Re: Drew Peterson Trial Discussion

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:43 am

StacyStClair
Jury deliberations began at 9:35, but courtroom clock is two minutes fast so some are going with that as official time.

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:55 am

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:12 am

Drew Peterson trial updates: Jurors begin deliberations

By Steve Schmadeke, Matthew Walberg and
Stacy St. Clair
Tribune reporters
9:53 a.m. CDT, September 5, 2012

___________________________________________________________

9:50 a.m. Should alternate jurors be dismissed?

After the alternate jurors were taken to a separate jury room, Peterson attorney Steve Greenberg objected to Judge Edward Burmila's decision to hold them in reserve, saying trial rules require that alternates be dismissed once deliberations begin.

"You want me to discharge the alternate jurors, and if we need them I'm just supposed to call them up at home and tell the to come back?" Burmila said. "Are you telling me that Mr. Peterson would accept a verdict from 11 jurors?"

"That it would be a mistrial," Greenberg said.

State's Atty. James Glasgow said he believed Burmila's plan was the correct way to proceed, but the judge said he would revisit the defense request after his normal court call.

___________________________________________________________

9:40 a.m. Peterson did not have to prove innocence

Before jurors left the courtroom to begin deliberations, Judge Edward Burmilla reminded them that Drew Peterson did not have to prove his innocence, and they cannot hold it against him that he didn't testify.

___________________________________________________________

9:35 a.m. Jurors begin deliberations

Jurors leave courtroom to begin deliberations at Drew Peterson murder trial.

The judge is now instructing the four alternate jurors that they are still part of the case and may be called upon to take part in deliberations if a jury is excused.

___________________________________________________________

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-drew-peterson-trial-updates-jury-to-begin-deliberations-20120905,0,6308698.story

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:22 am

The Judge has summoned the lawyers to come into the courtroom....

The jurors might have a question or perhaps they want to look at some exhibits.

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:43 am

The Judge said that he won't send evidence exhibits back to jury room unless jurors specifically ask to see them.

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:53 am

Does anyone wonder why Joe Lopez, not Drew Peterson's lead defense attorney, Joel Brodsky, delivered the closing argument?

by Lilith Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:10 pm

Alessandra - I found that curious also. Do you have a theory?

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:37 pm

In Session @InSession
The jury also wants #StacyPeterson's phone records and #HarrySmith's testimony.

In Session @InSession
The jury has two questions. They want #DrewPeterson's phone records for the weekend that #Savio died as well as #NeilSchori's testimony.

by Lilith Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:49 pm

This is a good sign (I think), the jury is taking Staceys phone call and the divorce attorneys testimony seriously.

by Weeziethm Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:52 pm

The jury has a third question. They want #KathleenSavio's letter to the state’s attorney, and the police report for the July 5 incident. In Session Tweet.

Seems as though this jury is serious about examining the evidence and not just buying into the BS!

by Hinky Refugee Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:59 pm

Watching In Sessions trying to figure out what the jury requests mean....only one I am paying attention to is what the Judge is saying.

But, it looks like this jury is moving fast and they have formed an opinion that Kathleen was murdered.

by Lilith Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:27 pm

Hinky - I so hope you are right.

by Guest Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:17 pm

Hinky Refugee wrote:Watching In Sessions trying to figure out what the jury requests mean....only one I am paying attention to is what the Judge is saying.

But, it looks like this jury is moving fast and they have formed an opinion that Kathleen was murdered.

hi Hinky Refugee, the jury deciding this was actually a murder was the biggest hurdle imo for the State to prove. It's a relief it appears this has been accomplished, hopefully, inspite of NOTHING putting DP in that bathroom such as his hair or any of his DNA, Kathleen's fear for her life holds more weight, after all, she's dead and nobody else had a motive that we know of.

Although Stacy has been mentioned at a minimum in the trial, imo, had Stacy not suspiciously disappeared and causing so much publicity, it might have never motivated the State to delve into the circumstances of Kathleen's death and actually doing a credible investigation years after her original investigation and burial and determination of death. imo, it may have been those very threats that Stacy made to DP about Kathleen's murder that got her probably murdered.

by Bmore Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:28 pm

I think with high profile cases jurors are going to take it more seriously after the Casey debacle... I hope they realize if you take 1 brick of evidence at a time it'll build a wall circumstancial or not.

by Hinky Refugee Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:58 pm

Bmore wrote:I think with high profile cases jurors are going to take it more seriously after the Casey debacle... I hope they realize if you take 1 brick of evidence at a time it'll build a wall circumstancial or not.

I think that the first thing a jury asks for are words directly from Stacy & Kathleen....this seems to me to be karma.....I hope Drew is getting a play by play of both these women being asked to speak to the jury first.

Does anyone know where to look for a sight to view when the verdict does come in? In Sessions is off until tomorrow. Where can we get a first hand recital from the media?

by nanshin Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:09 pm

Alessandra_Deux wrote:Does anyone wonder why Joe Lopez, not Drew Peterson's lead defense attorney, Joel Brodsky, delivered the closing argument?

Brodsky mentioned the other day on In Session that Joe Lopez is very srong in closings. Others have concurred, the former Judge White and other guest lawyers. Most defense and prosecutors do this, open or close or even direct or cross examine.

by nanshin Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:12 pm

Hinky Refugee wrote:
Bmore wrote:I think with high profile cases jurors are going to take it more seriously after the Casey debacle... I hope they realize if you take 1 brick of evidence at a time it'll build a wall circumstancial or not.

I think that the first thing a jury asks for are words directly from Stacy & Kathleen....this seems to me to be karma.....I hope Drew is getting a play by play of both these women being asked to speak to the jury first.

Does anyone know where to look for a sight to view when the verdict does come in? In Sessions is off until tomorrow. Where can we get a first hand recital from the media?

HLN or Chicago Tribune's web site should have it.

by Hinky Refugee Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:26 pm

Thanks nanshin. And per the talking heads after the defense made closing statements they say it was not a good closing statement at all.

Have HLN on and Chicago Tribune pulled up...playing games on FB...lol.....that's my jury watch!

by ClaireUncensored Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:34 pm

Bmore wrote:I think with high profile cases jurors are going to take it more seriously after the Casey debacle... I hope they realize if you take 1 brick of evidence at a time it'll build a wall circumstancial or not.

I completely agree. This particular jury seemed to jump right in head first and ready to go, almost immediately asking for transcripts, photos, phone records to have on hand in the jury room for their convenient review. Of course the defense team objected and now has their undies in a wad since the judge seemed to think the jury's request was reasonable (and legal).

The defense started out so well (insert sarcasm) O-O As soon as the judge sent the alternate jurors to their very own room (instead of home), shit hit the fan over on the defense side because apparently that's not how it's usually done (paraphrasing the whining words of the defense). IMO, however, the judge made a very good point: Why send the alternate(s) home in case a sitting juror gets ill during the day? Then an alternate could just be pulled from down the hall. I suppose the defense was still whining since the nice judge asked for some case law so he could mull over that decision. (BTW, this is only my interpretation of how it went down since I was in and out of the room but pretty sure that's the gist of the situation; know for sure that the defense whined A LOT.)

crystal ball

I can't predict where the jury is going with their requests. My mind tells me that this jury was obviously paying attention to the testimony even though they were marched in and out of the courtroom way too much -- my heart tells me they want to see through the fluff of all of the evidence presented and come to their own conclusion as ONE. (Does that make sense? It did in my mind, somehow.)

As a woman there were several times when I was just down-right offended by the defense team (attitude, cockiness, the puffy-chest walk, smirk w/sunglasses, general snarkiness). Mostly, I just felt really bad vibes from these defense dudes. It's hard to explain, to put into words, since I don't know them personally. As a survivor of abuse, these men just exhibited a familiar behavior IYKWIM. With Drew as a client maybe his representation would likely be, well, like him -- dregs of society, birds of a feather and all that. JMHO of course. ~~C Embarassed

(trying to not speak too much out of turn but the defense dudes really turn my stomach)

by Gia Wed Sep 05, 2012 6:46 pm

At least this jury have made requests which is more than what happened with the kc ant trial.

It stands to reason with both this case and the kc ant one that there was so much evidence that proper deliberations would entail clarifying the details before coming to a conclusion. So while I have no idea what this jury will decide, IMO it is a positive sign that they are at least putting some effort into the deliberations.

by Tamta Wed Sep 05, 2012 7:08 pm

Gia wrote:At least this jury have made requests which is more than what happened with the kc ant trial.

It stands to reason with both this case and the kc ant one that there was so much evidence that proper deliberations would entail clarifying the details before coming to a conclusion. So while I have no idea what this jury will decide, IMO it is a positive sign that they are at least putting some effort into the deliberations.

I think the autopsy photos were used to establish agreement on homicide, which may have been easily achieved as no requests were made on expert testimony?

The other requests of the day IMO serve in the consideration of Peterson as Kathleen's murderer.

Specifically notable in Smiths testimony was the State eliciting from Smith that Stacey referred to "HOW" Kathleen was murdered and not "THAT" she was murdered.

I liked their requests.

by Estee Wed Sep 05, 2012 7:35 pm

At least they are using their brains...

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:21 pm

Drew Peterson trial updates: Jury asks to go home

By Steve Schmadeke, Matthew Walberg and
Stacy St. Clair
Tribune reporters
6:23 p.m. CDT, September 5, 2012

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6:10 p.m. Jury asks to go home

Judge Edward Burmila told jurors they could go home or keep deliberating, and the jury has requested to go home. Burmila will bring them in to remind them to avoid any media coverage and dismiss them for the night.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6 p.m. Jurors ask about dinner

Judge Edward Burmila said that jurors have asked for dinner.

But Burmila said he is concerned about how long the day has been for the jury, noting a recent conviction in Will County was overturned after an appellate court found they were made to deliberate for an excessive length of time.

The defense suggested that the court simply let them know that they have the option to continue or resume deliberations tomorrow, but prosecutors said the jurors have made their intentions known.

"Clearly they have communicated their desire to continue," Assistant State's Atty. Chris Koch said.

Burmila sent jurors a note asking if they would like to continue deliberating or stop and resume in the morning.

Jurors sent a note back to Burmila asking, "If we want to resume deliberations tomorrow, will we go home or will we stay somewhere?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Read more:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-drew-peterson-trial-updates-jury-to-begin-deliberations-20120905,0,6308698.story

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:38 pm

Drew Peterson Murder Trial: Jurors head home after 1st day of deliberations

Updated at 06:42 PM today

September 5, 2012 (JOLIET, Ill.) (WLS) -- About an hour and a half after starting their first day of deliberations, jurors in the Drew Peterson murder trial had three questions for the judge.

They asked Judge Edward Burmila for phone records between the Peterson household and his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in the days leading up to her death; for transcripts of testimony from two witnesses -- Stacy Peterson's pastor and Savio's divorce attorney, whom Stacy Peterson called; and Savio's police report and letter written to the state's attorney alleging Peterson threatened her.

Judge Burmila denied the request for transcripts, but said they will be read aloud in open court. The phone records will be sent to the jury; and more information was requested from the jurors about what they are looking for in the police report, of which only part was read.

The jury responded, and the judge sent a copy of the handwritten statement police report. They also asked for autopsy, bruise, bathroom and crime scene photos. All those allowed into evidence will be sent to the jurors, despite defense objections.

Read more:

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=8799419

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:40 pm

Peterson jury deliberations will continue tomorrow

http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-verdict-may-come-today-in-peterson-trial-20120905,0,225382.story

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 9:18 pm

Drew Peterson 'trial watchers' travel far, line up early

Updated at 05:27 PM today

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=8799364

by vegret Wed Sep 05, 2012 9:52 pm

"They asked Judge Edward Burmila for phone records between the Peterson household and his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in the days leading up to her death; for transcripts of testimony from two witnesses -- Stacy Peterson's pastor and Savio's divorce attorney, whom Stacy Peterson called; and Savio's police report and letter written to the state's attorney alleging Peterson threatened her.

Judge Burmila denied the request for transcripts, but said they will be read aloud in open court."

Why would he deny the transcripts?

by Tamta Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:06 pm

vegret wrote:"They asked Judge Edward Burmila for phone records between the Peterson household and his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in the days leading up to her death; for transcripts of testimony from two witnesses -- Stacy Peterson's pastor and Savio's divorce attorney, whom Stacy Peterson called; and Savio's police report and letter written to the state's attorney alleging Peterson threatened her.

Judge Burmila denied the request for transcripts, but said they will be read aloud in open court."

The jury is supposed to be unaware of redacted or stricken portions.
Why would he deny the transcripts?

by vegret Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:11 pm

Thanks Tamta!

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:13 pm

vegret wrote:"They asked Judge Edward Burmila for phone records between the Peterson household and his third wife, Kathleen Savio, in the days leading up to her death; for transcripts of testimony from two witnesses -- Stacy Peterson's pastor and Savio's divorce attorney, whom Stacy Peterson called; and Savio's police report and letter written to the state's attorney alleging Peterson threatened her.

Judge Burmila denied the request for transcripts, but said they will be read aloud in open court."

Why would he deny the transcripts?

Because the transcripts contain information about issues that were argued by the lawyers about the witnesses' testimonies outside the presence of the jurors.

Only the parts of the testimonies that were allowed into the trial were read back for the jurors.

by Alessandra_Deux Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:33 pm

After 8.5 hours of deliberations, Drew Peterson jurors break for night

BY DAN ROZEK Staff Reporter/drozek@suntimes.com September 5, 2012 9:38AM

Drew Peterson’s jurors had barely started deliberating Wednesday when they abruptly returned to the courtroom to review testimony from two key witnesses.

The jury asked to review trial statements from the Rev. Neil Schori and divorce attorney Harry Smith — who both recounted claims by Peterson’s missing fourth wife that tied Peterson to the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Will County Judge Edward Burmila opted to call jurors back into court, where a clerk spent nearly 90 minutes re-reading their testimony, as well as reciting records of phone calls between Peterson and Savio on the weekend she died.

Jurors ultimately deliberated for about 8½ hours Wednesday before being sent home for the night.

------------
DREW PETERSON TRIAL: DAY 23

Jurors begin discussing the evidence and deliberate for 8 ½ hours without reaching a verdict.

The jury hears clerk re-read testimony from two key witnesses: Rev. Neil Schori, who counseled Stacy Peterson, and Harry Smith, who represented Kathleen Savio in her divorce and also talked to Stacy Peterson.

Jurors also were allowed to look at autopsy photos showing bruises and abrasions discovered on Savio’s body. They also were given photos showing Savio’s body in her bathtub.

Jurors resume deliberating on Thursday.

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/14950487-761/jury-asks-for-testimony-alleging-drew-peterson-killed-third-wife.html

by Alessandra_Deux Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:15 am

Kathleen Savio's sister: Peterson killed her

September 5, 2012
Posted: 12:59 PM ET

http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/

by Alessandra_Deux Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:21 am

Day 1 of Deliberations: Questions, But No Verdict

Jurors received instructions for two counts of first-degree murder

By Lisa Balde, BJ Lutz and Kim Vatis | Wednesday, Sep 5, 2012 | Updated 9:25 PM CDT

View more videos at: http://nbcchicago.com.

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Drew-Peterson-Jury-Begins-Deliberations-168618186.html

by Alessandra_Deux Thu Sep 06, 2012 3:33 am

In Peterson trial, jurors quickly confront hearsay

By Michael Tarm
September 5, 2012 / Associated Press

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/2012/09/05/jurors-deliberate-drew-peterson-murder-trial/Q7LlqGJ0CvgwhkKaoaFLOI/story.html

by Lilith Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:27 am

I really think we will have a verdict today. I hope it is the right one for Kathleen and Stacey.

by Alessandra_Deux Thu Sep 06, 2012 10:59 am

In Session @InSession
The #DrewPeterson jurors have gone directly to the jury room. The bailiff has taken back the evidence and deliberations continue.

by Alessandra_Deux Thu Sep 06, 2012 11:51 am

Drew Peterson Verdict Watch: Day 2 of Deliberations

Updated at 07:49 AM today

http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=8799920

by Alessandra_Deux Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:14 pm

StacyStClair
#drewpeterson is being kept in a holding cell in the courthouse basement during jury deliberations.

by Gia Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:17 pm

Is everyone else feeling as tense and anxious as I am waiting for the verdict?
Drew Peterson Trial Discussion - Page 18 451488

by Lilith Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:27 pm

I certainky am Gia. I love that DP is stuck in a basement cell as I have said many times he needs to be put under the jail! I hope he is trembling with fear of his upcoming fate.

by Julie Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:28 pm

At least the jury isn't the Pinellas 12.

by Lilith Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:37 pm

Exactly Julie! I am trying hard to have faith that this jury will see the facts and evidence as it is and act accordingly. The prosecution has disappointed me many times in this trial with their missteps and blunders but iin the end I think the defense screwed up with the divorce attorney and their closing argument (wth was THAT all about?? lol) and sent the jurors into deliberation with thoughts of Stacey and what she knew.

by Gia Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:41 pm

Too true Julie.

Lilith, if he is human at all then he must be worrying and pacing. But he is so smug and full of himself that I'm not so sure .

by Gia Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:43 pm

Lilith wrote:Exactly Julie! I am trying hard to have faith that this jury will see the facts and evidence as it is and act accordingly. The prosecution has disappointed me many times in this trial with their missteps and blunders but iin the end I think the defense screwed up with the divorce attorney and their closing argument (wth was THAT all about?? lol) and sent the jurors into deliberation with thoughts of Stacey and what she knew.

... and to think he spent 50-hours working on that closing arguement.

Sometimes being over confident doesn't pay off as one just comes across as being arrogant and smug.

by Lilith Thu Sep 06, 2012 12:48 pm

Gia - that is one of the things that annoyed me from the very first day he shoved his ugly mug in front of the cameras. The smugness and arrogance was stunning.

by Lilith Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:02 pm

Someday Stacey's children will (probably) see all that footage of their father being his arrogant and smug self in the days and months after their mom disappeared. I wonder what they will think?

by Weeziethm Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:13 pm

I should know this, but are there any "lesser included" charges IF, heaven forbid, the jury acquits him on the two first degree murder charges....manslaughter, negligent homicide, I don't know??? Anyone?

by Guest Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:21 pm

Lilith wrote:Someday Stacey's children will (probably) see all that footage of their father being his arrogant and smug self in the days and months after their mom disappeared. I wonder what they will think?

Lilith, imo, they will think just as Kathleen's children think, that DP is innocent. You have to consider that Kathleen's and Stacy's children have been raised by DP, Kathleen's children lived with DP and Stacy and the children had a close relationship to Stacy until she disappeared, but the 4 children have lived as siblings. DP had all 4 children until his arrest and his son, a former cop also, that is 31 has had all the children and still does. the oldest son is now 18 or 19, Conor, testified at DP's trial claiming his dad was innocent.

The MacNeil case is interesting, 2 of the oldest siblings pressured LE until an investigation and eventual arrest of their father, BUT, the difference is, the oldest 2 daughter's were in college and had a close relationship with their mother. In the case of DP's kids, they were small and he has had a relationship with all of them, even after his arrest, they still remain growing up and being raised by a Peterson.

by Lilith Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:33 pm

Art - knowing the children lived with Drew and now with his older son does explain the recent testimony. I expected that when I heard he was going to be called to the stand. I am thinking about when they are older as the 'influence' will be less and adult rational thinking will (hopefully) begin occurring. I have no doubt all of DP's kids believe in his onnocence - for now. The scary thing is if he is found innocent he will then be once again raising Staceys children. just the thought makes me sad.

by Alessandra_Deux Thu Sep 06, 2012 1:34 pm

StacyStClair
#drewpeterson jury has another question.

by Sponsored content