Death Toll Revised Down to 24 After Monstrous Oklahoma Tornado…100+ Injured…Children Among the Dead…Stunning Pictures…Woman Finds Dog During Interview!

WATCH on TheBlaze TV: Latest Updates on Tornado Aftermath, Including Updates From Glenn Beck in Oklahoma

Crime

Jury Convicts Drew Peterson of Murdering Third Wife: ‘Now He Can Rot in Hell’

Sep. 6, 2012 8:39pm Jason Howerton

In this May 8, 2009 file photo, former Bolingbrook, Ill., police sergeant Drew Peterson yells to reporters as he arrives at the Will County Courthouse in Joliet, Ill., for his arraignment on charges of first-degree murder in the 2004 death of his former wife Kathleen Savio. A jury on Thursday, Sept. 6, 2012, found Peterson guilty of murdering his third wife. (AP Photo/M. Spencer Green, File)

OLIET, Ill. (TheBlaze/AP) — Drew Peterson – the crass former Illinois police officer who gained notoriety after his much-younger wife vanished in 2007 – was convicted Thursday of murdering a previous wife in a potentially precedent-setting case centered on secondhand hearsay statements.

Peterson, 58, sat stoically looking straight ahead and did not react as the judge announced jurors had found him guilty of first-degree murder in the death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio. Her relatives gasped, then fell into each other’s arms and cried.

Illinois has no death penalty, and Peterson now faces a maximum 60-year prison term when sentenced Nov. 26.

The trial was the first of its kind in Illinois history, with prosecutors building their case largely on hearsay thanks to a new law, dubbed “Drew’s Law,” tailored to Peterson’s case. That hearsay, prosecutors had said, would let his third and fourth wives “speak from their graves” through family and friends to convict Peterson.

Hearsay is any information reported by a witness that is not based on the witness’ direct knowledge. Defense attorneys said its use at the trial would be central to their appeal.

Both relief and excitement showed on the faces of Savio’s family members as they stepped out of the crowing courtroom. Her sister, Susan Doman, threw herself into the arms of her husband.

“Finally, finally, finally,” Mitch Doman, Savio’s brother-in-law, said as he and his wife cried. Seconds later, he looked up at a reporter and said with a smile, “We finally got that murdering bastard!”

“Now he can rot in hell!” Kathleen’s stepmother Marcia Savio said.

Peterson’s personality loomed large over the trial, illustrated by crowds of bystanders gathered outside the courthouse in a circus-like atmosphere, cheering as prosecutors walked by and shouting “Loser. Loser. Loser” at defense attorneys. People driving by honked their horns.

Before his 2009 arrest, the glib, cocky Peterson seemed to taunt authorities, joking on talk shows and even suggesting a “Win a Date With Drew” contest. His notoriety inspired a TV movie starring Rob Lowe.

“The whole world has been waiting for Drew Peterson to be convicted. They hate him,” said defense attorney Joe Lopez, speaking to dozens of reporters outside over the booing and chants of detractors on a nearby sidewalk.

The verdict was a vindication for Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow and his team, who gambled by putting on a case they conceded was filled with holes. Glasgow, who is running for election this year, drew cheers from the crowd outside and chants of, “Four more years!”

“He was a thug,” Glasgow said of Peterson, his voice rising in indignation. “He would threaten people because he had a gun and a badge. Nobody would take him on. But we took him on and he lost!”

The case began with a gruesome discovery.

A neighbor came across Savio’s body on March 1, 2004. She was face down her dry bathtub, her thick, black hair soaked in blood and a 2-inch gash was on the back of her head.

The drowning death of the 40-year-old aspiring nurse was initially deemed an accident – a freak slip in the tub. After Peterson’s fourth wife, 23-year-old Stacy Peterson, vanished in 2007, Savio’s body was exhumed, re-examined and her death reclassified as a homicide.

Drew Peterson had divorced Savio a year before her death. His motive for killing her, prosecutors said, was fear that a pending settlement, which included their $300,000 home, would wipe him out financially.

The 12 jurors deliberated for more than 13 hours over two days before reaching a decision. The seven men and five women raised questions about whether they were taking the case seriously by donning different coordinated outfits each day of testimony, but did not wear matching attire Thursday.

Jurors didn’t talk to reporters after the verdict. They issued a brief statement saying they believe their decision was just.

Fascination nationwide with the former Bolingbrook police sergeant arose from speculation he sought to parlay three decades of law enforcement expertise into getting away with murder.

Savio’s brother, Nick Savio, grew emotional as he read a statement from the family outside court, calling Drew Peterson a “cold-blooded killer” and saying “everyone gets payback for what they have done to others.

“Stacy, you are now next for justice,” Nick Savio declared as he finished speaking.

Prosecutors suspect Peterson killed his sandy-haired fourth wife because she could finger him for Savio’s death, but her body has never been found and no charges have ever been filed. Jurors weren’t supposed to link her disappearance to Savio’s death, and prosecutors were prohibited from mentioning the subject.

Stacy Peterson’s family said they hoped the conviction will lead to a break in Stacy’s case. He says his fourth wife ran off with another man and is still alive.

Prosecutors faced enormous hurdles as they tried Peterson for Savio’s death.

They had no physical evidence tying Peterson to Savio’s death and no witnesses placing him at the scene. They were forced to rely on typically barred hearsay – statements Savio made to others before she died and that Stacy Peterson made before she vanished. Illinois passed the hearsay law in 2008, making the evidence admissible at trials in rare circumstances.

The hearsay included friend Kristin Anderson testifying that Savio told her Peterson once warned her at knifepoint, “I could kill you and make it look like an accident.”

Stacy Peterson’s pastor, Neil Schori, testified she told him that her husband got up from bed and left their house in the middle of the night around the time of Savio’s death. Drew Peterson later coached his fourth wife on how to lie to police, Schori said.

Peterson’s attorneys have said they may appeal all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court on grounds Illinois’ hearsay law is unconstitutional.

“It’s a very dark day in American when you convict someone on hearsay evidence,” Lopez said.

Some legal experts worried about the precedent a conviction dependent on hearsay would set, saying it could open the floodgates for the admissibility of such evidence in Illinois and elsewhere.

Prosecutors had to establish the most basic fact for a murder trial: that there was actually a murder. Pathologists testified for the defense that Savio’s wounds indicated an accident; those testifying for the state said it was impossible for a single fall to cause both the wound on the back of her head and the bruises on the front of her body.

Prosecutors several times raised the judge’s ire for broaching inadmissible subjects in front of jurors – issues that could also be cited in a defense appeal.

Peterson’s band of colorful, wisecracking defense attorneys – who joked outside court that Stacy Peterson could show up any day to take the stand – committed their own share of errors. As they sought to blunt the credibility of hearsay, for instance, they ended up prompting their own witness to repeatedly emphasize that Stacy Peterson was convinced her husband killed Savio.

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (41)

wrshpn
Posted on September 7, 2012 at 8:03am
2 wives dead! Does it take a rocket scientist? He walks around like a smart mouthed cocky spoiled kid that got away with something, knows it, and dares you to prove otherwise. Not only will he rot in our prisons, but he is doomed to rot in hell also I am afraid.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- LameLiberals
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 8:11am
  2 wives ALIVE
  
  No evidence on who killed the 3rd or what happened to the 4.
  
  Report this comment
- rangerskippy
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 3:41pm
  he may burn in hell, but will never rot there. If he goes there, the jury had nothing to do with it. It was all on him, and his choices.
  
  Report this comment
LameLiberals
Posted on September 7, 2012 at 7:51am
FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY, a judge allowed 2nd hand information – a she said/she said I heard it from the grapevine evidence which a person cannot cross examine as per our constitution. It is like defending a negative – YOU DID IT prove you didn’t instead of the other way around.

This guy is an a-hole and he may be guilty but they couldn’t prove it so they up a new rule which is just as unconstitutional as that parliamentary rule that congress made up to get around the Constitutional mandate to have a budget every year.

What’s that saying – better 10 guilty men go free rather than send 1 innocent man to prison.

Crow all you want but next time, that unconstitutional “Heard it through the grapevine” evidence could be used against YOU or YOUR family.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- GlintoftheScythe
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 8:07am
  Agreed. This is a sad day for the rule of law.
  
  Report this comment
- Twinkiediddle
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 8:57am
  My thoughts exactly, We may all be correct in that he did murder both wives, but to allow hearsay evidence opens a huge gap in the justice system. Anyone with a vendetta could easily convince a jury or judge that while you are completely innocent of a crime, your are completely guilty, convicted by hearsay of an old enemy,or a jealous ex-spouse, girlfriend, etc
  
  Report this comment
- Wango
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 11:30am
  You realize of course, that defending the letter and spirit of the law is the centerpiece of the ACLU. So when you decry their work in favor of those being victimized by its usurpation (like they did for Sean Hannity) you’re being wildly hypocritical. Thought you should know.
  
  Report this comment
teddrunk
Posted on September 7, 2012 at 6:50am
A trial not based on facts and laws but of stories and gossip? How long until the SC overturns this.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- LameLiberals
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 7:52am
  I agree. The guy is a jerk but HEARSAY and Heard It Through the Grapevine” evidence a person cannot cross examine is unconstitutional.
  
  But RINOs and liberals will find a way to justify “bending” the constitution again.
  
  Report this comment
babylonvi
Posted on September 7, 2012 at 12:58am
Regardless of how big an alpha hotel you think Peterson is, this trial was an absolute travesty. There is little doubt it will ultimately be overturned. There were so many DELIBERATE rule and instruction violations by the prosecution, is seemed like misconduct to many. ANTONE could be convicted of ANYTHING with prosecution like this. With courts doing this and the government trashing the constitution, what will be left of what was once a nation of laws.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- huufarted
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 7:34am
  This was a case where one of the Jail Deps should have “let” some unknown prisoner shank the f’er for some free dope…
  
  Report this comment
needmoinfo
Posted on September 7, 2012 at 12:10am
Didn’t Drew once say Stacy went where her mother went? Where would that be? She disappeared just like Stacy. Drew has a lot of mysteries. Stacy and Kathy aren’t the whole story. If he becomes sure his conviction won’t be overturned maybe he will give up Stacy’s grave site and solve some other cases for a reduced sentence. Whether you leave a good or bad legacy why not leave the true story.
John Wayne Gacy admitted some of what he did and by the end was retracting what he said earlier. No pity for the victims families. When he was executed the crowds chanted kill the clown.
Drew acts like he has no pity either. But I can picture him leaving HIS story.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- LameLiberals
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 7:56am
  Drew has a lot of mysteries. Stacy and Kathy aren’t the whole story. If he becomes sure his conviction won‘t be overturned maybe he will give up Stacy’s grave site and solve some other cases for a reduced sentence
  ______
  
  Lovely. Use “Heard it though the grapevine evidence” against someone their lawyer cannot confront and after you through him in jail – use prison as a way to make him “talk” about mysteries he may or may not know about.
  
  Why not tie Peterson to a dunking rod like the Salem witches were and hold him under water repeatedly until he “talks”. After all he is guilty of something.
  
  The end justifies the means.
  
  Report this comment
Elena2010
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 11:43pm
Just another Ted Bundy.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Electra
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 2:27am
  i was going to say Ted Kennedy.
  
  Report this comment
meanjeep
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 11:16pm
It’s Ill, where the laws don’t matter unless they apply them per the local elites wishes. I cannot believe this was the will of the people. The thugacracy could use this at any time against their opposition.

I don’t doubt he was guilty, but that does not mean this will stand as the final word. Christ was nailed to a cross in the same authoritarian manner, and clueless people cheered! Chilling thought to be a jury of peers in a rigged process!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Magyar
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 10:39pm
Well, well…looks like this megalomanic is going to rot in the BIG HOUSE— I bet Bubba and Woody will have their way….

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
blackyb
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 10:31pm
I guess he is not thinking, about now that he is so smart and “cool.” He would have made a good Democrat. I bet he is one.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
blackyb
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 10:30pm
Peterson will make a good Muslim in prison.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
grimmster
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 10:27pm
Doesnt matter how they got the conviction, if they put him in gen-pop,there would be a need for an appeal…..Sad part is, i agree, breaking the rule of law to convict is bad juju…..course,odumbass does that everyday….

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jespasinthru
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 10:27pm
He sure got old, fat & ugly in a hurry, didn’t he? I guess prison will do that to you….

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- blackyb
  Posted on September 6, 2012 at 10:29pm
  When wasn’t he old, fat and ugly?
  
  Report this comment
- LameLiberals
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 7:58am
  One of his wives were all that great looking or smart either. Guess that is why they married him.
  
  Report this comment
- LameLiberals
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 8:15am
  Correction: NONE of his wives were all that good looking or intelligent. If they were, they wouldn’t have hooked up with him.
  
  4th wife was sleeping with Perterson while he was still married to 3rd wife. 3rd wife was sleeping with Peterson while he was still married to 2nd wife. The only innocent wife is the 1st wife. The other 3 wives are as nasty as he is. But bending the Constitution to convict him when they have no evidence was wrong.
  
  Report this comment
ChiefGeorge
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 9:34pm
This is justice only in this life…the next will be the judgment on his soul.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- helluvagoodgod
  Posted on September 6, 2012 at 10:04pm
  Dat mofo kilt all dem white ho’s
  
  Report this comment
762x51
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 9:25pm
Good, at least he will not be victimizing any other women. Now if the weak-kneed Marxist State of Illinois can just get a death penalty in place so that when Stacy’s body is found they can fry this a-hole, the world will be a better place.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
chips1
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 9:09pm
I believe he is guilty, however twisting the rules of law makes this a slap in the face of justice. The cost of all the appeals will be tremendous. Obama’s idea of what laws to follow and which ones they won’t enforce puts everyones freedom at risk. Total government control. NWO is here.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- the_truth_or_not
  Posted on September 6, 2012 at 10:03pm
  Chips1
  I whole heartedly agree with you! As I believe he is guilty to start convicting citizens on hearsay evidence is the precipice to becoming the U.S.S.A. this is disgusting and vial! Her citizens and patriots should not stand for this!
  
  Report this comment
Captain Crunch
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 9:07pm
There are lots of other thug cops who deserve to be convicted of crimes against innocent law abiding people. Thugs…Extremists….Power hungry control freaks with a badge….maybe Peterson will get raped in prison and then stuck with a wooden stake through the heart.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- LameLiberals
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 8:23am
  Maybe when you speak out too much and/or get in someone’s way or have something someone else wants or get on someone’s nerves or people don’t like you….
  
  then YOU WILL be charged with a serious crime …..
  
  and then a politician or a neighbor or relative or bribed stranger that doesn’t like you will testify that “they heard from a dead person or missing person that YOU DID WHATEVER IT IS YOU ARE ACCUSED OF. Since you cannot question your accuser – YOU ARE GUILTY. You will rot in prison next to Peterson.
  
  Report this comment
- Captain Crunch
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 12:41pm
  @LameLiberals
  
  The guys is arrogant, overly proud, boastful and he ran his mouth too much. That’s usually how criminals get caught. They like notoriety and think they are some kind of god above the law.. Peterson is the perfect picture of a narcissistic sociopath plagued by a criminal mentality. Reminds me of the President. I hope he looses his appeals…justice has been served. A wooden stake through the heart would be a nice finishing touch.
  
  Report this comment
bikerdogred1
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 9:04pm
Where is the proof,I wonder how many times Drew,said I’am a cop and I can do anything I want.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- LameLiberals
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 8:01am
  There was no proof. The trial was a travesty.
  
  It was worse than OJ’s Nevada trial because even though 99% of the time a prosecutor would never have charged a person with what OJ did or at least not charged with such harsh crimes, at least they had evidence of a crime.
  
  Report this comment
nobull14
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 9:01pm
There was no solid evidence to convict him it was all done in the press all of it was hear say ? The jury was wrong to convict with no proof of evidence !!!!!. Drew Peterson was guilty in my opinion but you can not put a man or women in jail with out solid proof. Look what are courts are doing to a George Zimmerman in Florida . How stupid are the American people these days.!!!!!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Evileye
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 8:58pm
He probably did it.
But does that mean some people that don’t like you
could give false testimony and get you Hung?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- LameLiberals
  Posted on September 7, 2012 at 8:17am
  That is EXACTLY what this trial against Peterson means.
  
  It is EXACTLY why our founding fathers said in the Constitution that it could not be done.
  
  Report this comment
dontbotherme
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 8:58pm
I wonder where he hid the body of another of his wives, Stacy Peterson. Justice is served.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
fande3rls
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 8:53pm
I ‘m glad he deserves the death penalty

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Mr.Fitnah
Posted on September 6, 2012 at 8:49pm
What a miscarriage of justice .
How many rules of evidence did they skirt?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- paleoconservatarian
  Posted on September 6, 2012 at 9:54pm
  Enough that this conviction will eventually be vacated by a straight-thinking higher court. At the expense of millions of dollars in court expenses the taxpayers can’t afford. A large price to pay to keep a probable murder behind bars for a few years because otherwise your case was far too weak. Not to mention the precedent it sets and all the other costly, overzealous prosecutions enabled by it that will be sunk at a later date when the law is overturned.
  
  Better had he (and a nine-hundred ninety nine other guilty men) gone free.
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.