Bill Bickel’s Crimeweek

(Press release, October 28, 2008) Responding to reporters’ inquiries seeking comment on the one year anniversary of Stacy Peterson’s disappearance, Drew Peterson released the following statement:

“There is not a single day that goes by that I don’t think about Stacy, so to me Tuesday is just another day of her being away. I realize this may be a significant event for the media, but it is not for me or my family. I won’t be participating in any vigils. Instead, I am giving one interview and then I will be far from the media spotlight spending quality time with my kids who need their dad now more than ever.

“For those who are concerned about my children, I thank you. But there’s no need for worry. I am taking good care of them though I have to admit acting as both dad and mom takes a lot of work and patience. My son Thomas is first in his class at one of the largest and finest high schools in Illinois. His brother Chris is also doing exceptionally well in school and is involved in wrestling and other activities. My youngest kids, Anthony and Lacy are too young to be in school but both are happy and healthy and adjusting normally.

“I have consistently and steadfastly maintained that I had nothing to do with Stacy’s disappearance and the death of Kathy Savio, my third wife. I hope that Stacy returns home or reveals herself, and that I am one day cleared of any wrongdoing in both cases. Until then, I remain strong thanks in no small part to my family and especially my kids who believe in their dad.”

Media Note: Drew Peterson is not available for further comment. He is scheduled to make only one media appearance on Tuesday on NBC’s Today show with Matt Lauer and Meredith Vieira.

• Related Crimeweek articles and additional information

According to a statement Will County (Illinois) State’s Attorney James Glasgow gave to local media this week, investigations into the disappearance of Stacy Peterson (Drew Peterson’s fourth wife) and the apparent murder of Kathleen Savio (Peterson’s third wife) have been “highly productive,” and he expects “a resolution in at least one of these investigations in the near future.”

So far, almost a year after Stacy Peterson’s disappearance (she’s been missing since October 28 of last year), this is what the investigations seem to have produced: Nobody knows what happened to Stacy Peterson, and nobody has been charged in either her disappearance (though Drew has been named “a suspect”) or Savio’s murder.

There are two possibilities here: The first has Drew Peterson, whom just about everybody is convinced is guilty, cheerfully flaunting the fact that he’s gotten away with two murders. He’s being treated by the media as more a celebrity than a suspect, he has a publicity agent handling his new-found fame, and at one point a local radio station staged a “Win a Date With Drew” contest.

The second possibility is that Drew Peterson is innocent; and investigators have been spending a year trying to find evidence against  him, to the exclusion of seriously exploring any other leads.

• Related Crimeweek articles and additional information

At a hearing today, Judge Roger Beauchesne set a May 27, 2009 date for the civil lawsuit against Scott Peterson for the wrongful death of his wife Laci, brought by Laci’s biological parents (a distinction worth mentioning because Dennis Rocha apparently was a minor paternal figure in her life at best; that role was filled by Ron Grantski, though he and Laci’s mother Sharon are not married). The trial is expected to take about 5 weeks.

When the lawsuit was originally filed, the Rochas were asking for $25 million. The amount they’re asking for now is undisclosed, but their attorney has said Scott Peterson can settle the lawsuit by admitting his guilt and agreeing to a payment of $10 million.

This is hardly likely, especially since Peterson has no money anyway: ten million, twenty-five million, it’s pretty much all the same to him. The Rochas admit that the lawsuit is largely symbolic, mostly to make sure Peterson never sells his story.

Though this is something anybody is likely to confirm, I would imagine that the Rochas’ attorney is being paid an hourly rate: There doesn’t seem to be much profit in earning one-third of a symbolic award.

Nobody knows what happened to Drew Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy Peterson, who disappeared the last week in October last year. Peterson hasn’t been charged either this case or for the apparent 2004 murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio (see earlier updates). Nonetheless, a second book about Peterson and his wives, Drew Peterson Exposed (by thriller-author Derek Armstrong), hits the bookstores on October 1 (preceded on September 1 by Joseph Hosey’s Fatal Vows: The Tragic Wives of Sergeant Drew Peterson).

According to a press release from the publisher, Kunati Inc., “we’ve guarded the contents of Drew Peterson Exposed, working under strict non-disclosure agreements …The facts and testimony assembled here presents new evidence, sheds new light on the details of the existing police investigations, the possible timelines, and the motives ascribed to Peterson. Conflicting witness accounts, false leads, widespread rumors, and red herrings that have dogged the case are analyzed and 140 photographs and documents (including many private family photos published here for the first time) go beyond the headlines to the heart of this sensational story.”

Peterson gave Armstrong “many hours of exclusive interviews;” and according to the press release, Peterson reveals for the first time his complete timeline for October 28, 2007, the day he says Stacy disappeared.

John Ramsey told Oprah Winfrey’s audience yesterday that he forgives the media for the “cyberspace lynching” he and his wife endured for years after their six-year-old daughter’s 1996 murder. He refers, of course, to the belief by many people who followed the case — a belief that was widely discussed in online forums and chatrooms, as well as alleged in countless newspaper and magazine articles — that one or both of JonBenet’s parents had a part in her murder.

Since Ramsey specified “cyberspace,” I should point out that I was part of the online media circus: I wrote so many articles about the case that a reporter writing a cover story for a major magazine phoned me to get my “expert” thoughts — and then repeated virtually everything I told her, passing it off as her own work.

I became acquainted with a number of people who could only be described as zealots, both pro-Ramsey (JonBenet’s parents were innocent) and anti-Ramsey (guilty). There was genuine hatred between the two sides, and I knew of at least one actual death threat.

I ran a series of online chats about the JonBenet Ramsey case and to my knowledge, these were the only online chats where the more vocal members of both “camps” were invited to attend, and I managed to enforce a modicum of civility. I was the moderator they all seemed to trust and honestly, it was all even more stressful and depressing than you might expect.

All this being said though, as fair as I tried to be as both a writer and a moderator, if somebody asked me for my opinion, I was willing to give it: I believed that Patsy Ramsey (JonBenet’s mother, who died in 2006) was responsible for JonBenet’s death, and that her husband John obscured the evidence to protect her. This was not a unique belief, of course, and as much as I sympathize with the Ramseys if they were innocent — in fact I sympathize with them for their loss even if they’re guilty — I don’t think the cloud of suspicion the Ramseys lived under approaches in any way a “lynching.” And I’ll take this a step further:

In July, Boulder (Colorado) District Attorney Mary Lacy announced that newly-analyzed DNA evidence revealed that an unknown person — not one of the Ramseys — had removed JonBenet’s clothing, and traces of that same person’s blood was found in her underwear. Though either of these DNA samples could have been left at different times, it’s highly unlikely that they weren’t both left the night she was murdered, when she was wearing both articles of clothing. The Ramseys referred to this as evidence of their innocence, and Lacy issued a public apology to them.

But does this new evidence really prove anything other than the fact that somebody else was with JonBenet that night? There are any number of scenarios that could include both the presence of this unknown person and complicity by the Ramseys. Unlikely scenarios? Certainly. But any scenario that fits all the evidence is going to seem unlikely on the face of it.

Putting aside every piece of evidence gathered over the past 11+ years except for one… The morning JonBenet’s body was found, the Ramseys also found a ransom note, written on a pad of paper from the Ramsey home, and with a pen that might also ahve been theirs, demanding $118,000, the exact amount of money John Ramsey had recently received as a Christmas bonus. A stranger entering the Ramsey home, rummaging about for the writing pad, and then specifying $118,000, might be the unlikeliest scenario of all.

So no, in the absence of another explnation for the note, suspecting the Ramseys were involved in the crime, or that they know who was, is not a “lynching” or a witch-hunt, even with the new DNA evidence.

O.J. Simpson’s attorneys for his upcoming trial armed robbery and kidnapping trial wanted to ask potential jurors whether they believe Simpson was guilty in the 1994 murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and Nicole’s friend Ron Goldman. Judge Jackie Glass’s response this morning was, “No, we are not going there.”

I have to side with Simpson’s people here: The defense is always entitled, as much as possible, to unbiased jurors. “I think this man slashed two people to death and got away with it” is not a mindset that leads to impartiality.

Judge Glass did, however, instruct the jury pool that they were not to use this case “to punish Mr. Simpson for what happened in Los Angeles back in ‘95″ [either referring to the date of the trial, or misremembering the date of the murders]

Simpson is accused of leading an armed invasion into a Las Vegas hotel room, in an attempt to force two sports memorabilia dealers to turn over items he claimed belonged to him; the charges include kidnapping, and could carry a life sentence.

Also this morning, the paperback edition of If I Did It, Simpson’s memoir in which he describes how he would have killed Nicole and Ron if he had done it, hit the bookstores. The rights to the book have been transferred to the Goldman family who shrunk the word “If” and added the subtitle Confessions of the Killer. Oddly enough, as on the hardcover version, Simpson’s name is missing from the cover, so this appears to be (and is listed on sites such as Amazon.com as) “If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer, by the Goldman Family”.

In Oregon, the two sides had wanted to arrange, by today, a plea bargain under which Joel Courtney would plead guilty to the 2004 murder of 19-year-old Brooke Wilberger and lead investigators to her body, and in return would not be subject to the death penalty. No deal was made, and Courtney is still scheduled to stand trial on February 1, 2010.

Wilberger’s parents have said they would not oppose a plea bargain.

• Background and previous updates

Richard Cooey’s federal lawsuit, in which he claims that his weight and his migraine medication will make it difficult to anesthetize him (and therefore his execution, scheduled for October 14, would be unconstitutionally painful), is still to be decided — but his appeal for clemency on the grounds of ineffective representation (among other things, his trial attorney neglected to tell the jury about Cooey’s substance abuse problem or the fact that he’d been abused as a child) has been turned down by unanimous vote by the Ohio Parole Board.

The decision is not legally binding on Governor Ted Strickland.

Cooey admits taking part in the rape, beating and strangulation of two women in 1986, but insists that his partner — who cooperated in the initial investigation and is serving life in prison — committed the actual murders.

That being said, there’s a possibility that Cooey’s date with the lethal injection will be delayed because of a murder he says he did commit:

Back in 2003, when he was hours away from execution for the 1986 murders (the execution was delayed by a federal judge because of Cooey’s claim of ineffective representation) , he told a prison official who was a member of the execution team that he’d killed “a hockey player”: He didn’t provide a name, or a date; he said the man had beaten one of Cooey’s sisters, but didn’t specify which sister.

Confessions given to a member of the execution team are considered confidential — but a transcript was made of the discussion, and the transcript recently came into the hands of a reporter, and now an investigation is underway.

A federal jury today took three hours to decide that Joseph Duncan should be put to death for abducting and sexually abusing Dylan and Shasta Groene, and murdering Dylan (background and complete timeline). The decision was binding on District Judge Edward Lodge, who immediately imposed the sentence.

Duncan, serving as his own attorney, had not offered any defense, and smiled when the verdict was announced.

Duncan had previously pleaded guilty, in an Idaho state court, to murdering the children’s mother and older brother, and their mother’s boyfriend. Sentencing was delayed pending the end of this federal trial, and Duncan faces a possible death sentence on those charges as well.

A California district attorney has already charged Duncan with the April, 1997 of 10-year-old Anthony Martinez, and he might be extradited to stand trial on those charges. He is also being investigated in the 1996 murders of two Seattle girls.

At a clemency hearing today, attorneys for Richard Cooey, who earlier this month filed a federal lawsuit claiming he shouldn’t be executed October 14 because (among other factors) he’s too fat (see earlier article, and your comments) asked that his death sentence be thrown out because his trial lawyer never mentioned Cooey’s history of alcohol abuse or the fact that he was beaten as a child.

Seriously now… If you remove from Death Row everybody with substance abuse issues and everybody who’d been physically abused as a child, would anybody be left other than Scott Peterson?

The parole board will make its non-binding recommendation to Ohio Governor Ted Strickland after the hearing is completed.

In a largely superfluous — but in a federal trial, legally necessary — vote, a jury decided today that Joseph Duncan is in fact eligible for the death penalty for the 2005 abduction of Dylan and Shasta Groene and for Dylan’s murder. Duncan had previously pleaded guilty to the crimes themselves.

The vote was unanimous.

Duncan, serving as his own attorney, probably didn’t help his own case by telling the jury, that they didn’t yet “have a clue” about the depth of his “heinousness” and that by showing them the evidence against him, the prosecution was “helping me to take away your heart and your innocence.”

The next phase of the hearing — the jury deciding whether to actually impose the death penalty — will begin Monday. The jury’s decision will be binding on U.S. District Judge Edward Lodge: If they vote unanimously for the death penalty, the judge must impose it (and of course, as in all capital trials, if they fail to vote for the death penalty, the judge can’t impose it).

• Timeline and previous updates

David Lee Onstott has been sentenced to life in prison.

---

August 21, 2008: A Florida jury found David Lee Onstott guilty today of second degree murder for the 2005 death of 13-year-old Sarah Lunde. The prosecution had been seeking a first degree murder verdict (though not the death penalty, because of a lack of physical evidence; see earlier article below). Tomorrow, Onstott will be sentenced to a minimum of 25 years in prison, and could in fact receive the same life sentence that would have been mandatory with a first degree murder conviction.

---

August 11, 2008: Jury selection began today for the trial of David Lee Onstott, for the 2005 abduction and murder of 13-year-old Sarah Lunde. Sarah was the third Tampa, Florida-area girl to be abducted and murdered over a 14-month period (Joseph P. Smith was convicted and sentenced to death for Carlie Brucia’s murder, and John Couey was convicted and sentenced to death for Jessica Lunsford’s murder).Prosecutors won’t be seeking the death penalty for Onstott, because they have no physical evidence directly linking him to the crime, and no confession. They had a confession, but it was excluded because police detectives continued to question Onstott after he’d requested an attorney (just as Couey’s confessions were thrown out because police detectives apparently never got the memo about the Miranda Warning and a suspect’s right to an attorney).

According to Joel Brodsky, Drew Peterson’s attorney, the police have an affidavit from a college friend of Stacy Peterson’s — identified publicly so far only as “Mike” — in which he claims to have met with Stacy on October 27 of last year, the day before her disappearance. At the time, she told him that she wanted to leave her marriage, and he advised her to “take the cash money and not use her credit cards to preclude being found.”

Brodsky claims he received a copy of this affidavit during discovery for the gun possession charge against Drew Peterson.

A spokesperson for the state’s attorney would not comment.

Brodsky contends, of course, that this backs up Drew’s claim that Stacy didn’t meet with foul play, but rather left on her own and deliberately covered her tracks. Assuming Mike’s story is true, the alternate interpretation, of course, is that Stacy’s plan to leave was the catalyst for her murder.

Though Drew Peterson has not been charged in either Stacy’s disappearance or for his previous wife Kathleen Savio’s murder, the first book about these cases will hit the stores on September 1:

• Background information and earlier updates

Friday night, ABC Television’s 20/20 will feature a segment called “Vanished: Coeds,” focusing on Maura Murray (missing since February, 2004) and Brooke Wilberger (missing since May of 2004).

According to promotional material, on-air reporter Elizabeth Vargas will examining why police responded quickly in the Wilberger case and not in the Murray case.

If this is an accurate description of the segment, I can save everybody a lot of time: Though in hindsight both women’s stories likely ended in tragedy, Maura Murray drove her car (for reasons still unknown) from her University of Massachusetts campus to New Hampshire, where it was eventually found. Brooke Wilberger, who did not have a car at her disposal, was clearly abducted from the grounds of an apartment building where her sister worked; one of her shoes was left behind, and witnesses believe they heard her scream. The reason that the police treated the cases differently at first is both obvious and correct.

Neither body has been found. While the Murray case remains open, convicted sex offender Joel Courtney will be standing trial for Brooke Wilberger’s murder (background and updates).

The fact that the DNA of JonBenet Ramsey’s killer has presumably been found (see July 9, 2008 update) is no guarantee that the killer himself will ever be found: Not only have investigators been unable so far to find a match in the federal government’s DNA database… but even if he’s been arrested and convicted of a felony over the past few years, even if a DNA sample was taken, the massive backlog on entering the information into the database (the backlog was between 200,000 and 300,000 in 2003, the last time a Justice Department estimate was made, and is probably much higher now) could make an eventual match impossible.

Opening statements were presented this morning in the penalty phase of Joseph Duncan’s federal trial for kidnapping and sexually abusing 9-year-old Dylan Groene and 8-year-old Shasta Groene in 2005, and murdering Dylan. Duncan has already pleaded guilty to the crimes themselves, and could face the death penalty.

He also pleaded guilty, in an Idaho court, to murdering the children’s mother and older brother, and their mother’s boyfriend. The penalty phase on those charges — he could face the death penalty here as well — has been delayed pending resolution of the federal case.

Duncan is defending himself, though he has a court-appointed attorney at his side if he desires assistance.

Both sides have agreed that Shasta will not have to appear: Her testimony will consist of videotaped statements she made after Duncan’s arrest.

• Complete background, earlier updates, and timeline

Opening statements are scheduled for Wednesday morning in the murder trial of David Lee Onstott, a one-time boyfriend of 13-year-old Sarah Lunde’s mother. Onstott is accused of chocking the girl to death after trying to sexually assault her, then throwing her body into a fish pond.

Although Onstott’s confession was excluded (because it was made after he’d repeatedly asked for – and was refused – an attorney) and there is no physical evidence directly linking him to the crime, indications are that the defense will claim Onstott was drunk when he attacked Sarah.

Jury selection was completed Tuesday, with the empaneling of nine women and three men.

• Previous update

Jury selection is scheduled to begin today in the trial of David Lee Onstott, for the 2005 abduction and murder of 13-year-old Sarah Lunde. Sarah was the third Tampa, Florida-area girl to be abducted and murdered over a 14-month period (Joseph P. Smith was convicted and sentenced to death for Carlie Brucia’s murder, and John Couey was convicted and sentenced to death for Jessica Lunsford’s murder).

Prosecutors won’t be seeking the death penalty for Onstott, because they have no physical evidence directly linking him to the crime, and no confession. They had a confession, but it was excluded because police detectives continued to question Onstott after he’d requested an attorney (just as Couey’s confessions were thrown out because police detectives apparently never got the memo about the Miranda Warning and a suspect’s right to an attorney).

Judge Lodge ruled today that Joseph Duncan can defend himself in the death penalty phase of his trial. Jury selection is scheduled to resume August 6.

• Background and earlier updates

According to the website Drew Peterson’s publicist set up to disseminate press releases about this case — yes, Peterson has had a publicist for several months now, and now there’s a website set up to disseminate press releases about the case — this is Peterson’s version of his neighbors’ claim that they wore wires to record him making incriminating statements (see earlier articles):

After a week of hearing their names on local and national news coverage, Drew Peterson says he wants to set the record straight on the couple referred by the media as his “friends,” “long time friends,” and “close friends.”  These descriptions of Len Wawczak and Paula Stark, he says, are far from accurate and he wants to the record straight, according to his publicist, Glenn Selig. 

Drew Peterson released the following statement:

“I first met Len Wawczak about 16 years ago.  As a Bolingbrook police officer I was involved in Wawczak arrests for multiple various petty offences, such as drunk and disorderly, misdomeanor gun charges, and battery.

“After that, as an officer, I would see Len Wawczak and Paula Stark while I was on neighborhood patrol in my police car. I would stop and talk to them. It was in the capacity of police work, but the contacts were friendly in nature.  I would see Wawczak and Stark about once or twice a month in this capacity, and we would engage in friendly conversation.  However, I never entered their house, and neither Wawczak or Stark ever came to my home.

“After Stacy left, and the Illinois State Police (ISP) towed my cars as ‘evidence,’ many of my police offier friends abandoned me, and the media surrounded my home. At that point Len Wawczak and Paula Stark showed up and offered to let me use their car when I needed it.  They also offered that I could come over to their home to get away from the media, and that they would help me by watching my kids when I needed. I took them up on their offers.  Len Wawczak and Paula Stark suddenly started to come over to my house quite often, and engage me in conversation, and now, looking back,  pretended to be supportive and friendly so they could record conversations to give to police. Len Wawczak and Paula Stark suddenly began to pay a great deal of  attention to my children and put effort into developing a close and loving relationship with the kids apparently in an effort to gain even more access to me.

“Len Wawczak and Paula Stark were never my close friends or long-time friends.  Further, they are people who we now know took advantage of my children and myself when he I was most vulnerable and needed help.”

Federal  Judge Edward Lodge ruled today that Joseph Edward Duncan III, who’s already pleaded guilty to kidnapping and sexually abusing 9-year-old Dylan Groene and 8-year-old Shasta Groene in 2005, and murdering Dylan, is mentally competent to participate in a trial to determine his sentence (life in prison or the death penalty).

Now that this question is settled, Judge Lodge will consider Duncan’s request, filed in April, that he be allowed to serve as his own attorney. This matter might involve another competency hearing.

---

April 21, 2008: Jury selection began last week, in federal court, for Joseph Duncan’s penalty hearing. Duncan pleaded guilty in December of kidnapping and sexually abusing 9-year-old Dylan Groene and 8-year-old Shasta Groene in 2005, and murdering Dylan. He could face the death penalty.He’d previously pleaded guilty to murdering, in the early morning of May 16, 2005, Brenda Groene (Dylan and Shasta’s mother), Slade Groene (the children’s older brother) and Mark McKenzie (Brenda’s boyfriend) in McKenzie’s Coeur d’Alene, Idaho home. He could face the death penalty on these charges as well, but the judge presiding over that state trial has postponed sentencing pending Duncan’s federal sentencing.Duncan had stalked the family before murdering the three adults and abducting the children. He is believed to have taken them to at least three different campgrounds, including one in Montana, where Dylan’s body was later found.

Around 2am on July 2, 2005, Duncan brought Shasta into a Denny’s restaurant near Coeur d’Alene where they were recognized and Duncan was arrested.

Last Wednesday, Duncan asked Judge Edward Lodge for permission to act as his own counsel, and the judge is expected to rule on the request today. On Friday, he ordered Duncan to undergo a psychiatric evaluation.

The following timeline is reprinted from an April, 2006 Crimeweek article, and will likely be corrected once testimony in the penalty hearing begins: (more…)

In response to yesterday’s report that two of his friends recorded their conversations with him between November of last year and June of this year, Drew Peterson said today that he never made the comments they claim he made, and “if they recorded me for seven months it’s going to clear me more than it’s going to hurt me.”

Peterson suggested that since the neighbors, Len Wawczak and Paula Stark are having financial problems — Wawczak is unemploed, they’re losing their house, they’d asked Peterson for thousands of dollars and were angry when he turned them down, and they’d once sold a hat he’d signed and given them on eBay — they might be motivated by the hope of selling their story.

An Illinois State Police spokeman would not comment on whether the tapes exist. Joel Brodsky, Peterson’s attorney, said there’s “no way” the police would allow the neighbors to speak with the media if they had in fact secretly recorded their conversations with Peterson.

Wawczak and Stark are apparently the friends to whom Peterson gave one of his guns before the police seized the other guns in his home (see earlier story). When word of this “missing gun” came to light last month, Peterson and Brodsky denied that any such gun existed. Now Brodsky says that Peterson had indeed given guns to Wawczak and Stark (as well as to other people) after his gun owner’s permit was lifted, and never tried to conceal the fact that he’d done so. (more…)

Len Wawczak and Paula Stark, a married couple and long-time friends of Drew and Stacy Peterson, told the Chicago Sun-Times that last November, a few weeks after Stacy’s disappearance, they grew suspicious of him and agreed to wear surveillance wires to gather information for the police.

The Sun-Times quoted a number of comments Wawczak said that Peterson made, though it isn’t clear whether these are comments that appear on the recordings. Certainly the comment Peterson made in 2004 following the death of his ex-wife Kathleen Savio, in which he mocked the investigators saying “She was in a dry bathtub, what a bunch of f****** idiots,” came from Wawczak’s recollections alone — though it does beg the question of why, when Peterson’s subsequent wife disappeared three years later, it took Wawczak several weeks to begin suspecting him.

After Stacy’s disappearance, after Wawczak began wearing the wire, when Savio’s body was exhumed and a new autopsy determined that she had in fact been murdered rather than drowned accidentally, Drew said “I should have had the bitch cremated. It would have cost me less and I wouldn’t be going through this trouble.”

According to Wawczak. Which might or might not be on the tapes.

Wawczak also told the Sun-Times that Drew “said he wasn’t worried about them finding Stacy’s remains down the road because he figured by that time he would have been tried and acquitted, and you can’t be tried for the same case twice because of double jeopardy or something.”

Stark reports that she was afraid Peterson would discover the wire when he hugged her, tried to kiss her, “rubbing up against me, whispering in my ear, ‘I love you,’” and when he asked her to try on Stacy’s bikinis.

She also claims Peterson asked her to run off with him.

There is either a lot less or a lot more to this latest chapter than is immediately obvious.

• Additional information and previous updates

A woman who used to work for record producer Phil Spector has forward to say that in 1996, after he propositioned her and she turned him down, he showed her his holstered gun and said “You know I could kill you right now.”

Her testimony might not help the prosecution in Spector’s upcoming re-trial for the 2003 murder of Lana Clarkson, since five women who told the jury similar stories during the first trial wasn’t enough for a unanimous vote to convict (Spector claims that Clarkson shot herself, either accidentally or on purpose).

The fact that she continued to work for Spector for another four years probably won’t help her testimony either.

A new state law, awaiting the signature of Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, could impact the Drew/Stacy Peterson case: The law would allow a judge to accept hearsay testimony if it’s proven that the defendant murdered the witness. This is all rather specific, and of course the Peterson case was the impetus for the law.

Under this law, if Drew Peterson is convicted of murdering Stacy Peterson (his fourth wife, missing since October), her comments to her pastor that Drew told her he’d murdered his third wife, Kathleen Savio, could be admitted into evidence in a trial for Savio’s murder.

The questions remain whether this law could be applied retroactively, and whether third-hand hearsay (the pastor would testify that Stacy had told him that Drew had told him…) would even be covered.