Peterson Lawyer Says Jury Did the Right Thing in Anthony Case

One of Drew Peterson's lawyers, Joel Brodsky, said the jurors in the Casey Anthony murder case did "the correct thing" and hinted that it may be good news for the alleged wife-killer from Bolingbrook.

According to a Chicago Tribune report: 

Joel Brodsky said his client, held for more than two years on charges that he drowned his third wife, was pleased that jurors in the high-profile case based their decision solely on the evidence.

"The jury is not to judge people morally; it's to judge whether there is sufficient evidence," Brodsky said. "There was more evidence against Casey Anthony — circumstantial evidence — than there is against Drew Peterson. It's good to see a jury do the correct thing."

Anthony was found not guilty of killing her 2-year-old daughter on July 5. She was also found not guilty of aggravated child abuse and aggravated manslaughter of a child, according to a Huffington Post report, but was convicted on charges of misleading law enforcement.

From HuffPo:

The case against Anthony was mostly circumstantial, but as it unfolded she was portrayed in the trial as a promiscuous, self-centered woman who became a cold-blooded killer. The motive, prosecutors alleged, was to allow her to live a carefree life without her daughter.

Peterson’s latest plea to get out of jail fell on deaf ears earlier this month, as an appellate court shot it down and told him he’s not going anywhere.

Jailed since May 2009 on charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio, Peterson, 57, has been waiting on the appellate court to return a decision on what hearsay evidence can be used against him at trial.

The appellate court has been mulling over the matter for just shy of a year.

The murder charge in the Savio case stemmed from the then-40-year-old woman’s death in March 2004.