Wives' Words to Haunt Drew Peterson After Appellate Court OKs Hearsay

Prosecutors will be able to use a mountain of hearsay evidence, after the Appellate Court decided 14 statements from Drew Peterson’s last two wives can be considered in his murder trial.

The 14 statements supposedly spoken by Drew Peterson's dead third wife and missing fourth wife can be used against him at his murder trial.

The Third District Appellate Court in Ottawa handed down its decision on the Peterson case Thursday.

The matter has been under appeal since the day before Peterson’s murder trial was to start in July 2010. The appellate court declined to decide the matter, prompting Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow to take the case to the Illinois Supreme Court.

In November, the supreme court sent the case back to the appellate court and charged them with settling it.

Prosecutors sought to use 11 statements attributed to Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio, and three said to have been made by his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson. Savio was found drowned in a dry bathtub in March 2004. Stacy Peterson mysteriously vanished in October 2007 and remains missing.

Drew Peterson, a 58-year-old former Bolingbrook cop, was arrested and charged with murdering Savio in May 2009. The state police also say he is the sole suspect in the investigation of Stacy Peterson’s disappearance, a case they have termed a “potential homicide.”

Stacy Peterson, the mother of two of Drew Peterson’s six children, was 23 when she vanished.

In the period between Stacy Peterson’s disappearance and Drew Peterson’s arrest, Glasgow worked to pass a new state law to allow hearsay evidence.

Following Drew Peterson’s arrest, a landmark, month-long hearing was convened in January 2010 to determine what statements could be used against Drew Peterson. Will County Judge Stephen White ruled that only six of the 14 statements would be permitted at trial.

Charles B. Pelkie, the spokesman for the state’s attorney’s office, applauded the appellate court’s decision.

“The Will County State’s Attorney’s Office argued from the beginning that all of the statements it presented from Stacy Peterson and Kathleen Savio should be admitted as evidence at trial in the case of People v. Drew Peterson,” Pelkie said, pegging the start of the trial for late spring or early summer.

Whenever the trial does start, Joseph “Shark” Lopez, one member of the shifting team of lawyers defending Drew Peterson in the nearly three years since he was charged with murder, doesn’t think it will be greatly affected by the hearsay statements.

“So what? It still doesn’t mean anything,” Lopez said.

The statements that can be used against Drew Peterson were testified to by a range of witnesses including a minister, Savio’s sisters, her divorce attorney and a male nurse from Stacy Peterson’s past.

The various witnesses testified to Savio fearing for her life, telling how Drew Peterson threatened her at knife-point, and of Stacy Peterson relating how Drew Peterson coached her to give a cover story to police after Savio’s body was found.

Drew Peterson’s longest serving lawyer, self-proclaimed “lead attorney” Joel Brodsky, failed to return calls for comment on what impact this evidence might have on the case. But Lopez was dismissive of what difference it will make.

“If they prosecuted every person who said they wanted something bad to happen to their ex-spouse, there would be such a backlog it would be incredible,” Lopez said. “They still don’t have any evidence.”

Freddie Kissell April 17, 2012 at 07:54 PM
So because Lopez says there's no evidence, that means there's no evidence? This, coming from a man who enjoys being referred to as "Shark."
Freddie Kissell April 17, 2012 at 07:56 PM
Moreli, you need to study up before you start making comments willy nilly. Read "Fatal Vows."
Lorie Taylor April 29, 2012 at 05:08 PM
Sheila, When his own step brother comes forward and says, Drew asked him to rent a storage unit, asks him to remove a blue barrel from the upstairs bedroom, don't you find that odd? Why would a blue barrel of that size be in an upstairs bedroom? Especially that at one time might of had chemicals in it to ruin floors, carpeting etc? What could he have possibly had in there up in the master bedroom? Why would he ask his step brother to sit at a park with his cell phone, and don't answer it if Stacy calls? Don't you think he would want to know where she is? Keep her on the phone so they could track her location? Where did Drew go? And why did he ask his brother to keep his phone? All of this, and numerous other odd behaviors of Drew before and after Stacy went missing doesn't lead you to believe he was involving his step brother to establish an alibi, and cover up yet another murder? Oh then he says Stacy called him at 9 to say she is leaving with another man, and the car is at the airport. Ok ......so then while doing an interview he is asked why he was down at the canal due to cell phone pings from one of the towers, which was way later then the 9 o'clock phone call. Drew's answer?He says he was down in the area by the canal looking for Stacy somewhere he thought she might be, and looking for his car. Hmmm, looking for his car!! Thought it was at the airport! Grieving? What's to grieve when you rid of your wife so she couldn't turn you in for the previous wife!
Watchful Eye April 29, 2012 at 11:56 PM
Excellent observations, and recounting of the FACTS. Unfortunately, I think too many ignore the reality of what he said during relevant times of the investigations, and how his story changed. Too many are caught up with thinking this jerk's rights are being trampled on when, in reality, it's he who trampled on others' rights. The right to breathe and live!
Lorie Taylor May 01, 2012 at 02:15 AM
Amen to that Watchful Eye! They also fail to remember how he had his buddy come over with a cell phone for him to use so that the police couldn't listen to his phone calls, and was writing notes and shredding them in a shredder so the police couldn't get them out of the garbage. Why would a grieving, pissed off, even worried husband do this, if he had nothing to hide? A guy who tracked his wives, and girlfriends everywhere they went, showed up where they were, had his buddies following them around, doesn't know where his wife is at? Yeah right! Ran off with some mystery man, that nobody knows about, or heard about. Oh yea she is just missing! Poof! Been gone since Oct 2007 with no trace of her anywhere. No money trails, no sightings, no nothing! Funny she went to the Pastor, which Drew knew she was with him, and even called the Pastor afterward to let him know she was there. She went to see an atty about a divorce, which I am sure he knew about, then she just poof! Disappears! oh yeah ran off with some mystery man! Oh wait he led them to believe it was her friend from Shorewood, that she had lunch with! Ooops he knew about that too!! He even showed up there, because he GPS tracked her to the local Denny's there in town! For someone who knew where she was every waking minute, even coming home while on duty, and on break, why didn't he know where she was then? He knows where she is!! He knows what happened to her! They need to read up on the whole case, and get the facts!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »