E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe pastor of Drew Peterson wife Stacy testifies that Peterson coached her to lie about his whereabouts on the night of ex-wife Kathleen Savio's death. WMAQ's Kim Vatis reports.
Updated at 8:12 p.m. ET: Prosecutors on Tuesday asked the jury in the first-degree murder trial against Drew Peterson to focus on the witnesses who said the former police officers threatened his third wife -- and was therefore capable of killing her. Defense attorneys, meanwhile, stressed the lack of evidence.
Prosecutor Chris Koch several times implored jurors to use their everyday experiences and keep their common sense in mind.
"It is clear that this man murdered Kathleen Savio," Koch told the jurors before reminding them of significant points they've heard throughout the last five weeks of testimony.
Peterson, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant, is charged in the 2004 drowning death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Prosecutors allege Peterson killed his wife and staged it to look like an accident.
The judge released the jurors Tuesday afternoon, the Chicago Tribune reported, saying he hadn't expected arguments to last so long. Deliberations will begin Wednesday morning.
Also at NBCChicago.com: Strike looms as students return to school
Koch told jurors that Peterson had the intent and motive to kill Savio.
"You are not going to make it to the divorce settlement. You're not going to get the pensions, you're not going to get the kids," he told jurors of a statement Peterson allegedly made.
Pathology experts, Koch said, showed that the injuries Savio sustained -- 14 separate wounds -- could not have happened in a single fall in a bathtub that measures just 40 inches from the back to the drain.
"It's not possible," he said.
Jurors were reminded that Savio told several people that she feared her husband would kill her, and they were reminded of testimony from a police officer who said Peterson tried to hire him to find a hit man.
Stay informed with the latest headlines; sign up for our newsletter
"Taking all of that information together and drawing reasonable inferences from them ... we have proved to you" that Peterson killed Savio. "We are asking you to find him guilty."
Attorney Joe Lopez, speaking on behalf of the defense, appealed to jurors patriotism.
"You don't have to like Mr. Peterson. But you have to like that flag. You have to like America," he said, pounding the podium.
He attacked assertions that the initial investigation into Savio's was botched and pointed out that no one asked Peterson if he killed his wife because everyone could see it was an accident.
"Look at the gash in the back of her head. It's as big as the Grand Canyon. You could stick your fist in there," he said, drawing gasps from those gathered in an overflow courtroom.
Jurors were expected to receive the case Tuesday afternoon. Members of the public, an official said, began showing up outside the courthouse at about 1 p.m. CT Monday in hopes of getting one of the few available spectator seats.
Watch US News crime videos on NBCNews.com
Prosecutors have no physical evidence tying Peterson to the death and have waged a case based on hearsay testimony and circumstantial evidence. Peterson's attorneys say there's no proof Savio's death was a homicide, let alone that Peterson had anything to do with it.
"It's like the game of Clue, where they say, 'Colonel Mustard did it with the candlestick in the dining room.' Have you heard that? No," defense attorney Steve Greenberg said last week.
Prosecutors entered the courthouse Tuesday morning without addressing the media.
Each team has been given one hour and 45 minutes to state their case before the seven-man, five-woman jury that has already sat through five weeks of testimony.
Reuters contributed to this report.
NBC Chicago has reporters in the Will County Courthouse for the trial. During proceedings, follow along with our Drew Peterson Trial Live Blog or follow @bjlutz on Twitter
More content from NBCNews.com:
- Thousands of dead nutria pile up on Mississippi beaches after Isaac
- Fire in California's San Gabriel Mountains burns for third day
- Man survives 4 days in Utah tunnel with broken leg
- Isaac's remnants bring torrential rain to East Coast
- Missing Fla. tycoon reportedly left watch, ring at home
- Video: WWII veteran, 92, kills burglar with single gunshot
Leave a Comment:
....this guy definitely wins the top prize in the "creep" factor stakes...I hope they put him away for life if they can't execute him....
You got that right. He sure is one creepy looking dude.
Now that's a good reason to find someone guilty. If she was a young, attractive female you'd probably be singing a different tune.
I think that Peterson is likely guilty, but from what I have seen of the evidence presented I do not know if the prosecution has made their case beyond a reasonable doubt. They just do not seem to have the physical evidence needed to even prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Savio was murdered, let alone that Peterson killed her. I think this is one of those cases where a person who is more than likely guilty is going to go free. It will also probably turn out like the OJ case where Peterson will be found responsible in a civil wrongful death suit which no doubt will be filed by Savio's family. The burden of proof is lower in civil court and I think they can show Peterson responsible by a preponderance of the evidence, which is the civil court standard, just not beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the criminal court standard. Peterson may end up free, but he will be broke for the rest of his life.
I suspect that the Statute of limitations has run for a civil suit.
He is a DIRTY COP.. Alot are, To many dead wifes will lead you to prison. and I bet he thought he was just to cool and would get away with it, You know how he will get treated in prison, He might be creepy, but alot will think he got a purdy mouth,,,,,,
Usually in cases such as these, civil suits are filed at the same time the criminal suits are filed, and then the civil suits are stayed pending the outcome of the criminal case, which is also what happened in the O.J. case.
In the civil case, this guy will be FORCED to testify, just like O.J. was which is what got O.J. convicted, i.e., O.J.'s conduct on the witness stand, his profuse sweating, his facial expressions, etc. As we all know, O.J. was found not guilty on criminal charges, but was held liable in the civil case.
super weak case, I'm surprised they even brought it... but when one cop has how ever many wives get killed, that's way too much coincidence.... I hope they prove something on him one day....
First degree murder is one of the hardest charges to prove by a prosecutor. I don't think this case was proven beyond a reasonable doubt to the jury. In my opinion I think he did it, and the jury might think he did it..but if the jury follows the rules of the law... then its not proven he did it in this court....results not guilty.
The prosecutor told the jury to use common sense at his closing remarks, but the judge will have the very last statements to the jury and will repeat the rules of the laws to follow ( even more then once if the jury asks for the rules again) to find this guy guilty or not guilty.
Even if found guilty with this court...no doubt his attorneys will appeal the case and it will be another long trial again.
I think this guy is guilty as sin, but lets not forget if this trial was being held in Texas he would probably be found not guilty because in Texas beating, abusing or even killing your wife is socially acceptable.... It's called the "Republican Party Red State Effect".
I do not like Peterson, and I think he is guilty, but "common sense" is not "beyond a reasonable doubt", and, in fact, it could imply that the prosecutor does not believe he proved his case with real hard evidence.
@Gil-2872519, the statute of limitations on a civil offense starts when they know they have been wronged. In some cases, other factors can re-start the clock: For example, if you say to a credit card company, "I will pay you", or "I know I owe you", you just reset the clock in most jurisdictions.
There doesn't have to be direct evidence as this is a circumstantial case. The references to using common sense are because the jurors are able to use their own common sense to determine whether it is reasonable that such and such an occurrence happened or would have reasonably happened in the way either side is presenting to them. People are convicted on circumstantial evidence all the time. Reasonable doubt is not "beyond a shadow of a doubt" but what is reasonable to infer from the totality of the circumstances.
He's arrogant and sly. His knowledge of the investigative process gave him an advantage in hiding the truth. I hope the jury finds him guilty, but I'm not holding my breath.
General population in prison for him. Then he will recieve his justice.
Well yeah, but the jury has to find him "guilty" before he goes anywhere. This guy is some kind of pathilogical killer. The first day of this criminal trial, Peterson walked in the courtroom laughing out loud and saying (out loud) that the whole case was based on hearsay and circumstantial evidence.
So, if Peterson was innocent, I doubt very seriously he'd be laughing at any time during this trial, i.e., "you got nothing".
I hope he gets what he deserves....guilty guilty guilty=life in prison killed by prisoners the most horrific way just like he killed his two wife's
This man is a monster and if they let him off you can bet he will do it again. He is guilty as heck.
What I cannot fathom is the long line of idiot women who will sign up for his abuse. Blaming victims is wrong, but blaming future victims is fair, in this case. Any woman who involves herself with him will know the risks. But the fools will disregard it. I hope he only has prison matrons to choose from, when some big guy isn't choosing him.
Yeah, where's the body of his 4th wife? Remember, this is about the death of his 3rd. The 4th disappeared a few years ago, without a trace.
Exactly what i was going to say. If they let him walk, he most certainly will kill again.
Best refer him as to the clinical name "sociopathy/psychopath". You're right and if they can't convict him after kililng wife #3, we've got a serious problem with our judicial system.
I do not doubt the guilt of this man. He has lost too many wives to strange events. I just worry about the jury. Did the prosecution present a case that proves his guilt. The letter of the law can be a difficult thing at times. I hope the prosecution had enough evidence to put him away for life, but I doubt it. No physical evidence...if found guilty, they will give him 20 to life.
As for creep factor...this guy takes the prize. Based on that alone, I am trying to figure out why anyone would marry him or even get into a relationship with him. Then you add in his history with women...yikes.
The Bollington Police Department should be on trial for allowing a getting-divorced, acrimonious police officer, already under suspicion for a prior ex wife's death, to be on the force IN THE SAME TOWN, as his ex wive. Never mind he as part owner of a bar under suspiciosn and rumors of drug dealing. I would NEVER want to live in that town knowing there are no ethical boundaries for the police. If that is gone, forget it.
It's the brother officer mentality. He could have slashed her throat ear to ear in front of a fellow officer and said he was in fear of his life and the other officer would have backed him up. I suspect there are a lot of deep closets in law enforcement. I know there were in Miami FL 35 years ago. Those mostly involved wife beatings, not killings. All the women were afraid to file charges.
whew! this guy needs to be put "under" the jail..
I hope the Jury is biased against him!
Give him a lil prison pickle to sit on for twenty+ years!
Not enough... this monster must get more then that in order to believe in justice system not his defense lawyers
maybe that is where he put the blue barrel his last wife was in.
Please tell me the jury will hang him soon.
They should certainly be done today with all the closing arguments..
I am betting (hoping anyway!) a hung jury in about 3 hours.. "DEATH" for the peterson sicko!
11:25 a.m.
Prosecution ends closing argument
Prosecutor Chris Koch ended his 70-minute argument.
Personally I hope the jury get's it right, he has no doubt killed Kathleen and Stacey. He will never get the death sentence but life in prison without any possibility of parole would be fine. I just can't believe how women find him so attractive, don't know what they see in him. I personally think he's a mess with the big bags under his eyes and his arrogant attitude and a killer who in their right mind would want this guy? I wouldn't want to be in the same room he is such a creep...
This creep took this 2 women by fear I bet...He's a good talker plus knowing the fact that he is a cop and trained how to get away with murder...Die creep die...Justice want your life . You took two innocent lives and your own kids lives by making them orphans and let them live with shame.....
Yes he will ve entertaining. This guy should be giving an academy award speech. He has to be one of the evilest men on earth today.
Not because he has killed so many people but because he is who he is and he truly believes he is above the law and other humans are just his play things.
I agree 100%! I have been waiting like 2 years to see this guy get what he deserves!
hopefully he is shaking in his boots!
make that evil man suffer as much as possible..
We need to clean Police Force members...all bad apples out so we can feel like citizens who have a right to defense our self and be protected by real law representatives
You have just described a psychopath.
11:45 a.m.
Defense begins its closing argument
The jury is back in the courtroom and defense attorney Joseph Lopez has begun
his closing argument.
I dont think it will be long now!
we might even have a result today!
Guilty as sin!!!!!
Hoping! praying! :)
"Joe is going to be informative, entertaining and it's going to be compelling -- all three," he said before heading into the Will County Courthouse for a day that's garnered increased attention.
Entertaining? Wow. They are all attention-seeking murderers then.
I don't know if this guy is guilty or not, and if he is I think he's a perfect candidate for The Chair. But I can say that some of the tactics used by the prosecution sure make me nervous. Like getting the celebrity medical examiner to change the cause of death from accident to homicide after the body had gone through several years of decomposition. Like getting laws changed to allow hearsay evidence, for the sole purpose of trying this guy. Google "Drew's Law." If you people can't see the danger in that then there's no sense me explaining it to you. It's almost like lazy prosecutors read this forum then try to build their cases based on the majority opinion expressed here. The opinions of people who think someone is guilty because he "looks creepy."
ya lets give this dood another wife to kill.. ya that sounds right..
LOL.
how many will it take?
4 or maybe 5?
This guy needs to go down.. and if it needs to be done that way, then so be it..
"Getting" the cause of death changed? Not so much....coroner's change findings based on new information, facts, and/or evidence....Natalie Wood comes to mind; shes' been dead for decades and her "cause of death" was recently changed. Don't think the DA's Office has control of this, it doesn't.
The cause of death wouldn't have changed had the DA's office not re-opened the old investigation. They opened that investigation as another avenue to bring Petersen "to justice." Then they brought in the HBO celebrity ME for the purpose of changing the findings, and how much motivation did he have to be sure he found reason to change the findings? Sorry, I can't trust a TV star who has every reason in the world to promote himself (and his show) by overturning the findings in such a high-visibility case. Having worked with District Attorneys offices for many years, I can tell you that they have much more influence in these things than you apparently want to believe. Which is how you end up with "experts" from each side proving each side's point of view. But it's not this that worries me most, it's how laws were changed to allow his prosecution.
How much "new" evidence can you realistically get after 4 years (or in Natalie's case, about 40) of decomposition. The vast majority (I'd like to say "all" but I don't know "all" of the evidence) of the "new evidence" is hearsay and circumstantial. To the point that they pushed through "Drew's Law" to allow previously banned types of "evidence" into court. The problem with circumstantial and hearsay "evidence" is that it can't be corroborated to the exclusion of reasonable doubt, which is why it was banned to begin with. The prosecutors have already admitted that without that excluded "evidence" they didn't have a case.
votetovote.com, if Petersen is guilty then I agree with you 100%. But considering how many proven innocent people are getting out of prison these days, I would think it would worry you that someone can get convicted and possibly executed on hearsay and circumstance. Quit thinking with your emotions and use logic, otherwise one day YOU might be accused of something and won't have any protection from being railroaded to the electric chair.
CC,
There are exceptions to the heresay rule because in certain situations, the statements are considered reliable. An example is the "excited utterance." If someone says something in the moments after a particular event transpires, it is considered reliable because it is unlikely they would have had any time to come up with a false statement in the intervening seconds after the event. Another is the statement someone makes right before death, as it is unlikely they have any reason to tell a falsehood at that particular moment. There are various other exceptions that exist because the circumstances of the communication enable them to be reliable beyond a reasonable doubt if believed by the jury.
Peterson knows even if the jury convicts him he and his attorney's will appeal the case and most likely get him off in the end but in the mean time he is locked up serving time. Peterson should have been arrested long before he was I blame his own police dept. for not doing a good investigation on Peterson. Peterson did kill the women he is a serial murderer without question and may have killed other women in the area besides his wives. Peterson should be hung or burnt at the steak would be more fitting. I like the steak burning for about 4 hours before he finally dies.
Steak burning.. yes.. yes.. I like it!
Why would you burn him at the 'Steak?" A steak is a delicious cut of beef. I would not waste a good steak on this creep.
I would prefer to burn him at the STAKE....
Not guilty! The first investigation was flubbed up and that has been seized on again and again. I bet he did it, but he has a get out of jail free card with the first investigation saying it was an accident. It was an accident, on second thought it was murder...... was it an accident?......... Nah it was murder!.....But the first investigation said it was an accident......the second says murder...okay, roll eyes and with a sigh.....Not guilty!
Let's see, dudes has been involved with THREE missing and/or dead women. Not just Kathleen, two more. Who better than a cop to leave 'no evidence.' This guy deserves the death penalty because he used his position as a 'trusted law enforcement officer' to pull off these crimes. Like any serial killer, his only regret is that he got caught. Our regret, as a society, is that two male sons are defending him and therefore, we have two more males like him, capable of the same behavior. It's as sick as Josh Powell and his father in Utah. He killed his wife Susan, his pervert father was involved and finally the guy kills his kids and the ultimate act of cowardice, himself. These men are cowards to the end. Hang em and hang em high.
"Who better than a cop to leave 'no evidence.'" Not the cops I know, they're not that smart.
"This guy deserves the death penalty because he used his position as a 'trusted law enforcement officer' to pull off these crimes" Nope, these were personal crimes. Abuse of his office has nothing to do with this.
"Our regret, as a society, is that two male sons are defending him and therefore, we have two more males like him, capable of the same behavior." Did your daddy do anything wrong we should pin on you? Maybe they just think their father is innocent. This was a stupid statement.
I can't argue guilt or innocence since I haven't been privy to the body of evidence. My only exposure to this case has been the media, and of course we know how unbiased and thorough they are. What concerns me is the headline "Prosecutor says use common sense". This is not abut common sense, it's about facts and actual evidence. I certainly wouldn't want someone to judge me on the basis of what they think.
Whatever the decision of the jury, I hope it was rendered on the facts presented befor the bar and not just the hope of the prosecutor to slam the lid on a case frought with issues. Is Peterson guilty, I have my opinion, but that's all I have. No one sat before me and presented all of the testimony or evidence, so I'm not fully prepared to render a verdict. Certainly anyone asked to use "Common Sense" is indicating that the decision isn't a slam dunk.
Fred,
Please see my post above at 1.12. Common sense is in reference to using it to determine if it is reasonable to conclude the events happened in the way either side is arguing. It is how jurors, all of us, determine if something is reasonable, given all the circumstances. In many cases there isn't direct proof of guilt.
I think the guy is as guilty as the day is long. BUT! I sure as hell wouldn't want jurors using their 'common sense' to decide guilt or innocence. IQ nor intelligence nor wisdom are factors in jury selection. And I believe we have all heard of the Darwin Awards ???
Now really who gives a crap about this guy any more. Just another dirty cop. If they only knew how many of these kind of officers were out their, and the stuff they pull. And the some people wonder why they do not trust authority. Bad cops and politicians, that's what this country has, and way too many.
It is about common sense. Many crimes, some hideous, have no overwhelming and undeniable physical evidence. It's great when it's there, but when it's not, it doesn't mean you cannot find some guilty because "beyond reasonable doubt" means exactly that--do the facts that you have--circumstantial and otherwise--and using your "common sense" take you to a place of being able to say that someone is guilty "beyond reasonable doubt." Reasonable. Not absolute. Absolute would mean having a person on camera committing the crime. Which doesn't happen often. So you need to have to think, evaluate, analyze the data you have and make a decision based on that information and your own brain power--your common sense. In this case it is a no brainer. An absolute no brainer. It may be impossible to prove premeditated in the case of the wife he killed in the bathtub, and since his wife who has "disappeared" cannot be examined at all, it is not known if he killed her in a fit of rage and then got rid of her body, or he planned it and killed her and got rid of her body. But this man is a killer. And no one bumps themselves 40 times in a bathtub sufficiently to kill themselves. It is ridiculous.
Tru-dat! But what bothers me are the hear say allegations that some of his Law Enforcement Brethren may have helped him. These need to be investigated if the people in that community are going to be able to trust them in the future.
Totally agree!!!! Like the cop that said Peterson asked him about hiring a hit man. HELLO, didn't that raise any flags and why didn't this cop come forward sooner; it could have saved that woman's life!!! Even if Peterson did say it in a joking manner; her death was ruled as a homicide afterward. INVESTIGATE, investigate and investigate.
Love,
If you're referring to the guy he asked during a ride along in his police car (the only person I'm aware of he asked) he wasn't a cop. It was a guy Drew worked with in a side business he had. In testimony he said he wasn't sure if Drew was kidding or not, he didn't know what to think.
As in: "OK , folks, let's not turn this into rocket science....we all know what happened here.....either he did it, or the space aliens did it....you can figure that out...."
If this man walks; whatever little faith is left in the justice system will be gone. Worse; if this man walks, he'll probably get his kids back!!!!! If he doesn't walk; I can't wait to see that smug look go south on his freaky looking face!!!!! Hope the photographers are poised just right :)
he is a very, very, sick man.. and he needs to be dealt with..
I cant imagine what he got away with when he was a cop!
Common sense on a jury today is like a heat wave in the deep Arctic - good luck with that. I've given up expecting justice or even hard thinking from any jury. People are depressingly stupid - they think that without a signed confession, DNA, fingerprints, 5 witnesses and a high resolution videotape of the crime being committed, the perp is innocent.....sad..... I would not be surprised if he walks - again....