Getting Away With Murder, Not Once, But Twice?

by Susan Murphy-Milano

The house located at 392 Pheasant Court, Bolingbrook, Illinois, became a cold case crime scene four years after a botched local "good old boys" police investigation.

The major screw-up also resulted in an incorrect autopsy report on a 2004 closed-case file.

Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow asked the court for permission to exhume the body of its former resident, Kathleen Savio. On February 21, 2008, her death was reclassified as a homicide.

My God, if those walls could speak, what would they reveal? A wife, devoted mother of two boys, and nursing student, isolated from anyone who would answer her pleas for help—including the police department employing her husband, Sgt. Drew Peterson. And the Will County State’s Attorney to whom she repeatedly sought out assistance as evidenced by one of several letters sent to the Will County State’s Attorney’s office.

Kathleen’s life and fight for survival makes the game show contestants' battles on Survivor look like child’s play.

Consider for a moment the life of any woman married to a person trained to kill, a man who upon graduation from the police academy is issued a firearm and a badge to protect our streets from criminals. Imagine being the wife of a man who comes home after his shift and terrorizes his own family members. When the person harming her is himself in law enforcement . . . where is a woman in this position, enduring a daily battleground, going to go for help?

In my professional opinion, the answer to this question does not exist.

A police officer's wife must take extraordinary measures just to get the police to respond, and, if she’s lucky, to write a report. In Kathleen’s case, the Bolingbrook police documented going to the home 19 times out of a possible 90 or more undocumented calls where police did not write a report or arrest their watch commander Sgt. Drew Peterson.

If Stacy Peterson had not vanished off the face of the planet, the truth about Kathleen Savio’s death would have remained in the Closed Case file cabinet collecting dust. Speaking of case files, if Illinois State Police investigators reviewed one by one each of Drew Peterson's arrest and case files over his twenty-nine year law enforcement career, I am confident that they would no doubt uncover important information and clues in solving one or both of these cases.

The grand jury has been convening for more than a year on Wife #3, Kathleen Savio, and Wife #4, Stacy Peterson. This past week brought a victory of sorts, as the appellate court allowed the family of Kathleen Savio to re-open and gain control of the estate Drew Peterson was trying block.

While we continue to watch Drew Peterson draw attention to himself like a circus act in the media, remember, it cost two women their lives. Do I believe the body of Stacy Peterson will be recovered? In my opinion, no.

In the case of Kathleen Savio, I am holding my breath, hoping the State’s Attorney, James Glasgow is able to bring justice in a court of law for these women, their children, and their families.

Tweet

Scared Monkeys Tonight

The Dana Pretzer Show On Scared Monkeys Radio

Sunday, December 21, 2008 - Tonight’s Guests: ADA Robin Sax, Tim Miller of Texas EquuSearch, Victims’ Right Advocate Wendy Murphy and Author Diane Fanning .

Tune in tonight LIVE at 9:00 eastern as Dana Pretzer welcomes the following guests:

ADA Robin Sax – She will be discussing her new book “Predators and Child Molesters: What Every Parent Needs to Know to Keep Kids Safe”

Wendy Murphy, a victims’ rights, sex crimes, violence against women and children advocate and the author of And Justice for Some will be discussing the Casey Anthony case and the recent events in the discovery of Caylee Anthony.

Author Diane Fanning will be discussing her new book The Pastors Wife the story of the Mary Winkler case. She has also just signed a contract to write a book on the Anthony case.

Tim Miller of Texas EquuSearch will be discussing the Caylee Anthony case.

Tweet

WOMEN IN CRIME INK RADIO TONIGHT!

This Fourth of July weekend, listen in as several WCI contributors discuss crime stories making the news. Join Forensics Specialist and Author Andrea Campbell, Crime Author Diane Fanning, Violence Expert and Author Susan Murphy-Milano, Criminal Defense Attorney Katherine Scardino, and Investigative Specialist Donna Weaver as Dana Pretzer hosts a special broadcast for Scared Monkeys Radio. On tap for discussion: Brooke Bennett, Becca McEvoy, Mandatory Minimum Sentencing, and Zodiac–is there a Part 2? Tune in Sunday, July 6, from 9:00 - 10 p.m. ET, LIVE ON http://scaredmonkeysradio.com/

Tweet

WOMEN IN CRIME INK RADIO

Tonight, please join Women in Crime Ink contributors Pat Brown, Stacy Dittrich, Diane Fanning, Vanessa Leggett, Donna Pendergast, and Robin Sax as Dana Pretzer, host of Scared Monkeys Radio, features them discussing today's hot stories and issues in the world of crime. Please feel free to tune in and comment on Tuesday, May 6, beginning at 9:00 p.m. EDT, LIVE ON http://scaredmonkeysradio.com/

Listen to Podcast:

FreeVideoCoding.com

Tweet

Ink Blotter

Ink Blotter

Today's Ink Blotter is whatever you want it to be. One of our readers, Cherry Simpson, expressed interest in discussing the Becca McEvoy case, which we featured in a post last Thursday. Good choice, Cherry. Unfortunately, our most knowledgeable contributor on that case, Robin Sax, is unavailable today. But please open the discussion. First, listen to Robin discuss the case on Scared Monkeys radio with outraged friends and family of Becca McEvoy here. Then tell us how you see it. In the upcoming week, we will respond to your thoughts with our own impressions in the live chat box.

Post-chat update: This afternoon, Robin Sax was able to make an appearance, as was Scared Monkeys host Dana Pretzer--both authorities on the Becca McEvoy case. Thanks to Dana for getting the ball rolling today. And for helping the conversation pick up speed, thanks to WCI contributors Kathryn Casey, Stacy Dittrich, and Diane Fanning. The panel that took shape this afternoon was ideal for the subjects covered, which included the polygamists in Texas. All the women who participated in our live chat have prosecuted, arrested, and/or written on sex offenders.

Tweet

Why Does a Child Molester Get to Benefit from the System He Disgraced?

by Robin Sax

The last two years of 12-year-old Becca McEvoy's short life were spent living with sexual abuse by her stepfather, Bob Inge (pictured left). It’s not all that unusual, unfortunately, to hear of horrendous sex abuse stories where step-dads are molesting, raping, and running their step-daughters through the Penal Code. But this case is heinous on so many more levels that even the truest believers out there should be motivated to see that certain laws need amending—fast!

So what makes this case so wrong?

1. The defendant is Corporal Bob Inge, once a police officer with the Chickasaw Police Department;

2. The defendant is now out of custody and is living with young children as he awaits the court’s ruling;

3. The defendant was arrested in 2006, and Becca died in March 2008, in an unforeseen car accident; and

4. The Supreme Court decision from Crawford v Washington will probably let this pedophile walk.

As a result of the Crawford decision, the validity of firmly rooted hearsay exceptions has been called into question. Performing the “indicia of reliability” or “trustworthiness” test for hearsay statements has been abolished because Crawford overruled the decision in Ohio v Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, back in 1980.

So how does Crawford work? When deciding whether a hearsay statement will be admissible at trial without the declarant testifying, courts apply the following formula:

Step 1. Is the hearsay statement testimonial? Was the statement made to a government agent? Did a government agent question the declarant? Would the declarant reasonably expect that the statement would later be used at trial?

a. If the answer is no, then utilize your state’s Rules of Evidence to determine whether the hearsay statement falls into a recognized exception which may negate the need for the declarant to testify.

b. If the answer is yes, then proceed to Step 2.

Step 2: Have the declarant testify and be subject to cross-examination.

a. If the declarant is unavailable, but testified at a prior proceeding and was subject to cross-examination, the transcript of the prior testimony will be admissible and other admissible hearsay statements will also be allowed (such as statements made during a forensic interview).

b. If the witness/victim is unavailable and has never testified in any proceeding in the case, then all hearsay statements will be inadmissible.

What you may notice in this formula’s short checklist is that there is no Step 3. That means if a witness is no longer available (and death certainly qualifies) and (i) there is no other exception to the hearsay rule that would apply or (ii) there hasn’t been any testimony subject to cross-examination, we are basically left with 2 choices.

One, we can hope that there are other ways to make the case (DNA, other victims, defendant’s admissions, etc.) or, two, the case can get dismissed.

While it seems convenient to say, “Well, let’s try to prove the case by some other means,” that is problematic, especially when your perp is a cop. I mean, do you really think a cop is going to confess or admit to his wrongdoings? And do you think he left any evidence around?

Think about, it. Sex crimes happen in the most secretive of ways in the most covert places. If this guy is even a third-rate cop, don’t you think he covered his tracks? And it’s not as if sex crime perps leave a ton of evidence, even in the best investigations. We all know that the defendant isn’t at all concerned about leaving his evidence in the victim’s heart and mind: permanent scars of abuse.

I am all about defendants having rights. But what about the victim’s rights, and victims before her? Why does Bill Inge get a pass? Why does a child molester get to walk free as we all sit back and wait for him to do it again?

So, what’s the answer? The answer is to carve out an exception.

How about a specific child sexual assault exception where grand jury testimony could be admitted in a trial? (Becca testified at TWO prior grand jury hearings.) How about hearsay statements made to a police officer coupled with grand jury testimony to ensure reliability and consistency? How about testimony where a child has said same thing to a number of civilians as corroboration to police testimony and grand jury testimony? The point is there should be alternative exceptions. There are ways to ensure reliability and trustworthiness and therefore, there should be a way to get Becca’s voice heard and not let the men who disgraced his position as stepdad and cop go free.

Note: This post and all other posts by Robin Sax represent Robin's personal opinion and NOT the opinion of the LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY nor the LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

Tweet

Hear No Evil - WCI Podcast

Scared Monkeys Radio was not afraid to give the mic to Women in Crime Ink . . . even when three of us shared airtime with wife murder suspect Drew Peterson. The Dana Pretzer Show featured Women in Crime Ink on Tuesday, March 11, 2008. Listen in on an interview with Criminal Profiler Pat Brown, Crime Writer Vanessa Leggett, and Sex-crimes Prosecutor Robin Sax. Other guests: former Bolingbrook police sergeant Drew Peterson with his attorney, Joel Brodsky, and a Scared Monkey on the Natalee Holloway case. Take a listen. We'll speak no evil.

FreeVideoCoding.com

Tweet