Drew Peterson Tired of Waiting On Appellate Judges and Wants Out of Jail

Drew Peterson's attorneys plan to file papers Monday morning to have their client sprung from jail while the appellate court figures out what it's doing.

Drew Peterson was all set to stand trial on charges he murdered his third wife when State's Attorney James Glasgow filed a last minute appeal of what hearsay evidence could be used against the disgraced former Bolingbrook cop.

That was almost a year ago. The judges from the Third District Appellate Court still haven't made up their minds about the appeal and Peterson was been locked up all the while. And now he wants out.

Peterson's legal team plans to file papers with the appellate court in Ottawa asking for the accused wife-killer to be freed while three judges mull over what to do with the prosecution appeal.

"They're FedExing it to Ottawa is what I understand," said Charles B. Pelkie, the spokesman for the Will County State's Attorney's Office.

"Our understanding is (Peterson's lawyers) contacted the media to inform them that they plan to file this motion directly with the appellate court," Pelkie said.

Steven Greenberg, the attorney who against the prosecution appeal during an appellate court hearing in February, said he only saw the motion requesting Peterson's release on Friday afternoon. Greenberg said the motion was crafted by Joel Brodsky, who has insisted he is Peterson's "lead attorney" despite his increasingly diminished role in the case.

Greenberg found no fault with the appellate court, but maintained that Peterson should be free during the appeal process.

"I don't think the appeal is taking an inordinate amount of time (but) he should be out," Greenberg said.

Greenberg also did not put much faith in Brodsky's motion, as Greenberg himself already appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court.

"They denied it," Greenberg said.

Peterson has been since May 2009 on charges he murdered third wife Kathleen Savio. The state police also suspect Peterson may have killed his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who vanished in October 2007 and remains missing.

Peterson is being held on a $20 million bond. His attorneys have appealed without success to have the bond lowered.

john bruno June 03, 2011 at 11:21 PM
Doesn't matter what the mopes at the appellate or supreme court do. He'll be found not guilty at trial and Will County will pay a ton to settle the lawsuit he files. Bad faith conduct by the State's Attorney's office from beginning to end.
Bbrook Vigilance June 04, 2011 at 12:05 AM
Let him rot, he's been gaming the system for years, and now he doesn't like that the system works against him. Boo hoo.
Petunia June 04, 2011 at 12:47 AM
Joel Brodsky already filed a motion once to try to spring Drew while awaiting the appellate decision and was denied. What's the point of doing it again? He must be jealous of Jose Baez getting all the press these days. Getting a little antsy because there's no news on the Peterson front to keep Joel's name in the media. Who needs a lawyer like that? Why shouldn't Peterson wait like all the other people who can't come up their bail? What makes him special? He already gets a private jail cell. I hear some detainees have to sleep on the floor. He should count his blessings.
Mr Tibbs June 04, 2011 at 12:58 AM
Sure he will be found not guilty. That will only happen if 12 deaf and blind people are picked for jury duty. Anyone that has followed this case knows Drew Peterson is a murderer! He sits in the Will County jail on a 20 million dollar bond because he is innocent? I do not think so! 2nd wife crashes her car (because her brake lines were cut) and spends months in the hospital, 3rd wife found dead in a dry bathtub right before the divorce settlement, 4th wife just ran off and has not been seen in over 3 years? He is either a killer or a person with the worst luck known to man. I'm going with he is a murderer (common sense tells me that) and I'm glad that Mr Glasgow understands that too.
Mr Tibbs June 04, 2011 at 01:04 AM
1st comment by john bruno = Joel Brodsky
Tina June 04, 2011 at 09:15 PM
I am no attorney but I think the point of doing it again is that it is the norm that the defendant is released when the prosecutor files the appeal. Also, if the prosecutor had any real evidence and didn't need to rely on bs hearsay, this wouldn't be an issue. If you were charged with murder, would you want them to lock you up for the rest of your life because somebody said something, or people think that you did it, or the legal way-----prove it!!? I vote for prove it.
Petunia June 04, 2011 at 09:55 PM
Tina, how does it benefit ones client to keep filing repetitive motions, when the defense already got a response? This redundant motion is a hack move that will only prolong the decision on the hearsay evidence. As for the rest of your response, Peterson isn't in jail because of hearsay, he's in jail because he's been accused of murdering his wife and he can't come up with the bail to get out. There's nothing "illegal" about Peterson's arrest or his detention. He's getting the full benefit of the law as far as the evidence is concerned. He's got a team of six lawyers working in his defense. If they can find a legal basis to get evidence suppressed or to get their client out of jail while awaiting trial, then they must not be all that good. If Drew is unhappy with his defense, he's free to hire new lawyers. "Prove it?" That's exactly the prosecution will attempt to do when it comes trial time. You don't need to specially request such a thing. :)
Petunia June 04, 2011 at 09:56 PM
Sorry, meant to say "If they can't..."
Bbrook Vigilance June 04, 2011 at 11:28 PM
Tina, please be clear on what hearsay evidence is and how it is used. There are many exceptions to the general rule that hearsay evidence is not admissible, and there are exceptions to those exceptions, all based on balancing the reliability of the evidence against the value of cross examining the person who made the statement. The prosecutors are not trying to get permission to use inadmissible hearsay evidence; they believe the judge was wrong to exclude the evidence, and they are asking a higher court to review that decision. This happens a lot, prosecutors want to include all the evidence they can to PROVE the case, just like you are requesting, and defense attorneys try to get as much evidence excluded as possible. The prosecutors may not even need this hearsay evidence to win their case, but they are doing their jobs by trying to amass as much helpful evidence as possible, and making sure the jury gets to hear all of it. Prosecutors still have to prove their case, and defense attorneys can talk to the jury about the validity of statements made by someone who is not in the courtroom to be questioned directly. There is nothing unusual, illegal, or underhanded in the appeal filed by the prosecutors. Finally, it is not a "norm that the defendant is released when the prosecutor files the appeal." Not sure where you got that idea, but if a defendant can't come up with bail, they stay incarcerated during trial, including an appeal of a particular ruling.
Tom Selleck June 06, 2011 at 12:05 AM
Petunia what evidence? None,nada, zilch! Hearsay is crap evidence! Show me the real physical evidence! None! He's being held only on presumption he did wrong! His bond should not be the ridiculous 20 million!
Candice Delong June 06, 2011 at 03:30 AM
Can someone tell me why the crowd around me has not been shut down? I know why because there is under consumption and drug sales that occur, that the ,Mayor Richard Chapman over looks because he is provided with free alcohol from owner Terry Tolios? The corruption in the Village of Shorewood is ridiculous, and I'm disgusted as a tax payer.
lomma June 06, 2011 at 01:09 PM
Would yo want him out if he was your neighbor?
Candice Delong June 06, 2011 at 02:58 PM
Hell ya let him out we can go get a drink at Bar Louie his favorite hangout.
Petunia June 06, 2011 at 03:22 PM
Tom, hearsay evidence is actual evidence as there are numerous (I believe over 40) exceptions to the right to confront and it has been that way for a very long time. It wouldn't be admitted to trial if it weren't legal evidence. You may not like it but it's legal fact. As for your not liking Peterson's bail or his detainment, remember that he has a 6-man team of crack lawyers. If they can show that he is being detained illegally, that his bail is excessive or that evidence should be barred from his trial it's their job to do so. Stating that there is no evidence (zilch, etc.), is just ignorant as obviously a grand jury deemed there was enough evidence to indict the man for murder. That's over and done with it. You may as well deal with the reality of the situation.
ChicagoNick June 10, 2011 at 07:23 PM
How does a sack of crud like this manage to get married once much less 4 times? Women's lack of judgement when it comes to men never ceases to amaze me. The scum attract women like flies on shiiite and millions of great honest hard working non criminal non killer men are available at this moment for marriages. I hate to say they got what they deserved but c'mon, this sack was a known piece of garbage long before his 3rd and 4th marriages. I wouldn't marry a woman who's been married once much less 4 times.
Denise Meehan June 11, 2011 at 12:51 PM
Really ChicagoNick? You "hate to say the women got what they deserved"? Really? I thought that thinking died long before the turn of the last century. Thinking is exactly the point I'd like to bring to your attention. People like this are master manipulators. They know that who and what they are and what they really feel is unacceptable to most of society, including women, so they hide their true selves. Someone who has been a cop for as many years as he was knows even better how to act and what to say to get people to 'trust' him. People like him also look for and target those whom they believe they will be able to initially fool, then control when they get wise. The fact that these women ended up missing and/or dead shows just how much they really did 'think', once they got the true picture. The problem was that because of their basice decency, they simply could not believe that the man who professed to love them, would actually do them harm. Thinking people understand that they never loved him, as they never knew who he really was. They loved a phantom, a construct, carefully crafted to be loved by them. For the "great honest hardworking non criminal non killer men" out there, don't compare your lack of being married to this guy. I'm sure if you were willing to pretend to be someone totally false, you too would be married. Multiple times. Look at the positive side - if you do get married, it will be because of the person you are.
kris June 12, 2011 at 02:48 AM
Too bad you did not do a story on Thomas graduating and leaving the Savios out? ! Karma for sure..
Petunia June 12, 2011 at 03:16 AM
Look at this MORON get completely owned when she tries to get information on Drew's girlfriend and offers up her voter registration card, tax return and a personal bill as proof of her own identity. How STUPID could she be to not see the point being made. The last email is the best! http://www.scribd.com/doc/57546659/Kris-McPherson-tries-to-get-info-about-Diana-Grandel
Lettuce June 12, 2011 at 08:02 PM
Kris, he article was about Drew, not Tom. Leave his son out of it. Tom has been through a lot as a KID and doesn't deserve your nasty attitude. Not many kids go through all that and then graduate as valedictorian of a class of 800+. Back off.
Amber June 12, 2011 at 10:28 PM
I can't say they got what they deserved, no one deserves to die like that but I do agree that there should have been better judgement. And how about that young woman (in her earky 20's I believe) that was dating him after Stacey went missing? So here is a guy who has been married 4 times; divorced twice, 3rd wife dead, 4th wife missing (we all know she is dead) and is in the media left and right because of it and this crazy broad wants to date him????? Again, not saying she would have deserved to die but would it have surprised anyone if she had gone missing or died too???? NO! She is lucky they arreseted him first!
Amber June 12, 2011 at 10:32 PM
Love it!


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