Peterson judge to meet with lawyer about Savio statements
BY JON SEIDEL and DAN ROZEK Sun-Times Media June 6, 2012 9:40PM
Retired Bolingbrook Police Sgt. Drew Peterson arrives at the Will County Courthouse in Joliet on May 8, 2009, for arraignment on charges of first-degree murder in the death of his former wife, Kathleen Savio. | M. Spencer Green~AP file photo
Updated: July 8, 2012 7:04PM
Before she turned up dead, Drew Peterson’s third wife confided in her attorney that she expected her husband to kill her and she didn’t want him to profit from her death. A Will County judge was hearing arguments Wednesday on whether the testimony from attorney Harry Smith, who represented Kathleen Savio, constituted a violation of attorney-client privilege. Smith, however, disagrees and says he has more information that he’s withholding because it would break the privileged silence between attorneys and their clients. Smith said Savio made many statements such as, “He’s going to kill me. He’s going to make it look like an accident.” Smith said Savio repeatedly told him she didn’t want Peterson to benefit from her death. “Kathy wanted me to make sure that her death, if unresolved, did not go without repurcussions for Drew,” Smith said before a Will County courtroom. The former Bolingbrook police sergeant was back in court Wednesday for a pretrial hearing as lawyers prepare for his July 23 murder trial. Peterson is charged in the 2004 drowning death of his third wife, 40-year-old Kathleen Savio and is a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who has been missing since 2007. It was Stacy Peterson’s disappearance that prompted investigators to go back and review Savio’s death, which had been ruled accidental after Savio was found dead in a dry bathtub. Will County Judge Edward Burmila, however, has ruled that prosecutors can’t mention Stacy Peterson’s possible death to jurors. Peterson’s lawyers want Burmila to bar Smith’s testimony arguing that he violated attorney-client privilege when he testified at an evidentiary hearing about conversations he had with Savio and Stacy Peterson. Burmila said those conversations would have been covered by attorney-client privilege, but he also said Savio might have waived that privilege — which would bar Smith from disclosing what she told him — when she supposedly told the lawyer, “If I die, you have to go to the authorities and tell them that Drew did it.” Burmila said he would meet privately with Smith, at another time, to hear what sort of additional information he’s withholding and decide whether it should be revealed publicly. Peterson, dressed in a blue prison jumpsuit, wearing glasses and a thin beard, sat quietly in the courtroom Wednesday as attorneys on both sides sifted through a number of legal motions in preparation for his upcoming murder trial. Peterson chatted briefly with Will County Sheriff Paul Kaupas before the hearing started. Earlier in the day, Burmila rejected a defense motion on the potential pool of jurors. About 175 potential jurors previously filled out a questionnaire and were admonished not to follow news of the case. Peterson’s jurors likely will be picked from the original pool set aside in 2009, despite objections from his defense attorneys Peterson’s attorneys argued that members of the jury pool, knowing that they could be participating in the case, would be more attracted to the media coverage. Defense attorney Joel Brodsky likened it to telling somebody to stand in a corner and not think about a pink striped elephant. “They’re going to go to the corner and they’re going to think about the striped elephant,” Brodsky argued Burmila, however, said there’s no reason to think the potential jurors aren’t following the original judges instructions and denied the motion. Burmila also rejected Peterson’s motion about prosecutors’ alleged lack of evidence, and told them to raise objections and seek a directed verdict. It was one of several motions lawyers have to argue in the seven weeks remaining before Peterson’s trial. Some of the other legal motions contain colorful language, including one from Peterson’s team arguing that prosecutors have no evidence he entered Savio’s home at all on the day of her death — and that they wouldn’t even if they argue that Peterson enlisted “Scotty from the Starship Enterprise” to beam him up like in “Star Trek.” Prosecutors appeared to make Burmila unhappy at a hearing late last month at which they asked him to limit email communication between attorneys on the two sides of the case. Burmila took passages in the motion they filed to suggest they were saying he’d engaged in an improper dialogue with Peterson’s lawyers. Prosecutors said that wasn’t how they meant it. In addition to limiting Smith’s testimony, court records show Peterson’s lawyers want the Will County state’s attorney’s office to give them a witness list and identify what hearsay evidence they plan to present. Prosecutors have filed their responses under seal. An Illinois appellate court’s April ruling that prosecutors can use hearsay evidence finally cleared the way for Peterson’s long-delayed trial to begin. He’s been held in the Will County jail since his arrest in May 2009.
