Drew Peterson Is Innocent

Drew Peterson Is Innocent!

Got your attention didn’t it? Had I been on the jury, there is no way I could have voted to convict.

Do I believe he did it?

Of course.

So why wouldn’t I vote to convict?

You see, even though I didn’t finish, I did attend Law School and there is this thing call the United States Constitution, which guarantees the individual the right to confront his accuser. Didn’t happen here.

But you say Stacy Peterson (dead and/or missing) testified through her pastor. And Kathleen Savio was also represented through hearsay evidence.

Heresy evidence is just wrong. Even though the Illinois legislature which can’t really do anything to attack the State’s real problems, passed “Drew’s Law” in 2008 specifically to enable hearsay evidence to be allowed in our state courts.

Let me give you an example why hearsay is wrong as discussed at lunch Saturday. One person at our table said he heard someone else at the table had made a pledge of $10,000 to Hadassah. Someone else said she heard it was a pledge of $100. Yet I, and everyone else at the table heard him say the pledge was $10,000. We never heard the pledgee make any statement to that effect, yet according to the new Illinois Peterson Here Say Law; we could admit the higher number into evidence. We could also say we heard it was $100, no the higher figure. But in court, if asked, we would say we understood it to be $10,000.

Further, at lunch, a Rabbi stated very clearly that if someone came to him with a story about a felony that person had committed, the Rabbi would be unable to testify in court The law states comments made to an ordained religious person, in confidence, cannot be used in a court of law.

The consensus at our table was that, of course, we all felt Peterson was guilty; yet the two Rabbis with whom I discussed this along with an attorney at our table (It was a Bar Mitzvah, so who do you think might be in attendance?) all agreed they too could not vote to convict.

Then there is the matter of the U.S. Constitution. Article Six clearly states the following:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

So now and for the next few years Peterson will rot in jail – not necessarily a bad thing for such an arrogant ass – while the case makes its way through the Illinois courts which have already confirmed the law.

Eventually, it will reach the Federal courts where Peterson’s attorneys will cite the 6th Amendment and if the Court follows law, it will dismiss the conviction and remand the case for retrial without allowing any hearsay evidence. And as anyone who followed the case knows: without hearsay, there is no evidence worthy of a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

That’s’ why I would have voted as suggested. Peterson may have done the foul deed, but from any thinking perspective – the man is innocent.

Now for your weekend entertainment review.

Wifey was babysitting for two of the grandchildren on Saturday. What better excuse to bond with the male child?
Northwestern University was playing an evening home game against a fair SEC team. (Big 10 teams have not faired well against those from the SEC in the last few years.) It wasn’t Alabama, LSU or one of the national powerhouses, but it was an SEC decent team from Vanderbilt.

The evening was lovely, clear and in the low 70s. Northwestern has a habit of playing games closely with a hair-raising end often the case. The team has often been called “The Cardiac Kids” because they tend to come from behind in the closing moments. In fact, they won their season opener at Syracuse exactly that way with a last minute come-from-behind victory.

So when they were down late in the fourth, we braced ourselves for a typical ending. We were not disappointed! However, like most of those in attendance, we were not prepared for the sudden rain, which began with about 10 minutes to go in the 4th quarter. Fortunately, I had worn a hat, which at least kept the rain off my spectacles. With the game so close there was never a question of going until it was decided. NU scored twice in the last minute to win 23-13 and despite being soaked to the skin, I loved every moment.

College football with all the pageantry and diehard fans and alumni make it a spectacle to enjoy. It doesn’t make any difference if you are an alum, if there’s a game close by; you owe it to yourself to go at least once a year. For those in the Chicago area, Northwestern plays next Saturday at 2:30. And since it is Northwestern, tickets are available. See you there!

Ah, but the weekend entertainment doesn’t end there…unfortunately! Wifey has had a Marriott Theater subscription for years. I enjoy 2 or 3 of the 5 offerings, but like a good soldier, I willingly join her for an evening of song, dance and drama. Generally, I enjoy the work of this fine core group of singers and actors. In fact, of the three times I’ve seen Les Miserables, Marriott easily was the best.

However, unfortunately I was subjected to a far less than memorable Dream Girls last night. Was I bored?


Was the acting over the top?


Were the voices excellent?

Generally speaking, yes.

Were the songs or their melodies memorable?
Absolutely not!

I couldn’t stop yawning due to the boredom of the hyper-over the top songs. Never having been a fan of Motown, I didn’t care about the trials and tribulations of the faux Supremes and James Brown. I like my rock with the Stones, Led Zeppelin and The Doors. Petty, CSNY, Genesis and, of course, the Boss round out my personal preferences.

The net-net was I did not care one iota for Dream Girls.

As always, your comments and criticism are welcome…even the new reader who called me an idiot!

Filed under: Uncategorized


Leave a comment
  • Apparently, you haven't read any recent Supreme Court decisions on the issue, including Crawford v. Washington and cases cited therein. I didn't expect such from other bloggers here, but since you went to law school, maybe you ought to go to the Daley Center and open a law book.

    Of course, Joel Brodsky and Sheldon Sirotsky went to law school, too.

  • Not to mention that Drew and Brodsky waived the point by putting on a hostile witness to try to impeach the dead, and then fired the lawyer saying not to do it. Fox News story.

    But, as I said, Brodsky went to law school, too. The legal experts that the Tribune consulted (which is a first for them) indicated that to get a chance on appeal or habeas corpus on the basis of lack of competent representation by counsel, Drew should fire Brodsky. Looks like he won't though. Otherwise, I agree with those lawyers that Drew's appeal doesn't have a chance, although not with all the reasons they give in support thereof.

Leave a comment