The judge in the scolded prosecutors but then went along with their request to stop after-hours emailing by defense attorneys.
Judge Edward Burmila convened an after-hours emergency hearing Friday to resolve the after-hours email issue, and he spent much of it taking prosecutors to task for having "exposed the court to suspicion" by filing a "hyperbolic" motion.
Prosecutors filed the motion under seal Wednesday, but Burmila said it had been released to the public and gives the impression that "the court and the defense are participating in some sort of unethical communication," and this is putting prosecutors at a disadvantage.
Burmila has allowed both sides to present motions to each other via email in an effort to expedite the 3-year-old murder case.
Peterson, 58, has been on charges he murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio.
Peterson, a former Bolingbrook cop, is also the sole suspect in the state police investigation of the . Stacy Peterson remains missing and no one has been charged with harming her.
Burmila said he was not going to put limits on attorney emailing — but he was willing to prohibit it completely.
"I don't see how I can do the Solomon routine and cut the baby in half," he said. "Either we have electronic communications or we don't have them at all."
The Judge then offered to let prosecutors and Joel Brodsky — the only one of Peterson's five defense attorneys to attend the hearing late on the Friday before Memorial Day — to hash out a compromise.
Will County State's Attorney James Glasgow stood up and volunteered that he is 61 years old and said that "these emails (from the defense) come flying in 10 o'clock, 11 o'clock at night."
"I didn't envision beyond work hours we'd be doing that," Glasgow said.
He and Brodsky then agreed to only send email between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. on weekdays, at least until the case's next scheduled hearing on June 6. Brodsky did say that if he was up late at night crafting an email he would hold off until the morning before sending it.
Why should judges be able to make it personal with any of the attorneys, either prosecution or defense? This judge comes across as sounding rattled. This trial sounds as though it might be just another phase of the Drew Peterson Circus. Too bad cameras won't be in Judge Burmila's courtroom. Maybe not bad for him, but bad for everyone else. That must have been a sight to behold.
From this, Judge Burmila gleaned the prosecutors are accusing him of something and needed to blast them in open court? Tsk. Glasgow gets a whole lot of criticism, but I think there's plenty of buttheads in the Will County court system. This sounds like one of them.
Brodsky used him on radio shows to promote his personal liquor/food establishment, he conjured up goofy news events, like an engagement to keep his client in the news, and Brodsky is hoping for book deals and legal commentary jobs. Why do you think that Lopez and Greenberg signed on? They don't care if Peterson is guilty or innocent. They get their careers boosted by name recognition! Call it like it is. In fact, Greenberg has been doing legal commentary on the national circuit for a while, and was quick to slam Brodsky before he joined the team. I am tired of you slamming those that don't agree with you, but I will say, your bias is no different than those that aren't drooling all over Peterson. You get nasty and mean, and start with the "pea brain" name calling after a while, and you are so predictable. Good luck with your main man, Moreli. Hope you think he's worth it. I guess you do.
I like the idea that they should give up email altogether. But maybe at this stage, it's okay.
I think all of us agree he deserves a fair and just trial, and to be judged by a jury of his peers. Most of us stick to the events and facts as we know them in this case. I've been to some of the hearings, so I know what I'm talking about. We don't dredge up what bond was set for someone else that has nothing to do with the facts of this case. I can just as easily go the other way and say I've seen cruel and harsh criminals get out on relatively minor bonds, when they should have been locked in a toilet stall away from the rest of civilization. But it brings nothing to the conversation to do that, since it doesn't relate to the facts of this case. I think the Sandusky should be chained to a wall, but what has that got to do with anything? IMO, of course.
As it is, if the judge is allowing motions prepared by one side to be emailed to the other, so won't the judge have to police the motions to make sure they're intact and identical once they are formally filed and made a part of the record? Is this how it's done now? I wonder. I can understand a motion being emailed to the opposing party AFTER it's been filed, but I would have no idea if this is now a part of the Rules of Procedure, or if this is something a judge has discretion about doing. Also, if the judge mistook the true intentions of the prosecutors, that's one thing, but from what the media is reporting, he sure got swept up in the heat of the moment with his temper flaring. Wouldn't it be better to be the Kool Kat of the group and keep things on an even keel? Guess not.