BBM

And with that I do believe the prosecutors have a very steep mountain to climb.

TRIAL DAY 13 (8-21-12)

STATE OF IL. VS. DREW PETERSON


Trial Day Starts in Joliet Il. - Tuesday, August 21, 2012 9:00AM CT

Days will be ....Tuesday Through Friday, every week until it goes to jury!!!

There will be no camera's in courtroom unfortunately so we will have to rely on twitter for information as to what is going on in courtroom & also Updates from several outlets.

TRIAL UPDATES: Chicago Tribune Breaking News
(Link to Daily Update Story)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... g&lpos=Sub

LIVESTREAMING FOR TRU TV
http://superusvox.com/index.php/specialty/trutv
or
http://livetvcafe.net/video/7Y78YR9H9DKB/Tru-TV

WGN TV - Drew Peterson trial (links to daily blogs)
http://www.wgntv.com/news/drewpeterson/

InSession on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/InSession




TWITTER LINKS:

IN SESSIONS.
http://twitter.com/InSession

Joseph Hosey (reporter)
Joseph Hosey@ShorewdILPatch
http://twitter.com/ShorewdILPatch

Tweets for Drew Peterson case
https://twitter.com/#!/search/drew%20...+peterson+case

Jon Seidel
Jon Seidel@SeidelContent
https://twitter.com/seidelcontent

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Drew Peterson trial updates:


6:45 a.m. 2 key witnesses could testify

The Drew Peterson trial enters its fourth week of testimony Tuesday with prosecutors hoping to call two potentially powerful witnesses.

Both the Rev. Neil Schori and Jeff Pachter, a former Peterson co-worker, could take the stand this week if their appearances survive challenges from the defense.

Prosecutors want to call Schori to testify that Peterson's missing fourth wife, Stacy, told him during a pastoral counseling session that she saw her husband return home late, dressed in black and carrying a bag of women's clothing, not long before his third wife, Kathleen Savio, was found dead. His testimony is critical to the prosecution because another witness who said he heard a similar story from Stacy Peterson was not allowed to testify last week because of missteps by the state.

Schori's account would be the strongest piece of evidence prosecutors have introduced so far that could show Drew Peterson behaved suspiciously the weekend Savio died. No physical evidence or eyewitness account ties him to the alleged murder, which a coroner's jury initially ruled was an accident.

Peterson's attorneys long have sought to bar Schori from the trial, but Judge Edward Burmila has ruled that marital privilege does not apply to his testimony because Stacy Peterson was relaying what she saw, not what she heard. Burmila has indicated that he still must decide whether the testimony is relevant to the case.

Prosecutors also will try to persuade the judge to allow Pachter to take the stand. Pachter, who once worked with Drew Peterson at his side job as cable outfitter, is expected to testify that the former Bolingbrook police sergeant offered him $25,000 to hire a hit man to kill Savio in late 2003, just a few months before her death.


Updates at link
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... 0802.story

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Arguing admissibility of "Hit Man" testimony

In Session “Before we bring in the jury, we have the 404(b) hearing with regards to Mr. [Jeff] Pachter’s testimony.” Prosecutor Koch: “What we’re suggesting to the Court is we intend to introduce this testimony to prove intent, motive, and identity . . . it’s clear that when he [the defendant] is out speaking to Mr. Pachter, offering Mr. Pachter $25,000 to take care of his wife, it’s very clear as far as intent . . . as far as motive, he tells Mr. Pachter that his wife has information on him, he doesn’t want her to go to the police . . . and identity is also at issue in this case, as to who committed this crime. This evidence helps prove that the defendant is the one who killed Kathleen Savio . . . that is the defendant . . . and we believe it happened in the later months of 2003 . . .because of that, I think that if you take his testimony you certainly have a situation that is close in time to her death, very close in time, in fact.”

In Session Prosecutor Koch: “We do believe it is relevant; it is close in time . . . one witness is sufficient, if found to be credible, to prove that an act was committed . . . obviously, any type of other act is prejudicial; there’s no question of that. But just because it’s prejudicial doesn’t meant that it’s not probative . . . in this case, it is highly relative, highly probative; it goes directly to the intent of the defendant to commit this crime, to his identity, to his motive. So, we ask that you allow this 404(b) evidence to be admitted into this trial.”

In Session Defense attorney Steve Greenberg responds. “This doesn’t go to motive . . . it doesn’t establish a motive . . . identity is not really an issue, and intent is not really an issue. We’re not saying that Drew was there but it was an accident; we’re saying he wasn’t there. So the State doesn’t really need this extra evidence of intent.” Greenberg cites case law to support the defense’s position. “What they want to do is bring in highly, highly prejudicial evidence, which is suspicious anyway. Mr. Pachter said he didn’t really believe anyone . . . they don’t need it for intent; all of the cases say that intent is not an issue when we’re presenting this kind of a defense. So it’s irrelevant, it’s prejudicial, and it’s not relevant of anything in the case. Our defense is it’s an accident . . . so what does a hit man have to do with anything? They don’t say he hired a hit man; they say he [Peterson] went over there and did this . . . if they can’t find an Illinois case; we’re in Illinois, Judge . . . they keep sending me [case] law from Massachusetts . . . to come here now and argue that Massachusetts and New Jersey say that it’s OK is just preposterous when there’s Illinois law right on the issue that says if our defense is it’s an accident and he wasn’t involved then it doesn’t come in.”

In Session Koch responds: “Intent goes to the state of mind of the defendant. His state of mind is clearly relevant in this case . . . I’d ask you to take that into consideration when you’re making your ruling.” Greenberg then jumps in, disputes the case law that the State has just cited. “It appears to be a consent defense, which is different from what we’re talking about here.” Judge Burmila: “Counsel was correct when he said that the precedent that the State provided to the Court was non-jurisdictional in its nature . . . however, that leaves us with the issue of intent. What is the purpose of this evidence? . . . the issue is, did the defendant intend to kill his wife?, and this testimony goes to that issue. So the jury will be able to consider that, and this evidence will be admissible.”

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

In Session The sidebar ends. Defense attorney Darryl Goldberg objects to the publication of two photographs the prosecution hopes to show during the upcoming testimony of Dr. Mary Chase, calling them “gruesome.” Prosecutor Glasgow responds, claims the photos “will show that this was not an accident, but a homicide . . . it’s important that they [the jurors] see it first hand.” Goldberg also rails against “an artist’s rendering of an alleged injury” (this relates to a diaphragm injury). The judge asks to see the actual photograph of this particular injury. Goldberg also complains about “some other illustrative exhibits of some alleged injuries . . . these are in isolation, nothing to do with connecting the dots amongst each other [other injuries] . . . it is completely contrary to what we discussed previously, and it’s clear the only things these things would do are mislead or confuse the jury . . . it would be unfairly prejudicial, even for a demonstrative purpose.” Glasgow withdraws one of the proposed exhibits, but supports the appropriateness of the others. Judge: “The injuries depicted . . . are there actual photographs of those injuries?” Glasgow confirms that there are. Judge: “I understand Mr. Goldberg’s argument . . . I’m going to allow them to use [one], to demonstrate the relationship of the wounds.” Another demonstrative, however, is not allowed.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Drew Peterson trial blog: Peterson's ex-coworker will take the stand

("Hit Man" Testimony)

August 21, 9:45 a.m.
A former co-worker of Drew Peterson’s who claims Peterson once offered him $25,000 to hire a hit-man to kill his wife will be allowed to testify. Jeffrey Pachter, who worked with Peterson at a cable company, will testify that Peterson asked him to find someone to kill Kathleen Savio but later told him he wouldn¿t need that “favor” anymore. Prosecutors had mentioned Pachter¿s expected testimony in opening statements which set off a firestorm of motions and filings with Judge Burmila making his decision this morning.

Updates at link
http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-drew-pe ... .htmlstory

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Drew Peterson trial blog: Jurors dressing in same colors

August 21, 10:24 a.m.
Another late start in the Peterson trial with the jurors taking their seats after 10:15am. The jurors are dressed in green today. Last week they started dressing in the same colors although it is not clear why. Dr. Mary Case, a neuro and forensic pathologist, has taken the stand.

Updates at link
http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-drew-pe ... .htmlstory

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

10:30 a.m. Medical examiner takes the stand
The first witness of the day is St. Louis County Medical Examiner Mary Case, a prosecution expert on what renders people unconscious.

In Session
Prosecutor Glasgow calls Dr. Mary Case to the stand. She identifies herself as “a medical doctor,” and goes over her educational and professional background. She has been a pathologist since 1973, and she is currently a professor of pathology at St. Louis University. She also serves as chief medical examiner for four counties (including St. Louis County).

In Session
Dr. Case is tendered as an expert in the field of neuro-pathology (without objection). “Were you contacted in 2010 to review an autopsy investigation into the death of Kathleen Savio Peterson?” ‘Yes, I did . . . I reviewed a large number of items, including the autopsy and scene investigation. In this case, there were three autopsies; I had all of those records. I had microscopic slides from the second and third autopsies. I had depositional testimony of the three doctors that were involved, as well as testimony from a large number of individuals . . . I also have testimony from a number of police individuals . . .” In the middle of this testimony, the attorneys suddenly go to a sidebar.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

ANOTHER COCK UP!!!

"Chase references testimony she has reviewed from people who won't testify. Apparently this is a big deal "

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

In Session
The jurors and witness are now gone. Judge: “The doctor has now advised the jury that she’s reviewed the sworn testimony of people that this jury will never hear from . . . what are we going to do about that now?” Glasgow: “With all due respect, I apologize to the Court.” Judge: “Are all those people testifying? I’m assuming the State won’t call them all.” Goldberg points out that some of the people mention have already been excused as witnesses earlier in the proceedings. “We don’t have any obligation to call any witnesses . . . and Dr. Mitchell’s grand jury testimony wasn’t subject to cross-examination. That certainly crosses the line . . . it would be highly inappropriate for her to comment on any of those things.” Glasgow: “Judge, if we could have a short break, we have case law we looked at previously.” Judge: “I don’t believe that any such case law exists. But if you’ve got it, I’d like to see it.” The judge leaves the bench, and the trial is in a brief recess.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Drew Peterson trial updates: Judge halts trial yet again

11 a.m. Judge halts trial yet again
Just minutes into Medical Examiner Mary Case's testimony, the trial ground to a halt as the judge stopped her in mid-sentence and asked that the jury be led out of the courtroom.

At issue was Case's testimony that she reviewed reports and statements about the Savio case from witnesses who have been or will be called, as well as similar documents from people the state does not intend to call or whose testimony was barred.

"So now the doctor has advised the jury that she has reviewed the sworn testimony from people this jury will never hear from," Burmila said. "And what are we going to do about that?"

The defense, which did not raise an objection, seized the opportunity to argue that the state erred in allowing Case to mention the names of the barred or un-called witnesses.

"It would be entirely inappropriate for her to comment on any of those things, particularly at this point," Peterson attorney Darryl Goldberg said.

The trial recessed for the state to try locate case law showing other instances where an expert witness has been allowed to talk about the findings of witnesses who were not themselves called to testify.

Judge Edward Burmila has stopped the trial several times, frustrating some jurors. The trial was put on hold three times previously so Burmila could consider whether to declare a mistrial after prosecution errors.

10:30 a.m. Medical examiner takes the stand
The first witness of the day is St. Louis County Medical Examiner Mary Case, a prosecution expert on what renders people unconscious.

Updates at link
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... 0802.story

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

In Session
Judge Burmila returns to the bench. “During the break, I asked the parties to find for me the case … it’s an Illinois Supreme Court case from 1981. And in the decision, it was the first instance where the Illinois Supreme Court started to direct trial courts to leave behind the old methodology of proposing hypotheticals to expert witnesses . . . in this instance, when Mr. Glasgow told the doctor to go on [and give names], that was unnecessary . . . some of the people whose names she mentioned, their testimony was banned in this case, and that worries me . . . so when the jury comes back, I’m going to tell the jury to ignore the names of the people she said she relied on.” Attorney Goldberg: “We discussed Dr. Mitchell’s grand jury testimony . . . I want to make sure that the doctor [Case] is not going to rely upon uncross-examined testimony from Dr. Mitchell.” Judge: “She’s an expert, and if she says she saw something in his testimony, and she took it into account, she can do that. And you can cross-examine her about that.” Attorney Greenberg responds: “We have such a unique circumstance here, with what happened with Dr. Mitchell . . . they should not be able to have an expert testifying as to Dr. Mitchell; the jurors should never be allowed to hear that . . . there’s no reason for this witness to have to say what Dr. Mitchell said.” Prosecutor Kathy Patton then jumps in, and disputes Greenberg’s interpretation of the case law in question. Glasgow: “She is not going to say that she relied upon Dr. Mitchell’s grand jury testimony to form her opinion.” Judge: “We’re good to go, then.”

In Session
The judge sends for the witness and the jury.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Prosecution finished with Mary Case testimony ......
"My opinion is that it is a homicide ... It is not a suicide or an accident." - Case

Defense setting up for cross-examination of Case.

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Glasgow begins a redirect examination of Case

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Drew Peterson trial blog: Day 13

August 21, 5:27 p.m. Dr. Mary Case has completed her testimony. The jury has been sent home for the day.
Judge Burmila has just added a day of testimony on Monday August 27th. Details to follow.

updates at link
http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-drew-pe ... .htmlstory

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

TRIAL DAY 14 (8-22-12)

STATE OF IL. VS. DREW PETERSON


Trial Day Starts in Joliet Il. - Wednesday, August 22, 2012 9:00AM CT

Days will be ....MONDAY through Friday, every week until it goes to jury!!!

There will be no camera's in courtroom unfortunately so we will have to rely on twitter for information as to what is going on in courtroom & also Updates from several outlets.

TRIAL UPDATES: Chicago Tribune Breaking News
(Link to Daily Update Story)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... g&lpos=Sub

LIVESTREAMING FOR TRU TV
http://superusvox.com/index.php/specialty/trutv
or
http://livetvcafe.net/video/7Y78YR9H9DKB/Tru-TV

WGN TV - Drew Peterson trial (links to daily blogs)
http://www.wgntv.com/news/drewpeterson/

InSession on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/InSession




TWITTER LINKS:

IN SESSIONS.
http://twitter.com/InSession

Joseph Hosey (reporter)
Joseph Hosey@ShorewdILPatch
http://twitter.com/ShorewdILPatch

Tweets for Drew Peterson case
https://twitter.com/#!/search/drew%20...+peterson+case

Jon Seidel
Jon Seidel@SeidelContent
https://twitter.com/seidelcontent

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Drew Peterson trial updates:

10:15 a.m. Witness says Peterson looking for hit man
Drew Peterson’s former co-worker, Jeff Pachter, testified this morning that Peterson offered him $25,000 to find a hit man “to take care of” Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Under the plan, Pachter would find someone to do it, negotiate the price and keep whatever was left of the $25,000. Peterson said he would go to Great America in Gurnee on the day of the hit so he would have an alibi.

Pachter said he called Peterson in July 2004 and Peterson told him, “I no longer need (that favor) anymore.” Savio drowned in March 2004.

Pachter testified that Peterson told him Pachter would take the hit request to “his grave.”

10:30 a.m. No call to police after hit man talk
During questioning from defense attorney Joseph Lopez, Jeff Pachter admitted there was no record of his alleged hit man conversation in November 2003 with Drew Peterson, that Pachter doesn’t know how to plan a murder, and he never went to police.

He also acknowledged that Peterson never specifically asked him to "kill" Kathleen Savio, nor did Peterson provide a picture or an address for Savio.

Pachter said Peterson was a jokester and never again mentioned the hit.

"I didn’t know what to make of it," Pachter said.

Lopez suggested that Pachter wants to write a book and make money from the Peterson case.

updates at link
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... ory?page=1

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Drew Peterson trial blog:

August 22, 11:55 a.m. Illinois State Trooper Bryan Falat was on a temporary assignment in investigations when Kathleen Savio was killed. Falat had little homicide training saying he had taken a few courses including introductory to homicide. Under cross-examination, Defense Attorney Joe Lopez asked Falat if he conducted a thorough investigation. Falat answered that he is sure there were other objects he could have looked for if he was trained. Prosecutors have been trying to show the jury that the initial investigation done by ISP in Kathleen Savio’s death wasn¿t done correctly for a myriad of reasons, including protocol and lack of training.

updates at link
http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-drew-pe ... .htmlstory

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light

Drew Peterson trial updates:

2:50 p.m. Doctor: Savio was not more likely to fall
Kathleen Savio’s physician, Dr. Vinod Motiani, took the stand and testified that Savio had no conditions that would make her more likely than normal to fall.

"She was at no more risk than any other person," he testified.

Savio had complained previously about dizziness, but it was nothing out of the ordinary, Motiani.

"She didn’t complain out of the usual of the dizziness… it is a very routine complaint that we face in our practice," he said.

Peterson’s defense team contends Savio slipped and fell in her bathtub, perhaps because of some medical condition, leading to her drowning in 2004.

updated at link
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... ory?page=1

_________________
Do not go gentle into that good night.
___________ Rage, rage against the dying of the light