TRIAL DAY 9 (8-14-12)

STATE OF IL. VS. DREW PETERSON


Trial Day Starts in Joliet Il. - Tuesday, August 14, 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/




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. Prosecutors to call forensic pathologist
Prosecutors in the Drew Peterson murder trial this week will attempt to clear the first hurdle in their case — convincing jurors that the former Bolingbrook police sergeant's third wife was murdered.

This week, prosecutors plan to call Dr. Larry Blum, a forensic pathologist from Rockford who has performed more than 9,000 autopsies, to testify about the 2007 Savio autopsy. Blum ruled that Savio's death was a homicide based on the pattern of injuries he found on her body.

Another pathologist for the state, Dr. Michael Baden, did a third autopsy and came to the same conclusion. Peterson was charged with Savio's murder two years after the autopsies.

The pathologist who performed an autopsy the day after Savio's body was discovered died two years ago. Last week, a police officer testified at trial that Dr. Bryan Mitchell told him he thought Savio's death should have been labeled as having an "undetermined" cause.

...more at link (plus updated)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... 5433.story

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

Drew Peterson trial updates:

9:30 a.m. Pathologist: No toxins found in Savio
The first witness this morning is forensic pathologist Christopher Long, who told jurors his lab was contacted to perform tests for toxic drugs and other substances on samples taken from Kathleen Savio in 2004.

Long said his lab tested Savio's liver — where toxins are most likely to be found in the greatest concentration — and found nothing.

"We ran it twice, and they (the tests) were both negative."

...updates at link
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... 5433.story

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

WGN NEWS - Drew Peterson trial blog - Day 9

Dr. who conducted toxicology test takes stand

August 14, 9:31 a.m. The third week of the Peterson trial has begun. The first witness today is Dr. Christopher Long, an expert in forensic toxicology, who conducted toxicology tests on Kathleen Savio in 2004 and 2007.

...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

_________________
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

Drew Peterson trial updates:

1:45 p.m. Former cop, current mayor takes stand
The trial resumed this afternoon with the second witness of the day, former Bolingbrook police officer Teresa Kernc, who retired as a lietenant in 2005. She is the mayor of the Village of Diamond, about 60 miles southwest of Chicago.

She took a police report from Kathleen Savio after Drew Peterson allegedly threatened Savio with a knife.

...updated at link
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... 5433.story

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

Objections and side bars over this witness. Judge allows her in but..... the prosecution again push beyond what was agreed to.



https://www.facebook.com/InSession

_________________
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

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

Prosecutor Kathy Patton, in direct violation of judge's order asked a witness about an order of protection.

This is the THIRD time that a possible mistrial could of happened due to prosecution

IMO the prosecution are NOT presenting a strong case at all.

I think the Judge might just as well end it now with a mistrial (with prejudice)

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

Drew Peterson trial updates:

2:25 p.m. Another motion for mistrial

For the third time in the Peterson trial, defense attorneys have asked for a mistrial, and the judge has given prosecutors until 3 p.m. to come up with an appropriate response for their latest mishap.

The judge had ordered prosecutors not to make any mention of an order of protection during questioning of former Bolingbrook police officer Teresa Kernc because it’s too prejudicial to the jury and because Kathleen Savio never did obtain an order of protection against Peterson. Kernc was testifying about interviewing Savio after an alleged threat made against her by Peterson in 2002.

Just a minute into her questions, assistant state’s attorney Kathleen Patton asked Kernc if she suggested getting an order of protection to Savio. The question prompted an objection from the defense, and after the jury was escorted out of the courtroom, a strong rebuke from Judge Edward Burmila.

Patton apologized profusely but the defense pressed the issue, saying that for the third time at trial the state has mention inflammatory or prohibited statements that are denying their client the right to a fair trial. They asked for a mistrial with prejudice, which means the murder charges would be dropped and could not be brought again against Peterson.

Burmila expressed concern that if he once again tells the jury that prosecutors acted improperly and to ignore parts of their statements, it could deprive the state of its right to fair trial.

He asked the state to come up with its own suggested remedy for their actions. He set a 3 p.m. deadline for a response.

...updates at link
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/loca ... 5433.story

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

https://www.facebook.com/InSession

Judge Burmila is back on the bench. Judge: “The State has provided the court with a copy of a case from New York. Attorney Greenberg repeats that the defense is asking for a mistrial with prejudice, or striking the witness’ testimony. Prosecutor Patton: “I wish to apologize to the Court for my error . . . I say that, because it is my error, not the team’s error . . . I would ask that the sanctions be against me, and not against the State, because I’m the one who made the error.” Prosecutor Koch: “We believe both of the defense suggestions are too extreme of a remedy for the jury . . . when we’re looking at what is a remedy, with regards to the jury, I think there are two separate issues. As it relates to a remedy for the jury and for Mr. Peterson, I think the proper remedy is to strike the question, and to disregard the question . . . I submit that there was no prejudice to the defendant, since there was no answer given to that question. There is no prejudice; it’s a fleeting response . . . the appropriate remedy is to simply strike the question and move on. And then if Your Honor has reason for any other sanction or remedy toward the State, that can be done outside the presence of the jury . . . we believe that striking the entire testimony or granting a mistrial would be extreme.”

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

https://www.facebook.com/InSession


Judge: “Is there any case law you’ve seen where the prosecution intentionally defies a court order? Is there a case where the State defies the court, and then there isn’t a mistrial motion?” Koch: “No, but I don’t see a case that a mistrial with prejudice should be granted.” Judge: “Do I isolate this incident, or do I now take into account all three major incidents in which the defendant asked for a mistrial? Do I now look at an accumulation of intentional error by the State, and take that into account?” Koch: “Isolation is the proper way to look at it, Your Honor.”

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

https://www.facebook.com/InSession

Koch repeats that “the appropriate remedy would be to strike the question and move on.” Judge: “So each of the State’s errors is a separate issue?” Koch: “Yes . . . as far as a curative instruction beyond anything other than striking it, we believe that’s the appropriate remedy.” Judge: “If there is a sanction to be imposed, it certainly isn’t going to be treated as a Sword of Damocles . . . that would be the worst thing I could do in this case, because that would hamper the way in which the State proceeds. If there is going to be a sanction in this case, it’s going to be immediate . . . it isn’t going to be put over; if there’s a sanction, it’s going to be discussed.” Attorney Brodsky responds: “Actually, there were five errors here: first in the opening statement, about the so-called hit man. Then with Mr. Pontarelli, the bullet. Then the FBI report. Then this one, with the order of protection . . . it was Kathy Savio’s state of mind being fear, which Judge White ruled was absolutely irrelevant. It’s an avalanche, Your Honor, of prejudicial error, illegal evidence that is polluting this jury. I heard people say, ‘Well, the State’s got to get a fair trial, too.’ Well, I’ve read the Bill of Rights, and there isn’t one thing that protects the rights of the State. The State has all the power, and the defendant is the one whose rights are protected. Here, we have what can only be intentional and prejudicial introduction of material to this jury time after time after time . . . with such a small number of witnesses, and such a short period of time, to have this many prejudicial errors of putting matters before the jury that are clearly irrelevant, how can the defendant get a fair trial?” “So you only want the mistrial?” “Yes . .. with prejudice, yes; without prejudice, no.”

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

https://www.facebook.com/InSession

In the alternative, Brodsky believes that the Court should strike Kernc’s testimony in its entirely, instruct the jury to ignore it in its entirety, and to tell jurors that if they find the State has purposely mislead the jury . . . “the jury can’t infer from this conduct of the State, a consciousness by the State of the weakness of its case, this fact alone may create a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors which would require a verdict of not guilty. Unless we’re going to end this case by a mistrial with prejudice, this kind of language is the only thing that can let this trial go forward.” Judge: “You said there isn’t anything in the Constitution that grants any specific rights to the State . .. I’m not sure I agree with that. The citizens of this community are entitled to a fair trial, a trial that they can rely on. The question I have for you, though, is I’ve already instructed the jury once on the actions of the prosecution. If I believe now that the State defied my order, and did so purposely, and give the jury the instruction you’ve suggested, what am I telling the jury? That the government is unlawful, out of control? How is that a fair trial? How does that create a trial the people in the community can look at and find confidence in? What does that accomplish?” Brodsky confirms that the defense does not want a mistrial at this point, only a mistrial with prejudice.

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

https://www.facebook.com/InSession

Brodsky: “The protections in the Constitution are not against the people, they’re against the government functionaries . . . if the police or the State violate the law, then the rights of the accused must take precedence over that.” Prosecutor Connor then offers a cite, “People v. Hall,” a 2000 case. “In that case, there were two violations of the Court’s motion in limine . . . I’d certainly argue that under these circumstances this would be far less of a violation.” Attorney Greenberg: “I agree with the Court that the remedy is for the proceedings here; Mr. Peterson is entitled to a fair trial . . . [but] I don’t think we can characterize this as inadvertent . .. the fact is that the question shouldn’t have been asked. I believe the transcript reflects that the day the bullet testimony came out that it was purposeful. And I don’t think we can characterize this as inadvertent; it was in there, and it was done, and it was done for a reason. What kind of a trial, what kind of evidence are we dealing with here? This is probably a situation that will never come up again; we’re already talking about dangerous evidence. They have a special duty to be careful about presenting this evidence. It’s explosive evidence, and if it’s mishandled the prejudice is undeniable . . . they are the attorneys not just for the people of Will County, but also for Drew Peterson . . . they are under obligation to make sure they give him a fair trial, Judge . . . they keep repeatedly striking these foul blows. I actually think the only remedy at this point is a mistrial with prejudice. And if you then felt that wasn’t the right remedy, that’s the point to talk about secondary remedies.”

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

https://www.facebook.com/InSession

Greenberg: “When Your Honor considers a motion to suppress, you don’t consider whether ruling in the defendant’s favor is going to harm the people of Will County, or the people of Illinois. You do it because it’s what the law requires. It doesn’t say that in a murder case you’re supposed to read the Fourth Amendment . . . there’s no different standards . . . there is no case anybody’s going to be able to cite to you that says the people’s right to a fair trial is a reason not to grant a mistrial with prejudice. The case law is clear in saying you can consider a accumulation of errors.”

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

https://www.facebook.com/InSession

Greenberg: I think you can consider the amount of times this has happened, and I think each one builds on the one before . . . we should not be made to pay for that. If you think a mistrial with prejudice is not appropriate, then I think we’d have to access whether a mistrial without prejudice would be appropriate, and whether Mr. Peterson would have to remain in jail for what would probably be another year? And only after those sanctions had been rejected would an instruction be considered.” Greenberg cites the case against W. R. Grace. “In that case, the prosecutors repeatedly violated court orders. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals said it was indeed appropriate to give the kind of instruction we’re asking for . . . people are human . . . are we going to just tell them to ignore the evidence? It still is there . . . if this hurts the prosecution, shame on them! If they have to stand up and be accountable to the people of Will County for the problems they caused, then they have to be accountable for the problems they caused . . . the sole consideration at this point was is it intentional, and can Mr. Peterson get a fair trial? That’s really the consideration.”

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