May 5th - 5/10 [Archive] - In Session Message Boards

Anakerie

05-05-2008, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by newbiee
Hi all, went to post on the other and it seems it was closed. Maybe the "others" will not join us today.:beer: [/*]

Originally posted by newbiee

Then maybe you and your friends could start a new thread and leave us to discuss DP's guilt! [/*]

Good morning newbiee.. I did the same thing. Was going to post to your suggestion that they start a NG thread. IMO, they won't start a new thread to discuss their ideas of Drew's innocence or Stacy's guilt. After all, the two of them have nothing to discuss since they completely agree with one another. Just ignore them, or read their posts and have a chuckle at their baseless suppositions. They're only here to get a "rise" out of the rest of us who have actually read up on the case. They can put in their ideas that the rest of the world needs psychological care because we don't agree with them. Pretty comical idea, in my opinion.

As for Drew, its been almost a week since the announcement of his too little too late reward for the "safe" return of Stacy. I keep waiting to hear about another of their so wonderful tips about her location. We've only heard the one from them about Stacy possibly being seen at some all-inclusive resort in Jamaica, right? Or have they announced other tips that I managed to miss in the news?

I still say that Stacy must be a genius to have supposedly walked off with $25,000 and only the clothes on her back and managed to stay sort of hidden, yet be spotted in all kinds of places and not be out of money yet.
:rolleyes: Not to mention that no one has a clue who this other man is that Drew says she left with.

The investigators have told Stacy's family that they are sure that Stacy didn't leave that house under her own power. We know bits and pieces of the evidence that LE is working with. The cadaver dogs hitting on several areas in the house and garage area. The missing furniture. Tom Morphy's statements about moving a container of some sort from the bedroom to the SUV. I could list more, but what's the use? The Drew-fans don't read the stuff anyway.

Jpanda

05-05-2008, 03:30 PM

OK, I was just checking in to see if anything new was going on that I heaven't heard about, and now I gotta go to the other thread and see which posters you're referring to - someone is actually sticking up for Drew???? Wow....

JMO

Jpanda

05-05-2008, 03:40 PM

Regarding the timeline, and forgive me since this has probably been discussed, but didn't DP slip up on Larry King and say he was "sleeping" when Stacy disappeared? And then JB nudged him....? TIA

Anakerie

05-05-2008, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda
Regarding the timeline, and forgive me since this has probably been discussed, but didn't DP slip up on Larry King and say he was "sleeping" when Stacy disappeared? And then JB nudged him....? TIA [/*]

Yup... Brodsky seemed to want Drew to shut up before he said more... lol... I am sure the investigators saw that too....

north-eh

05-05-2008, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

Yup... Brodsky seemed to want Drew to shut up before he said more... lol... I am sure the investigators saw that too.... [/*]

Good point is that IMO. If we as lowly posters and observers(not!) can point out discrepencies in things that ole Drew says, we can be sure LE is catching it also and then some! I for one for love to be privey to what they have on him! jmo

N

MsBrown408

05-05-2008, 06:47 PM

gerald1: quote from the previous (closed ) thread.

" You have no idea what you are talking about" insert :no: at the start of the comment. snipped

Sorry if you misunderstood my QUOTE AND LINKS to the actual constitutional definition of the 5th amendment, as some-one had asked for earlier in the thread.

It was not my opinion, hense no OMO. But posted from one of the link.

:no:

SOME people just irk my butt. :(

kizzzy

05-05-2008, 09:59 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

Good morning newbiee.. I did the same thing. Was going to post to your suggestion that they start a NG thread. IMO, they won't start a new thread to discuss their ideas of Drew's innocence or Stacy's guilt. After all, the two of them have nothing to discuss since they completely agree with one another. Just ignore them, or read their posts and have a chuckle at their baseless suppositions. They're only here to get a "rise" out of the rest of us who have actually read up on the case. They can put in their ideas that the rest of the world needs psychological care because we don't agree with them. Pretty comical idea, in my opinion.

As for Drew, its been almost a week since the announcement of his too little too late reward for the "safe" return of Stacy. I keep waiting to hear about another of their so wonderful tips about her location. We've only heard the one from them about Stacy possibly being seen at some all-inclusive resort in Jamaica, right? Or have they announced other tips that I managed to miss in the news?

I still say that Stacy must be a genius to have supposedly walked off with $25,000 and only the clothes on her back and managed to stay sort of hidden, yet be spotted in all kinds of places and not be out of money yet.
:rolleyes: Not to mention that no one has a clue who this other man is that Drew says she left with.

The investigators have told Stacy's family that they are sure that Stacy didn't leave that house under her own power. We know bits and pieces of the evidence that LE is working with. The cadaver dogs hitting on several areas in the house and garage area. The missing furniture. Tom Morphy's statements about moving a container of some sort from the bedroom to the SUV. I could list more, but what's the use? The Drew-fans don't read the stuff anyway. [/*]

The safe return of Stacy? Well he knows it's a sure bet he won't have to pay out on that one! :(

Mamie

05-05-2008, 10:39 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda
OK, I was just checking in to see if anything new was going on that I heaven't heard about, and now I gotta go to the other thread and see which posters you're referring to - someone is actually sticking up for Drew???? Wow....

JMO [/*]

Too cute, for sure!! :lol: :lol:

steffaroob4

05-05-2008, 11:36 PM

Stacy Peterson's Memory Garden (http://thewaroncrime.blogspot.com/search/label/Stacy%20Peterson%20Vanished)
Did you all see this?

newbiee

05-06-2008, 07:54 AM

Morning all!:seeya:

Thanks for the link Steff!

I can't imagine what those kids feel when they see that garden of their mother. It's so sad!:rose:

Anakerie

05-06-2008, 09:58 AM

Originally posted by steffaroob4
Stacy Peterson's Memory Garden (http://thewaroncrime.blogspot.com/search/label/Stacy%20Peterson%20Vanished)
Did you all see this? [/*]

Thanks for the link, Steff... The "garden" has grown quite a bit since I first saw pictures of it! Beautiful!

Anakerie

05-06-2008, 10:01 AM

:D
Drew pulled over for speeding on way to help 'friend'
http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/933445,CST-NWS-boling06.article
Drew Peterson was in such a hurry to pick up a 22-year-old female friend who needed a ride over the weekend that he got stopped for speeding by Naperville Police

lol, He didn't get a ticket, just a warning. He was doing less than 10 mph over the speed limit. But still.... 22 year old FEMALE "friend"? uhm....

newbiee

05-06-2008, 10:21 AM

Jpanda

05-06-2008, 10:41 AM

Jpanda

05-06-2008, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by newbiee

"That's just the type of guy he is," said attorney Joel Brodsky.
Give me a break!barf [/*]

Yep, that IS just the type of guy he is....a creepy old man preying on a 22 year old. JMO

aubrey04

05-06-2008, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Yep, that IS just the type of guy he is....a creepy old man preying on a 22 year old. JMO [/*]

Good point. I always wonder what is going through the minds of people who hook up with these psychos, (much like I wonder about Phil Spector/Rachelle Spector).

Are they not afraid for their life? Unbelievable.

Anakerie

05-06-2008, 11:07 AM

Originally posted by newbiee

"That's just the type of guy he is," said attorney Joel Brodsky.
Give me a break!barf [/*]

lol, I'll bet he wouldn't have been in such a hurry if it had been a 22 year old GUY.

pcaves

05-06-2008, 11:07 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Yep, that IS just the type of guy he is....a creepy old man preying on a 22 year old. JMO [/*]

at 2:30 a.m. ... left the kids at home ... CPS, where are you?!

kimmy56

05-06-2008, 11:12 AM

not.another

05-06-2008, 11:40 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Yep, that IS just the type of guy he is....a creepy old man preying on a 22 year old. JMO [/*]
He seems to like them young. Maybe someone should hook him up with the FLDS. (he seems to think he's a prophet anyway) JMO

:lol:

newbiee

05-06-2008, 11:48 AM

Originally posted by lilCanuck

I must have missed that - could you please give me the url for the site? Much appreciated!!:) [/*]

Here you go... it's a very interesting site. Read some of the things she predicted for the Lacy Peterson case and how she predicted where Lacy would be found.

If I were the search people, I'd invest some time on what she says.
http://www.heliumraven.com/casefile

:read:

newbiee

05-06-2008, 11:49 AM

Originally posted by kimmy56

Yes, the Naperville Police will stop anybody for almost nothing (much to my son's chagrin many a night) but this time, I'm glad they did! heehee [/*]

Would you be willing to visit some of your local tanning salons and see how many 22 year olds are working there?
:D

Jpanda

05-06-2008, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by kimmy56

Yes, the Naperville Police will stop anybody for almost nothing (much to my son's chagrin many a night) but this time, I'm glad they did! heehee [/*]

Sorry for the O/T but this made me laugh out loud - ITA! My very first speeding ticket years ago was in Naperville. But why would they give little ol ME a ticket and not Drew?? :D

Jpanda

05-06-2008, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by aubrey04

Good point. I always wonder what is going through the minds of people who hook up with these psychos, (much like I wonder about Phil Spector/Rachelle Spector).

Are they not afraid for their life? Unbelievable. [/*]

I often wonder about this too. Do these ladies have no self esteem? Who thinks to themselves, "Hmm....so wife number 3 died of a mysterious homicide, and wife number 4 mysteriously disappeared, and he is the main suspect, huh? Sign me up! I wanna date him!" :rolleyes:

JMO

aubrey04

05-06-2008, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Ugh, I read that in the Sun-Times this morning on my way to work and almost vomited all my coffee out. Who ARE these women who flock to murder suspects?? Disgusting.

JMO [/*]

My favorite part of that little news item --

"I was just being a good samaritan," he said, declining to identify the woman, but insisting she wasn't a girlfriend. "Let's call her a friend," said Peterson

Awww Drew was just being a kind, good samaritan! (give me a break)

Anakerie

05-06-2008, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by aubrey04

Respectfully snipped....

Awww Drew was just being a kind, good samaritan! (give me a break) [/*]

I'm thinking this is another lame idea from his PR guy and he and Brodsky are going to run with it.... :rolleyes:

Anakerie

05-06-2008, 01:34 PM

Another article:

Peterson Caught Speeding
http://www.wbbm780.com/Peterson-Caught-Speeding/2136140

NAPERVILLE, Ill. (AP) -- Drew Peterson says he was on his way to help a 22-year-old woman he knows when he was pulled over for speeding in Chicago's western suburbs.

Hmm... "Peterson SAYS"? This whole thing comes from something that DREW told that reporter friend of his? Can we say "PUBLICITY STUNT"?

Geez... I wish the Grand Jury would HURRY up!!!

ETA: I am sorry to have linked the original story... I am so sure that it's a bogus "rescue" that was created in Drew's head and given the go ahead by the so-called PR guy he and Brodsky hired.

newbiee

05-06-2008, 01:44 PM

Seems odd also that DP had to include the age of the girl. Why not just say he was helping a friend? Not giving either male or female?

Reeks of publicity stunt!barf

Jpanda

05-06-2008, 01:45 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

I'm thinking this is another lame idea from his PR guy and he and Brodsky are going to run with it.... :rolleyes: [/*]

ITA. You know, I can think of better "good samaritan" things DP can be doing with his time...like, maybe looking for his WIFE??? Since he really believes that she ran off on him and all. :rolleyes:

JMO

Jpanda

05-06-2008, 01:47 PM

Originally posted by newbiee
Seems odd also that DP had to include the age of the girl. Why not just say he was helping a friend? Not giving either male or female?

Reeks of publicity stunt!barf [/*]

Good point!! Why WOULD he give such specific details? He probably enjoys everyone's reaction....sick, IMO.

I feel dirty for even READING that nonsense story! barf

Mzeez

05-06-2008, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by newbiee

Makes you wander how the media found out about this ticket in the first place. Another publicity stunt? [/*]

For what it's worth, I don't think his hired publicist would advocate his leaving the children alone at 2:30 in the morning to pick up a female who needed a ride. If I were the publicist I'd think the public would NOT think this would have been a good thing and would anger most people. JMO

Guessing how the info got released, I'd say the policeman who did the arresting of the driver talked when he/she got back to the station and it spread that way. IMHO

Anakerie

05-06-2008, 02:13 PM

By the way, rumor has it that Nancy Grace will have a piece tonight about Stacy's garden in Sharon's front yard. (If the story doesn't get "bumped, that is.)
:rose:

Anakerie

05-06-2008, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by Mzeez

For what it's worth, I don't think his hired publicist would advocate his leaving the children alone at 2:30 in the morning to pick up a female who needed a ride. If I were the publicist I'd think the public would NOT think this would have been a good thing and would anger most people. JMO

Guessing how the info got released, I'd say the policeman who did the arresting of the driver talked when he/she got back to the station and it spread that way. IMHO [/*]

The story came from Drew.... Not the cop, not the "damsel in distress" nor anyone else but Drew. All the articles say "Drew says"...
:rolleyes:

Mzeez

05-06-2008, 02:32 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

The story came from Drew.... Not the cop, not the "damsel in distress" nor anyone else but Drew. All the articles say "Drew says"...
:rolleyes: [/*]

I totally missed that. Thanks. Looks like he'll stop at nothing to get his name in the news.

newbiee

05-06-2008, 04:07 PM

north-eh

05-06-2008, 05:18 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

The story came from Drew.... Not the cop, not the "damsel in distress" nor anyone else but Drew. All the articles say "Drew says"...
:rolleyes: [/*]

ITA it came from Drew. Even Brodsky added his two cents worth as well. It's always about those two, always! This was so NOT newsworthy! :mad:

N

Land Shark®

05-06-2008, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965
It's "noteworthy" enough to have a thread devoted to it. :D

mho

Really? Where is the thread you speak of?

This thread is titled May 5th until.........

:shrug:

AmndaRcknwth

05-06-2008, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie
By the way, rumor has it that Nancy Grace will have a piece tonight about Stacy's garden in Sharon's front yard. (If the story doesn't get "bumped, that is.)
:rose: [/*]

Why does Sharons garden need to be on Nancy Grace? Have we not seen enough of Sharon?

BTW, does the Friends of Stacy Peterson fund have tax-exempt status yet? They claim to, yet neither IL nor IRS has them listed.

The number to check for the Tax-Exempt organizations is 877 829-5500. Call for yourself.

They are not listed here:
http://www.guidestar.org/

And while on a related subject, there were no searches last weekend, or the weekend before that, nor will there be one this weekend. Why not? Because they have yet another fundraiser to fund non-existent searches.

Foliage is in. Aerial searches? What aerial searches? Now it's too late.

Oh, but do give your Mom's Mothers Day gift to them instead!

Yes, they did say that.

AmndaRcknwth

05-06-2008, 06:56 PM

Originally posted by steffaroob4
Stacy Peterson's Memory Garden (http://thewaroncrime.blogspot.com/search/label/Stacy%20Peterson%20Vanished)
Did you all see this? [/*]

That would be a real nice tribute if it were a tribute to Stacy and not a Sharonshrine.

Why is it not at Cassandra's? At Anthomy Cales'? In a public park?

Why does it have to be there at MsTV's home?

ellvarn

05-06-2008, 08:58 PM

WOW I have been away from the DP threads and when I just checked I saw that Coldwater has issued a warning that anyone calling DP by Drewpy, etc. will be banned. And then I was just taking a minute to catch up on the posts and all I read is anger. What has happened or what have I missed to read such anger being spewed. No answer is really needed, but I have so much respect for all posters on this entire board, and I am a little let down. Please be nice so some of us can actually catch up on the latest, and be proud of what we read. I use "we", but this all MOO and how I feel.
:rose: For Stacy and her loved ones.

aubrey04

05-06-2008, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by ellvarn
WOW I have been away from the DP threads and when I just checked I saw that Coldwater has issued a warning that anyone calling DP by XXXXX, etc. will be banned. [/*]

Yikes, thanks for posting that. I noticed that one of my posts disappeared into thin air but couldn't figure out why. I didn't even notice Coldwater's warning until I saw your post, then backed out of this thread and found it.

I had no idea there was a ban on that nickname; otherwise, I wouldn't have used it. I don't post on Drew's board often, so I am clueless.

hammer

foofoo3

05-06-2008, 10:16 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth

That would be a real nice tribute if it were a tribute to Stacy and not a Sharonshrine.

Why is it not at Cassandra's? At Anthomy Cales'? In a public park?

Why does it have to be there at MsTV's home? [/*]

Are you serious? Why does it matter where it is? It is her right to have it if she wants too. Why would anyone have a problem with this? :confused:

Anakerie

05-06-2008, 10:19 PM

Originally posted by ellvarn
WOW I have been away from the DP threads and when I just checked I saw that Coldwater has issued a warning that anyone calling DP by Drewpy, etc. will be banned. And then I was just taking a minute to catch up on the posts and all I read is anger. What has happened or what have I missed to read such anger being spewed. No answer is really needed, but I have so much respect for all posters on this entire board, and I am a little let down. Please be nice so some of us can actually catch up on the latest, and be proud of what we read. I use "we", but this all MOO and how I feel.
:rose: For Stacy and her loved ones. [/*]

Unfortunately there has been some anger in the posts recently. I've tried very hard to scroll past the posts that are placed in this board to inflame others and I wish others would do so as well. I suppose reading this morning's little "news" tidbit that Drew and Brodsky managed to get in the papers sort of irked me a bit, but.. When you think of it, Drew's media attention does keep Stacy's name out there.

The more the missing people's names are in the news, the longer people will look for them. Look how the Lisa Stebic case has gone. How often does her name or her husband's name hit the headlines? It's hard to think of the families of these missing people and what they're going through. Stacy's and Lisa's included.

KINSEY

05-06-2008, 11:24 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

I often wonder about this too. Do these ladies have no self esteem? Who thinks to themselves, "Hmm....so wife number 3 died of a mysterious homicide, and wife number 4 mysteriously disappeared, and he is the main suspect, huh? Sign me up! I wanna date him!" :rolleyes:

JMO [/*]

He seems to pick vulnerable women, who are blinded by his $$$$$$$$$$! That is all I can see that they would see in him!

KINSEY

05-06-2008, 11:34 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth

Why does Sharons garden need to be on Nancy Grace? Have we not seen enough of Sharon?

BTW, does the Friends of Stacy Peterson fund have tax-exempt status yet? They claim to, yet neither IL nor IRS has them listed.

The number to check for the Tax-Exempt organizations is 877 829-5500. Call for yourself.

They are not listed here:
http://www.guidestar.org/

And while on a related subject, there were no searches last weekend, or the weekend before that, nor will there be one this weekend. Why not? Because they have yet another fundraiser to fund non-existent searches.

Foliage is in. Aerial searches? What aerial searches? Now it's too late.

Oh, but do give your Mom's Mothers Day gift to them instead!

Yes, they did say that. [/*]

I really don't think this forum's purpose is to bash people involved with Stacy's case.

If this is what has been going on here, I'm glad I haven't had time to read or post.

This is just spewing venom and I'm surprised Stacy's forum here hasn't been shut down by now!

aubrey04

05-07-2008, 12:36 AM

Originally posted by Anakerie

Unfortunately there has been some anger in the posts recently. I've tried very hard to scroll past the posts that are placed in this board to inflame others and I wish others would do so as well. I suppose reading this morning's little "news" tidbit that Drew and Brodsky managed to get in the papers sort of irked me a bit, but.. When you think of it, Drew's media attention does keep Stacy's name out there.

The more the missing people's names are in the news, the longer people will look for them. Look how the Lisa Stebic case has gone. How often does her name or her husband's name hit the headlines? It's hard to think of the families of these missing people and what they're going through. Stacy's and Lisa's included. [/*]

You've got a valid point there. Both DP and Brodsky's antics just keep the limelight on the case.. All the publicity milking and charades will only showcase Stacy's disappearance more and keep the media, police and public on this case.

So, I guess they can carry on with dog and pony show - it will come to an end eventually - when Stacy's body is discovered or they have enough evidence w/o the body.

juliekan

05-07-2008, 02:16 AM

Originally posted by aubrey04

You've got a valid point there. Both DP and Brodsky's antics just keep the limelight on the case.. All the publicity milking and charades will only showcase Stacy's disappearance more and keep the media, police and public on this case.

So, I guess they can carry on with dog and pony show - it will come to an end eventually - when Stacy's body is discovered or they have enough evidence w/o the body. [/*]

I think LE will eventually get him. There was a case in Houston about 11 years ago where 2 young girls were murdered one afternoon. There was a neighbor who stepped forward to say he saw a black man jump his fence that afternoon, running away. Well, LE kept him in sight, with no evidence to back them up. I had a neighbor that was a Lt. in HPD at the time that said they thought the neighbor did it , and had guys keeping tabs on him. Well sure enough, about 2 1/2 years later the perp admits to his "friends" (2 undercover cops asssigned to be his friends)
that he did it. Case closed.....

Patience

juliekan

05-07-2008, 03:33 AM

And can someone ...aaah ....delicately let me know what the note from Coldwater about calling someone D,,,,,,,,,,,,, means? It was the third notice, but I'm an infrequent poster on this thread. Thanks, lets just not get in trouble.

johnielee333

05-07-2008, 05:44 AM

johnielee333

05-07-2008, 05:45 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Yep, that IS just the type of guy he is....a creepy old man preying on a 22 year old. JMO [/*]

yep

AmndaRcknwth

05-07-2008, 08:22 AM

Bashing?
No.

My post about the location of Sharons shrine is the truth. This is a woman who is trying to make the case about herself.

There are NO searches going on.

There ARE fundraisers going on, despite the fact that there are no searches.

I have the right to say this. I was a searcher.

We now have full foliage. What happened to the "we need $500/day for the fuel, planes, boats".

Now you cannot see the ground from the air, no evidence is visible if the burial site is in a wooded/forested area (which it makes sense that it would be).

Lisa Stebic's family is all about dignity.
Did any of you attend the walk 4/27? I did. It was solemn, dignified, prayerful, respectful.

Yet, Sharon hurried to a camera EVERY time she saw one. Talked throughout the speakers, even the prayers.

Oh, but DO attend their FUN-raiser!

The last one featured Drewbuster bats and a pinata with his face.
Real dignified, that.

Let me end by saying I cannot stand Drew, hope he rots, believe he did it. But her so-called "friends" are also the ones destroying the dignity of her memory.

Let's party on! Send your mothers day gift to Sharonshrine.

Yes, they did suggest THAT.

Jpanda

05-07-2008, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by gerald1
If they follow Houston's lead they very well could get Drew convicted. Problem with that is Houston PD has one of the worst crime labs in the country. Given time maybe the new DA will change things since the former DA(Rosenthal) resigned in disgrace. Whats the # of wrongfully convicted released prisoners up to. In the 100's I think. I understand Dallas has the same problem. At one time in recent memory the state of Ill. gov. declared a moratorium on executions. Seems their were too many wrongfully convicted cases turning up. No wonder Drew says he is ready. The sooner he is convicted the sooner he can get out on appeal.:cool: [/*]

Nah, I think the ISP is taking their time and making sure they have a concrete case before even attempting to prosecute him. JMO :cool:

KINSEY

05-07-2008, 11:43 AM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth
Bashing?
No.

My post about the location of Sharons shrine is the truth. This is a woman who is trying to make the case about herself.

There are NO searches going on.

There ARE fundraisers going on, despite the fact that there are no searches.

I have the right to say this. I was a searcher.

We now have full foliage. What happened to the "we need $500/day for the fuel, planes, boats".

Now you cannot see the ground from the air, no evidence is visible if the burial site is in a wooded/forested area (which it makes sense that it would be).

Lisa Stebic's family is all about dignity.
Did any of you attend the walk 4/27? I did. It was solemn, dignified, prayerful, respectful.

Yet, Sharon hurried to a camera EVERY time she saw one. Talked throughout the speakers, even the prayers.

Oh, but DO attend their FUN-raiser!

The last one featured Drewbuster bats and a pinata with his face.
Real dignified, that.

Let me end by saying I cannot stand Drew, hope he rots, believe he did it. But her so-called "friends" are also the ones destroying the dignity of her memory.

Let's party on! Send your mothers day gift to Sharonshrine.

Yes, they did suggest THAT. [/*]

Oh, but there ARE searches going on, you just don't know about them!

newbiee

05-07-2008, 11:50 AM

Hi all, I see nothing has broke since i signed off yesterday. :(

I sure wish something would happen to break this case.

not.another

05-07-2008, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth
Bashing?
No.

My post about the location of Sharons shrine is the truth. This is a woman who is trying to make the case about herself.

There are NO searches going on.

There ARE fundraisers going on, despite the fact that there are no searches.

I have the right to say this. I was a searcher.

We now have full foliage. What happened to the "we need $500/day for the fuel, planes, boats".

Now you cannot see the ground from the air, no evidence is visible if the burial site is in a wooded/forested area (which it makes sense that it would be).

Lisa Stebic's family is all about dignity.
Did any of you attend the walk 4/27? I did. It was solemn, dignified, prayerful, respectful.

Yet, Sharon hurried to a camera EVERY time she saw one. Talked throughout the speakers, even the prayers.

Oh, but DO attend their FUN-raiser!

The last one featured Drewbuster bats and a pinata with his face.
Real dignified, that.

Let me end by saying I cannot stand Drew, hope he rots, believe he did it. But her so-called "friends" are also the ones destroying the dignity of her memory.

Let's party on! Send your mothers day gift to Sharonshrine.

Yes, they did suggest THAT. [/*]

There are still searches going on per Stacy's website.

http://www.findstacypeterson.com/searches.php

My guess is it's best left to the professionals rather than volunteers.

steffaroob4

05-07-2008, 12:47 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

Thanks for the link, Steff... The "garden" has grown quite a bit since I first saw pictures of it! Beautiful! [/*]

I just cried so hard when I saw it. I knew about it when they started it with one batch of flowers, it has grown. It says a lot about Stacy.

steffaroob4

05-07-2008, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by AnnieBean

I never called him anything but Drew or DP...I knew the day would come when calling him anything else would get folks in trouble. The same thing happened on the Phil Spector thread, there were names amonga that people thought up for him, but technically I think its against TOS because there was warning, then bannings on that forum. So its not a good idea to make up names for the criminals we love to hate on this board. The moral of the story: stick to names or initials and keep the name calling in PM's if you must. I am trying to keep my nic. Sometiomes its hard! [/*]

Hi, Anniebean, how have you been doing?
I agree with you, we must keep it clean here, respect that we have a place to post and not start stupid fights, we are all adults.

Land Shark®

05-07-2008, 01:24 PM

Drew is definitely a criminal. One of the worst kind. He hid behind a badge for years. But no more.

Drew will end up dying in prison. IMO.

aubrey04

05-07-2008, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
Since you seem concerned may I also suggest you not call them criminals before they have been convicted of anything. IMO it tends to show a bias and possible lack of appreciation for due process which is a right we all enjoy. Thank you.:cool: [/*]

She never called him a "convicted criminal", she referred to him as a "criminal". We are not a court of law on here or a jury; therefore, we do not have to adhere to the "innocent until proven guilty" rule. O.J. Simpson was found "not guilty" by a jury of 12, but that does not rewrite history or change the fact that he is a double murderer; therefore, a criminal. (IMO)

We are all just stating our opinions.

I happen to believe Drew Peterson IS a double murderer, too ... and therefore, a criminal.

:seeya:

Jpanda

05-07-2008, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965
You'd think Sharon would wait until a body is found, and cold before she enshrines it. :rolleyes:

There is no proof Stacy is dead.

mho [/*]

Dead or not, she's missing. I think a shrine is a nice and thoughtful thing to do. IMO

Land Shark®

05-07-2008, 01:41 PM

I look forward to calling Drew a convicted criminal. Convicted double murderer.... even moreso.

But I'll settle for convicted murderer.

I definitely see that happening.

Most definitely.

aubrey04

05-07-2008, 02:19 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
Lets take this one step at a time. Are you stating that I stated she stated he is a "convicted criminal". I can't find anywhere in my post the phrase "convicted criminal". Can you? So before I address the rest of your post can we agree that I did not post that phrase. Yes or no.:cool: [/*]

No, sir, you did not. The point is - you do not have to be convicted of a crime to be a criminal. Isn't the definition of a criminal someone who commits a crime?

American Heritage Dictionary -
adj.

1. Of, involving, or having the nature of crime: criminal abuse.
2. Relating to the administration of penal law.
3.A. Guilty of crime.
3.*. Characteristic of a criminal.
4. Shameful; disgraceful: a criminal waste of talent.

n. One that has committed or been legally convicted of a crime.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/criminal

Had the poster called him a CONVICTED criminal, it would be an untrue statement, as it is NOT an opinion - it is either a fact or an untruth.

There are many criminals roaming around the street that don't get caught for their crimes, yet are still criminals.

I was trying to respectfully disagree with your post.

:patriot:

sunmoonsky4u

05-07-2008, 02:24 PM

covering up for murder is also criminal. but I doubt those calling drew a criminal would call Stacy a criminal.
such bias!!:no:

aubrey04

05-07-2008, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

Sharon's got a pretty good "dog and pony" show going with that garden.

mho [/*]

She is keeping the story of Stacy being missing alive. That is all that matters to me. I have seen a lot of people slam her on this site and other sites. She is taking a lot of heat for her aggressiveness regarding Stacy's disappearance.

It doesn't look like she is backing down or recoiling just because some people don't care for her.

The fact is - she is one of the people that keep the search going for Stacy. And if Drew is truly innocent, he should be grateful - shouldn't he? If Stacy were found alive, then everyone would get off his back about her, right?
Not that I believe she is still live or innocent, but for the sake of argument - I would think that DP would appreciate the efforts she has made.

JMO

:seeya:

steffaroob4

05-07-2008, 02:38 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie
:D
Drew pulled over for speeding on way to help 'friend'
http://www.suntimes.com/news/peterson/933445,CST-NWS-boling06.article
Drew Peterson was in such a hurry to pick up a 22-year-old female friend who needed a ride over the weekend that he got stopped for speeding by Naperville Police

lol, He didn't get a ticket, just a warning. He was doing less than 10 mph over the speed limit. But still.... 22 year old FEMALE "friend"? uhm.... [/*]

I hear that the gal he picked up when he was speeding the other nite. has her own private forum, so let's all keep in mind that these private forums are used to try to get nice places like this forum we have shut down. Please don't take the bait on these threads, there will always be people that are happy when we get our threads shut down and our loyal users banned. If you do NOT engage these people, they will get tired and leave, please, just ignore them. I like our forum and don't want it to close.

Has any heard if the boys will go to the GJ?

not.another

05-07-2008, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u
covering up for murder is also criminal. but I doubt those calling drew a criminal would call Stacy a criminal.
such bias!!:no: [/*])

How did Stacy cover up a murder? Do you mean KS's? I do believe Stacy knew about Kathleen's demise but only because Drew told her in confidence. If Stacy had been a "witness" to the death/murder I think the police would have been called immediately (or she would have high-tailed it out of there asap).
JMO

Jpanda

05-07-2008, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by steffaroob4

I hear that the gal he picked up when he was speeding the other nite. has her own private forum, so let's all keep in mind that these private forums are used to try to get nice places like this forum we have shut down. Please don't take the bait on these threads, there will always be people that are happy when we get our threads shut down and our loyal users banned. If you do NOT engage these people, they will get tired and leave, please, just ignore them. I like our forum and don't want it to close.

Has any heard if the boys will go to the GJ? [/*]

Very well said. I love scrolling past nonsensical posts.

:beer:

I thought the boys already went to the GJ, but I could be wrong. I'll look around.

newbiee

05-07-2008, 02:53 PM

sunmoonsky4u

05-07-2008, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by not.another
)

How did Stacy cover up a murder? Do you mean KS's? I do believe Stacy knew about Kathleen's demise but only because Drew told her in confidence. If Stacy had been a "witness" to the death/murder I think the police would have been called immediately (or she would have high-tailed it out of there asap).
JMO [/*]

yes KS and I suggest your read the pastor's full transcript and you will find that what you believe is incorrect.
Stacys own words to the pastor, IF TRUE, show Stacy knew within hours of kathleen's death that drew killed her and then stacy gave an alibi for drew to the police.

but back to my question why only call one a criminal when it appears they were partners in crime.

bias
:no:

now to address the general assembly, it's getting very tiresome to hear over and over many on this board continue to accuse anyone that doesn't hold their views of being either drew, brodsky, wife#5 and on and on.
I don't know how you can live in such a bubble and think that all opposing views are that of ONLY JB and Drew.
You go on and on about the trouble makers on this forum and personally you are causing most of the trouble by trying to shut down any view that doesn't conform to yours.
I was not aware that this board is only for those that have the same views and all others are outsiders and not welcomed. But I am highly aware of that now.

Jpanda

05-07-2008, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u
yes KS and I suggest your read the pastor's full transcript and you will find that what you believe is incorrect.
Stacys own words to the pastor, IF TRUE, show Stacy knew within hours of kathleen's death that drew killed her and then stacy gave an alibi for drew to the police.

but back to my question why only call one a criminal when it appears they were partners in crime.

RESPECTFULLY SNIPPED

Whether she was a "criminal" or not, she's still missing. My feelings are that regardless of what Stacy did in her life, she did not deserve to end up MISSING. I, for one, do not believe that Stacy was a saint at all, and I definitely don't agree with some things she MAY have done. However, she is still missing and she needs to be found. If she was, in fact, murdered, then her killer (in my opinion, Drew Peterson) needs to be taken off the streets so he/she does not kill again, or harm other members of society.

I respect any and all views that may be different, but I'm just stating mine. :patriot:

JMO

not.another

05-07-2008, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u

yes KS and I suggest your read the pastor's full transcript and you will find that what you believe is incorrect.
Stacys own words to the pastor, IF TRUE, show Stacy knew within hours of kathleen's death that drew killed her and then stacy gave an alibi for drew to the police.

but back to my question why only call one a criminal when it appears they were partners in crime.

bias
:no:

now to address the general assembly, it's getting very tiresome to hear over and over many on this board continue to accuse anyone that doesn't hold their views of being either drew, brodsky, wife#5 and on and on.
I don't know how you can live in such a bubble and think that all opposing views are that of ONLY JB and Drew.
You go on and on about the trouble makers on this forum and personally you are causing most of the trouble by trying to shut down any view that doesn't conform to yours.
I was not aware that this board is only for those that have the same views and all others are outsiders and not welcomed. But I am highly aware of that now. [/*]

Wow, Sunmoon...I will have to read the pastor's transcripts then. I had no idea that she might have covered for him! I will check it out now. (I hope I didn't irritate you, that was not my intention)

sunmoonsky4u

05-07-2008, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by not.another

Wow, Sunmoon...I will have to read the pastor's transcripts then. I had no idea that she might have covered for him! I will check it out now. (I hope I didn't irritate you, that was not my intention) [/*]

no you did not irriate me at all you were very respectful in your question and also this answer and it's understandable that many don't realize this is what stacy told the pastor.

my general assembly rant was not directed at you. As you have not called me drew, brodsky, drews #5, girl at tanning salon and on and on or at anyone else that does not act that way. Those that do know who they are!

sunmoonsky4u

05-07-2008, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Whether she was a "criminal" or not, she's still missing. My feelings are that regardless of what Stacy did in her life, she did not deserve to end up MISSING. I, for one, do not believe that Stacy was a saint at all, and I definitely don't agree with some things she MAY have done. However, she is still missing and she needs to be found. If she was, in fact, murdered, then her killer (in my opinion, Drew Peterson) needs to be taken off the streets so he/she does not kill again, or harm other members of society.

I respect any and all views that may be different, but I'm just stating mine. :patriot:

JMO [/*]

Yes I realize she is missing and I totally agree that she needs to be found whether that will be alive or not time will tell. We don't have enough FACTS to assume anything.
That being said my initial comment has nothing to do with the tragedy of her missing.
I'm simply saying if other insists on calling drew a criminal before he's tried and convicted then that puts Stacy in the same catagory. But yet those calling drew a criminal, even though he has NO criminal past or record, would not look objectively at stacy or anyone else that might have been involved in criminal acts, ie the death of Kathleen because IMO they are biased towards any FACTS that my put stacy in a bad light.

AmndaRcknwth

05-07-2008, 04:32 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Dead or not, she's missing. I think a shrine is a nice and thoughtful thing to do. IMO [/*]

It is in the wrong spot.

Yeah, it's a real nice shrine.

*IF* it was at Cassandras brighteneing her spirits, or Dad's house.

At MzI am the TV's home it is a pee on Stacy P shrine. And pee on her kids shrine too. All in the name of messing with Drew, they have created a circus of enormous proportions.

Don't forget your mama would love her gift to go to Sharon!

AmndaRcknwth

05-07-2008, 04:34 PM

Originally posted by aubrey04

She is keeping the story of Stacy being missing alive. That is all that matters to me. I have seen a lot of people slam her on this site and other sites. She is taking a lot of heat for her aggressiveness regarding Stacy's disappearance.

It doesn't look like she is backing down or recoiling just because some people don't care for her.

The fact is - she is one of the people that keep the search going for Stacy. And if Drew is truly innocent, he should be grateful - shouldn't he? If Stacy were found alive, then everyone would get off his back about her, right?
Not that I believe she is still live or innocent, but for the sake of argument - I would think that DP would appreciate the efforts she has made.

JMO

:seeya: [/*]

There is no search. There is fun-raising.

Call and ask.

Also has anyone else called the IRS number I linked?
877 829-5500

Scam, folks. Scam.

not.another

05-07-2008, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

For the sake of argument, IF ITS TRUE that Stacy knew within hours Drew killed Kathleen, this would be a reason why she may have chose to disappear: She would face criminal charges for helping a "killer" by giving him an alibi:

Kathleen didn't deserve to die, either, but IF TRUE Stacy helped cover a murder with an false alibi, and went on to have children with the "killer."

mho [/*]

Maybe she disappeared because she didn't want to die like KS? If she did find him doing laundry in the early morning hours wouldn't her first question be...Where were you? Thus, leading into him telling her that the police would probably be asking questions and to be his alibi?

I don't know! Stacy was/is so young. She ventured into this marriage with a blind eye and did not get out soon enough. There are conflicting stories about who was following who around. Drew stated that Stacy used to follow him everywhere (when they were dating). Then a story from Stacy's side saying he would stop by and see her all the time where she worked. So, who are we supposed to believe. I tend to believe that drew was controlling enough to monitor her every move. So, I just can't get past that he doesn't know where she is. When he was having her followed, calling her cell phone umpteen times a day. Something about these controlling people....

:rose: For the kids.

AmndaRcknwth

05-07-2008, 04:39 PM

Jpanda

05-07-2008, 04:40 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

For the sake of argument, IF ITS TRUE that Stacy knew within hours Drew killed Kathleen, this would be a reason why she may have chose to disappear: She would face criminal charges for helping a "killer" by giving him an alibi:

Kathleen didn't deserve to die, either, but IF TRUE Stacy helped cover a murder with an false alibi, and went on to have children with the "killer."

mho [/*]

That's a good point. However, my problem with this is that I honestly don't think she just ran off, never to be seen or heard from again. I would think that someone, somewhere, would have spotted her or she would have turned up somehow....no bank account activity, social security activity, cell phone activity, etc. I think she would have slipped up by now. I also don't think the Tom Morphey thing was just a coincidence.

Also, if she did run off for that reason, why would Drew then lie and say she called and told him she was running off with another guy?

Curious to hear your thoughts - I'm open-minded, but I still think Drew killed her. IMO.

not.another

05-07-2008, 04:45 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

That's a good point. However, my problem with this is that I honestly don't think she just ran off, never to be seen or heard from again. I would think that someone, somewhere, would have spotted her or she would have turned up somehow....no bank account activity, social security activity, cell phone activity, etc. I think she would have slipped up by now. I also don't think the Tom Morphey thing was just a coincidence.

Also, if she did run off for that reason, why would Drew then lie and say she called and told him she was running off with another guy?

Curious to hear your thoughts - I'm open-minded, but I still think Drew killed her. IMO. [/*]

I agree with you. There are just too many cards stacked against him. Circumstancial cards, i might add.

sunmoonsky4u

05-07-2008, 05:03 PM

the confusion is due to your own determination that I and others are Drew supporters.

I don't support drew nor do I think the others out here do and your assumption of that is what is confusing you.

Jpanda

05-07-2008, 05:10 PM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u
the confusion is due to your own determination that I and others are Drew supporters.

I don't support drew nor do I think the others out here do and your assumption of that is what is confusing you. [/*]

I THINK....(and correct me if I'm wrong about this, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from) that you want people to admit that Stacy was not a saint...correct? And that's fine, I will admit that IMO she may have done some awful things in her life.

But that doesn't change the fact the Stacy is still missing (regardless of what she may have done) and that all evidence points to Drew having killed her IMO, and that Drew has been named an official suspect in her disappearance....

If we all agree on the above, I don't understand what the snippy posts are all about......right?

Kathleen = deceased via homicide
Stacy = missing
Drew = official suspect

JMO

unclezeek

05-07-2008, 05:11 PM

ellvarn

05-07-2008, 05:31 PM

Originally posted by ellvarn
WOW I have been away from the DP threads and when I just checked I saw that Coldwater has issued a warning that anyone calling DP by Drewpy, etc. will be banned. And then I was just taking a minute to catch up on the posts and all I read is anger. What has happened or what have I missed to read such anger being spewed. No answer is really needed, but I have so much respect for all posters on this entire board, and I am a little let down. Please be nice so some of us can actually catch up on the latest, and be proud of what we read. I use "we", but this all MOO and how I feel.
:rose: For Stacy and her loved ones. [/*]
I just came back to boards since I posted this last night and the reason I did this was not to stop people from giving their opinions. That is what makes the boards good is a debate and IMO posts. I just knew that Coldwater must have been a little angered since it was her 3rd warning. And Anniebean I agree about keeping our original nic's. I wanted everyone to know that there was a warning from CW. I never meant to offend anyone, just hoping to change the attitude. Also DP is keeping Stacy in the news and that's what counts because IMO she will never be found alive so the media is needed to help find her remains or evidence against DP. MOO!!!!
For Stacy and her loved ones-:rose:

aubrey04

05-07-2008, 05:58 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth

There is no search. There is fun-raising.

Call and ask.

Also has anyone else called the IRS number I linked?
877 829-5500

Scam, folks. Scam. [/*]

I am just curious, What do you think the money that is being brought in -- is being used for? You don't think it is to fund the search, whether it is by P.I.'s, private searches, etc?

And why is it important that it is not linked to a tax exemption status?

My mothers neighbor's child has cystic fibrosis and did a walk-a-thon, and I pledged money to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. They sent me an email stating that it could not be used as tax deductible since the way the money was collected.

I am not trying to be condescending or sarcastic,.. I truly would like to hear your opinion. I've seen this brought up previously.

Anakerie

05-07-2008, 06:14 PM

I just wanted to chime in here about the fund raisers and the searches. I've read in a couple places (I can't find the links again, sorry.) a while back that even when there aren't VOLUNTEER searches going on, there are still searchers out. Apparently some of the areas being searched aren't exactly the kind of places that volunteers can walk through. For instance, the boat searches. Not everyone can do those. You need qualified people on those boats. (divers, etc. and fuel for those boats cost money, right?) Anyway, the fund raising is going towards the difficult searches as well as getting put towards the VOLUNTEER searches.

As for the "non-profit" status. Why the big deal? If the money puts fuel in the boats, provides materials for the volunteer searches, what's the big problem? Perhaps it's the name they're calling this fund raiser? "Fun-Raiser"? Also, not a big deal to me. If they're providing "fun" at the event to raise money for searches, why not call it a "Fun Raiser"?

unclezeek

05-07-2008, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

Right. They didn't start looking into KS's death until after Stacy went missing, but that is not to say Stacy didn't get scared she would be found out. Maybe Stacy killed Kathleen, and Drew knew. Maybe he threatened to expose her. Or he might not have known until much later. Maybe Stacy slipped and told him that she killed Kathleen and he wanted her to turn herself in..and so she started to cover her tracks...and cast suspicion on Drew.

Or maybe Stacy just took off with another man, and after Kathleen's death was ruled a homicide, she is afraid to come home unless she gets immunity.

All I know for a fact is that nobody has put Drew on the scene at Kathleen's death and nobody had proven Stacy is dead. All else is theory and speculation.

mho [/*]Nice try, but there is no way Stacy could have killed Kathleen in the manner her death occured.

unclezeek

05-07-2008, 06:49 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

"Nice try?" Look I am giving my opinion, and theory. I am not "trying" to do anything other than opine and theorize.

Yes, she could have killed Kathleen in the manner the death occurred.

mho [/*]I think you'r trying to get a rise out of people, but that is just my opinion and theory.

There is no way Stacy could have overpowered Kathleen at that time. Had Kathleen been shot or stabbed, your theory might have legs.

IfIMay

05-07-2008, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by unclezeek
I think you'r trying to get a rise out of people, but that is just my opinion and theory.

There is no way Stacy could have overpowered Kathleen at that time. Had Kathleen been shot or stabbed, your theory might have legs. [/*]

different victim, different day, but same posts by mccannie.

The only thing that makes sense is if Stacy wanted to leave, brought up Kathleen, and Drew felt he needed to get rid of Stacy to protect himself against murder investigation into Kathleen's death.

martha

05-07-2008, 07:57 PM

Does anyone have anything new on this case? Just wondered what was going on or if there was any late news on this case. I was hoping they would find Stacy by now.:rose:

aubrey04

05-07-2008, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
:confused: Where is the proof that a crime was committed in this case. A person disappearing is not indicative of a crime. Your own definition, "commits a crime". Crime could be an act or an omission. Thus far, no evidence of either in this case. [/*]

Circumstantial evidence. I think you've been on this forum to see it all pointed out. I don't feel the need to go through it again ad nauseum. IMO, he killed both Kathleen Savio and Stacy Peterson.

I could go through all the reasons why but it seems pointless to hash through it time and time again. So, I will politely excuse myself from debating the issue, since neither of us are going to change our minds on the subject.

:seeya:

IMO, Drew Peterson is a murderer; therefore, a criminal.

----------------------------------------------

JMHO

Mamie

05-07-2008, 08:51 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

On this thread! I learned about it when I saw it on this thread...so I guess it is "noteworthy" after all.

mho [/*]

(I think it was your use of the word 'devoted' that brought attention from fellow posters.)

unclezeek

05-07-2008, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

I am not trying to get a rise out of you. I wasn't trying to get a rise out of you last Thursday, either. How can I try to get a rise out of you when I wasn't posting to you. And you mean nothing to me. I don't even know you. Now if you have a problem, report it to Coldwater.

mho [/*]I'm not going to go running to mommy everytime someone looks at me crosseyed. I'll state how I feel and that is that your post was directed towards me, it was innapropriate, and lent nothing to the conversation.

Now you can post whatever theory you like, doesn't bother me. To be honest, the mentality that you have to blindly believe that Drew is guilty has not only bothered me at times, but gotten me into many arguments here. I can enjoy a fresh point of view, provided it is somewhat relevant, and hasn't already been hashed out for several days.

But it doesn't seem like that is what many here are trying to do....And that goes for both sides of the fence.

Basicly, if your theory has no basis other than "I think that is what happened" then you"re really just going for shock value and not trying to be part of a discussion.

Again, just my opinion.

Anakerie

05-07-2008, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by unclezeek
Respectfully snipped.....

Basicly, if your theory has no basis other than "I think that is what happened" then you"re really just going for shock value and not trying to be part of a discussion.

Again, just my opinion. [/*]

Well said, Uncle Zeek.
:beer:

kizzzy

05-07-2008, 10:10 PM

Greta mentions DP's late night out , coming up soon. Not sure if it will be very imformative:shrug:

not.another

05-07-2008, 10:29 PM

Below is the wiki definition of the word theory...
In common usage, the word theory is often used to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. This usage of theory leads to the common incorrect statements. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements which would be true independently of what people think about them.

---By the way, I start alot of my sentences in this thread with "I think"

AmndaRcknwth

05-07-2008, 10:43 PM

Originally posted by aubrey04

I am just curious, What do you think the money that is being brought in -- is being used for? You don't think it is to fund the search, whether it is by P.I.'s, private searches, etc?

And why is it important that it is not linked to a tax exemption status?

My mothers neighbor's child has cystic fibrosis and did a walk-a-thon, and I pledged money to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. They sent me an email stating that it could not be used as tax deductible since the way the money was collected.

I am not trying to be condescending or sarcastic,.. I truly would like to hear your opinion. I've seen this brought up previously. [/*]

I do not know what the money is being used for. Not for searches.
It needs to be accounted for. The case has gotten mad publicity.

The importance is not that they are not tax-exempt or non-profit, or whatever... the problem is they lied about it. They said months ago that they went to an atty and all was in order. Businesses had to file extensions because of this.

IL has no record of them, feds have no record of them. There is nothing in any charity search site either.

Yet they are still collecting using false info.

That is wrong. It is wrong on many levels.

magpie1

05-08-2008, 01:50 AM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

For the sake of argument, IF ITS TRUE that Stacy knew within hours Drew killed Kathleen, this would be a reason why she may have chose to disappear: She would face criminal charges for helping a "killer" by giving him an alibi:

Kathleen didn't deserve to die, either, but IF TRUE Stacy helped cover a murder with an false alibi, and went on to have children with the "killer."

mho [/*]

You're only partially correct. Drew and Stacy were married in October 2003 and at the time of their marriage they already had one child.

Kathleen Savio was murdered in March of 2004.

At the time of Kathleen Savio's murder, Stacy was already married to Drew and had one child with him.

Stacy was young and impressionable. If she DID know that Drew was responsible for Kathleen's death, she may have very well have felt trapped. And who is she going to go to? To the Bolingbrook Police Department? There's been rumors of corruption within that department. If you don't know who is corrupt and who is not, who do you go to?

magpie1

05-08-2008, 02:14 AM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

Right. They didn't start looking into KS's death until after Stacy went missing, but that is not to say Stacy didn't get scared she would be found out. Maybe Stacy killed Kathleen, and Drew knew. Maybe he threatened to expose her. Or he might not have known until much later. Maybe Stacy slipped and told him that she killed Kathleen and he wanted her to turn herself in..and so she started to cover her tracks...and cast suspicion on Drew.

Or maybe Stacy just took off with another man, and after Kathleen's death was ruled a homicide, she is afraid to come home unless she gets immunity.

All I know for a fact is that nobody has put Drew on the scene at Kathleen's death and nobody had proven Stacy is dead. All else is theory and speculation.

mho [/*]

The Illinois State Police recently released a statement that Stacy did not leave her home willingly, and that they have evidence. They also stated that they believe an arrest will be made.

newbiee

05-08-2008, 08:40 AM

Morning all! :seeya:

Found something interesting...

http://legalpublication.blogspot.com/2008/05/scrutinizing-microscopic-view-of-drew.html

RayStar

05-08-2008, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

Money could very well have been Stacy's motive for helping him cover the murder of Kathleen, if indeed he did cover it. Young and impressionable doesn't necessarily cut it.

We are accountable for our actions. A good argument can be made that Stacy stayed with Drew for money.

One child or two children. She still slept with him and had another child with him.

Kathleen didn't deserve to die, and IF the pastor's story is true, Stacy helped to cover the killing by giving him an alibi.

If she is to be held reponsible as a mother, then she is reponsible for her actions..

She knew he was married when she started dating him, and juries don't look too kindly on men who commit adultery, and the women who they consider homebreakers. So dead or alive, Stacy won't be looked on kindly, IMO.

I think she is still alive.

mho [/*]WOW Stacy is too young to care about what people think of her dating a married man. Young people see things differently. I think she is DEAD!

AmndaRcknwth

05-08-2008, 09:05 AM

Originally posted by RayStar
WOW Stacy is too young to care about what people think of her dating a married man. Young people see things differently. I think she is DEAD! [/*]

Oh come on.

Young people get a pass on dating married people? In what place on earth?

Stacy has declared emancipation at her 17th birthday.

By all accounts, she was a girl in charge of her own life. She knew that sneaking into the basement of THE WIFE's home to sleep with her husband (estranged or not) was not the right thing to do.

Are you sying that is just peachy and to forget that because she is a likely murder victim? See, it does not work that way.

Stacy may be a wonderful mom, a wonderful friend, sister, person, but she was not candidate for sainthood fgs.

After DP killed KS, SP went on to enjoy that insurance money and profit from the sale of the home.

She KNEW all along.

Unless the pastor is a liar.

newbiee

05-08-2008, 09:25 AM

thought this was interesting...........
http://tinyurl.com/4395pq

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by newbiee
thought this was interesting...........
http://tinyurl.com/4395pq

Second posting is the charm, eh? :)

Thanks for the link.

Joel Brodsky has two posts at that blog. One is from earlier this morning.

The first needs to be seen to be believed.

newbiee

05-08-2008, 10:06 AM

Originally posted by Land Shark®

Second posting is the charm, eh? :)

Thanks for the link.

Joel Brodsky has two posts at that blog. One is from earlier this morning.

The first needs to be seen to be believed. [/*]

Hi Land Shark!
yeah, he is out there. It seems everything that comes out of his mouth contradicts something he has said before. I'll never understand it.:shrug:

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by newbiee

Hi Land Shark!
yeah, he is out there. It seems everything that comes out of his mouth contradicts something he has said before. I'll never understand it.:shrug:

The reason I believe it might really be Joel Brodsky posting is because he comes across as the biggest idiot of a lawyer I've ever seen. Which jibes with what I've seen from Joel Brodsky before.

And the blogger himself claims to have interviewed Joel for that day's posting.

aubrey04

05-08-2008, 10:12 AM

Stacy's involvement or lack thereof is really not an issue here, considering she is most probably DEAD. And you can not prosecute someone who is DEAD for a crime. Even if she had remained hushed or got rid of evidence for Drew Peterson, she is no longer an issue here- as far as alleged crimes she participated in.

I do NOT think that Stacy was a saint but blaming the victim is old and tired.

Even if she was somehow involved in Kathleen's death, she didn't deserve to be murdered over it.

Glad some of the Drew supporters (even if they claim otherwise) are now spreading the Stacy hate so much, that they now concede that he might have killed KS, as long as it is another opportunity slam Stacy.

Where is the logic in that? You want Stacy to look bad so much so -- that you are willing to offer up ideas that she was involved in helping Drew w/KS's murder.

So, regardless of whether or not Stacy was murdered or not.. Drew is still a possible murderer.

I really don't see the point in all this?

:shrug: :shrug:

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by newbiee
thought this was interesting...........
http://tinyurl.com/4395pq [/*]

Thanks for the link, newbiee! That IS interesting and IMO a pathetic attempt by JB to make his client look like a saint/victim.

If any of those "life-saving" attempts by Drew were true, I'm sure there would have been an Enquirer story by now with a headline that says something along the lines of, "Drew Peterson Saved My Life." I think it's BS.

And does anyone else think that supposed pic of Morphey looks like a younger pic of Drew??

JMO

newbiee

05-08-2008, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by Land Shark®

The reason I believe it might really be Joel Brodsky posting is because he comes across as the biggest idiot of a lawyer I've ever seen. Which jibes with what I've seen from Joel Brodsky before.

And the blogger himself claims to have interviewed Joel for that day's posting. [/*]

yeah, I don't think he would have posted something that he "created" from joel. I think those are JB's words also.

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by aubrey04
Stacy's involvement or lack thereof is really not an issue here, considering she is most probably DEAD. And you can not prosecute someone who is DEAD for a crime. Even if she had remained hushed or got rid of evidence for Drew Peterson, she is no longer an issue here- as far as alleged crimes she participated in.

I do NOT think that Stacy was a saint but blaming the victim is old and tired.

Even if she was somehow involved in Kathleen's death, she didn't deserve to be murdered over it.

Glad some of the Drew supporters (even if they claim otherwise) are now spreading the Stacy hate so much, that they now concede that he might have killed KS, as long as it is another opportunity slam Stacy.

Where is the logic in that? You want Stacy to look bad so much so -- that you are willing to offer up ideas that she was involved in helping Drew w/KS's murder.

So, regardless of whether or not Stacy was murdered or not.. Drew is still a possible murderer.

I really don't see the point in all this?

:shrug: :shrug: [/*]

ITA. Even if Stacy was no saint, I don't understand how that has any relevance to the fact that all evidence points to Drew murdering her, IMO.

Saint or not, Drew is still a murderer, IMO. It doesn't justify it any more because Stacy may have made some mistakes in her life. IMO

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 10:21 AM

You know... when posters continuously post that Stacy knew that Drew killed Kathleen... it only reinforces the belief that Drew also killed Stacy. They can continue to post it all they want.

Drew murdered the only person that knew he murdered Kathleen.

Makes a lot of sense. IMO.

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 10:24 AM

Originally posted by Land Shark®

Second posting is the charm, eh? :)

Thanks for the link.

Joel Brodsky has two posts at that blog. One is from earlier this morning.

The first needs to be seen to be believed. [/*]

The comments on that blog are... Uhm... lol, I'm not quite sure what word I want to use. You're right about Brodsky's first comment. Unreal. The arguments among the other folks are especially interesting.

Oh... And if Brodsky ever reads here I'd like to inform him that a person in their 50's is NOT considered to be "elderly"... Sheezzzz....

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by Anakerie
respectfully snipped

Oh... And if Brodsky ever reads here I'd like to inform him that a person in their 50's is NOT considered to be "elderly"... Sheezzzz.... [/*]

I noticed that too!! :rolleyes: And Brodsky isn't that much younger...

On another note, I work for an attorney and was going through his address book a little bit ago and he has Joel Brodsky's number! Ewwwww.......

JMO

tallcoolone

05-08-2008, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Thanks for the link, newbiee! That IS interesting and IMO a pathetic attempt by JB to make his client look like a saint/victim.

If any of those "life-saving" attempts by Drew were true, I'm sure there would have been an Enquirer story by now with a headline that says something along the lines of, "Drew Peterson Saved My Life." I think it's BS.

And does anyone else think that supposed pic of Morphey looks like a younger pic of Drew??

JMO [/*]Oh my, YES! I thought he resembled a younger version of DP also! Morphey is referred to as a Step-brother, not a half-brother, and this made me do a double-take about 3X's. Poor guy. He'll probably end up with a set of soft-side luggage under his eyes too. Ewwwwwww.................

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by Anakerie

The comments on that blog are... Uhm... lol, I'm not quite sure what word I want to use. You're right about Brodsky's first comment. Unreal. The arguments among the other folks are especially interesting.

Oh... And if Brodsky ever reads here I'd like to inform him that a person in their 50's is NOT considered to be "elderly"... Sheezzzz....

I have a feeling that one or two posters from here left a couple of comments there. Not including my own posted comments. Can you guess which ones? ;)

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

I noticed that too!! :rolleyes: And Brodsky isn't that much younger...

On another note, I work for an attorney and was going through his address book a little bit ago and he has Joel Brodsky's number! Ewwwww.......

JMO

Hook me up with the number in a PM. I'll call him right now & ask him about the comments attributed to him on the blog. ;)

tallcoolone

05-08-2008, 10:32 AM

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by Land Shark®

I have a feeling that one or two posters from here left a couple of comments there. Not including my own posted comments. Can you guess which ones? ;) [/*]

I'm still reading the comments over there and just got to the one by Brodsky saying that the cadaver dogs are an "unsubstantiated rumor" and that he never saw the dogs in any video of the police going in and out of the house during the searches.

Uhm... I remember seeing a couple videos that showed the dogs in front of the garage. Does anyone else remember seeing them?

tagalong

05-08-2008, 10:43 AM

http://legalpublication.blogspot.com/2008/05/scrutinizing-microscopic-view-of-drew.html

After reading the above link I am convinced more so than ever that DP is a definite sociopath and his attorney keeps reiterating that with his comments.

I'd like to hear from whomever charged this girl’s boyfriend with DUI, towed the vehicle away, and left the girl stranded.....any official who has the right to charge someone with DUI and take them off, would never leave the passenger stranded. IMO
The girl was out with her boyfriend when he was arrested for DUI at 2:30 a.m., not too far from Drew’s home. The police took the boyfriend into custody and towed the car. The girl was left stranded and alone at 2:30 a.m.

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 10:46 AM

Originally posted by tagalong
http://legalpublication.blogspot.com/2008/05/scrutinizing-microscopic-view-of-drew.html

After reading the above link I am convinced more so than ever that DP is a definite sociopath and his attorney keeps reiterating that with his comments.

I'd like to hear from whomever charged this girl’s boyfriend with DUI, towed the vehicle away, and left the girl stranded.....any official who has the right to charge someone with DUI and take them off, would never leave the passenger stranded. IMO
The girl was out with her boyfriend when he was arrested for DUI at 2:30 a.m., not too far from Drew’s home. The police took the boyfriend into custody and towed the car. The girl was left stranded and alone at 2:30 a.m. [/*]

Agreed. That would NEVER happen, IMO.

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 10:47 AM

This whole "good samartan" story that Drew and Brodsky are trying to sell has me thinking about the police in Naperville (and other places). If the police stop a car and arrest the driver for a DUI and then tow the car away, is it common practice to leave any passengers in the car stranded by the side of the road?

That part of the story is one of the things that make me think that the whole story has been cooked up by Drew, Brodsky and the PR guy.... Where is the report from the Naperville PD? Where is the evidence that this might have actually happened? Are they trying to get us to believe whatever comes out of Drew's mouth is the truth?

HAH! No way.

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by Anakerie
This whole "good samartan" story that Drew and Brodsky are trying to sell has me thinking about the police in Naperville (and other places). If the police stop a car and arrest the driver for a DUI and then tow the car away, is it common practice to leave any passengers in the car stranded by the side of the road?

That part of the story is one of the things that make me think that the whole story has been cooked up by Drew, Brodsky and the PR guy.... Where is the report from the Naperville PD? Where is the evidence that this might have actually happened? Are they trying to get us to believe whatever comes out of Drew's mouth is the truth?

HAH! No way. [/*]

I come from a family of police officers (dad, brother, cousins, etc - none in the western burbs though!), and LE would NEVER arrest someone for a DUI, take them away, tow the car, and leave a girl stranded. NO WAY.

JMO

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 10:55 AM

Originally posted by Anakerie

I'm still reading the comments over there and just got to the one by Brodsky saying that the cadaver dogs are an "unsubstantiated rumor" and that he never saw the dogs in any video of the police going in and out of the house during the searches.

Uhm... I remember seeing a couple videos that showed the dogs in front of the garage. Does anyone else remember seeing them? [/*]

And I love the part where Brodsky asks if anyone has any examples of cadaver dogs being used in criminal court - like he's asking the public for help in how to do his job. Ugh.

JMO

tallcoolone

05-08-2008, 11:06 AM

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

And I love the part where Brodsky asks if anyone has any examples of cadaver dogs being used in criminal court - like he's asking the public for help in how to do his job. Ugh.

JMO [/*]

LOL... Someone provided a photo of one of the cadaver dogs in front of the garage.
http://media1.suburbanchicagonews.com/multimedia/jo02_bolingbrook_peterson_3.jpg_20071101_22_24_17_ 50-263-400.imageContent

And then the poster commented that he's in need of a job and wants Brodsky to hire him as an investigator since it seems one is needed... LMAO!

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by tallcoolone
Hmmm........ didn't the dog handlers testify in the Laci Peterson case? Seems that I recall that they did? [/*]

I remember that as well, tallcoolone... I do seem to remember the dog handler on the witness stand... And Geragos doing his best to discredit them.

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 11:20 AM

Does anyone know......?
Does Drew have to be charged before Brodsky is entitled to disc lousure of the states evidence against Drew?

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by unclezeek
Does anyone know......?
Does Drew have to be charged before Brodsky is entitled to disc lousure of the states evidence against Drew? [/*]

I am by no means a legal expert, but I believe that is the way it's done. The "defense" can't get into the evidence before charges are filed.

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 11:28 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

I noticed that too!! :rolleyes: And Brodsky isn't that much younger...

On another note, I work for an attorney and was going through his address book a little bit ago and he has Joel Brodsky's number! Ewwwww.......

JMO [/*]

sigh, I'm sure your attorney will appreciate you telling the public this info.
thats soo not cool. not trying to start anything or be mean just stating the facts.

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 11:28 AM

Originally posted by DogsRule

Run Jpanda, RUN! LOL :chicken: [/*]

Ha! My office is pretty much down the street from Brodsky, and my home is in the neighboring town to Drew's!! AHHHH!

In all seriousness, I think the close proximity to Drew is what has me so vested in this case. It creeps me out that a double-murderer (IMO of course) lives so close!

:chicken:

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u

sigh, I'm sure your attorney will appreciate you telling the public this info.
thats soo not cool. not trying to start anything or be mean just stating the facts. [/*]

My attorney doesn't come on here, and the info is public anyway. An attorney's office info is public - in Sullivan's, in the phone book, and online. It's not a personal phone number or anything. And for the record, I didn't post it. :D

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by unclezeek
Does anyone know......?
Does Drew have to be charged before Brodsky is entitled to disc lousure of the states evidence against Drew?

Brodsky can do anything he wants with the information he has at this time.

Alas.... Brodsky has no clue what evidence the state has against Drew. No clue whatsoever.

He'll get all that info once Drew is charged.

not.another

05-08-2008, 11:31 AM

Anybody have any guesses as to who will be meeting with the GJ today? My hope...DP's boys. Well, one can only hope.

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 11:33 AM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u

sigh, I'm sure your attorney will appreciate you telling the public this info.
thats soo not cool. not trying to start anything or be mean just stating the facts.

sigh... the fact that Jpanda's employer has Joel Brodsky's phone number in his/her possession is not proprietary information.

Please explain... why is it "soo not cool"?

tallcoolone

05-08-2008, 11:36 AM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u

sigh, I'm sure your attorney will appreciate you telling the public this info.
thats soo not cool. not trying to start anything or be mean just stating the facts. [/*]*sigh* I highly doubt any of us knows who the attorney is that they work for. Add to that the fact that even if we did, what the heck difference would it make? Oh that's right, just another way to try to stir it, huh?

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 11:37 AM

Wisconsin Court Ruling Could Deem Evidence Unreliable in McCann Case
Will Cadaver Dog Evidence be Used in the Madeline McCann Case?

snip
Evidence against him largely focused on the findings of cadaver-sniffing dogs that picked up the scent of death in the Zapatas' basement, two other homes Zapata subsequently owned and in a storage locker in Madison. No body has ever been found.

The jury never knew of this potential evidence, however. During the 2007 court proceedings, Dane County Judge David Fiedler ruled that the results of the cadaver dog search were inadmissible, deeming them unreliable. Defense attorneys had presented the judge with reports attesting to these particular dogs' dismal success record. That's all Fiedler needed to know before he made his ruling.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/395909/wisconsin_court_ruling_could_deem_evidence.html

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by tallcoolone
*sigh* I highly doubt any of us knows who the attorney is that they work for. Add to that the fact that even if we did, what the heck difference would it make? Oh that's right, just another way to try to stir it, huh? [/*]

Thanks guys. Add to that the fact that attorneys have other attorneys numbers, no surprise there. I was just pointing it out cause it gave me the creeps. IMO

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 11:39 AM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u
Wisconsin Court Ruling Could Deem Evidence Unreliable in McCann Case
Will Cadaver Dog Evidence be Used in the Madeline McCann Case?

snip
Evidence against him largely focused on the findings of cadaver-sniffing dogs that picked up the scent of death in the Zapatas' basement, two other homes Zapata subsequently owned and in a storage locker in Madison. No body has ever been found.

The jury never knew of this potential evidence, however. During the 2007 court proceedings, Dane County Judge David Fiedler ruled that the results of the cadaver dog search were inadmissible, deeming them unreliable. Defense attorneys had presented the judge with reports attesting to these particular dogs' dismal success record. That's all Fiedler needed to know before he made his ruling.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/395909/wisconsin_court_ruling_could_deem_evidence.html [/*]

Very interesting. Thanks for posting that!

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

My attorney doesn't come on here, and the info is public anyway. An attorney's office info is public - in Sullivan's, in the phone book, and online. It's not a personal phone number or anything. And for the record, I didn't post it. :D [/*]

ok whatever, I still don't think it's cool. JMO

and no I'm not trying to stir the pot tall are you??

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Very interesting. Thanks for posting that! [/*]

:)

tallcoolone

05-08-2008, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Thanks guys. Add to that the fact that attorneys have other attorneys numbers, no surprise there. I was just pointing it out cause it gave me the creeps. IMO [/*]Not to worry, it's just funny how something as unimportant at that can get such a rise out of them, yet they have those rose colored glasses on when it comes to Drew. Simply amazing it is!!

I'm just sayin'.......................

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 11:53 AM

I've e-mailed Joel Brodsky asking him if the two posts attributed to him at the Legal Pub blog are indeed coming from him.

We'll see.

AmndaRcknwth

05-08-2008, 11:57 AM

Originally posted by Lyndawitha"Y

I don't recall anyone here declaring Stacy a "Saint"..and somehow I find it hard to believe that Stacy had ANY control over the purse strings of the Peterson's finances...

The most common terminology utilized referring to Stacy was/has been/will continue to be a Murder Victim! rubbed out for what reason..well, I think there's plenty of reasons and all attributable to Mr. Drew Peterson~

LMS :punch: [/*]

Oh really? She didn't control any purse strings?

Decorating a nice home. Going on vacations. Enhancement surgery. Dental correction. She did not want for anything. Of course, it was paid for by the other wife's DEATH that she covered up.

This is not some poor thing who was locked in the basement.

aubrey04

05-08-2008, 11:58 AM

I just found Brodsky's law office phone number in about 40 seconds. It is public information, which I am sure that is the way Brodsky likes it.

Otherwise, how else would potential clients get in touch with him? You can't gather up business by having an unlisted number. :rolleyes:

I have absolutely no intention of posting it on here, nor do I feel the need to call it,..regardless, it is quite public info.

http://yp.yahoo.com <-- you can find many lawyers and/or other businesses information there.

aubrey04

05-08-2008, 12:01 PM

Originally posted by Land Shark®
I've e-mailed Joel Brodsky asking him if the two posts attributed to him at the Legal Pub blog are indeed coming from him.

We'll see. [/*]

Good for you. I would like to know if that is truly him posting a blog or not. It seems a tad ridiculous to think that he would be posting comments on a blog spot, but whatever.

PS- I just found his law practice's website. He even looks CREEEEEEEEPY in his picture on there. Yikes!

AmndaRcknwth

05-08-2008, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by Land Shark®
You know... when posters continuously post that Stacy knew that Drew killed Kathleen... it only reinforces the belief that Drew also killed Stacy. They can continue to post it all they want.

Drew murdered the only person that knew he murdered Kathleen.

Makes a lot of sense. IMO. [/*]

I think he killed them both.

However, I am willing to let a jury convict him, and not the media.

I am more disturbed at the circus surrounding this IN BOLINGBROOK. No searches going on, but collecting money is the priority.

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 12:03 PM

Originally posted by tallcoolone
Not to worry, it's just funny how something as unimportant at that can get such a rise out of them, yet they have those rose colored glasses on when it comes to Drew. Simply amazing it is!!

I'm just sayin'....................... [/*]

"them" ???

"rise" ??

seems the rise was gotten out of you due to my post!!

rose colored glasses about drew? highly doubt that but I do see you wear them concerning anything that doesn't agree with your views.
simply amazing it is!!

just saying!!

have a nice day!

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth

I think he killed them both.

However, I am willing to let a jury convict him, and not the media.

I am more disturbed at the circus surrounding this IN BOLINGBROOK. No searches going on, but collecting money is the priority. [/*]

oh how dare you, don't you know that the media and public are judge and jury?? don't forget the physics too!!

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 12:39 PM

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 12:45 PM

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 12:58 PM

Originally posted by GH247

Physics??? [/*]

lol

pardon me
"psychics"

aubrey04

05-08-2008, 01:00 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
Don't you think that the missing persons whos faces appear on milk cartons deserve a shrine. Like Stacy we don't know if they are alive or dead. Unlike Stacy there hasn't been wild speculation about their disappearance on tv. Is that the criteria you go by.:confused: [/*]

I am missing your point here. Sharon is making the "garden"/shrine for Stacy on her own time, in her own yard.

If the families/friends of other missing persons, who may or may not appear on milk cartons, wish to make a shrine for their loved one, they are entitled.

Down the road from where I grew up a teenager died in an automobile accident - there is a small shrine where the accident took place. They've kept it up for almost 20 years. Every holiday and season change, they change the decorations and wreath.

It's Sharon's personal right to do whatever she wishes on her property, in regards to a "shrine".

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 01:02 PM

shrine= very nice idea

shrine to stick it to dp and be in his face=wrong, tasteless, classless and not in the best interest of the children Sharon claims to care soo much about.

JMO

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 01:04 PM

I would love to be enlightened as to how a garden is *sticking it to Drew Peterson*.

not.another

05-08-2008, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth

Oh really? She didn't control any purse strings?

Decorating a nice home. Going on vacations. Enhancement surgery. Dental correction. She did not want for anything. Of course, it was paid for by the other wife's DEATH that she covered up.

This is not some poor thing who was locked in the basement. [/*]

Drew knew exactly what that spending money was going for. He made it a point during the tour of his home to mention that Stacy poored alot of money into decorating it. Did she do vacations with anyone other than Drew? Probably not. As for the breast enhancement - who else would that have been for but her husband. Surely something that expensive would not have been decided on by her alone! Yes, I agree that she did not want for anything but that's the way Drew decided it should be. To keep her happy so she didn't leave him. Which is exactly what she ended up trying to do. IMO.

AmndaRcknwth

05-08-2008, 01:05 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

I think that if anyone's friends are missing, and they wish to create a shrine, it is a very nice idea. I'm sorry, I don't see anything wrong with putting up a shrine for someone who is missing. Of course all missing people should have them. Not sure what you're getting at....:shrug: [/*]

The placement of the shrine is a direct slap at the children. There are pictures of both their moms there.

I'd say how sweet. IF it were in a public park, or IF it was at Cassandra's home or Anna Domans home.

What it stands as now, is a shrine to Sharon Bychowsky MzTV. They are even asking people to bring Sharons favorite dessert to the fun-raiser on Saturday. I am not joking, there is an actual post asking for desserts and telling members that her fav dessert is cheesecake on a stick.

No, not Stacy.

Stacy WHO?

The committee to find Stacy has dropped that. They are collecting money for something called FUNraiser.

The last fundraiser featured Drewbuster bats and a Drew pinata.

Circus. Not dignity nor memorial. Circus. They spit on their so-called friend.

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 01:07 PM

How much has Drew Peterson done to find his missing wife?

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 01:12 PM

Originally posted by Land Shark®
I would love to be enlightened as to how a garden is *sticking it to Drew Peterson*. [/*]The comment Sharon made about Drew sitting on his porch looking at them is kind of telling.

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 01:14 PM

Originally posted by unclezeek
The comment Sharon made about Drew sitting on his porch looking at them is kind of telling.

If Drew Peterson has a problem with Sharon's garden... it's his problem.

Thanks for the attempt to enlighten me. :)

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
Please go back and read the post. Concentrate on the last sentence.:cool: [/*]I'm not sure how you have time to post here....You have alot of work to do. Milk cartons to collect, shrines to construct.
I was very good of you to take up the fight here and right this injustice.
The milk carton picture havers of the world are now counting on you to be their hero.

Be that hero gerald.....Be that hero!:patriot:

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 01:18 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
Why are you making fun of zeek. He apparently missed the last sentence of the post. I have suggested to him to go back and read it. You might want to do the same.:cool: [/*]I did and understood it completely.

Now get out there and make things right.

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by unclezeek
The comment Sharon made about Drew sitting on his porch looking at them is kind of telling. [/*]

yep and the many comments Sharon makes on FSP about drew concerning it along with her followers.

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by Land Shark®
How much has Drew Peterson done to find his missing wife? [/*]

Hmm... Lets see.

* He went on national TV and complained about her menstrual cycles, then snidely told her to "come home".

* He allegedly hired private investigators to look for her electronically.

* He offered a reward with conditions for her to be found "safe".

Anything else that anyone can add?

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u

yep and the many comments Sharon makes on FSP about drew concerning it along with her followers. [/*]No argument from me. Personnaly I think this would have been more meaningfull placed on Cassandras lawn since she should be the one getting the most support.

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by unclezeek
No argument from me. Personnaly I think this would have been more meaningfull placed on Cassandras lawn since she should be the one getting the most support. [/*]

I agree, it's sad enough Stacy is missing but this just is wrong, IMO.
Ofcourse if it's at Cassandra's it's not in Drew's face. IMHO these kinds of tatics and a few others of Sharon's and her followers are very negative and shed's a bad light on them and what they stand for.

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

Hmm... Lets see.

* He went on national TV and complained about her menstrual cycles, then snidely told her to "come home".

* He allegedly hired private investigators to look for her electronically.

* He offered a reward with conditions for her to be found "safe".

Anything else that anyone can add?

Nope.

That about covers it.

not.another

05-08-2008, 01:35 PM

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
You seem so blinded,IMO, by your dislike for DP you missed the ? The ? has to do with criteria. :cool: [/*]It's a pointless question since nobody said Stacy is any more deserving of a shrine than milk carton guy.

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 01:44 PM

Originally posted by unclezeek
It's a pointless question since nobody said Stacy is any more deserving of a shrine than milk carton guy.

It would be more appropriate for gerald1 to ask Sharon the question.

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by Land Shark®

It would be more appropriate for gerald1 to ask Sharon the question. [/*]I think he thinks he IS asking Sharon the question.

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 01:52 PM

I've been thinking about the "garden/shrine" in Sharon's front yard. We've all seen the roadside memorials where people have died in accidents. We've all seen the memorials/shrines pop up where someone has been killed. (Think about the pictures of the one where John Lennon was murdered.) Has anyone considered that the one in Sharon's yard is sort of appropriate in that context? Since they believe that Stacy was murdered in Drew's house, Sharon's yard is the closest they can get to making one of those memorials like we've all seen in the news? They can't do it in Drew's front yard. He wouldn't stand for it. But Sharon's yard is next door and Drew can't do anything about what she has in HER yard.
:shrug:

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 01:53 PM

Originally posted by unclezeek
I think he thinks he IS asking Sharon the question. [/*]

I don't think Sharon is here, though. So perhaps he should go to where Sharon DOES post?

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 01:55 PM

Joel wrote another comment on Legal Pub.....

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 01:58 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

I don't think Sharon is here, though. So perhaps he should go to where Sharon DOES post? [/*]He'd be booted off before he could hit send.

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie
I've been thinking about the "garden/shrine" in Sharon's front yard. We've all seen the roadside memorials where people have died in accidents. We've all seen the memorials/shrines pop up where someone has been killed. (Think about the pictures of the one where John Lennon was murdered.) Has anyone considered that the one in Sharon's yard is sort of appropriate in that context? Since they believe that Stacy was murdered in Drew's house, Sharon's yard is the closest they can get to making one of those memorials like we've all seen in the news? They can't do it in Drew's front yard. He wouldn't stand for it. But Sharon's yard is next door and Drew can't do anything about what she has in HER yard.
:shrug: [/*]You cannot tell me after reading through the 16 pages of the "fresh flowers for Stacy" thread at FSP that irritating Drew was not, at the very least, an underlying factor to some.

juliekan

05-08-2008, 02:04 PM

Land Shark®

05-08-2008, 02:05 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda
Joel wrote another comment on Legal Pub.....

Still waiting for a reply to the e-mail I sent.

The newest comments are in no way Joel Brodsky's comments. IMO.

The first two comments attributed to Brodsky have a link within his name. The newest comments do not.

Of course, the link takes you nowhere.

But one poster from here... her link takes you to her Google profile. :)

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 02:07 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda
Joel wrote another comment on Legal Pub..... [/*]

lol, I saw that... And I posted another comment too...
:D

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by DogsRule

Do you have the link? Is it ok for you to post it here? Not sure... [/*]

It was posted earlier:
Scrutinizing The Microscopic View of Drew Peterson
http://legalpublication.blogspot.com/2008/05/scrutinizing-microscopic-view-of-drew.html

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by unclezeek
You cannot tell me after reading through the 16 pages of the "fresh flowers for Stacy" thread at FSP that irritating Drew was not, at the very least, an underlying factor to some. [/*]

lol, Uncle Zeek... I've looked through a few pages of that thread (and I prefer NOT to read the whole thing) and I'm sure that is the main reason that some of them have contributed flowers and such....

I guess I'm lame or something. The thing looks to me like one of those roadside/crime scene memorials we've all seen.

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by Land Shark®

Still waiting for a reply to the e-mail I sent.

The newest comments are in no way Joel Brodsky's comments. IMO.

The first two comments attributed to Brodsky have a link within his name. The newest comments do not.

Of course, the link takes you nowhere.

But one poster from here... her link takes you to her Google profile. :) [/*]

Who me? LOL...

I can't help the link.. If I'm logged in to google or my blog, when I post a comment on another "blogger" blog, it links to me... hehe

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by juliekan

as in "icing on the cake" after honoring Stacy's memory? :beer: [/*]And that's fine. But then don't get upset when people scrutinise the intentions. When you open that door, you get people who see it as both the icing AND the cake.

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

lol, Uncle Zeek... I've looked through a few pages of that thread (and I prefer NOT to read the whole thing) and I'm sure that is the main reason that some of them have contributed flowers and such....

I guess I'm lame or something. The thing looks to me like one of those roadside/crime scene memorials we've all seen. [/*]I don't think you're lame, I think the overall intention is very sweet.
But Drew needles them through the media....
They needle Drew through Sharons front yard....

RayStar

05-08-2008, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by Lyndawitha"Y

I don't recall anyone here declaring Stacy a "Saint"..and somehow I find it hard to believe that Stacy had ANY control over the purse strings of the Peterson's finances...

The most common terminology utilized referring to Stacy was/has been/will continue to be a Murder Victim! rubbed out for what reason..well, I think there's plenty of reasons and all attributable to Mr. Drew Peterson~

LMS :punch: [/*]ITA It seems control is a common factor when women are murdered by husbands, boyfriends and exs. I truly wish she would be found.

not.another

05-08-2008, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by RayStar
ITA It seems control is a common factor when women are murdered by husbands, boyfriends and exs. I truly wish she would be found. [/*]

Control is a HUGE factor. Not just in this case. I believe a high percentage of murderers think their significant others have to bow down to them. And if they don't, off with their heads!

AmndaRcknwth

05-08-2008, 02:49 PM

Originally posted by unclezeek
No argument from me. Personnaly I think this would have been more meaningfull placed on Cassandras lawn since she should be the one getting the most support. [/*]

Why... unclezeek, what a novel idea... the SISTER of the missing woman. Not the NOSY NEIGHBOR/employer bff.

Have you seen the picture of Sharon SMILING over Stacy's picture?

Here, check it out:
http://i31.tinypic.com/iy1niv.jpg

Her fav dessert is cheesecake on a stick.

No, not Stacy's. This isn't about her, it's about MzTV.

AmndaRcknwth

05-08-2008, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

lol, Uncle Zeek... I've looked through a few pages of that thread (and I prefer NOT to read the whole thing) and I'm sure that is the main reason that some of them have contributed flowers and such....

I guess I'm lame or something. The thing looks to me like one of those roadside/crime scene memorials we've all seen. [/*]

They have made her memory tacky, trashy, terrible.

Come to the FUNraiser. And hit the donate button. Oh but we aren't searching for Stacy. Stacy who?

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
The point is pretty simple. There has been much fuss on this board about a shrine for Stacy. Support for this shrine is based only on tv shows and speculation. She very well could be alive and not want to be found. Nothing unique about that. I have seen nothing posted here which can state with any degree of certainty what her condition is.Alive or dead she is missing and that is what the shrine is based on. I don't need the TV to tell me I don't know where she is or what has happened to her 1st hand knowledge or factual reporting of how, what, when and where is nonexistent. The same can be said for some of the milk carton pictures. And I am in full support of you building a shrine to each of them. I doubt anyone else here would protest it The difference between the two is that Stacy's story sold newspapers and pumped up ratings for some tv shows. As it stands now her story is no different and she is simply missing. Given that it just seems that the criteria for Stacys shrine, which some posters are so adamant about, is based only on news media coverage. Which btw as we all know is not allways accurate. Again, didn't need the media to tell me I don't know where she is or what happened to her I was just curious as to what some peoples criteria is. I don't know where she is or what happened to her BTW the person that my post was original directed to gave a much more rational amswer than you did. You might like to read it. :cool: [/*] You might want to stop telling me to go back and read, and take your own advice. Your question was answered before you even got involved with this subject.

aubrey04

05-08-2008, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth

They have made her memory tacky, trashy, terrible.

Come to the FUNraiser. And hit the donate button. Oh but we aren't searching for Stacy. Stacy who? [/*]

On the FSP website, there were two searches set up for May. One which supposedly already went down on May 3rd-4th -- and another scheduled for May 27th -28th. Are you saying you think they fabricated these searches and if so, why? Do you not believe that Stacy's family and friends truly want to find her?

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 03:05 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
Perhaps Stacy should e-mail Sharon a thank you. She could stop in one of those coffee bars that let you use computers. The least she could do is thank her when she is found. Sounds like a win, win to me. Sharon ends up with a nice garden and Drew gets a nice view. Except for some posters everbody is happy.:cool: [/*]Imagin all the thank yous you will get when your done with all your milk carton shrines.

kimmy56

05-08-2008, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by DogsRule
Have you all seen the latest post in the Legal Pub blog? It reads:

"Its true, Drew lied on national tv a week ago on Larry King. He is dating Denise Werner from Romeoville since the beginning of March. They met at Tailgators in Bolingbrook. She has two kids and lives with her brother in Lakewood Falls. She has met Drews kids and had dinner at the house. Drew and her were seen at Poms sports bar friday night on Route 30. Drew has told her that he can get a divorce in November when Stacy has been gone a year. So much for telling the truth on the air ! "

Hum. I guess we can take that for what it's worth. The poster is asking for Joel to comment.

http://legalpublication.blogspot.com/2008/05/scrutinizing-microscopic-view-of-drew.html

ETA: I hope I don't get in trouble for this post. I don't think I'm violating POS. [/*]

I bet Denise's mother is SO proud of her!:rolleyes:

aubrey04

05-08-2008, 03:23 PM

kimmy56

05-08-2008, 03:42 PM

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
:confused: I never stated anything about me personally building milk carton shrines. Wrong again. Lets try this. What do you think will happen if they find the corpse of Stacy and they discover there is no link to DP for the causation of her death. Does he walk? :cool: [/*]

I'm pretty positive that Uncle Zeek is messing with you. He actually has a really great sense of humor. :)

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 03:57 PM

Originally posted by DogsRule
Have you all seen the latest post in the Legal Pub blog? It reads:

"Its true, Drew lied on national tv a week ago on Larry King. He is dating Denise Werner from Romeoville since the beginning of March. They met at Tailgators in Bolingbrook. She has two kids and lives with her brother in Lakewood Falls. She has met Drews kids and had dinner at the house. Drew and her were seen at Poms sports bar friday night on Route 30. Drew has told her that he can get a divorce in November when Stacy has been gone a year. So much for telling the truth on the air ! "

Hum. I guess we can take that for what it's worth. The poster is asking for Joel to comment.

http://legalpublication.blogspot.com/2008/05/scrutinizing-microscopic-view-of-drew.html

ETA: I hope I don't get in trouble for this post. I don't think I'm violating POS. [/*]

Hi DogsRule, sorry I didn't post that link for ya - I went out to lunch! I can't believe someone would post her name and all that info about her! That's awful!

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Hi DogsRule, sorry I didn't post that link for ya - I went out to lunch! I can't believe someone would post her name and all that info about her! That's awful! [/*]

sure is! what if it's not true and it is very likely that it is not true.

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 04:06 PM

Originally posted by sunmoonsky4u

sure is! what if it's not true and it is very likely that it is not true. [/*]

Even if it IS true, I think it's appalling. Now people will try to look her up and harass her. IMO she definitely needs to take a better look at her choice of men, but that's not for me to decide. JMO

magpie1

05-08-2008, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by newbiee
thought this was interesting...........
http://tinyurl.com/4395pq [/*]

I saw that blog and read the comments. Joel Brodsky has met his match and is being exposed for all the world to see! :)

First he states that it's only rumored that there were cadaver dogs that hit on the master bedroom and Stacy's car, and goes on to state that in all the videos he never saw a cadaver dog in the police search of the Peterson residence.

Then a poster posts the picture that many of us remember of the dog during the search.

magpie1

05-08-2008, 04:14 PM

Originally posted by Land Shark®
You know... when posters continuously post that Stacy knew that Drew killed Kathleen... it only reinforces the belief that Drew also killed Stacy. They can continue to post it all they want.

Drew murdered the only person that knew he murdered Kathleen.

Makes a lot of sense. IMO. [/*]

It comes down to, who has the motive and the means.

In this case, Drew Peterson had the motive (more than one) and the means. He remains the only suspect.

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 04:14 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
I didn't state I thought she is. It's a what if question. Same ? to you. Does he walk?:cool: [/*]

Can you ask me that question? :D

Zaun

05-08-2008, 04:36 PM

Originally posted by magpie1

It comes down to, who has the motive and the means.

In this case, Drew Peterson had the motive (more than one) and the means. He remains the only suspect. [/*]

Who cares. There is NO proof of anything.

Justice. imo

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 04:47 PM

Originally posted by Zaun

Who cares. There is NO proof of anything.

Justice. imo [/*]

No proof that YOU nor the rest of us out here know. Do YOU know what the investigators have? Do YOU know what the Grand Jury have seen or heard?

Justice, indeed.

AmndaRcknwth

05-08-2008, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by aubrey04

On the FSP website, there were two searches set up for May. One which supposedly already went down on May 3rd-4th -- and another scheduled for May 27th -28th. Are you saying you think they fabricated these searches and if so, why? Do you not believe that Stacy's family and friends truly want to find her? [/*]

No volunteer searches have been held since April 19-20.

Opportunities for aerial searches are now lost. Foliage is full. From a plane, the ground cannot be seen in forested areas. If SP is buried in a place like that, no one can see disturbed ground/burial site from a plane now.

No searches will be held this weekend because the FUNraiser begins at 5pm Saturday. But please do send desert.

On and on and on about how they needed $500/day for fuel. So a boat could go out a couple of weekends? What? Who does that?

Serious question... has ANYONE ever seen a MP (family/official representative) website like FSP? Full of cat pictures and insults and if you ask a question you are banned or called a troll or told to donate before you post.

Shame on them for doing her like this. Not to mention the defense is going to be able to use it against them.

All in the name of sticking it to Drew, they sacrifice what it should have been about: STACY.

Zaun

05-08-2008, 04:53 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

No proof that YOU nor the rest of us out here know. Do YOU know what the investigators have? Do YOU know what the Grand Jury have seen or heard?

Justice, indeed. [/*]

Well obviously they will attempt to railroad the husband but there is a great chance his lawyers may get a few jurors to hang despite the media tainting his jury pool. imo

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 04:59 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth

Respectfully snipped.....
[/*]

Not to get terribly off topic, but what's with the private message board you're advertising?

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by Zaun

Well obviously they will attempt to railroad the husband but there is a great chance his lawyers may get a few jurors to hang despite the media tainting his jury pool. imo [/*]

IMO, if they were going to "railroad" him they probably would have done that already. It's been seven months.

I think they know this will be the trial of the century and heavily scrutinized so they will make SURE they have a solid case against him. JMO

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by Zaun

Well obviously they will attempt to railroad the husband but there is a great chance his lawyers may get a few jurors to hang despite the media tainting his jury pool. imo [/*]

ROFLMAO!!! The media tainting the jury pool? I'd say Drew and Brodsky are doing a hefty bit of contributing to that theory of yours...
:lol:

magpie1

05-08-2008, 05:09 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie
I've been thinking about the "garden/shrine" in Sharon's front yard. We've all seen the roadside memorials where people have died in accidents. We've all seen the memorials/shrines pop up where someone has been killed. (Think about the pictures of the one where John Lennon was murdered.) Has anyone considered that the one in Sharon's yard is sort of appropriate in that context? Since they believe that Stacy was murdered in Drew's house, Sharon's yard is the closest they can get to making one of those memorials like we've all seen in the news? They can't do it in Drew's front yard. He wouldn't stand for it. But Sharon's yard is next door and Drew can't do anything about what she has in HER yard.
:shrug: [/*]

You're correct. In most cases, memorials are created as close to the place of death, or what is believed to be the place of death.

In this case, Sharon's yard is the most appropriate place for a memorial.

Zaun

05-08-2008, 05:12 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

ROFLMAO!!! The media tainting the jury pool? I'd say Drew and Brodsky are doing a hefty bit of contributing to that theory of yours...
:lol: [/*]

The media already tainted the jury pool with their deep obsession to spin the story for ratings. IMO

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
:confused: I never stated anything about me personally building milk carton shrines. Wrong again. Lets try this. What do you think will happen if they find the corpse of Stacy and they discover there is no link to DP for the causation of her death. Does he walk? :cool: [/*]Yup, Drew walks, and goes on to live a happy life.

Which is more than I can say for the poor milk carton people you have now decided to turn your back on.

Zaun

05-08-2008, 05:14 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

IMO, if they were going to "railroad" him they probably would have done that already. It's been seven months.

I think they know this will be the trial of the century and heavily scrutinized so they will make SURE they have a solid case against him. JMO [/*]

Why would it be the trial of the century? :confused: Alot of women go missing. jmo

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 05:16 PM

Originally posted by Zaun

Why would it be the trial of the century? :confused: Alot of women go missing. jmo [/*]

Sorry, I don't think my post was all that clear (I'm multi-tasking while at work). I was saying that BECAUSE of all the media attention, IMO they will be extremely careful not to "railroad" him, or arrest him without solid evidence. IMO

Uncle Zeek, I thoroughly enjoy your humor.

Zaun

05-08-2008, 05:17 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
:confused: I never stated anything about me personally building milk carton shrines. Wrong again. Lets try this. What do you think will happen if they find the corpse of Stacy and they discover there is no link to DP for the causation of her death. Does he walk? :cool: [/*]

I doubt there will be any evidence against him.....they will try and convict him by tainting the jury pool and then say it was " circumstantial" evidence that convicted him. IMO

Zaun

05-08-2008, 05:20 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

Sorry, I don't think my post was all that clear (I'm multi-tasking while at work). I was saying that BECAUSE of all the media attention, IMO they will be extremely careful not to "railroad" him, or arrest him without solid evidence. IMO

Uncle Zeek, I thoroughly enjoy your humor. [/*]

I think they will try and make him " Fit" because they want to build up their careers and get on Oprah to sell a book or two. IMObarf

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 05:23 PM

Originally posted by Zaun

I think they will try and make him " Fit" because they want to build up their careers and get on Oprah to sell a book or two. IMObarf [/*]

See, I think Joel Brodsky is more likely to go on Oprah or write a book than any of the prosecuters will, IMO.

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by Zaun

I doubt there will be any evidence against him.....they will try and convict him by tainting the jury pool and then say it was " circumstantial" evidence that convicted him. IMO [/*]Whatever gets him behind bars is fine with me.

Jpanda

05-08-2008, 05:24 PM

I just found this, stating that Kathleen's sister is going before the GJ today. Wasn't someone asking about this earlier?

http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2008/05/08/savios-sister-to-testify-thursday/

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 05:28 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda

See, I think Joel Brodsky is more likely to go on Oprah or write a book than any of the prosecuters will, IMO. [/*]

IIRC, I read in a couple articles that Brodsky was saying there was a lot of money to be made from the book deals from this case... I mean, geez.. the reporter that Drew and Brodsky initially went to with this dumb "good samaratan" story already has a book coming out that he tried to plug on Greta's show last night... lol

I agree, though... Brodsky stated at the beginning of this that one of the reasons he contacted Drew was so that he could get "fame".... He even bragged about how many google "hits" he was getting since taking on Drew's case..
:rolleyes:

aubrey04

05-08-2008, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth

No volunteer searches have been held since April 19-20.

Opportunities for aerial searches are now lost. Foliage is full. From a plane, the ground cannot be seen in forested areas. If SP is buried in a place like that, no one can see disturbed ground/burial site from a plane now.

No searches will be held this weekend because the FUNraiser begins at 5pm Saturday. But please do send desert.

On and on and on about how they needed $500/day for fuel. So a boat could go out a couple of weekends? What? Who does that?

Serious question... has ANYONE ever seen a MP (family/official representative) website like FSP? Full of cat pictures and insults and if you ask a question you are banned or called a troll or told to donate before you post.

Shame on them for doing her like this. Not to mention the defense is going to be able to use it against them.

All in the name of sticking it to Drew, they sacrifice what it should have been about: STACY. [/*]

I am not trying to argue with you, but on their website they state that a search was supposed to be conducted on May 3rd and 4th, but it was not a volunteer search.

The on May 17th and 18th, there will be a search with volunteers, but they haven't released the location or time yet.

So, do you believe those are lies? Do you believe they did not do a private search on the 3rd and 4th?

and honestly, do you NOT believe they want to find Stacy's body?

I am not a member on the FSP board because it's not my cup of tea, to be honest. I, personally, like seeing all opinions and all sides of the coin - even if I don't agree with them. That is why I come here.

but I still am having a hard time believing they are doing something that is sinister over there with regards to the donations. If one of my loved ones was missing and presumed dead, I would move heaven and earth to find their body.

So, I guess I am just confused on what you are inferring here.

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda
I just found this, stating that Kathleen's sister is going before the GJ today. Wasn't someone asking about this earlier?

http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2008/05/08/savios-sister-to-testify-thursday/ [/*]

I'm always curious about who is testifying each week. I would give anything to be a fly on the wall in that room every thursday... lol

magpie1

05-08-2008, 05:37 PM

Originally posted by aubrey04

I've seen the rumor about Drew dating this lady before. In fact, it was big talk on a few blog sites. I, seriously, hope that this woman is not dating Drew Peterson. She's an adult woman and can make her own choices in life, but from what I read she had children -- which really makes me worry.

http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2008/04/18/the-search-for-stacy-week-in-review-17/ [/*]

I agree that there's reason to be concerned. Denise supposedly has a 17-year-old daughter.

magpie1

05-08-2008, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by Zaun

Who cares. There is NO proof of anything.

Justice. imo [/*]

The Illinois State Police have stated that they have evidence. That evidence is not our right to see or know about until the time of a trial.

The Grand Jury has been calling witnesses now for almost 6 months. If the members of the Grand Jury have evidence to indict, they will.

Evidence = proof!

magpie1

05-08-2008, 05:51 PM

Originally posted by Zaun

I think they will try and make him " Fit" because they want to build up their careers and get on Oprah to sell a book or two. IMObarf [/*]

The only person who's trying to build his career and get on Oprah to sell a book is Joel Brodsky!

Rockford2

05-08-2008, 05:54 PM

why is anyone surprised that Drew may be dating again? She probably believes in his innocence, and i just knew it was a matter of time before he found somebody to date.

For a man who had a website up for a bit, asking people to donate money for his defense, he sure has enough money to hit the pubs and tanning salons.

kimmy56

05-08-2008, 06:04 PM

Originally posted by Rockford2
why is anyone surprised that Drew may be dating again? She probably believes in his innocence, and i just knew it was a matter of time before he found somebody to date.

For a man who had a website up for a bit, asking people to donate money for his defense, he sure has enough money to hit the pubs and tanning salons. [/*]

Not to mention how hard he's working taking care of those kids! I know I wouldn't have been out at 2:30 in the morning to help out a "friend" when I knew I'd have to be up early in the morning with four kids! But as Joel says "that's just the type of guy he is".

Yep, I think most of know what kind of guy he is!

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 06:09 PM

Originally posted by Rockford2
why is anyone surprised that Drew may be dating again? She probably believes in his innocence, and i just knew it was a matter of time before he found somebody to date.

For a man who had a website up for a bit, asking people to donate money for his defense, he sure has enough money to hit the pubs and tanning salons. [/*]

I'm not surprised at all that Drew would be dating. Errr.. Wait.. I am surprised that it took this long for it to get out. After all he was "advertising" for female company months ago.

As for the money; don't forget this man who was advertising for his "defense fund" also managed to write some rather large checks to his son...

magpie1

05-08-2008, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by AmndaRcknwth

Why... unclezeek, what a novel idea... the SISTER of the missing woman. Not the NOSY NEIGHBOR/employer bff.

Have you seen the picture of Sharon SMILING over Stacy's picture?

Here, check it out:
http://i31.tinypic.com/iy1niv.jpg

Her fav dessert is cheesecake on a stick.

No, not Stacy's. This isn't about her, it's about MzTV. [/*]

I checked out the FSP website and there was only ONE very brief mention of Sharon's favorite dessert. But when it was mentioned that Stacy liked anything chocolate, most of the posts are about baking something chocolate.

not.another

05-08-2008, 06:13 PM

Originally posted by Jpanda
I just found this, stating that Kathleen's sister is going before the GJ today. Wasn't someone asking about this earlier?

http://petersonstory.wordpress.com/2008/05/08/savios-sister-to-testify-thursday/ [/*]

Yep, that was me. I figured we would hear something today. I was hoping it was the boys of DP. Something is better than nothing.

aubrey04

05-08-2008, 06:35 PM

Originally posted by magpie1

I checked out the FSP website and there was only ONE very brief mention of Sharon's favorite dessert. But when it was mentioned that Stacy liked anything chocolate, most of the posts are about baking something chocolate. [/*]

I just looked it up, too. And all it says is that Sharon likes cheesecake on a stick. I've never heard of that but it might be a good thing to have at a fare-type event. I doubt that suggestion was made so Sharon could get some "free" cheesecake. That's absurd.

Also, I saw a poster mention that perhaps people could make a donation in their mother's name for mother's day.

I did not see where anyone suggested that people NOT buy their mother a gift and instead donate to the fund. I think both are pretty innocent suggestions on the site.

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 06:50 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
:eek: You don't think she's buried in Sharon's garden. Do you? Maybe Drew and Sharon are really involved in a conspiracy. The garden would certainly be a good cover up and smoke screen for their actions. Gosh the possibilities are endless.:cool: [/*]

I think you've been reading way too many two-bit bad murder mysteries... :rolleyes:

BobbysGirl

05-08-2008, 06:59 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
:eek: You don't think she's buried in Sharon's garden. Do you? Maybe Drew and Sharon are really involved in a conspiracy. The garden would certainly be a good cover up and smoke screen for their actions. Gosh the possibilities are endless.:cool: [/*]

:cool: uh ooooh!

I had time on and off this afternoon to catch up on any news. Read this thread. Quite obvious there are no news.

Stacy is missing. Period. Correct?

BG

not.another

05-08-2008, 07:00 PM

Originally posted by Rockford2
why is anyone surprised that Drew may be dating again? She probably believes in his innocence, and i just knew it was a matter of time before he found somebody to date.

For a man who had a website up for a bit, asking people to donate money for his defense, he sure has enough money to hit the pubs and tanning salons. [/*]

Maybe he thinks that by being tan he will receive more interest in himself? Oh wait, it must be the young tanned clientel. Everything this guy does is for a reason. What man at his age would need to even step foot in a tanning salon unless he is planning a vacation. OMG, maybe that's it. He's frequenting tanning salons because he is going to some island beach to search for Stacy? NOT!

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by BobbysGirl

:cool: uh ooooh!

I had time on and off this afternoon to catch up on any news. Read this thread. Quite obvious there are no news.

Stacy is missing. Period. Correct?

BG [/*]

Stacy is missing. And according to the investigators, she's a possible victim of a homicide and her husband is the ONLY suspect.

The one you quoted is trying his best to get stuff stirred up again.

Rockford2

05-08-2008, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by kimmy56

Not to mention how hard he's working taking care of those kids! I know I wouldn't have been out at 2:30 in the morning to help out a "friend" when I knew I'd have to be up early in the morning with four kids! But as Joel says "that's just the type of guy he is".

Yep, I think most of know what kind of guy he is! [/*]

wonder if good ol Drew would have gotten up at 2:30 to help a '50ish elderly hammer woman who needed his help?

Anyone know how old his 'lady of the moment' is??

Rockford2

05-08-2008, 07:06 PM

Originally posted by not.another

Maybe he thinks that by being tan he will receive more interest in himself? Oh wait, it must be the young tanned clientel. Everything this guy does is for a reason. What man at his age would need to even step foot in a tanning salon unless he is planning a vacation. OMG, maybe that's it. He's frequenting tanning salons because he is going to some island beach to search for Stacy? NOT! [/*]

ask any mother of 4 kids if she has time to hit the pubs and tanning salons? Especially with 2 smaller kids at home.

Especially for a man who needs to ask the public to donate money.

aubrey04

05-08-2008, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
Suspect of what? A missing person who's mental or physical condition is unknow.:cool: [/*]

Well, the police named Drew a suspect in the possible homicide of Stacy Peterson. This goes waaaaay back -- Here I even dredged up an article from early November 2007 --- where they had already named him their one and only suspect. You are keeping up with this case, aren't you? This is basic knowledge.

http://www.14wfie.com/Global/story.asp?S=7338053

not.another

05-08-2008, 07:15 PM

Originally posted by Rockford2

ask any mother of 4 kids if she has time to hit the pubs and tanning salons? Especially with 2 smaller kids at home.

Especially for a man who needs to ask the public to donate money. [/*]

I just read on the wiki website that Drew is receiving over $6,000 dollars per month on his pension. And he has the nerve to ask for donations? WOW! Glad that website got shut down as fast as it did. I'm sure JB isn't cheap but come on. Everyone should be a cop!

BobbysGirl

05-08-2008, 07:15 PM

Originally posted by Anakerie

Stacy is missing. And according to the investigators, she's a possible victim of a homicide and her husband is the ONLY suspect.

The one you quoted is trying his best to get stuff stirred up again. [/*]

YUP, she is missing all right and dear hubby is suspected. Curious why a posters opinion thinks it's "cool". To state an absurd assumption. IMO

BG

BG

Anakerie

05-08-2008, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
Thats it Bubba:cool: [/*]

Gerald, as much as you like "defending" the underdog, why aren't you defending the guy in Austria, Josef Fritzl? After all, the whole world is against him, not just the US.

Here's a link for you:
http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showthread.php?threadid=330059&perpage=40&pagenumber=1

sunmoonsky4u

05-08-2008, 07:19 PM

Originally posted by Rockford2

wonder if good ol Drew would have gotten up at 2:30 to help a '50ish elderly hammer woman who needed his help?

Anyone know how old his 'lady of the moment' is?? [/*]

what 50's woman are you refering to? No where in the article does JB refer to this elderly woman as 50ish. Just another example of someone reading something wrong and then it's gospel and spread as fact.
Oh but it sounds sooo juicy!
trust but verify!
snip

If you know Drew then you know that this is what he does. For example on Friday evening he was out for dinner with a friend and his wife, (both in there 50's). While having dinner a women in the restaurant, a stranger to Drew, had a seizure. Drew administered first aid to the woman, (32 years of law enforcement training), and stayed with her until the paramedics arrived. This didn’t make the news. It would have if the woman was 22, but because she was elderly there was no way to make it sinister, and therefore it would not sell papers.

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5166169592714997268&postID=9149613399932217491

magpie1

05-08-2008, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
Suspect of what? A missing person who's mental or physical condition is unknow.:cool: [/*]

The Illinois State Police named Drew Peterson a suspect early on in this case. Evidently this was based on what evidence they found in the Peterson house when they executed a search warrant.

It was after the initial search of the Peterson house that the request to exhume Kathleen Savio's body was made.

Most people believe a crime has been committed, and likely more than just one crime.

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
You obviously don't know anything about Grand Jurys. It's basically a one sided afair all in favor of the prosecution. The prosecution controls the GJ from begining to end. Maybe the ? you should be asking is why 6 months. As I have stated before you can get a ham sandwhich indicted by a GJ if you try hard enough.:cool: [/*]Right, a GJ is not a trial. Why 6 months? My firm belife is they don't have enough to charge him with anything.
The noose is not tightening.
His days are not numbered.
They are not being really carefull.

I think they don't have squat!

But I still belive Stacy is dead and Drew killed her and I don't have to have any proof to belive that.

magpie1

05-08-2008, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by gerald1
You obviously don't know anything about Grand Jurys. It's basically a one sided afair all in favor of the prosecution. The prosecution controls the GJ from begining to end. Maybe the ? you should be asking is why 6 months. As I have stated before you can get a ham sandwhich indicted by a GJ if you try hard enough.:cool: [/*]

I'm very well acquainted with a grand jury and their duties. Bringing a matter before a grand jury doesn't always result in an indictment, so I strongly disagree with your assessment that a "ham sandwich" could be indicted.

Why do you seek to cast doubt on the American system of justice?

BobbysGirl

05-08-2008, 07:37 PM

:lol: I love Bubba!

This is such an intriguing case with so many people and unanswered questions involved...I believe this case will come to fruition in due time. GJ can take and do all the time they need to indict or not.

IMO not a ham sandwhich. If it was, it be done and over with and Mr. Drew in custody. Patience is rewarding. In due time. May not be in my life time.

I do pray Stacy is found. If not, another cold case that could go on for years.

:rose: for Stacy and family. Kathleen as well.

BG

not.another

05-08-2008, 07:41 PM

Most of this link has probably been seen before. But just in case, here it is for your viewing pleasure...

http://www.foxnews.com/ontherecord/stacypeterson/index.html

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 08:42 PM

Originally posted by mcannie1965

Look for loose dirt!

mho [/*]I heard a cadaver dog is all you need.

magpie1

05-08-2008, 08:56 PM

Originally posted by not.another
Most of this link has probably been seen before. But just in case, here it is for your viewing pleasure...

http://www.foxnews.com/ontherecord/stacypeterson/index.html [/*]

Thanks not.another!

Reviewing the material at Fox News, there's so much circumstantial evidence in this case, and depending what evidence LE has, I think we'll see an indictment in this case. While finding Stacy's body would be best, there's been a number of successful "no body" prosecutions.

unclezeek

05-08-2008, 09:15 PM

Originally posted by magpie1

Thanks not.another!

Reviewing the material at Fox News, there's so much circumstantial evidence in this case, and depending what evidence LE has, I think we'll see an indictment in this case. While finding Stacy's body would be best, there's been a number of successful "no body" prosecutions. [/*]I had hoped you all still weren't falling for that.

They either need a body, or someone to talk. And with as many people that Drew would need to cover up two murders, there is someone.