Register  Login       Friday, September 10, 2010
Message Boards Minimize
Subject: Kathleen Savio
Prev Next
You are not authorized to post a reply.

Author Messages
CloeyUser is Offline

Posts:1063


05/11/2009 9:55 PM  

Listening to a voice long silent

Here's a great article on Savio's death and the hearsay law.

There are no known witnesses to the death of Savio, 40, who was found drowned in an empty bathtub of her Bolingbrook home on March 1, 2004.

What is known is that she and Peterson were in the midst of a contentious divorce when she died. Their fights -- some physical -- are outlined in Bolingbrook police reports and letters that Savio wrote to a former assistant state's attorney and to an ex-TV news anchor.

Her sister told the coroner's jury that Savio believed if something should happen to her, her death would only look like an accident.

Under the new hearsay law, which took effect in December, Glasgow could ask a judge to admit Savio's letters and alleged statements to friends and family into court. He would have to prove to the judge by a preponderance of evidence that Peterson murdered Savio to keep her from testifying against him, that Savio's statements are credible and that the best interests of the court would be served if the statements were admitted into evidence.

"It allows testimony from the grave, so to speak, about threats of violence made toward the victim," said defense attorney Lawrence Wolf Levin. But he said Glasgow would be taking a risk by relying on a law that could face legal challenges. Opponents of admissible hearsay argue that it goes against the 6th Amendment, which reads, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ... to be confronted with the witnesses against him." "Nobody really knows whether this law will stand up and what its final viability will be," Levin said. A higher court could see it as a denial of due process and strike it down, making the Peterson case even harder to prove.

There's another unusual aspect to the case: Two official autopsies were performed on Savio.

State police immediately decided her death was not suspicious, and -- based on a state trooper's testimony -- a coroner's jury concluded she accidentally drowned.

But after Peterson's fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, disappeared in October 2007, Glasgow reopened the investigation into Savio's death. Her body was exhumed for the second autopsy, and the results, Glasgow later said, confirmed his suspicion she had been murdered.

Records from the investigation and second autopsy indicate that a small gash on the back of Savio's head was an attempt to make her death look like an accident, authorities say. She had bruises on both shins and her lower abdomen and abrasions on her hand, wrist and arms, according to the original autopsy report.

Read full 2 page story details

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-peterson-case-sundaymay10,0,6895496.story?page=1


Admin
You are not authorized to post a reply.



ActiveForums 3.7
        
nantahala trading post
Please Donate Now
Play the new Arcade Games
crime map for US cities
Declare yourself as a Trial Junkie!
Message Board Rules Minimize

For the benefit of the community and to protect the integrity of the message boards, please observe the following guidelines:

1. No Advertising of any kind without permission from site owner. This includes the promotion of commercial and non-commercial products.
2. No Flaming or Trolling. Flaming is the hostile and insulting interaction between Internet users. Do not Troll or try to incite arguments.
3. No Profanity, Racism, or Prejudice. We don't talk religion or politics here. This is a Trial site.
4. Site Moderators have the final word on approving/removing posts.
5. For monitoring purposes, English language posting only!
6. No sexually explicit comments, pictures or innuendos. This can be offensive to others! Use social sensitivity! If you don't know what that is... Google it!

Members are solely responsible for the content of the comments they post here. Comments are subject to the site's terms and conditions of use and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of Jurorthirteen.

    Print      
Copyright 2007-2009 Juror Thirteen   Terms Of Use  Privacy Statement   Disclaimer