12/03/2007 (www.foxnews.com) Greta “On The Record” Update
“Trucker Update, ”
http://www.acandyrose.com/2007-12-03-GretaOTR-Update.htm
PLEASE NOTE: This is a RECAP transcript done by an Internet poster known as “Snicker.” (Note: Double spacing added by www.acandyrose.com)
Drew Peterson's Victim Wives??(Stacy Peterson,msg.2007/Kathleen Savio,exp.2004} > Monday, December 3 Discussion
http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php? s=57bb505b624b20e541e22a47a3273281&postid=10953620#post10953620
Snicker
Senior Member
Registered: Sep 2007
Location: In the sunny southeast
Posts: 3548
GVS Update:
GVS: (Summary of truckers' story)
JB: Well, it seems that this is just the ISP following up another lead like they did with the letter that we turned over to them. The problem is some of the media has reported this lead as though it is factual.
GVS: It would be very helpful if you could tell me where your client was between 10:15 am on Sunday and Monday morning.
JB: My client has given ISP his statement and I am not going to discuss that.
GVS: Why not? If he would just do that, the media might go away.
JB: I could check on it and see if ISP minds if we share that with you.
GVS: DP called the police tonight because one of the neighbor's sons removed the orange cones that DP had put in front of his house. The police took a report and refused to come out.
JB: I understand that there was a fist fight in front of the tent they were using for the vigil. I think the police chief is losing control of their neighborhood. He needs to go into that neighborhood and restore peace and order.
GVS: Does DP have the right to put cones in the street?
JB: He has the right to keep people out of his driveway. If someone does not go in there and restore order it could get dangerous.
GVS: I have a letter here requesting that DP return articles of police property (second letter) and if these articles are not returned, they will file theft charges against DP.
JB: This is an example of the malicious prosecution that DP has been subjected to. I'm sure he will return the items as he has been asked. We don't know the exact nature of the misconduct that DP is accused of, but many of the members of the BPD would commonly run warrant checks on family, friends, etc. and even on nights when things were boring they would do it. You can't prosecute for that.
GVS: Yes you can prosecute for that.
JB: Yes you can, but it's malicious prosecution.
GVS: So you will confirm that if you get your client's permission and ISP permission you'll come back on and share your client's timeline with us?
JB: Yes, I will, but I have to get a written copy of it because the slightest nuance can be misconstrued. I'll look into it.
(Showing DP's comments to the media about putting their attention on the people who are less fortunate.)
Chief McGury: We did speak with DP about the calls he made. He called back a short time later and was not satisfied that the report was taken on the phone, so we sent someone over there to take the report.
GVS: We understand that DP has not turned over his uniforms and other equipment.
CM: We sent a letter to DP requesting his uniforms, handcuffs, and other standard pieces of equipment that he still has in his possession. I have listened to what JB has said and I think the focus does not need to be on me, it needs to be on SP. JB needs to pay attention to defending DP and I will worry about being the chief of police. JB's comments are ridiculous. DP still has his badge. But we did confiscate his service revolver. Another example of JB coming up with . . . you call me tomorrow and you let me know the names and the facts of other PO in this dept who have committed felonies by using the computer inappropriately, I will follow up. I take a dim view of what JB has said and I take a dim view of officers who have nothing better to do that sit around running license plates.
SC: I spoke with DP about an hour ago and he's doing fine. He was filling me in on what happened with Roy next door. I have never asked DP what he was doing from 10:15am until 24 hours later. I have never asked him, but I can ask him and then talk to JB to see if that's OK for me to tell you.
GVS: I think it would be likely that the media would go away if they could fill in the blanks of the timeline.
SC: Now all of a sudden everyone wants to know about the timeline. I didn't know there was a big gap in the timeline.
Legal panel will be with us to discuss the developments when we return.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
12-04-2007 03:18 AM
Drew Peterson's Victim Wives??(Stacy Peterson,msg.2007/Kathleen Savio,exp.2004} > Monday, December 3 Discussion
http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php? s=57bb505b624b20e541e22a47a3273281&postid=10953620#post10953620
Snicker
Senior Member
Registered: Sep 2007
Location: In the sunny southeast
Posts: 3548
NG Update:
GVS asks the legal panel what they think:
GVS: This story is a big IF.
BG: This is just a flyer. This is like the letter DP received. The letter was fishy and this isn't far off.
JH: This reminds me of the other crazy hints that came up in the other Peterson case. People are trying to help and putting things together, but prosecutors can't affort to make that mistake.
TW: Where did this lawyer get his law degree? That's hogwash. I'd have felt better if he had just said that's privileged. The alibi is significant and important.
MC: I think we're entitled to the timeline. The more I hear the chief the more I like him. The more I hear DP and JB, the more I think they both ought to lawyer up. Coming on and saying he can't say this and that, but he can attack every person who says anything about his client--I'm just not clear on how he's handling this--I really have to wonder what his strategy is.
GVS: It would make good sense for DP and JB to come on and give the timeline.
MC: It's time for them to come on and give the whole story. He's gone on and given little snippets, he might as well tell the rest.
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
12-04-2007 03:28 AM