong.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

A potential witness in a case and in this instance two cases made a poor choice to create a blog about it. All IMHO of course

Underappreciated

 

[thesleuther]

You are very misguided as to what a competent attorney would do in a wrongful death suit that is positioned to precede a possible criminal trial. Drew's attorney could (and likely would) advise him to invoke his 5th Amendment right to certain questions.

In thinking about your comments regarding the filing of the civil suit (I'll be paraphrasing and condensing), it does make more sense to do that after any criminal action. Certainly if Drew has the possibility of a criminal charge being made against him, it would be foolhardy to answer a lot of questions regarding certain issues in a civil matter. This is still the USA and even though most of us here would love to see Drew deposed, he still has the right to a fair criminal proceeding.

Also, after a criminal trial, a whole lot more would be known about the case as the best evidence would be put forth at trial. Kathleen's family surely couldn't have access to all the evidence gathered by police thus far, nor have the funds to thoroughly investigate on their own

There must be factors that we aren't privy to that caused the Savio family to act now. I certainly would like to see them get justice for Kathleen, but I hope they are acting wisely. Kathleen's family has felt for nearly five years now that her life was snuffed out by Drew, and they have watched with great sadness while he went on with a new wife and children while Kathleen was lying in a grave. I understand their desire to seek justice, but I hope their advice is prudent.

All that being said, Wudge I think your insight is far better than ours.

 

[thesleuther]

I'm thinking about this whole Ric Mims thing and I guess that I don't understand why he would want to do a blog. It looks like he has importance as a witness because of the time he spent with Drew at Drew's home in the week or so after Stacy disappeared. He went from being a lifelong friend to publicly stating that he believes Drew caused Stacy to disappear.

His credibility is already going to be challenged because he sold a story to the NE - allegedly to pay his cell phone bill - okay, perhaps that hurdle can be overcome. But a blog? I would think it would result in a lot of credibility problems. This is such a serious case - a probable murder - and he seems to relish being in the public eye when I would think he would want justice for Stacy. Feeling important seems to top justice for Stacy.

I have a feeling that his intentions are honorable in that he really does want to see justice, but I also have the feeling that he lacks that little inner voice that says, "tacky.....tasteless......not too brilliant at this time....." those kinds of things.

Wanting to do the right thing and seeking justice doesn't seem to be consistent with creating a blog to answer questions from people like us. A slightly different answer in court from a black and white reply in a blog could easily be used by a defense attorney to impeach his testimony. This behavior is probably the best thing that has happened for Drew thus far.

We do have to remember that he was a long time friend of Drew's. I have seen him say a number of times that Drew "liked the ladies." That always kind of bothered me. Drew was a womanizer - a married man who cavorted with many women. To equate that with "liking the ladies" just seems so inconsistent.

I've had qualms about Ric Mims from early on and I just wish he would stop relishing the attention and keep his testimony for trial. JMO

 

[thesleuther]

Another quick comment about Ric Mims and his blog and what I believe could be credibility problems..........

There was a witness in the OJ case who saw OJ zooming by apparently in the infamous Bronco on his way home after Nicole was murdered. If I remember correctly, that woman sold her story to the NE and she wasn't called as a witness for that reason. Could that have made a difference at trial? With that jury, maybe not. But I think it's a good lesson.

Ric, find your inner voice......

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

There must be factors that we aren't privy to that caused the Savio family to act now. I certainly would like to see them get justice for Kathleen, but I hope they are acting wisely.

SNIP

Recently, Drew took action to try and protect some assets for his children. However, the Savios best chance to gain monetarily might well be now. The cost of a defense in a criminal proceeding would likely bankrupt Drew's estate.

 

[DeltaDawn]

Over at Gretawire someone has posted a llink to the IP address and you can actually narrow down the building if you click that link. Which makes me wonder why the ISP didn't just go there to find out what was going on since the address is available? Or maybe they did and we just haven't heard that portion of the story yet?

Something about this whole thing is bizarre..actually everthing about it is. I agree ISP needs to follow up on any leads..but can't for the life of me understand why they would go after the person who created the website and blog rather than the person at the IP address who left the comment. My hinky meter is going off again.

Between the letters about the sightings, the pics from Thailand and now this blog entry/comment this is becoming a three ring circus with JAB as ringmaster and Drew as the clown. But what it is doing is taking prescious resources away from Stacy's case..and that just is not right.

JMHO

 

[thesleuther]

Recently, Drew took action to try and protect some assets for his children. However, the Savios best chance to gain monetarily might well be now. The cost of a defense in a criminal proceeding would likely bankrupt Drew's estate.

Good points.

 

[Littledeer]

I for some reason am not getting a handle on what has happened with Ric Mims.

This is what I have understood so far:

Ric Mims started his OWN blog site
A poster posted that "she" was Stacy
Ric Mims turned this information over to LE
LE says they are going to arrest Ric Mims
Steve ?? - Is Administrator of site (has outstanding traffic warrant)

Help would be appreciated here so I can understand this. I went all the way back to the first day of our threads for this case, and we never did do a thread on Ric Mims. Why is that?? I do remember that he did post here for a while giving us some "inside" information.

 

[mysteriew]

In thinking about your comments regarding the filing of the civil suit (I'll be paraphrasing and condensing), it does make more sense to do that after any criminal action. Certainly if Drew has the possibility of a criminal charge being made against him, it would be foolhardy to answer a lot of questions regarding certain issues in a civil matter. This is still the USA and even though most of us here would love to see Drew deposed, he still has the right to a fair criminal proceeding.

Also, after a criminal trial, a whole lot more would be known about the case as the best evidence would be put forth at trial. Kathleen's family surely couldn't have access to all the evidence gathered by police thus far, nor have the funds to thoroughly investigate on their own

There must be factors that we aren't privy to that caused the Savio family to act now. I certainly would like to see them get justice for Kathleen, but I hope they are acting wisely. Kathleen's family has felt for nearly five years now that her life was snuffed out by Drew, and they have watched with great sadness while he went on with a new wife and children while Kathleen was lying in a grave. I understand their desire to seek justice, but I hope their advice is prudent.

All that being said, Wudge I think your insight is far better than ours.

It has always been my understanding that a person can take the 5th in a civil trial. But there is a funny thing about that. Think about the 5th- a person cannot be impelled to give testimony that may incriminate themselves. Now in a civil trial, there is a lower standard of proof. So by taking the 5th the persons judging the case can take the fact that the defendant is in fear of incriminating himself. To take the 5th in a civil case, means losing the farm lol.

Now think about how important money and his pension and property is to DrewP. He is may have been willing to kill for it. So his choices become to tell the truth, to take the 5th and basically give away the case.... or to purjure himself. Which do you think he will choose? If he perjures himself, you can bet prosecutors will be comparing every word to the statement that he gave early in the investigation. And since it is later in the investigation more is known than when DrewP gave his statement. So it will be like getting another interview with DrewP.

 

[mysteriew]

I for some reason am not getting a handle on what has happened with Ric Mims.

This is what I have understood so far:

Ric Mims started his OWN blog site Correct
A poster posted that "she" was Stacy Correct
Ric Mims turned this information over to LE Correct
LE says they are going to arrest Ric Mims Ric said that LE said they were going to arrest him. But Ric also made the statement to the effect that LE said that if they find out that the message came from either computer they would arrest him.
Steve ?? - Is Administrator of site (has outstanding traffic warrant) Scott. Ric told Greta that he was arrested for the comment. However he wasn't, he was arrested for the "previous traffic problem from last year"

Help would be appreciated here so I can understand this. I went all the way back to the first day of our threads for this case, and we never did do a thread on Ric Mims. Why is that?? I do remember that he did post here for a while giving us some "inside" information.

Does that help?

 

[SeriouslySearching]

IIRC, there was a post on the FSP site awhile back claiming to be Stacy.

 

[curiositycat]

IIRC, there was a post on the FSP site awhile back claiming to be Stacy.

I don't trust that site. Someone there gives out personal information without checking with the person first...for starters.

:furious:

 

[Littledeer]

mysterview:

Thanks!! Yes it did help. Ric Mims has not posted here in quite a while, but has been a regular poster over at the FSP site.

IMO, there are some posters who I feel would do anything (including crossing almost the line of being illegal) to entice DP to trip up.

I know their intentions are good, but in the end, all they will end up doing is exacly what we are talking about right now. (i.e. Ric Mims blog site fiasco).

Did that make sense??

 

[philamena]

:clap: :blowkiss: :bang:
You are on top of it girl/guy (it's hard to tell which at WS)

,,,.

Thanks SQ and I'm female.

 

[philamena]

Wrong.

Source or link please.