Last Chance For Drew Peterson to Dodge Prison Sentence For Wife Murder
If Drew Peterson doesn't win his hearing for a new murder trial this week, the judge is packing him off to prison.
Photos
Drew Peterson has one more shot to dodge a trip to Stateville, and it all comes down to a hearing scheduled to start Tuesday morning.
After more than three and a half years in the Will County jail and a five-week trial that wrapped up in September, the disgraced former Bolingbrook cop's lawyers will try to convince Judge Edward Burmila to give him a do-over.
And that's not all—matters from a wrongful death lawsuit filed against Peterson by his slain third wife's family will be shoehorned into the proceedings. And one of Peterson's current attorneys, Steve Greenberg, expects to argue that Judge Burmila should sanction former Peterson attorney Joel Brodsky.
But wait—there's more. Peterson's lawyers plan to call Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow, who was the lead prosecutor during the Peterson murder trial, as a witness at this week's hearing. Glasgow does not want to take the stand and has already filed a motion claiming that, as a prosecutor, special steps must be taken to force him to testify. He maintains Peterson's attorneys have failed to take those steps.
Peterson was convicted of murdering Kathleen Savio, his third wife, who was found drowned in a dry bathtub in March 2004. The attorneys still representing Peterson have blamed Brodsky for blowing the trial, both through his poor performance in the courtroom and by compromising Peterson's interests by entering into a publicity contract long before prosecutors even brought charges.
Brodsky, who claims to have voluntarily quit Peterson's defense team after losing the murder case, will likely have to testify at this week's hearing. Prosecutors may have to argue that Brodsky did an adequate job of lawyering in the losing effort.
Judge Burmila has set aside two days for the hearing, but some involved expect it to last much longer. If, at the hearing's conclusion, Burmila decides against granting a new trial, he said he will head straight to Peterson's sentencing.
Prosecutors have said they plan to call Peterson's second wife and one of his six children to testify against him at the tentatively scheduled sentencing hearing.
Second wife Victoria Connolly has previously said under oath that Peterson threatened to kill her and make her death look like an accident. She also told of Drew Peterson holding a gun to her head and breaking into her locked house while she slept.
Eric Peterson, who was born to Peterson's first wife, Carol Hamilton, has already testified that he witnessed his father viciously attack Savio.
If there is a sentencing hearing, prosecutors are also expected to bring up the circumstances surrounding the mysterious disappearance of Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.
Stacy Peterson remains missing. In November 2007, an Illinois State Police captain said detectives considered her disappearance a "potential homicide" and that Drew Peterson was the sole suspect in the investigation. In the more than five years since then, the state police have yet to charge Peterson with harming Stacy.
In This article
-
-
-
-
Bolingbrook Police Department Non-Emergency
375 W Briarcliff Rd, Bolingbrook, IL -
-
-
-
Time Is Money
7:32 am on Monday, February 18, 2013
Ex cop or not give the man a fair shake if you can't get any actual evidence let the man go home "NOT HEARSAY" FREE DREW!!!
Marilynn Reinhardt
9:47 am on Monday, February 18, 2013
I agree. None of these so-called "witnesses" have anything to lose by lying on the stand. They cannot be proven wrong...NOR can they be proven truthful. Being able to be convicted on hearsay evidence is something that our good lawmakers drummed up specifically for the Peterson case because they lacked solid evidence against him...not exactly a fair shake!
Colt45
7:27 pm on Monday, February 18, 2013
HANG DREW and HANG HIM from the Tallest Tree. HE was found guilty...Be done with him once and for all.
Bob Jamesly
10:28 am on Monday, February 18, 2013
As far as the "hearsay evidence" situation, he made that bed and now he has to sleep in it. Can his crack team of lawyers ever over turn that law? Well, stay tuned. there may be a chance to do that yet.
Dede
10:40 am on Monday, February 18, 2013
Looks like Big, bad Drew is afraid of prison. What about all the other people who are sent to prison while they're appealing?
anonymous
11:23 am on Monday, February 18, 2013
Hope Drew has fun in prison-I heard the cons love ex-cops;). Bad cop-no donut.
Rarebit
11:24 am on Monday, February 18, 2013
Initially, Glasgow relied on Public Act 095-1004 to try to get out of court evidence admitted to Peterson’s trial, but when eight statements were deemed inadmissible due to the higher standards of reliability required, he asked the court to consider the evidence under the long standing Common Law hearsay exception, "Forfeiture by Wrongdoing", under which a defendant forfeits their right to confront a witness if it can be shown to a reasonable extent that the defendant made the witness unavailable to testify.
The Constitution of the United States does NOT guarantee an accused person against the legitimate consequences of his own wrongful acts.
Ultimately the statements were considered on their own merits by a panel of three appellate justices and were deemed reliable and admissible in April 2012. The new statute was NOT the criteria for their decision.
Peterson's lead attorney, Joel Brodsky, even cedes that the so called "Drew's Law" was NOT used to admit the hearsay evidence to trial, saying:
"...the States Attorney appealed and decided to change his argument from the statute he drafted to the Common Law doctrine of forfeiture by wrongdoing... As to why the media still says that Drew Peterson was convicted based on "Drew's Law", you will have to ask them - but I wouldn't hold my breath for an answer."
More than 85% of the evidence presented at Drew Peterson’s trial was physical, forensic and circumstantial. Less than 15% was hearsay.
Single Mom
2:18 pm on Monday, February 18, 2013
What a shame that everyone else can't seem to see what you and I do! I for one just wish that the death penalty was still in use in Illinois. Of course we ALL know who took THAT one off the table!!!
anonymous
11:28 am on Monday, February 18, 2013
Hearsay law is ridiculous and goes against what our Founding Fathers had in mind-but I can see where it comes in handy for our increasingly desperate fascist militarized police state. We are slowly being boiled alive to become immune to the coming destablizing storm when the govt suspends the rule of law and freedom is crushed.
anonymous
11:32 am on Monday, February 18, 2013
Rarebit-the fact that the hearsay law is on the books is troubling-just like the fact that the courts struck down that law about videotaping cops in IL and yet the cops are still arresting citizens-if the cops have no respect for the laws why should we?
Ernie Knight
11:47 am on Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Heresay has always been around. It is not inherently unreliable. A dying declaration, where a murder victim names their killer, is heresay. The use of heresay is nothing new.
Christina
12:00 pm on Monday, February 18, 2013
Are there still very sick women who think he is innocent like the first two comments?
poker face
6:58 pm on Monday, February 18, 2013
All good points, & rarebit appears to be a lawyer.Some/most think I'm abusive w/ issues.Remember there are 2 or more sides to every story. I'm not agreeing w/ murder unless it's a life/death situation. Now hold on to your seats; It's poker face time: Why don't the legislators in this State change the divorce/property laws? It's sure to save some lives does anyone agree divorces turn dirty. Certain women out t know how to turn nice guys into killers. No man wants to hear from his wife that because he cheated or whatever that she will take him for everything he's got.When there is a heated rage one better look out.Why in ILL. should a man whom worked hard financially being successfull then lose it all to nice girl turned bitch and then have the backing of the state laws. A bad woman & attorney can make a nice guy turn bad, losing kids, property etc. Savio was committing adultry w/ Peterson then eventualy married him after the divorce. The same w/Stacy. While he was with to Savio, Stacy & Drew were doing the adultry thing. Ladies why do you's have to do this? These 2 in particular obviousley had bad jdgmnt & didn't care if they were home wreckers.The good wifes at home while the hubby is out cheating on them I think call these ladies ....well....whores? Sorry for the lingo, this has never come up. You ladies know what I'm sayin'. So please ladies, don't be home wreckers. Have some class and tell the cheating husband to get lost when they come a sniffing.
anonymous
8:27 pm on Monday, February 18, 2013
Poker face- it's all about feminism and the demasculation of "evil man". Why do you think men are portrayed as incompetent boobs on TV by the Lame Stream Media? Ball busters like Feinstein and Pelosi and Hillary are rabid man haters-just who do you think is targeted by the gun grab?
dogfog
8:18 am on Tuesday, February 19, 2013
I am just sick, thinking how much tax payer money was used not just to prosecute him, but also to house him for three and a half years in jail. While these aholes just keep screwing around with our money!
tom
12:24 pm on Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Let's hope Greenberg is dumb enough to call Drew to the stand. According to the conversation that Brodsky had on WGN radio this morning, if he does, he will have waived his rights to attorney/client confidentiality. It sure sounded like Brodsky has something that he'd like to share about conversations he had with Drew if this happens.
Buford Pusser
1:25 pm on Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Free Drew! This hearsay crap sucks. Show me the physical evidence equivocally and beyond a reasonable doubt.
Buford Pusser
1:26 pm on Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Brodsky can never release any information about Drew!!
tom
2:42 pm on Tuesday, February 19, 2013
According to the interview this morning, Brodsky said that if they call Drew to the stand, Drew breaks the attorney/client privilege. Whether Brodsky is right or not, I don't know. Just passing along what he said in the interview with WGN radio before court today.
samantha lee
3:23 pm on Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Drew should have been in prison long ago
ssamantha lee
3:57 pm on Tuesday, February 19, 2013
This is why Illinois has a big money problem wasting tax payer dollars on Drew Peterson....I really think Drew is really afraid of prison