E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSView more videos at: http://nbcchicago.com.
A former colleague of Drew Peterson's testified Tuesday that Peterson once told him his life would be easier if his third wife was dead.
Bolingbrook, Ill., police officer James Coughlin took the stand as prosecutors sought to prove Peterson murdered Kathleen Savio in 2004.
Coughlin told jurors he ran into Peterson at the Will County courthouse weeks before Savio was found dead in her bathtub.
For more, visit NBCChicago.com
He said Peterson made an apparent reference to his estranged wife eventually getting all his money. Coughlin told jurors Peterson then added that his "life would be easier" if Savio was dead.
Under cross-examination, Coughlin said he didn't think Peterson was serious at the time.
No signs of struggle
Crime-scene investigator Robert Deel said he saw no signs of a struggle at the home where Peterson's third wife was found dead in a bathtub.
Deel testified under cross-examination that he's been at other murder scenes where doors are broken, holes are punched into walls and there's blood splattered everywhere.
He added dramatically that, in his words, "When someone is fighting for their lives, it's an intense thing."
But he says there were no such signs at Savio's home.
Prosecutors are trying to convince jurors that there's no physical evidence in the case because the investigation was botched by police.
Peterson was charged in the 2004 murder of Kathleen Savio, found in a bathtub in her Bolingbrook home. Savio's death originally was ruled an accidental drowning but years later was reclassified as a homicide.
Judge Edward Burmila called a recess last week after a juror became sick and broke out into a coughing fit during court.
Before the recess, Savio's older sister, Anna Doman, testified a "scared and upset" Savio came to see her six weeks before the death and said Peterson had threatened her.
"Drew had told her he was going to kill her," Doman testified, "that she wasn't going to make it to the settlement."
"She made me promise over and over again to take care of her boys," Doman said.
It also was decided Harry Smith, Savio's divorce attorney, would not testify for the day.
The idea of Smith's testimony had been contentious in pre-trial motions. Peterson's attorneys had argued Smith violated attorney-client privilege when he testified at a hearing about conversations he had with Savio and Stacy Peterson, Peterson's fourth wife who disappeared.
Peterson's trial hasn't been without complications. Multiple objections flew on the first day, and in the first week, defense called for a mistrial over tainted testimony. Burmila decided to deny the motion and told jurors to ignore the contentious portion of testimony.
More content from NBCNews.com:
- Minister stands trial in international lesbian kidnap case
- Are nuns getting ready to spurn the Vatican?
- Girl, 6, found clinging to corpse in middle of lake
- Missing best friends found dead in New Jersey river
- Video: Athletes reveal the royal who makes them swoon
Follow US News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
One wife dead. One wife missing. Hmmm...this poor guy just can't catch a break with the ladies. <sarcasm>
Cat: he can't catch a break with ANY ladies... /sarc!
And yet, he seemed to have no trouble finding wives. Wonder how come so many kept flocking to him? He couldn't have been that good (at anything except murder).
That's the only thing he's been good at is murder. Him being a cop he had the upper hand all along. He has staged it from the very beginning. His police buddies believed him...why wouldn't they,they only heard his side. I believe her family was scared of him to a point because of what Kathleen told them. The whole scene was botched from the beginning because he conducted how it went so no evidence was taken. Plus I seriously do not see what these women saw in him. He was stone flat out ugly. Even in his younger days he was nothing to look at. Poor girls thought they were getting something special...guess they were so to speak their killer.
I take exception to the idea that the investigation was "botched". They knew exactly what they were doing, which was "whitewashing".
My guess the guy is a snake
Half the guys I work with have said that. It doesn't mean he killed her even though he probably did
If it was me they would have to prove it with facts no here say or he would walk out an inocent man
you gotta feel for poor old Drew
you can tell this whole tragedy has been tearing him to pieces - yet somehow, he finds the strength to go on
...kind of like OJ....
every time i see this guy in video i cannot help noticing his look of "i have done nothing wrong" laughing, joking, sneering, good old boy act, is nearly identical to sandusky right up to the walk out of the courthouse after the conviction.
No kidding, at what point does 2+2=4 here? Unreal.
At what point does the state take responsibility for the investigation its police officers did ?
I don't know if Drew Peterson did or did not kill any of his wives. It just seems to me that there would have to be some kind of physical evidence. If the police made errors in the investigation, that is part of what happens.
This whole case just seems to be a witch hunt with a prosecutor who had a suspect, but just needed to find a crime to charge. When owning an illegal gun wouldn't work, they tried homicide of the fourth wife, but could not prove that, so they dug up the third wife, rewrote the autopsy and decided to charge based on hearsay, rumors, conjecture, speculation and even lies.
The rule of law doesn't mean much when you have a prosecutor intent on convicting someone, they will find a crime after they already have a suspect.
Prosecutors usually don't care about the truth, they care about their political carreer. Convictions put them closer the the position of judge.
He doesn't have to catch a break. Lack of evidence is already giving him the break he needs.
Stupid of the prosecution to bring charges with so little evidence.
When the prosecution comes up with "real" evidence, that's when 2 + 2 = 4. This county has a history of wrongful and costly (to tax payers) convictions. Why should I believe anything circumstantial this prosecution has to offer, they've lied and deceived before and it has cost the taxpayers. Why should I agree that it is OK to dilute my right to a fair trial by agreeing to let the prosecutors introduce hear say evidence. Furthermore, how many people have gone missing only to turn up many years later to find out they left intentionally? Take all of that into consideration and then it isn't so clear that Peterson did anything wrong other than being a jerk and a smart ass?
Hopefully we can vote Glasgow out of office this November. He shouldn't even have the power to write parking tickets. Look him up in Wikipedia under "Incompetence Illustrated".
What I find odd is the conversation with her sister. If she feared for her life that much why just tell the sister? Why not tell the police? Why wouldn't you get out? The complete lack of a struggle almost tells me that it was an accident or maybe even a suicide and this is one of the unluckiest guys in the world.
Need to find the fourth.
She "was out" and there doesn't have to be a struggle if some one creeps up on you (possible while sleeping)and knocks you in the back of the head. Peterson was a police detective he knew what they would look at/for.
Go to the police when your husband who is trying to kill you is WITH the police? There was a similar case in Washington State, where the police department PROTECTED the officer at the expense of the wife. In the Washington Case he later gunned down his wife in a mall parking lot and then took his own life, in front of his children.
The Police sometimes protect their own in domestic disputes regarding officers. It shouldn't be this way but it does happen.
what would have telling the police accomplished? he worked for the police
Why not just tell him? Then you're telling the police at the same time, kill two birds with one stone
And just what the police do?? He was a cop. Without any proof, it's just her word against his and they no doubt would have sided with him anyway. I read that there were bruises on her wrists and elsewhere......how would THAT happen in a fall? It would definitely happen in a struggle though. With his ego and smirk, there is no doubt in my mind that he is guilty on both charges of murdering his wives. Accusing his last wife of "running off with another man" was the most ridiculous accusation ever. All men that murder their wives would love people to believe that.
At least if she had enough sense to go to the police or the prosecutors office then the complaint would have been ON RECORD and more believable than what it is now. She didn't go to the police for probably the same reason thousands of people don't....they don't believe the threat is real, the reason they don't believe the threat is real is most likely because at one point in time everyone says something in the heat of the moment they have no intention of carrying out, which is even more reason not to listen to hearsay evidence. If Savio thought Peterson's threats were real, or her family thought the threats were real, there were other places to go....state police, county police, county, state or federal attorneys office to register a complaint. Why was there no restraining order if Savio or her family thought she was in danger? Too many questions without answers and too many answers based on he said she said hearsay.
She didn't tell the sister because the police protect their own they will not bring to light they have a rapist or a murderer in their departments because they are afraid of a lawsuit that would cost the city they are working for big lawsuits and payouts.
This clown probably asked her who would belive her over him. Both wives were afraid of this clown.
If the jack ass goes free I wonder who in this country would hire him? Hopefully he will wind up in prison or living under a bridge eating out of garbage cans.
I suppose all of you that are calling for Peterson's conviction are also familiar with the Kevin Fox prosecution. They arrested and jailed Kevin Fox for sexually assaulting and then drowning his daughter who was maybe 5 years old. Typical story, woke up in the morning, door open, child gone. Ended with Fox being released, county tax payers on the hook for multiple millions of dollars, and the evidence they had was "convincing", all the way up until someone else was found to be guilty. All that time Fox was jailed with people believing he was a sexual predator and child killer. Luckily there were people who were not so fast to jump to conclusions and the real killer was found. I'm not sure of Peterson's innocence or guilt, he repulses me with his attitude and smirks, but I'll be damned if I'll go down the same road as before with circumstantial evidence and believe that the prosecutors only agenda is finding the guilty person, when in fact his only agenda is to get a conviction, regardless of whether the convicted is actually innocent or guilty.
I've watched him in interviews, seen him on Dr. Phil...in my opinion this man is guilty. And he will likely get away with it. He is a former police officer...the investigations were botched...hmmm...his wife, who "drowned" was found in a dry bathtub...same wife who told her sister if something happens to her, it's because of him, and made sure her children would be taken care of.
Of course, these conversations are now just "speculation" or "hearsay" and that is unfortunate. The 4th wife has never reappeared...she is probably dead, too. All of the "speculation" and "hearsay" surrounding her disappearance points out that she was a loving and devoted mother who would never leave her children behind.
I've never believed a word this man has said. I find it highly suspicious that it does not appear he tried in any capacity to find this "missing" wife, in much the same way as OJ never really tried to find Nicole's true "killer"...because they are most likely looking them right in the face every time they brush their teeth.
Sad thing is, this guy will probably be set free and future dead/missing wife #5 is out there somewhere.
I am truly afraid this man will get away with what he's done. He's smart. He knows how to hide evidence and he's a former cop with alot of people who will stand up for him. It looks as if he's pretty narcissistic, too. He has the ability to make threats and make good on them. I don't think he believes for one minute that he will be found guilty, as smug and cheerful as he has been through all this. Best of luck to the prosecutors. I hope they have more than hearsay evidence, which I'm sure the defendant is aware, cannot be used to convict him.
He may have worn out his welcome with the police force. There is only so much a person will do for another, protecting a co-worker against a murder charge that seems to be true is not one of them. I don't care if they are cops, having been married to one, I can tell you how quick they turn on one another. It is not the sanctuary that everyone believes it to be.
Then who is to say someone didn't turn on him and hence the trumped up murder charges?
I am pretty sure Drew did it. The problem is that this first case was ruled a suicide based on the evidence at hand, but when the 4th wife went missing then this case was reopened. So they thought this was a suicide, but now it is a murder with all the same evidence as before. Really? I heard one idiot testified that he had doubts about the suicide but just kept it to himself. Don't be surprised when Drew is found not guilty.
Savios death was never ruled a suicide, it was ruled an accidental drowning. Thank god you aren't on a jury, seems you want to jump to conclusions based on false facts.
Did you even read the article WAHO??
Cindy....DID YOU READ THE ARTICLE?
WEHO is absolutely correct, it was considered an accidental drowning, never a suicide. What MORON believes that you commit suicide by falling down and hitting your head on the bath tub? Jesus, did you people leave your brains at home when you came out to slam Peterson?
Cindy, did you read it? "Savio's death originally was ruled an accidental drowning but years later was reclassified as a homicide."
Of course there's no evidence, the man is a cop and knows what investigators look for!
Drew is quilty and when he is sentenced to life without, him and Bubba can live Happily Ever after
I hope no more women fall for this guy.
Wasn't he briefly engaged to someone very young right before he was arrested? Creeeeepy.
Yes, there was a girl that lived with him and her father was very upset. If I remember correctly, she finally saw the light and left him.
I heard on the news that he is communicating with women from his jail cell.
Women that fancy themselves to be "fixers" and think they can save him, maybe. So unhealthy! Predators like this one seem to have a constant source of prey, unfortunately.
They are trying this case without much tangable evidence. That brings in "reasonable doubt". It took very long to bring this case to trial and it would be a shame if a killer goes free because of the pressure to bring this case to trial.
This is a witch hunt and that is all it is.
Bama I have to agree with you, he has pissed someone off in the department of law, be it a superior, prosecutor or whoever. You don't change an accidental death to a homicide when there is no apparent evidence.
I think the concept is that it should't have been ruled an accidental death and that happened only because of his undue influence, as a cop, on the process. Then when wife #4 disappeared, a clear, uninfluenced (by Peterson) view of what happened with wife #3 showed that it was in fact no accident.
That argument makes sense to me, and it just might work on the jurors as well. Here's hopin'.
Drew is a sociopath; bottom line!! He knew how to kill Savio without suspicion, he is to blame for the disappearance /death of his 3rd wife and I think that every case he was ever on should be re-examined. How many others are dead because of him, that weren't even married to him??!!!!!
Oh I definitely think this guy is guilty - but he'll get away with it, same as Casey Anthony......no evidence unfortunately........wish his 3rd wife's sister would've said something to somebody after hearing what she heard, maybe wife #4 wouldn't be missing.......and let's just hope all the women out there that he'll no doubt "hunt" looking for wife #5 have their ears and eyes opened to what he got away with..........what a piece of dirt he is.........looking all smug - he's a cop so he knows how to avoid being caught is all........those poor women, may they rest in peace.....he'll have his karma come back around when he dies and hell's waiting for him..........
Drew Peterson is a pathetic jerk. Every move he makes states, "Look at me" His behavior makes him extremely unlikeable. I can't imagine getting pulled over by this guy or living with him for that matter.
why with his history do women still marry him?? now he can be someones "wife" in prison
If he is someones wife in prison I hope his new husband beats the $hit out of him each time he takes it up the butt and then does to him what he has done to two women end his miserable existance witha smile on their face as this a$$ hole takes his last breath.
Hey everybody what is Nancy Grace saying? Will be found guilty or not, isn't this how you all base your quilt on someone?
Coughlin needs to lose his job if any civilian had made such a comment he would have been detained questioned and arrested if there was any doubt his words had a purpose.
Coughlin had to know Peterson had a wife that died unexpectedly he should have reported the comment to his superiors. FIRE the bum for protecting his buddies job rather than serving to prevent a murder. Coughlin is just as guilty as perterson for his failure to act.
He makes comments no doubt to his guilt and the ex lawyer is not allowed to tell, this murderer should have no rights, he knows the system and that is why #4 has not been found he thinks no body no crime. Before some of you start quoting his rights I don't care about his rights, if he has confessed to anyone he should have no rights. I care about his victims not this smug self centered coward.
You truly are the village idiot. Hopefully you and the rest of those calling for Peterson's head on a stick remember your rush to judgement if you or someone you know is tried on nothing more than circumstantial and hearsay evidence, nothing tangible, and because others don't like your smirk or attitude they all assume you must be guilty. It isn't that I believe Peterson is innocent, I just believe giving up rights we all enjoy just to convict someone that "appears" guilty is not only stupid, but unethical. Jesus, didn't any of you take a civics class or pass a constitution test to graduate HS? I have rocks in my driveway smarter than some of the people posting here.
How about you stop drinking the drano , I'm tired of people like you telling the rest of us how smart you are. You could care less about justice, you don't care guilty people roam free to murder again but you will be the first screaming about how the system let you down if a puke like him takes out someone you love. People are convicted on circumstantial evidence. I guess it's the likes of you where bottom feeder lawyers come from, you have to think like the misfits to defend them.
Who cares what you're tired of....furthermore being smart has nothing to do with following the law and observing our rights. I don't give a @#$+ that your tired of the notion that our system is based on the presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty, that the prosecution follows the rules of evidence, and our constitutional rights are respected.
Whatever happens legally, ( not guilty, IMHO- unfortunatly) I sure hope someone, somewhere just beats the living sH *t out of this guy to within a millimeter of his arrogant, evil, pathetic "life".
Crime Investigator said he saw no signs of a struggle in the bedroom. The struggle could have happened somewhere else and he could have moved the body to the bathroom.
another OJ or Anthony thing...he'll get off....
I've yet to hear why the 1st autopsy failed to determine it was a homocide, when the 2nd autopsy could figure it out.
When the 1st autopsy was performed, they didn't need a crime, they didn't have a suspect. Then the prosecutor had a suspect and they needed a crime, don't you see how that works.
The second autopsy was actually the first. The first one was a Coroner's inquest when they had like a jury trial to look at the evidence in the death and determine the cause of death. Present is the Coroner (a friend of Drew's), 12 people picked at random (if you go to the courthouse to pay a traffic fine and renew your tags you are eligable) and the evidence picked by the coroner to present
His buds in law enforcement believed him that she drowned they did no investigation even though the neighbors said when they saw her she was in a different position than when the medics saw her. This police agency should be investigated inside and out, I guess being the laughing stock of the country is worth covering for a two time murderer, hmm makes you wonder what Mr. Smug face has on some of them.
Lots of married couples would make that statement about their spouses - that they'd be better off if their spouse was dead. That's a long way from murder. The prosecution has no case, and the longer this trial continues the bigger asses they make out of themselves. Free Drew!!!!
The 1st medical examiner of Savio's body clearly stated he felt there was
suspicious activity related to Savio's death but labeled it ONLY 'accidental drowning'.
He should be prosecuted for withholding vital information: jailed and heavily fined!!!