Drew Peterson Trial --GUILTY!

[Lady Cop]

finally this arrogant prick goes to trial. more of story and more photos at link.

Drew Peterson, 57, has been imprisoned for the past three years awaiting trial for the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio
Chief suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson
Claimed he picked 'women who changed after getting married'

When asked what he would do if Stacy reappeared he replied: 'Ask her to sign the divorce papers'
Jury selection begins Monday in high-profile case

Five years after he became an object of national scorn, former policeman Drew Peterson is about to go on trial on charges that he murdered Kathleen Savio in 2004.

He has been imprisoned for the past three years awaiting trial for her death, and is the chief suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife Stacy, who has never been found.

The case, which begins Monday with jury selection, is sure to rekindle memories of the media frenzy that engulfed Peterson before his arrest, when he often joked with an army of news crews camped outside his house and even invited Geraldo Rivera into his kitchen.

Reporters from around the country and maybe from as far away as Japan will descend on a courthouse in Joliet to watch the latest chapter of a story that has already spawned a couple of books and a cable TV movie starring Rob Lowe as Peterson.

The frenetic coverage 'absolutely has the possibility of reigniting,' said Mark Geragos, a prominent California defence attorney who has been at the centre of comparable firestorms, including when he represented Scott Peterson (no relation), a California man convicted of murdering his young wife and unborn child.

Prosecutors expect to tell a relatively simple story: Drew Peterson killed his ex-wife to keep her from making off with much of his money in a contentious divorce. Sometime around February 29, 2004, according to the indictment, Peterson went to Savio's house and in the bathroom caused her 'to inhale fluid,' killing her.






more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...z21LwqBzkI

[Lady Cop]

Associated Press

CHICAGO (AP) - Jury selection is to begin Monday in Drew Peterson's long-delayed murder trial, where prosecutors want the former suburban Chicago police officer's wives - one he's charged with slaying and another who has disappeared - to effectively testify from their graves through friends and relatives about his threatening to kill them.

Those picked for the jury are likely to hear witnesses describe statements that Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio, and his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, allegedly made. Such hearsay is usually barred. However, an appellate court ruled jurors can hear them.

Peterson, 58, is charged with killing Savio in 2004. Her body was found in a dry bathtub in her home, her hair soaked with blood. The ex-Bolingbrook police sergeant is also a suspect in the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

A judge will vet would-be jurors starting Monday. A 200-person jury has been waiting three years for a trial to get under way. It was put off because of appellate court battles over the Savio and Stacy Peterson statements.

"I've never heard of anything comparable to this - a jury pool waiting around for so long knowing what case they're going to be in and the reliance on hearsay," said Gal Pissetzky, a Chicago defense lawyer with no link to the case. "It's all very unusual."

The legal saga surrounding Peterson and whether he used his status as a police officer to try to get away with murder has attracted national attention. Rob Lowe portrayed Peterson in a 2011 TV movie, "Drew Peterson: Untouchable."

Vetting would-be jurors typically takes a few days, but extra time is sometimes required in high-profile cases to weed out those who come in with well-formed opinions. Opening statements at Peterson's trial in Joliet are slated for next Tuesday.

The defense raised concern some prospective jurors may have violated orders to avoid all news about Peterson. One question Will County Judge Edward Burmila is likely to ask is whether they saw the movie.

Pissetzky wonders if those in the jury pool succumbed to temptations to peek at the news or search online about the case.

"It's like you tell a kid, 'Now, don't you eat that pie over there,'" he said. "What are they going to do? Eat the pie!"

An appellate court ruled this year that jurors can hear witnesses say Savio and Stacy Peterson told them Peterson threatened them. There's apparently no physical evidence, so the hearsay is the heart of prosecutors' case.

At a hearing in 2010 to determine what hearsay a jury could hear, dozens of witnesses testified that Savio told them she feared Drew Peterson would kill her and make it look like an accident.

The 40-year-old Savio's death was initially declared an accident, but Peterson was charged after fourth wife Stacy Peterson disappeared. The 23-year-old Stacy Peterson's body has never been found, but authorities say they believe she's dead.

Peterson, jailed since his 2009 arrest, pleaded not guilty. His attorneys say Savio's death was an accident and that Stacy Peterson - 30 years younger than Drew Peterson - ran off with another man and is alive.

[Ma Huang Sor]

It's about fucking time. This degenerate deserves everything he's got coming to him. There's a recent video of him being transferred somewhere where he's cracking jokes and mugging for the camera. He's a total sociopath.

[Ma Huang Sor]

Peterson, jailed since his 2009 arrest, pleaded not guilty. His attorneys say Savio's death was an accident and that Stacy Peterson - 30 years younger than Drew Peterson - ran off with another man and is alive.

and she's staying hidden so he can be convicted of her murder? I think she's stuffed in a tube at the bottom of some river. There's a bunch of evidence to that effect. I forget... something about a boat and a shipping tube.

[Duchess]

There's a recent video of him being transferred somewhere where he's cracking jokes and mugging for the camera.

That's the ONLY way I've ever seen him present himself.

[ramseycat]

He is a true psychopath. No remorse.

[Lady Cop]

i think court tv/tru tv is going to cover trial. if a jury is seated this week, opening statements will be july 31.

[Love Child]

I was getting this one mixed up with Scott and Lacy Peterson. He murdered his wife.

And then it reminded me of the David Brame case in Washington where he shot his wife Crystal with their 2 kids watching.

While recalling these just now I found a website dedicated to officer involved domestic violence cases.

http://www.lanejudson.com/OFFICER_INVOLV...LITIES.htm

[Donovan]

Welcome back love child!

[Ma Huang Sor]

I was getting this one mixed up with Scott and Lacy Peterson. He murdered his wife.

And then it reminded me of the David Brame case in Washington where he shot his wife Crystal with their 2 kids watching.

While recalling these just now I found a website dedicated to officer involved domestic violence cases.

http://www.lanejudson.com/OFFICER_INVOLV...LITIES.htm

That was equally fucked up.

[Love Child]

Of course his sister is defending him, just as Josh Powell's sister defends her brother.

Another case in Washington-Peter Keller killed his wife and daughter. No one around to defend him thank God.

Its kind of sick how people say something like, "But society drove him to kill his kids, or his wife or whatever"

(Hi Donovan.)

[LuciferLynn]

Shouldn't they have picked a new jury? Id hate to see this asshole convicted, then overturned because it turned out someone on the jury googled him.

[cladking]

I'm not sure I even want him convicted. Yes, there's a high probability he did it and thinks it's funny he'll get away with it but we already have too many innocent people in jail and too many murderers turned loose.

I wish him all the worst but am not sure he should be jailed or killed in my name.

It's a tough case, that's for sure. There should have been a better investigation in the first place, probably.

[sharit]

I am from illinois and about 2 ¹⁄₂ hours from chicago. Everyone knows about this case. Media kept it in our face. I feel it will be very hard to find a person who has not heard about this case.

[Lady Cop]

it's ok for jurors to have heard about a case. the question is have they formed a firm opinion and can they keep open minds to go by the evidence alone? that is the real test of a juror's fairness.

[Lady Cop]

While an Illinois court moves swiftly to seat jurors in the murder case against former police officer Drew Peterson, who is accused of killing his third wife, police are probing his possible role in the disappearance of wife No. 4.

Peterson, 58, is charged with the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, which was deemed accidental until police began investigating the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson. With the former suburban Chicago police officer a defendant in one murder case and a suspect in another, Stacy Peterson's family is convinced of his guilt and confident they will see him tried for her murder.

"I think in time the case will be resolved and hopefully he'll go to trial for that to," said Pam Bosco, a spokeswoman for Stacy Peterson's family. "They have a dedicated force and are not going to give up until they find out what happened to Stacy," she said of investigators.

"He has not been charged because we don’t have a body," added Stacy Peterson's aunt, Candace Aikin, "But I believe that things are progressing with the investigation in a good way."

During the first day of jury selection Monday, a judge and attorneys removed pool members who saw a TV movie about the case or came to court already convinced he's guilty.

Legal experts say the court faces an uphill battle in selecting jurors who have not been subjected to intense media coverage on the case and who have no pre-conceived notions of Peterson's guilt or innocence.

"In a high-profile case whose circumstantial allegations are tailor-made for TV -- a police officer suspected of murdering multiple wives -- jury selection is extremely difficult," said Mark Bederow, a New York-based criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor.

"It is virtually impossible to find a person in that community who hasn't heard of the case and formed some opinion about it," Bederow told FoxNews.com. "The difficult task for the defense is finding jurors who it truly feels believe in the system -- and especially in a circumstantial case -- will hold the prosecution to its heavy burden of proof."

Twelve jurors have been selected in Peterson's murder trial. The full panel won't be seated until three more alternates have been picked. Eight jurors were selected Monday, and the final members of the jury and one alternate were chosen by noon Tuesday.

Among those selected Tuesday was a part-time poet and a man in his 70s who takes flying lessons and who played baseball on his college team.

Attorneys have until next Tuesday to prepare their opening statements, and prosecutors are expected to call their first witnesses later that same day.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/24/acc...z21ZDdKEQh

[justme]

About time he is going to trial---can't stand his smug ass. very unlikable man. Do I think he's guilty---oh yea

[Lady Cop]

tomorrow!

fox

Nearly five years since the disappearance of his fourth wife, former Illinois police officer Drew Peterson will be tried for the murder of his third wife in a high-profile case that gets under way Tuesday.

An Illinois court will hear opening arguments Tuesday in the case against Peterson, 58, who is charged with the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Her death was ruled accidental until police began investigating the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Stacy Peterson's body has never been found, but authorities believe she is dead and have named the former suburban Chicago police officer a suspect. Peterson, meanwhile, contends that the 23-year-old mother of two ran off with another man -- a claim Stacy Peterson's family vehemently disputes.

Savio's body was found in a dry bathtub in her home, her hair soaked in blood, just before her divorce settlement with Peterson was to be finalized in 2004. Peterson allegedly feared the settlement with the 40-year-old Savio would wipe him out financially. He has pleaded not guilty in her death.

A jury in the murder case against Peterson was selected last week. The panel of seven men and five women includes a part-time poet, a U.S. letter carrier, a woman who likes to read the National Enquirer and a research technician whose favorite TV show is "Criminal Minds." The jury also includes three male alternates and one female alternate. Nine jurors are white, two are African-Americans and one is Hispanic.

Opening statements will begin Tuesday, and prosecutors are expected to call their first witnesses later that same day.

[Lady Cop]

openings today. drew didn't behave like a clown as usual today. sat there subdued.

fox

Defense attorneys for a former Illinois cop on trial for killing his third wife claimed Tuesday their client was framed for an "accident," while prosecutors argued it was a cold-blooded murder.

Drew Peterson, a 58-year-old former police officer, is on trial for first-degree murder in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio, whose body was found slumped forward in a dry bathtub, her hair soaked in blood. Savio's drowning death was ruled accidental until police began investigating the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Prosecutors said during opening arguments Tuesday that Savio's death was a murder staged to look like an accident. They suggested Peterson killed Savio because he feared their pending divorce settlement would wipe him out financially.

Defense attorneys, meanwhile, told jurors that there is no physical evidence linking Peterson to Savio's death.

"There's no murder weapon, no crime scene, no forced entry, no broken glass, no sign of a struggle, no blood splattered, no broken glass or items," defense lawyer Joel Brodsky told the courtroom. "The bathroom was in perfect order."

While Peterson is on trial for the murder of Savio, police are still actively probing his possible role in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson.

Peterson claims Stacy, a 23-year-old mother of two, ran off with another man, but authorities have named him a suspect in her disappearance. They believe Stacy Peterson is dead, but her remains have never been found.

The real-life drama inspired a TV movie and a national spotlight was put on the case, with speculation about whether Peterson used his law-enforcement expertise in a bid to get away with the murder of Savio, 40, and to make Stacy Peterson disappear.

Tuesday's opening statements in Joliet, Ill., pit the dry but dogged James Glasgow, Will County's state's attorney, against flamboyant defense lawyer Joel Brodsky, both of whom have staked at least part of their reputations on the final result.

Peterson's attorney is seeking to tell jurors, who include a part-time poet, a letter carrier and a research technician whose favorite TV show is "Criminal Minds," the life story of his client and Savio.

The defense has described Savio's death as a tragic accident, and they have said Stacy Peterson, whose body has never been found, may have run off with another man.

Glasgow may face the greater challenge, legal experts say.

A botched initial investigation into Savio's death left prosecutors with scant to no physical evidence, forcing them to rely heavily on hearsay evidence -- statements not heard directly by a witness -- which is normally barred at trials.

But New York-based criminal defense attorney Mark Bederow told FoxNews.com that, "Circumstantial evidence can be enough to convict in certain situations."

"Certainly a pending divorce settlement which might ruin Peterson financially provides a strong circumstantial motive for a homicide," Bederow said. "Moreover, if credible medical evidence establishes that the death in the bathtub was a homicide, then the whole theme of the defense — “it was an accident” — crumbles and the defense loses all credibility with the jury, which would greatly harm Peterson.

"The task for the prosecution will be credibly explaining why the homicide was mischaracterized as an accident," he said.

Glasgow has said previously that Savio and Stacy Peterson will effectively speak to jurors through witnesses who can describe how Drew Peterson allegedly told his wives he could murder them and make it look like an accident.

But Judge Edward Burmila has said he would decide what hearsay statements to admit only as testimony proceeds, so Glasgow will have to decide whether to risk mentioning statements to jurors that the judge might later prohibit.

Brodsky told jurors during his opening remarks that they will hear only "myth, rumor, innuendo and hearsay" during the trial.

In the case of Stacy Peterson, Burmila has warned prosecutors they can't tell jurors Drew Peterson is responsible for her disappearance or refer to authorities' belief that she is dead.

Prosecutors have said they believe Peterson killed Stacy, in part, because she knew about Savio's death.

Stacy's family, meanwhile, says they are convinced of his guilt and confident they will see him tried for her murder.

[Lady Cop]

Judge Edward Burmila has offered an alternative to a mistrial in the Drew Peterson murder trial.

“In this particular instance, there’s no doubt in my mind that the testimony they presented was a low blow, and should not have been presented to this jury. However, courts are also loathe to grant mistrials... in this particular instance, in the court’s mind, there’s another sanction, which would be to strike, in total, the testimony of that witness [Tom Pontarelli]," said Burmila.

Court is now adjourned until Thursday morning, so attorneys can research whether this alternative will be an adequate solution to testimony that the Judge says was improperly introduced at trial Wednesday.

Peterson’s defense team asked Burmila for a mistrial after Pontarelli, Peterson's neighbor, testified about finding a .38 bullet in his driveway.

Pontarelli said the bullet was placed there by Peterson in an attempt to intimidate him. Defense attorney Steve Greenberg said it is a highly prejudicial prior bad act that is not admissible at trial.

Burmila said, “I have to say that their [the prosecution's] argument makes absolutely no sense to the court whatsoever... it makes no sense whatsoever, the argument the state just put forward... I’m going to take the motion under advisement, and I’ll have a ruling for you at 1:15.”