DREW PETERSON'S STEP-BROTHER TALKS, DREW CONFIRMS DETAILS

Drew Peterson's step-brother, Thomas Morphey (Sun Times)

This morning, Drew Peterson's step-brother, Tom Morphey, spoke to Good Morning America about the days before Stacy Peterson went missing. Video here. As we all know, a response from Drew was expected.  In fact, he had an interview arranged with the local radio station to discuss Morphey's interview immediately after it aired.

 DREW CONFIRMS MORPHEY IS CREDIBLE

Joel Brodsky, Drew's attorney, has made numerous statements about Tom Morphey, all of them dismissing his credibility because Morphey has had substance abuse issues in the past.  Regardless of what Brodsky says, today Drew confirmed Morphey's credibility. 

In the ABC interview, Morphey explained that Drew offered him $2000 to rent a storage locker to store a sealed container inside. Drew confirmed this account today! He told the radio that he did ask Morphey to visit a storage locker with him "to store extra tires."  Article here.   Drew dug his own hole by confirming Morphey's account of Drew's request to visit the storage locker.  Drew also confimed the location of the storage locker - that it was along the highway 53 - the highway that has long been suspected as the route Drew took to dispose of Stacy's body.  Drew is now putting together the timeline and the circumstantial evidence against him in his own case.  

WHY WASN'T TOM MORPHEY PREVIOUSLY CALLED BEFORE THE GRAND JURY?

Clearly, prosecutors knew of Morphey and the information he had to offer because he was offered immunity immediately after Stacy disappeared. In fact, Morphey was also placed into protective custody for a few months.  So why hasn't he been called before the grand jury?

I do not think prosecutors forgot about Morphey.  Prosecutors are building a timeline and a theory of the case.  Maybe they do not want to get locked into Morphey's story if other witnesses have a different account of what happened.  Or, since prosecutors may fear Morphey's credibility is an issue, maybe they are seeking other corroborating evidence of Morphey's account (the cell phone pings, video of Drew at certain locations) before bringing Morphey before the grand jury.

Regardless, prosecutors must be jumping out of their skin at the fact that Morphey spoke publicly.  They should have secured the confidentiality of his testimony by calling him before the grand jury.  Now, this interview can be used to impeach anything else he says that may be remotely contradictory. 

There is, however, a silver lining in every cloud.  So while prosecutors may have been fuming at Morphey's interview, they now have Peterson corroborating the request for the storage locker along the Highway, just days before Stacy's death.  This is huge.

WHAT'S TAKING SO LONG FOR DREW TO BE CHARGED?

It seems like every day someone is asking me, "Why hasn't Drew been charged yet?"  The reason is simple: murder does not have a statute of limitations.  There is no rush for the State's Attorney to charge him.  In fact, once they do, Drew will be taken into custody and will most likely demand trial.  That means the state will only have 120 days to try the case.  If, however, prosecutors prolong the grand jury proceedings, they can interview each witness, and build their case slowly.  The goal is to be 100% prepared so that when he is charged, they are essentially ready to go to trial and in 120 days they will just be tying up loose ends while Brodsky is up to his eyeballs in evidence. There is no rush!

As I shared with you in the Casey Anthony case, it is difficult to charge a murder without the body.  Many people thought I was defending Casey; however, that's not the case.  A dead body proves the person is, in fact, dead.  Like it or not, there may be a juror that could have thought Caylee was really kidnapped (this was before her body was found) or that Stacy Peterson did run off with another man. 

As for the alleged murder of Katheen Savio (Drew's 3rd wife), the problem with that case is that the IL State Police botched the investigation from the very beginning.  It took an independent exhumation of the body several years later to determine that her death was not accidental but a homicide.  My suspicion is that the murder of Kathleen Savio may never get charged because of their initial failure to properly investigate the case. 

Prosecutors are investigating two murders - one of a woman whose investigation was destroyed in the very beginning (Kathleen Savio) and the other of a woman who is still missing.  Prosecutors have not had it easy in either case but Drew's loose lips are a blessing in disguise.

www.xpunged.com and www.tamaraholder.com

JOEL BRODSKY: THE BEST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO DREW PETERSON - HE CONTINUES TO DAMAGE HIS CLIENT'S ALREADY-TERRIBLE IMAGE

Last November, I discussed how an attorney must be very conscious of not only their client's image but of how their own image can adversely affect their client. Blog here.

Yesterday, Joel Brodsky addressed the media (yet again) in response to Drew Peterson's step-brother's recent interview. Article here. Thomas Morphey told the media several days ago that he believes he unknowingly helped Drew carry Stacy's body in a blue barrel out of the Peterson home. Drew Peterson's step-brother Tom Morphey (courtesy of Sun Times)

Brodsky felt the need to give an opinion: "A person like that has fantasies—they are delusional. They can create things for whatever reason, they can twist facts or circumstances to meet their own needs. So you can't really take a person like that at their word." Interestingly, Brodsky previously said, "But Tom Morphey is a very ill (ph) man with all his multiple psychiatric hospitalizations and his problems with alcohol and his multiple suicide attempts. There's no question that he is a very disturbed person."

Brodsky previously suggested "“Maybe she [Stacy] fell in with bad people ... I'm not saying it happened, but it certainly starts creeping into your thoughts as a possibility.”

What Brodsky is attempting to do is poison the jury pool with doubt that Drew actually killed Kitty and Stacy.  Instead, Brodsky is poisoning the image of Drew that is already tarnished. 

So why do I say Brodsky is the BEST thing that happened to Drew? Well, while Brodsky is running his mouth and holding press conferences, the state's attorney is grinding away and building a case against Drew.  That's perfect; we would not want it any other way! Keep in mind, we know cocky Drew will demand a "speedy trial" - that means the state must put on their case within 120 days. They are using the grand jury for trial prep while Brodsky is buying new suits for his next presser.

Here's some more on this issue at the Stacy & Kitty blog.

(On a side note, the new girlfriend, Kristina Raines, allegedly moved out of Drew's home, yet again.)

www.xpunged.com and www.tamaraholder.com

Drew Peterson's Girlfriend Moves Back In - His Mind-Games Prevail

Drew Peterson's fiancée or girlfriend or housemate or whatever you want to call her, Christina Raines, apparently moved back in with Drew earlier this week. Article here. She had moved out of his house a few weeks ago after her father, Ernie Raines, and the father of her children, Mike, "saved her" from Drew. Christina Raines - Interviewed by the Today Show

My Conversation with Christina
As you know, I spoke to Christina in-depth the day she moved out of the house (she was already back at work.) Her stories of Drew depicted a man who is controlling and flat-out creepy. (I previously shared some of my conversation with Prime News here.)  Some of the things she said are so creepy that, out of courtesy, I do not want to share them with you. One thing she did say that has really stuck with me (that I do not mind sharing) is that she felt, after spending many hours alone in the house, there was no way Stacy could have just up-and-left her kids. The way the kids' rooms were decorated and other parts of the house...she believed it was the home of loving mother who would not willingly abandon her little children. She also stated Stacy's clothes remained in the closet. How weird! I mean, is she now supposed to "share" closet space with Stacy? The idea is bizarre but not a far stretch of the imagination.

Best Interests of Children Now Even A Bigger Issue
On January 13, 2009, Christina moved into Drew's home for the first time. She also moved in with her children. On this day, I wrote a blog discussing the best interests of the children. Blog here. I said: Should DCFS get involved in the case and should the father attempt to have the children removed from the home? Well, cases like this do not require the same burden as in a criminal case: beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, DCFS will look at “the best interests of the children” and determine if that allows them to remain in the Peterson home.

The "best interests of the children" issue is now of even greater importance, not because of Drew and his alleged violent, criminal behavior but because of Christina.  She is clearly unstable.  In less than one month, she has moved into the Peterson home, moved out and moved back in.  Granted, many parents act in this manner during contentious separations but this situation is terrible for Christina and Mike's minor children. 

DCFS now must get involved.  We have two kids moving in-and-out of a suspected murderer's home at the whim of their unstable mother.  Like I said before, if a woman wants to date Drew, fine.  But children should not become the victims of Drew's mind games played on their mother. 

Will County State's Attorney Must Hurry Up and Indict Drew
Last week, Christina Raines apparently testified before the Grand Jury.  Article here.  Smart move on the part of the Will County State's Attorney's office.  They probably figured it was only a matter of time before Drew won Christina over and so they needed to hurry and get her testimony on the record.  But now that she's back together with Drew, I think they need to move more quickly to indict him.  Here's why: a) we don't want Christina to end up missing or dead, b) we don't want the children to potentially be injured or killed, and c) we don't want her to recant her previous testimony to the Grand Jury at Drew's trial because Drew had this opportunity to brainwash her into doing so.

Caution!
Many bloggers and those with an opinion (all of us!) have stated that Christina is "stupid."  I would ask you to not call her such a derogatory name.  Maybe she's making a stupid decision but she's not stupid.  I spoke to her at length.  She is soft-spoken and kind.  I really feel this young woman is the victim of an old pro's mind games.  And while many of you may think, "I would never date Drew Peterson", you probably weren't raised by very controlling father -- as she clearly was (Ernie is obviously a control freak - didn't you see his behavior in front of the cameras?), and you probably don't have self-esteem and confidence issues.  So instead of calling her "stupid" you should probably try to understand the reasons for her decision to date him in the first place.

www.xpunged.com and www.tamaraholder.com

Tamara on CNN HLN "Prime News" on her conversation with Drew's ex-"fiancee"

2/2/09: Today I was on CNN HLN's "Prime News" with (fabulous) host Mike Galanos.  I shared my conversation with Christina Raines, Drew Peterson's ex-"fiancee" that occured last Friday, before she interviewed on TV.  Here is my take on Ms. Raines and her relationship:

www.xpunged.com and www.tamaraholder.com

DREW PETERSON UPDATE - INSIDE THE GRAND JURY & A MEETING WITH DREW'S FIANCEE

MY CONVERSATION WITH DREW'S EX-Fiancée - CHRISTINA RAINES

Last Friday night, January 30, I met Drew's now ex-fiancée and spoke with her for a bit.  She shared with me a lot about the relationship she & Drew shared.  Out of respect for her, I will not disclose the content of our conversation; however, I want to share a couple of my observations: Christina came across as a really nice girl who got in over her head.  I don't think she got involved with Drew because of any desire to get some media attention.  In fact, she mentioned that one TV show offered her money for the interview, which I have been told is not ethical.  She, like most 24-year olds, appeared quite naive still and somewhat shy.  Also, I think she felt bad about everything that happened.  While we spoke, her boyfriend, Mike (with whom she has moved back), stood by her side with smoke coming from his ears.  He spoke with such energy about how he feels he saved Christina from a possible death sentence.  But at the same time, he was happy to have his girlfriend back with him, by his side.  I'll share more about this conversation after her first public interview.

MY VISIT INSIDE THE PETERSON GRAND JURY

Many people have been asking me about my involvement in the Drew Peterson case since it was reported that I accompanied Kathleen Savio's nephew, Charlie Doman, into the Grand Jury. Article here and below. Charlie Doman - nephew to Kathleen Savio Of course, I cannot and will not discuss any part of the Grand Jury proceeding.  What I can say, however, is that being a part of the GJ was the most memorable experience of my career.  Charlie previously spoke with Greta Van Susteren here and shared his feelings about how he and the Savio family felt that IL State Police ignored investigating the posibility that Kathleen was murdered.  Remember, her death was orginally ruled an accidental death.  It was not re-classified until AFTER Stacy disappeared and Kitty's body was exhumed by Dr. Michael Baden who then ruled her death a homicide.

January 23, 2009
By Joe Hosey, Sun-Times News Group

The Will County grand jury investigating th e murder of Drew Peterson's third wife and the disappearance of his fourth reconvened Thursday, with his former divorce lawyer and a former employee summoned to testify.

The grand jury was impaneled more than a year ago and last met in November. Appearing before it Thursday were attorney Alexander Beck, who represented Peterson in his divorce from third wife Kathleen Savio, and Charlie Doman, Savio's nephew, who worked in a Montgomery bar Peterson owned as a maintenance man and disc jockey.

Doman and his attorney, Tamara Holder, declined to comment on what transpired during his grand jury appearance. Beck referred questions to his attorney, Matthew Bertani.

"Mr. Beck respects the sanctity of the grand jury and the gravity of these proceedings," Bertani said. "He will not comment on them publicly."

Beck apparently could not say much to the grand jury either.

"He will not and cannot, according to the (Illinois) Supreme Court rules, reveal a ny confidence s arising out of his representation of Mr. Peterson many years ago," Bertani said.

Peterson and Savio were in the midst of a contentious divorce when she was found dead in her bathtub in March 2004. Illinois State Police found no sign of foul play during their investigation of Savio's death, which originally was ruled accidental.

But when Peterson's next wife, Stacy, vanished in October 2007, the investigation into Savio's death was reopened and reclassified as a homicide. It remains under investigation.

State police also are trying to determine what happened to Stacy Peterson. They have labeled her disappearance a "potential homicide" and named Drew Peterson as the sole suspect.

Peterson, 54, a former Bolingbrook police sergeant who's now living with a 24-year-old mother of two in his Bolingbrook house, has denied involvement in either incident. He said Thursday that he has nothing to worry about regarding Beck or Doman testifying "unless they're making something up, which is always my big fear."

Charles Pelkie, spokesman for the state's attorney's office, said the grand jury's hiatus "by no means indicates a lack of activity" in the investigations.

"Things are moving forward. Things are full steam right now, and they have been for several months," he said.

www.xpunged.com and www.tamaraholder.com

IL GOV. BLAGOJEVICH'S MEDIA BLITZ ALREADY CAUSING PROBLEMS

llinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich listens to a caller while on the air with radio talk show host Cliff Kelley at WVON radio station Friday. (AP) On Friday, Gov. Blagojevich made two radio appearances in Chicago. One at WLS in the morning, the other at WVON with Cliff Kelley in the evening. I happened to be at both interviews and spoke to the Governor at both as well. His spirits were surprisingly up and I definitely got the feeling he's set to fight this long battle. The Governor is not, however, in denial about his impeachment; he even joked about how he'll soon have extra time on his hands.

But is the Governor's media campaign a good idea? At first, I thought "yes" because he is his strongest salesman. Aside from his terrible analogies (he compared himself to some old movie that's beyond my time), he makes a strong argument that this impeachment is unfair. He was very well-spoken on both radio shows and calls came pouring into the radio station showing their support of the Governor.

As things started to look better than they have for the Governor's image, two problems arose late Friday: 1) Blagojevich's lead attorney, Ed Genson, withdrew from the case; and 2) Blagojevich's camp hired Drew Peterson's PR firm.

Genson's withdrawal: I don't know anything about Sam Adam Sr. and Jr.'s work to comment; however, I can say that Ed Genson is probably one of the best defense attorneys in the country. I watched his arguments before the House impeachment panel; he's brilliant, convincing, well-prepared. Genson was nowhere to be found on Friday during the radio appearances. Instead, it was Sam Adam, Jr. who was at WLS's interview and then NO attorney was with Blagojevich at the WVON interview. I suspect Genson went through the roof when he found out Blagojevich was speaking to the press. I'm sure Genson wanted Blagojevich to keep his mouth shut. But, Adam's appearance at Blagojevich's side implies that Adam supported the interviews. Possibly the split because of this? Genson was quoted saying, "His action, what he's doing, isn't controlled by me," Genson said. "I'm not privy to it. I should be, but I'm not." Article here.

Drew Peterson's PR firm retained: Drew Peterson on NBC's Today Show

I wrote about Drew Peterson's image back in November 2008. Blog here. Image is everything, especially when you are potentially talking to a jury pool. Drew Peterson has the worst possible image of any person in the country - and it's not really because of the crimes he's suspected of committing but because of the way he's put himself in the media's light. There are many men who have managed to stay out of the press as they stand suspected of a crime, for example, Craig Stebic, husband of missing Lisa Stebic. I mean, Drew's PR firm had the audacity to send a press release that Drew got engaged last month. How disgusting. As if the guy is a celebrity?!? And this PR firm's antics are already playing out in Blagojevich's camp: on Friday morning, Blagojevich committed to an exclusive live interview with ABC's Good Morning America on Monday morning. Blagojevich agreed not to do any interviews in the interim, before Monday morning. Quite the contrary occurred. Instead, the PR firm set up an interview with NBC's Today Show, behind ABC's back, that aired today!

Blagojevich better be careful. It appears as if the camp is in disarray with Genson quitting and the worst PR firm being retained. He needs to focus on his image and his criminal case. Leave the rest alone.

www.xpunged.com and www.tamaraholder.com

DREW PETERSON'S "FIANCEE" MOVES IN - BEST INTERESTS OF CHILDREN FEARED

Drew Peterson's “fiancée" moved into the home of Drew and (missing) Stacy Peterson today.  Problem is, she did not move in alone.  She also moved in with her two minor children. Article here.  

Shortly after moving in, the cops were allegedly called to the Peterson home twice, along with the Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) after the fiancée’s father of her children could not get reach his kids after making numerous telephone calls to the Peterson residence.  

And another allegation is Drew is planning to sell the home he shared with Stacy so that he can buy a new home to share with the new woman, her children, and the children he shares with Stacy. 

This situation brings up several issues of which I will go into detail later:

1)   Drew is still married: I actually wrote about this in great detail when it was rumored that Drew might be filing for divorce from Stacy on the grounds of abandonment.  My blog here.  There is no way any sane judge will grant him a divorce on these grounds! Thus, Drew can be "engaged" because it has no legal bearing; he cannot, however, get married because he isn’t even divorced! 

2)   The marital property of Drew and Stacy: I am not sure if the home of Drew and Stacy is in their names jointly or if it is solely in his name.  Regardless, I am concerned that Drew is attempting to dispose of the marital property.  Hopefully, Stacy’s family will intervene if Drew does attempt to put the home on the market in an effort to buy a larger home for the new fiancée and her kids. 

3)   ** The Best Interests of the Children: This is my greatest concern.  Look, if an adult woman wants to date Drew Peterson, that is her decision, as crazy as she may be.  But Drew is the only named suspect, although not formally charged, in his ex-wife, Kathleen Savio’s, death and his current wife, Stacy Peterson’s, disappearance.  And if I were the “fiancee’s” ex, I would be concerned for my children too.  He has a legitimate concern!  His children are living with a suspected killer!

But what should happen? Should DCFS get involved in the case and should the father attempt to have the children removed from the home? Well, cases like this do not require the same burden as in a criminal case: beyond a reasonable doubt.  Instead, DCFS will look at “the best interests of the children” and determine if that allows them to remain in the Peterson home.

Some may argue, “He is only suspected of allegedly killing his wives, not his children.” I would argue, however, that he has a violent propensity and any person, be it a child or a lover, is potentially in danger of Drew Peterson.

Another piece of food for thought: does this new development of the children moving in and the issue of safety of the children add pressure to the prosecutor to expedite the case and indict Drew for murder on one, or both, of the cases?  If the State’s Attorney does not act quickly enough, there may be another incident at that home that could have been avoided BUT FOR their failure to arrest him. I previously discussed the "Drew Peterson Law" that was recently passed at the end of last year here.  

In conclusion, the moving-in of Drew’s new fiancée and her children brings about many more issues that require immediate attention.  Most importantly, the safety of the children must be determined as soon as possible!

www.xpunged.com and www.tamaraholder.com