Reflections on Snow, Crime, and Punishment

by Anne Bremner
Co-Authored by Bob Sims

Oh no, like salt on snow
I've been melted
Left alone on the side of the road
Is this where I am over
For your sake
Stuck between sleep and awake?

Having been snowbound for days here in wintry Seattle, my thoughts have drifted lately. But, still, I remain vigilant in my thinking about my cases, especially the ones involving missing persons and how inclement weather conditions sometimes affect the lack of crime.

I began pondering this when I started thinking about my clients Chuck and Judy Cox, and their missing daughter, Susan Cox Powell. More than two years ago Susan went missing when her husband Josh Powell supposedly took the couple's then 2- and 4-year-old sons camping in snowy Utah at midnight, browning marshmallows by campfire in the dead of winter.

Many speculate that Susan is out there in the snow, the snow that has melted and then fallen again and again over two long intervening winters. Others speculate she is alive and at some point has been kept secretly by Josh Powell and his father Steven Powell. But not many do. She is somewhere between sleep and awake.

Statistics show that snowy conditions reduce crime rates. This has been described in Dr. Emily Bloom's "The Ice Factor," where she wrote about how "snow slays crime."

And it is true. Crime declines during snowstorms. Is it the calming quiet that tames the beast in us? Or the inablity to get out and do things -- good or evil?"

It reminds me of what my psychiatrist father said when he was doing studies for Prozac, in the face of claims that Prozac made some people kill. My father said it just helped them get out of bed and they would've killed anyway.

"The first fall of snow is not an event, it is a magical event."

The thoughts of an icy, snowy death are unimaginable to me, like learning about those mountain climbers who died on Mt. Everest, as expressed so eloquently by Jon Krakauer in his book, "Into Thin Air."

It's almost akin to Titanic passengers drowning in the dark, icy North Atlantic waters long ago -- the same fate for some on the sinking cruise ship Costa Concordia off the Italian coast recently.

I believe Susan Powell didn't die in the snow, and the snow story just might turn out to be the Cox family's salvation. Almost everyone who has heard the story has scoffed and pointed toward her husband Josh Powell as a person of interest, for the very reason he has concocted this improbable tale.

"The future lies before you, like paths of pure white snow. Be careful how you tread, for every step is sown."

Crimes are not committed in snow.
In fact, such a claim makes me incredulous. As a prosecutor, I use the "footprints in the snow" analogy to describe circumstantial evidence.

When you retire to bed at night, the ground is covered with fresh and pristine snow, untouched. When you wake up in the morning, there are footprints in the snow, leading to your doorstep where the morning's newspaper is there. You didn't see the person deliver your newspaper directly, but circumstantial evidence tells you, via footprints in the snow, that someone indeed did.

Snow. Crime. Punishment. Help us find Susan Cox Powell.

Tweet

Summer Mystery: The Disappearance of John James Morris

by Michelle Sigona 

Madeline Morris has been searching for her missing son for the last four years. Montgomery County Police say John James Morris, 37, went missing from Dickerson, Maryland on July 30, 2007. He was last seen near his home at the 2400 block of White’s Ferry Road standing at the end of the driveway.

At the time he vanished, John shared his residence with his boyfriend. Police say his vehicle and belongings were left behind and there has been no trace of him since. In a press release, Montgomery County Police say, “Extensive investigative techniques have been used during this multi-year investigation to try to gain information about what may have happened to Morris. No evidence has been developed to confirm whether or not Morris remains alive. The family believes that he would not have stayed away this long without making contact with his family. His family also believes that he would not intentionally have left and abandoned his dog. At this stage of the investigation, foul play is suspected.”

Madeline says, "If you have any idea of what happened to John, please be a human being with a conscience and come forward. The truth will set you free. What comes around goes around, if not here, but at your final judgment day. Only you can make things right by coming forward and beg God's forgiveness.”

John has a tattoo of a scorpion on his left shoulder and a snake on his right forearm. According to the  website, he has a scar on his right calf, and his left ear is pierced.

A $1,000 reward is being offered for answers in this case. If you have any information, please contact Montgomery County Police at (240) 773-6239

Tweet

The Holly Bobo Case: Serial Killer, Bad Boyfriend, or Staged Abduction?

by Pat Brown

Another story of a beautiful, missing woman has taken over the media. Twenty-year-old nursing student, Holly Bobo, disappeared on April 13 from Parsons, Tennessee, and she has not been found.

With so much misinformation, changing stories, rumors, and peculiar behavior on the part of the family and law enforcement, the only thing we really know is that something horrible happened to Holly Bobo. Now, I know a few people believe that Holly ran away or that the family is hiding her and trying to collect money, and some people even think that this is a ruse to further the career of country music singer, Whitney Duncan. None of this I believe to be true, especially the last one. Duncan, who has some lovely songs that have made the charts, is doing fine enough on her own, she will thank you very much, and she doesn't need some horrifying charade like this to get her notice.

The chance of Holly being found alive is slim to none. But the looming question is did one of her boyfriends take her away? Is there a serial killer loose in the area? Or, did a family member do something to Holly, perhaps in a rage over some particular issue, real or imagined? I have worked a couple of Cain-and-Abel cases in which one child became jealous of the other and murdered them to get rid of the competition and gain the parents' attention. It usually works, because parents tend to hang on to the one remaining child left and fight to save him.

So, what happened to Holly? Here are a few known facts.

Fact One: Holly Bobo has not been seen in over a week.

Fact Two: Holly's brother, Clint, claims to be the last one who saw Holly in the company of a man that looked like her boyfriend.

Fact Three: Holly's white lunchbox was found in a creek eight miles from her home.

This is all we know. Everything else we can only wonder about. Many think we know more, but we don't because we are either taking the family's word on it or the convoluted and changing stories from law enforcement or the media. Because of all this confusion, there are four credible theories as to what happened to Holly:

Theory One: A serial killer or stalker abducted Holly

Theory Two: One of her boyfriends (present or ex) abducted Holly.

Theory Three: Holly's brother, Clint, did something to Holly and the family has no idea.

Theory Four: A family member did something to Holly, most likely Clint, and they are all covering it up.

Now, in saying this, I can guess there are those who will become immediately angry that I would even suggest Theory Three and Four. But as a criminal profiler, I cannot eliminate these possibilities unless they can be proven to not possibly be true. Sad as it is to ever question a family's involvement - especially when you understand the pain they must be in - the family is statistically the most likely to be responsible for a member's homicide and they must be looked at first and foremost unless they can be clearly eliminated by the evidence.

As it stands now with the Bobo family, they were the last to see Holly. Actually, the father never stated when he last saw Holly and the mother never stated when she last saw Holly. Only the brother has claimed to have seen his sister on the morning of her disappearance, and it has been stated he called 911 to report her missing. We have no information as to when Holly was last heard from, although there is a claim there was some activity on the phone after she went missing (whether it was a ping or a text, we do not know).

We cannot know at this time if Holly was alive the morning the 911 call from Clint was made. We have heard of a woman, supposedly a neighbor, who reportedly called 911 after hearing a female scream. We have yet to get clarity on the veracity of that call or when it was actually made, although the sheriff sort of stated it was around the time Clint saw Holly with the guy he thought was a boyfriend (but Clint didn't hear his sister scream). The police have not released either the 911 call from Clint Bobo nor this supposed 911 call from the neighbor. Why?

Next, we have some mighty strange stories about Clint Bobo's 911 call. When the story first broke, we heard it was a home invasion. We heard of a man in camouflage who dragged Holly off into the woods. Then we heard that Holly was never dragged off but that what Clint actually saw through a window was a man walking off with Holly into the woods. He thought - because their backs were to him - Holly was with her boyfriend, that he didn't think anything was wrong until he came out some forty minutes later to find her car still there and blood spatter in the area. It is theorized that media got it wrong but it is also stated by law enforcement that they originally believed she was dragged. How can the story change? In the 911 call, did Clint say Holly was dragged but changed his story later when no drag marks were found or did law enforcement misinterpret his phone call or did the media get it wrong? Why isn't Clint Bobo's 911 call being released?

For that matter, why isn't a decent description of the alleged abductor being released? Bobo supposedly claims (we have never heard from him because he has not been spoken to the media or appeared in front of any cameras) that the abductor was 5-foot-10 to 6-feet tall and about 200 pounds. Is that the same height and weight for the boyfriend he is said to have thought was with Holly? I have seen some photos of the boyfriend, and he doesn't look anywhere near 200 pounds. How about hair color? Did he have on a hat? Is he the same build as the brother, whose photo doesn't seem to be anywhere around? Why, if the police believe Clint Bobo's story, have they not released clear information about the suspect?

The police have stated that no one has been eliminated as a suspect. At the same time, they actually stated that Holly was led away into the woods "in fear of her life." What kind of cock-and-bull statement is that from law enforcement? If they did not see Holly being led away on camera and if all Clint said was he saw Holly walking off with a man in such a fashion that he didn't notice her in any distress, how do the police make such a ridiculous claim? And, in making that statement, they are indeed saying that the family has been eliminated. They also have stated that Holly may have been spirited out of the area but she is still in the state! How would they know this unless they know exactly who took her and where that person is? Why are they still searching through the bushes then? Why is law enforcement so inconsistent? Are they purposely giving misinformation or are they simply not very competent? I am not too happy with either conclusion. Even the family spokesperson, Kevin Bromley, appeared on Nancy Grace, stumbled over his words, hemmed and hawed, and was very evasive about the details of what happened at the Bobo home and whether Clint Bobo had taken a polygraph. This does not inspire confidence in the family's noninvolvement.

The community has put their heart out for this family and the search for Holly. They have responded in a way I wish every community would respond. They have given wholeheartedly and without reservation, given their time and money and physical and emotional efforts scouring the dense woods for this missing woman. I would hate to think they have been played by either the family or the police. They have the right to know the truth, as much as is known, at this time.

What needs to be done:

• The family and the boyfriends need to take polygraphs.
• The family and boyfriends need to be alibied.
• The family, including the brother, need to step forward and clearly state where everyone was after the last time Holly was seen or heard of from a non-family member (by voice, not text).
• The brother needs to give a clear public description of what he saw at the home, when he saw it, and what he did.
• The 911 calls need to be released to the public.
• A description of the supposed blood spatter needs to be released by the police, including what it is (human or animal) and whose it is (known person's or persons, or stranger's, or known person's and stranger's).
• The police need to clarify exactly what items of Holly's were found and where, and what items of Holly's are missing.

One final note that has really raised eyebrows. The media is reporting that the family is selling T-shirts for twelve dollars each and more than 2500 have been sold so far. The sales are going into The Holly Bobo Fund which is described as monies being saved to give Holly a vacation when she gets home, not a fund to help pay for searches or help victims of abduction and homicide. If this is true, it is one more issue that makes people uncomfortable with the Bobo family's behaviors. Not only is this inappropriate for the family of a victim to collect money that doesn't go toward the cause, but it makes me wonder if this is money being set aside for a defense fund.

If this is a true abduction, the police and the family should have no problem complying with the above list and, furthermore, it could only help, and not damage, the investigation. If the incomplete and erroneous information continues to be all that is offered to the public, no one can blame folks out there for questioning whether the family had something to do with Holly Bobo going missing. At some point, they may simply stop looking for her. That they haven't given up is a testament to good neighbors and a strong community. God bless them all.

Tweet

'How to get Away With the Ultimate Murder,' Author Unknown

by Susan Murphy Milano

Late last week, a Michigan jury found Doug Stewart guilty of the murder of his wife, Venus Stewart, who was abducted from just outside her parents' home in Michigan April 26, 2010. The relationship had a documented history of violence. Venus Stewart filed for divorce and moved out of the marital home. Doug Stewart, according to police reports, was furious with her sending text messages and emails, demanding she return with the kids or “you know what will happen if you don’t.” Once she was finally able to leave the toxic and dangerous environment, as in all intimate partner violence relationships, the abuser went into action plan mode. 

The victim files numerous police reports and has court orders of protection; she tells friends and family she is in fear for her life. Why? Because he lost ownership, power and control over the person with whom they married. In the inner workings of an abuser’s mind, “till death do us part” is now their goal.

As an angry abuser, not wanting the person with whom I am in a relationship to leave, I am going to boil over like hot liquid on a stove. And, as an abuser, I have a lot of time to think out a plan of action. In the beginning, after the victim leaves, I am going to threaten the person where no one else can hear me. I will make a victim's life unbearable during the divorce process, especially in court mandated mediation meetings with mental health evaluators, while sitting dressed neatly and showing the world what a wonderful person I am. The moment the session is over I will shoot those looks of "now you did it" and "you are going to pay for this if you do not return to me." Next, as custody of the kids is being determined, as an abuser, I am outraged and think about how "she is not getting away with this alive."

I then, as the abuser, figure out where to get that special "handbook" available to members only in an eBook format that the recently formed "secret society of abusers" are all reading, titled How to Get Away With the Ultimate Murder, author unknown.

For some abusers, in my expert opinion, the handbook has worked in cases where the victim has vanished without a trace. There must be a chapter in the "handbook" on how to correctly lawyer up, as you will notice with each person of interest in cases where the wife is reported missing, the last person to see them no longer cooperates with authorities. In the blink of an eye, most persons of interest hire a fairly skilled defense attorney in the early stages. The legal hired armor acts as the shield or the mouth piece for the only person, once again in my expert opinion, behind the vanishing act of their loved one. Perfect example is the upcoming trial for the murder of missing mother Renee Pernice. Her husband, Shon Pernice, who is awaiting trial, secured an attorney immediately.

Isn't it rather strange that the victim is often the mother of their children, estranged wife or girlfriend? And, more often than not, they are going through a divorce or custody battle. And, yes, I need to mention that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

All of these cases have a common theme: The person has been erased from the planet, never to be seen or heard from again. A common theme does not make one guilty of the crime, but it is highly unusual that the person with whom the relationship has ended, in cases of intimate partner violence, does not have a motive. The facts, although circumstantial, do carry a lot of weight but is often not enough for a grand jury indictment, unless you have a body.

The prosecutor, John McDonough, went ahead and tried the Stewart case without a body. Not an easy task. But, he had enough circumstantial evidence and proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Douglas Stewart was found guilty by a jury of first-degree premeditated murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree premeditated murder. Stewart is scheduled for sentencing sometime next month. The remains of Venus Stewart have yet to be found.

Venus Stewart is still missing. Anyone with information on the case is asked to contact Michigan State Police White Pigeon Post at 269-483-7611 or Rockford Regional Dispatch Center at 616-866-6666.

Tweet

Two Cases of Missing Mothers, and One Suspect

by Susan Murphy Milano

It was January 2, 2009 when Shon Pernice was scheduled to attend a training session with the Missouri National Guard. Instead he picks up his kids at a neighbors home and his wife, Renee, is not there. That evening his daughter from another relationship was concerned she had not heard from Renee, her step-mother. Around 9:30 pm the child calls Renee, leaving a voice mail asking her to come home.

Saturday, January 3, at approximately 4:30 a.m., leaving his 11,- 8-, and 6-year-old children alone while they were sleeping, Shon Pernice goes to a fire station. He used his key card to enter Fire Station No. 5’s hazmat storage area. This area stores chemicals used for clean-up of hazardous spills. Shon is an EMT for the Independence, Missouri, fire department assigned to Fire Station No. 7, not station No. 5–a huge red flag.

He does not report to the National Guard that weekend. He goes into a facility likely forgetting or not knowing that his key card will be documented and recorded upon entry. His story is fabricated. He is the last person to see her alive. He does not report Renee missing. He has a lot to lose financially.

On Saturday, January 3, the stepchild calls her mother. According to accounts, the child is scared, so her mother picks up the daughter at the Pernice home, cutting short the normal visit. She then contacts someone from Renee’s family. A few hours later a family member calls the Pernice home to speak to Renee. Shon answered and said that he did not know where Renee was. Family members called 911.

Shon Pernice has given conflicting information on when he last saw Renee. He told a family member it was on January 1. He told police it was on the morning of January 2 between 9 and 10 a.m. At approximately 3 p.m., family members met officers at Renee’s home. Family members, along with officers, entered the residence and discovered that no one was home. They also discovered that Renee’s purse, vehicle, personal hygiene items and coat were at the residence. They noticed that Renee’s wallet, credit cards and cell phone were missing. Renee’s car was parked in the garage.

At the Pernice residence a call came in to a family member from Renee’s cell phone at approximately 4 pm. A homeless man had found the phone at about 1 a.m. on the morning of January 3, 2009, on the ground in the northeast part of town, approximately 12 miles from Renee’s home. Police sent a patrolman to pick up Renee’s phone from the homeless person.

The family members, not Shon Pernice, filed a missing person report while at the residence with police.

Another red flag, and important pattern of conduct by the last person to see his wife alive, Shon Pernice and  two attorneys arrived at the home and ordered the family and police to leave. The attorneys stated Pernice would not be speaking to family members or the police except through them.

On Sunday, January 4, Renee’s family immediately printed up posters and began posting flyers. They also searched portions of Kessler Park close to where Renee’s cell phone was found. In addition, the family contacted the local news stations asking if they would broadcast the news of Renee’s disappearance.

Monday, January 5, Detectives found divorce documents at Renee’s place of employment. They also found a photo of Shon with one of the children and an unknown woman in the file.

Tuesday, January 6, in the evening, Shon drove to Line Creek Park, approximately 1.5 miles from Renee’s house and let the family dog out of the van and left. Detectives who were observing Shon retrieved the dog. On January 7, police to obtain a warrant to search Renee’s house and they obtained another warrant on January 9 for the car.

A little over two years since Renee Pernice vanished, her remains have yet to be recovered. Had the stepchild not been alarmed and contacted her mother, a lot more evidence would have likely vanished.

In May of 2010, without a body, Shon Pernice was charged with murder and is being held on a million dollar bond. He is scheduled for trial in June of 2011. What is disturbing is that Renee may never be located because of the chemicals, in my opinion, used when he killed her. The timeline of when the children went to bed and when Pernice left the residence is important because that is when he may have disposed of her body. Where he had it hidden is anyone's guess, but it had to be a safe enough place for him to return, a place only he knew, where no one would suspect.

The details a week prior are also important to the case, including cell phone records, purchases at hardware stores, his timecards at work, the strange woman in a photo with him and the kids. His fire work boots and, frankly, any shoes in his truck, locker at work, the house and on the property are important evidence along with credit card activity six months prior. If they can identify the woman from the photo, her cell phone records and credit card activity should also be considered, as this is someone who might unknowingly make purchases for him, or secure a cell phone and have packages delivered to her.

The pattern of conduct of Renee Pernice leading up to the day she vanished could be like so many other women trying to leave a marriage. Renee held a good job with a salary large enough to support herself and her children. In fact, Renee alone cared for her children while her husband was stationed overseas. During the investigation, divorce papers were discovered in Renee's home office, leading us to believe she was serious this time about leaving her marriage.

Renee Pernice was close to her family, was in constant contact, and as is often heard in cases of missing mothers, "She would never leave her children." Most of the statements from Shon Pernice are in direct contrast with the woman and mother her family knew her to be. Perhaps Renée confided in her family or close friends about the upcoming divorce, or about the problems in her marriage leading her to make the decision to finalize the divorce.

Tragically, this case is one of thousands, when a person begins a divorce action, separates or ends a relationship, that having the Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit (as provided in the book Time's Up) and video prepared, with copies given to trusted friends and relatives, removes the burden by surviving families members to have cases of intimate partner homicide investigated and those responsible arrested.

A $25,000 reward has been offered for information that leads to where her remains. The family is trying to appeal to the people that know, or have heard things on the fringes and could give them a tip. That's all they're asking for, according to Renee's father, Rick Pretz.

Anyone with information on Renee Pernice's disappearance is asked to call the TIPS Hotline at 816-474-TIPS.

Shon Pernice is also linked to another missing mother, Star Boomer. In my opinion, he can be placed at her crime scene according to eye witnesses years earlier. Star Boomer has been missing since 1999, and she left behind a son and a family who deserve some real, truthful answers. Shon Pernice was the last person known to see both women.

There is a $5,000 reward for information in Star Boomer's case. Call the TIPS Hotline or link to the family's private investigator's website for the case. Those with information about the disappearance of Star Boomer are asked to contact the KBI at (800)-KS-CRIME

Tweet

The State's Burden of Proof: 2 Cases 25 Years Apart

by Susan Murphy Milano

Robert Dianovsky maintained that his wife Peggy left their home voluntarily and took a bag of clothing with her when she vanished in September of 1982. Peggy Dianovsky left her yellow Chevrolet Nova behind and never picked up her last paycheck from her employer, Dominick's. Blood was found spattered at the top of the stairway in the Dianovsky home, but none of it was ever collected for analysis.

Robert took the boys and moved to Arizona sometime after 1982. He also filed for divorce, claiming Peggy abondoned him and the children. He was charged in 2003 with Peggy's murder. Their three sons went to the police in 2002 after tape recording a conversation with Robert where he made suspicious statement about Peggy's disappearance. One of the Dianovsky children says he witnessed his mother's murder, and all three of them say they saw Robert abuse and threaten Peggy. They claim they repressed the memories of the events but recovered them in therapy sessions as adults. One of Robert's friends also testified that Robert asked him for a gun in 1982 to "get rid of" Peggy. Robert also claimed his wife was having an affair.

In all, six hours of audio were taped when Dianovsky's three sons confronted and accused him of their mother's murder. The sons contend their father killed Peggy Dianovsky on September 12, 1982, in their Schaumburg, Ill., home during a brutal beating.

On the tapes, the accused man says, "I hit her pretty good." He also admits to previously saying his wife would never get out of the marriage alive. Dianovsky also said that he cut off his wife's tennis clothes in a jealous rage, and that his grown sons can tell their kids, "Your dad did something to her."

The trial took place in Cook County, Illinois, before a judge rather than a jury. Judge Robert Porter acquitted Robert after an eight-day trial in November 2004. He stated that Peggy probably had in fact been murdered after her disappearance, but there was insufficient evidence to prove that Robert did it.

The relevance of the Robert Dianovsky case, in my opinion, is important in the upcoming Drew Peterson trial as it pertains to evidence, as well as the State's burden to prove that Peterson murdered Kathleen Savio. Drew Peterson is awaiting trial for the murder of Kathleen Savio, his third wife. The State in this case is working on the admittance of hearsay testimony. Below is my explanation of hearsay as it would apply to the Peterson case.

Hearsay is an out-of-court statement "offered for the truth of the matter asserted" and is not subject to cross-examination, typically because the declarant or speaker is unavailable. This applies to Stacy Peterson because she is not "available." Such statements are deemed unreliable because of the obvious fact that they can easily be fabricated and can not be tested through cross examination.

One basic way to get around hearsay is to seek admission, not for the truth of the statement itself, but for another highly relevant purpose. For example, let's say I am charged with intentionally shooting my daughter's boyfriend (which is not beyond the realm of reason) while the two of them are harmlessly playing tie-up. Prior to bursting into the room and firing, I was told by her ex-boyfriend that the new guy was in the process of raping her. My defense is not intentional murder, but, rather, manslaughter because I believed the ex, who has since fled to Costa Rica and is unavailable at trial. Here I would offer his statement of rape, not because it was true, but because of the effect it had on my mental state, a very relevant fact in the case. Again, I am not offering it for its truth and therefore whether it was fabricated is not in issue. Whether the statement was made and whether my response was reasonable (based upon my credibility) can all be determined by the trier of fact at trial because I, not the ex, would be subject to cross-examination. In any event, statements can be admissible solely for their impact upon the listener (if relevant in a case) and not for the truth of the statement.

This approach should be very relevant to the statement Anna Domain (Kathleen Savio's sister) could testify to, "that Kathleen asked her to care for her kids." This is dynamite. Not offering it for the truth that Peterson said he wanted to kill her, but for the independent impact it had on her and her mental state to seek care for her children. Anna Domain could testify to her observations regarding Kathleen's credible belief that she needed to secure care for her kids because she was going to die soon. This really should have tremendous impact on the State's case, assuming Anna Domain is well prepared on the stand. And fear is hearsay with no subsequent act reflecting impact on her mental state.

Now for the exceptions, which have literally swallowed up the general rule. Since the beginning of time, Courts have recognized certain fact patterns that contain such inherent elements of reliability that they overcome the need for cross-examination. All of this is based on a notion of getting all relevant information to the jury that is subject to a prejudice in the analysis of the defendant. For the State this stuff is worth fighting over because it usually means game over for the defendant. Certain fact patterns below have crystallized into exceptions.

• Dying Declaration - declarant unavailable says just before dying to witness "Mr. X shot me." This is admissible based upon the notion that people who are dying do not typically have a motive to lie. Witness will testify as to demeanor of declarant.

• Excited Utterance - declarant screams "the plane is going to crash into the house" and witnesses doesn't see the plane. Here admission is based on the fact that when people are experiencing a startling event under stress they don't have time to fabricate.

• Present Sense Impression - this is the same as above, except the witness also experiences the same event as the declarant, and therefor the declarant's statement is relevant.

The exception used the most by prosecutors, and the one that is highly relevant for Peterson purposes, is a Statement Against Interest. For example, if I told you that I "did dope and shit," the statement would be admissable based on the theory that people do not make up highly negative evidence against themselves, especially facts that would subject them to criminal prosecution.

This is highly relevant for Stacy's statements to Pastor Neil Schori and Mike Rossetto that she provided an alibi, because it shows that she was willing to obstruct justice at Peterson's direction regarding Kathleen. Now maybe during the admissibility hearing the witnesses were weak on the statement, or just did not provide enough detail regarding the circumstances of the meeting with Stacy to overcome the highly prejudicial impact of the statement.

The state's case has more twists and turns than a tornado. Will Drew Peterson be acquitted? Is the State's case strong enough? No one really knows what the outcome will be. What we do know is what Peterson said in interviews when Stacy vanished. Just as Robert Dianovsky said 25 years earlier, "It's where she wants to be." Drew Peterson echoed those same words in media interviews shortly after Stacy Peterson disappeared October, 28, 2007.

Tweet

Silenced

by Susan Murphy-Milano

Two years ago today, 23-year-old Stacy Ann Peterson vanished from the house in the Illinois suburb of Bolingbrook that she shared with her police-officer husband Drew Peterson, her two children and his two sons, whom she'd adopted.

After several months of being stalked and living under her husband's tight, controlling reins, Stacy Peterson told her husband the marriage was over. In October 2007, Stacy met and consulted with divorce attorney Harry Smith -- ironically, the same lawyer Kathleen Savio hired to represent her when she decided to divorce Peterson.

When Stacy failed to show up at her brother's house that late-October day, family members were concerned, especially her sister Cassandra Cales. Just two days earlier, after a cozy family night of movie and pizza, Stacy warned Cassandra that she planned to leave Peterson and said: "If something happens to me, I just want you to know it was Drew." When Cassandra couldn't reach her missing sister, she went to Stacy's house and found the four children home alone, with no sign of Peterson's car. At the Bolingbrook Police Department, Cassandra filed a missing-person report.

Within 48 hours, camera crews and journalists besieged the once quiet suburban cul-de-sac. Peterson, then a police sergeant, gave them a show -- a bizarre public display including personal attacks on his wife and her family in the wake of her disappearance. The national media covered Peterson's act like a low-life reality TV show. Each day as Peterson left his house, journalists shoved microphones in his face, hungry for a sound bite for evening crime or news broadcasts. If you were a resident of Illinois during the first three weeks after Stacy vanished, you saw Peterson served up on local, cable and radio programs like a charred chicken flapping its wings almost around the clock.

To me, it seemed Peterson treated Stacy's life like a dirty rag. In his attempts to discredit her, Peterson made comments such as "You know she came from a broken home," or, "Her mother went missing too, so this is not a surprise." Then I heard Peterson say, "Stacy is where she wants to be." My heart sank as I thought of the boys who'd now lost a mother twice.

Seventeen days after Cassandra reported Stacy's disappearance, the Will County State Attorney's Office obtained a court order and exhumed the body of Kathleen Savio. Savio, Peterson's previous wife, was discovered dead in a bathtub in the marital house in 2004. Suddenly, the media and police focus swung from Stacy's disappearance to a new autopsy into the cause of Kathleen's death. The effort to find Stacy lost its momentum. The ground began to freeze, making the search more difficult for family and teams of volunteers. And the media remained hooked on Drew's public displays and his love life, leaving no time to find answers or enlist the public's help in finding Stacy.

In the months that followed, I met with people who knew Stacy personally. From the moment she married Drew, Stacy worked to knit a loving family environment, integrating Drew's then-estranged family into the couple's new life. From all accounts, she had a kind, warm and giving heart. People's eyes sparkled when they spoke of her. She made friends and family feel welcome. When a guest didn't show up for a gathering, Stacy called urged, "Come on," one relative recalled. "We're holding dinner, where are you? We're not starting until you get here."

Another told me: "Stacy was the glue, and that's why her disappearance is so painful to those of us who knew her."

Stacy Peterson's dream was to be a loving wife and mother, an all-around nurturer. She enrolled in nursing classes at a local college. When Stacy could no longer live under Peterson's heavy-handed control and constant watch, she made plans to leave. But like many women in her position, she made a mistake. She told her husband what she planned before she moved to a place where she'd be safe from him.

Stacy was silenced in the prime of her life. But there can be no silencing of family and friends who will continue to search for her until she is found. A grand jury met for 18 months before handing down an indictment against Drew Peterson for the death of Kathleen Savio.

I believe when that trial begins, the long silence about how Kathleen Savio lost her life will be lifted and the truth about how Stacy died will also be revealed. During the trial, thanks to Illinois' new hearsay law, Stacy Peterson's words will finally be heard.

Tweet

Every Day You Wait . . . Is One Day Longer

by Todd Matthews, Guest Contributor

If you have a missing loved one, not knowing what you can do about it is a huge challenge. Dealing with the situation on the usual day-to-day basis is overwhelming in itself. But not knowing what you can do to make sure all paths are being followed is another issue.

One thing you can do is to make sure your missing persons data is being properly reviewed.

Of course, the information contained in the missing person's NCIC case file is considered for law enforcement only. But rather than the usual phone call to the detective in charge of your missing loved one, maybe you can do some fact checking.

Normally the call consists of asking if there's any new info in regards to the investigation of the missing person. (More often than not, nothing has changed.) But since you may not have any idea of what is listed in the NCIC report, this might be a good time to do some fact checking. Ask the detective to confirm physical characteristics, height, weight, etc.

Do they have dental info listed? If not, do you have the dental info that you need to get to them for inclusion into the file? This is an extremely valuable piece of information! Have here been any DNA family reference samples taken? Mitochondrial and nuclear? Can you confirm the DNA has been included in the CODIS, the national DNA database?

Dates are important as well. There is no database in existence that is immune to human error. Why not double-check the dates involved such as date last seen and date of birth?. For example, numbers such as Social Security numbers are easy to mix up. Are there any birthmarks, tattoos, or other distinguishing characteristics that weren't noted? Do you have a photo that might be of value?

A simple-fact check review can't hurt anything, and might change everything. You are not asking for investigative information. You are asking to verify the very data you helped to provide. During the course of this conversation, it is a good time to ask your law enforcement contact to register as a NamUs user.

Now is the time when you yourself can get the ball rolling by entering your own loved one into NamUs. By doing this, a great deal of conversation in regards to your loved one's case begins.

I have seen simple human errors resolved in this manner. Some are minor and do not make an immediate difference, but they still affect the future. Some errors are fairly important and can have an immediate impact on resolution or on how the case is processed internally.

Once your loved one's case is in NamUs, you can work to help make sure all the gaps are filled with accurate information. The only thing worse that a lack of data is inaccurate data. Consider the tiniest details.

More resources:
http://missingpiecesshow.homestead.com/MissingPiecesEpisode74Archive.html

Todd Matthews' calling to be a voice for missing and unidentified persons began when he solved the identity of the "Tent Girl," Barbara Hackman-Taylor, after a ten-year journey that ended in 1998. He is also Media Director for the Doe Network, a consultant to Emmy-award winning producer Dick Wolf ("Law & Order"), and on the Advisory Panel for the U. S. Department of Justice NamUS (National Missing and Unidentified Persons System) database project. Todd also hosts a weekly radio show that publicizes unidentified and missing persons cases. A documentary featuring our guest contributor's work was recently broadcast on the BBC. A second documentary about his life is in post-production.

Tweet

Why Defense Attorneys Tell Clients to Shut Up

by Pat Brown

We see it over and over, again and again, especially in this 24-hour-a-day media world we live in: suspects giving interview after interview on nationally televised news shows—CNN, FOX, and MSNBC, and, if they get the opportunity, The Today Show and CBS's Early Show as well. They are like moths drawn to camera lights. They speak of their innocence, they give details of the crime, and, if they are Drew Peterson, talk about their dating life and send out a few winks to the ladies. All this public attention gets the suspect two possible results: a bad image and/or a prison sentence.

First off, if the person is a psychopath, he or she will not understand that their behavior on-camera is not coming across all that well to the public and a future jury. Scott Peterson? He was cold as ice with a smirk you just wanted to wipe off his face. Casey Anthony? Each time she opens her mouth, she just digs herself a deeper hole. With each interview, they increase the public's negative opinion of them.

The other risk these new television stars run is slipping up in their interviews; a bit of truth may escape or their retelling of the story may not match a previous version, sending up red flags to the investigators. Everything that is said on television can be used against them in the courtroom, so each word spoken is like playing Russian roulette with one's freedom.

A good example of a client who should have listened to his attorney's admonition to shut up would be Dino Pantazes. On March 30, 2000, the idyllic life of Clara and Dean Pantazes came to an abrupt end with the discovery of Clara shot to death in their suburban Maryland garage. Their successful life and partnership—a long happy marriage and the booming family business—came to a devastating finale.

Worse yet, Dean Pantazes, known as "Dino" to his friends and family, was arrested a month later and charged with ordering the execution of his wife. Relatives on both sides of the family stood staunchly behind Dino, swearing up and down that Dino would never have committed such a crime. They believed the police had rushed to justice and unfairly condemned a man who dearly loved his wife.

However, Dino was not your ordinary man. He was a bail bondsman, a man who made his living from dealing with some the worst criminals the Washington D.C.-area had to offer. And, being a bondsman, violence and sordid behavior can become normal features of life, criminal behavior can become ordinary.

Did Dino succumb to this world and find his wife a liability? Did he, as police believed, want out of the marriage to enjoy an alternative lifestyle, taking up with transgendered prostitutes like Mimi Kim Young (pictured left) who would later testify that Dino asked her to kill his wife? Was Clara on to some bad behavior by Dino and wanted a divorce? Or was he the loving husband and family man his supporters believed him to be? The story was heartbreaking.

A former Prince George's County bail bondsman convicted of hiring a prostitute to kill his wife was sentenced yesterday to life in prison without parole, despite his pleas that he was an "innocent lamb" tortured by police and framed by headline-seeking prosecutors.

"I am a victim, not only by the loss of my wife, but because of the judicial proceedings," Dean J. "Dino" Pantazes, 46, told Prince George's Circuit Judge James J. Lombardi.

Weeping in the courtroom, Pantazes said that police suspected him of the killing immediately after they arrived at his Upper Marlboro home on March 30, 2000.

I had met Dino and Clara once when I was working as a private detective. When this story broke, I couldn't really remember them clearly nor did I have any opinion as to Dino’s character. I do remember being stunned that it was the Pantazes that were in the news because they were pretty much fixtures next to the courthouse in Upper Marlboro, Maryland, and the Pantazes name was synonymous for decades with bail bonds in Prince George’s County. So, while I couldn't attest to what kind of guy Dino was, I found it hard to believe, from a distance, that this man would hire a hit on his wife and business partner.

Then I read a newspaper story in the Washington Post that changed my mind. Dino had given an interview to the press and as soon as I read his words, I could see good reason for him to be a suspect in his wife’s murder. He had made two fascinating statements that struck me as very concerning. The first was a comment on the killing:

Dino stated: “I had no reason to want her dead. No insurance policy out on her. Greeks don’t get divorced. That’s the ultimate shame, and we wouldn’t have done that. She was my best friend.”

Is there a sentence here that does not belong? What does getting divorced have to do with killing Clara? Dino was admitting that he WOULD have a reason to kill his wife in spite of the fact he said he didn’t have one. Dino is informing us that he could not divorce his wife because that would be the worst humiliation imaginable. One would think murder would be the ultimate shame . . . but, according to Dino, asking for a divorce would be worse.

Dino went on to make the second fascinating statement: “Now I know what O.J. felt like when he was accused of killing his wife," Dino said. "He didn’t do it either and was hunted down for it.”

Huh? Was he the last person in America to believe in O.J.’s innocence? This is a man who had worked on the fringes of law enforcement for years. He knew criminals and he knew evidence. He undoubtedly was aware there was a mountain of evidence against O.J. Simpson. So, why this statement? I believe Dino was already preparing for his defense. He was pandering to his future jury, which in Prince George’s County, Maryland, was bound to be heavily African-American. This bereaved and innocent man was already calculating his trial strategy.

Dino Pantazes should have avoided anyone with a camera or a pen and paper.

Now many of us are watching the saga of little missing Haleigh Cummings of Satsuma, Florida. Her father, Ronald Cummings, and her caretaker, Daddy's 17-year-old girlfriend, Misty Croslin, have been doing interview after interview, show after show.

Armchair detectives on the blogs have been analyzing these two every time they tell their story. While neither Ronald nor Misty has been labeled a suspect in the disappearance of Haleigh, I bet there are defense lawyers across the nation shouting at their television sets, "Just shut up already! They might be totally innocent of any wrongdoing, but, if they are not, they should take the advice of these attorneys and just say, "No comment."

Dino got nailed and is serving life in prison. The conviction was based mostly on circumstantial evidence and witness testimony. But, in the end, it was Dino's big mouth that got him caught and put away.

Tweet

Grief for the Missing

by Donna Weaver

Sometimes when a perpetrator is apprehended for the abduction and murder of a child or adult it is reported that they are a suspect in the disappearances of other victims. What is it like for the families of these victims who have no answers? Their heartbreak is something I call “suspended grief.” Currently, there are few resources and little information available to assist families of missing persons in coping with the specific elements of their “suspended grief.” Traditional victim assistance services are frequently not available to these families.

According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Crime Information Center (NCIC), in the U.S., there are an estimated 58,200 child victims of non-family abductions; 50,930 active missing adult cases; and 6,218 active cases of unidentified persons. However, most investigators and law enforcement agencies agree that this represents a fraction of the true number of cases since it is not mandatory for local police agencies to enter adult missing person cases in NCIC. Many cold cases were never entered into the system simply because of the limits of technological resources at the time, and I have found in some instances that cases originally entered in a local agency’s system were subsequently purged to make room for new cases.

For example, as of 2004, more than half (51%) of the nation’s medical examiners' offices had no policy for retaining records—such as x-rays, DNA, or fingerprints—on unidentified human remains. Sadly, there are many such cases sitting in boxes covered by layers of dust in local police storerooms and warehouses—or worse yet—none exist at all.

In 2007, the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) called the number of missing persons and unidentified human remains in our Country a crisis, labeling it a “a mass disaster over time.”

The nation’s legislators are beginning to understand the magnitude of the problem of missing persons and unidentified victims in the United States. Congress recently implemented legislative provisions allowing families of missing persons to submit DNA samples to the FBI’s national CODIS database, previously used solely for criminal DNA identification, and cases are being retrieved from many thousands of individual police jurisdictions across the country, moving toward a uniform national reporting and filing system.

In the spring of 2005, NIJ assembled federal, state, and local law enforcement officials, medical examiners and coroners, forensic scientists, key policymakers, and victim advocates and families from around the country for a national strategy meeting in Philadelphia. The meeting, called the “Identifying the Missing Summit,” defined major challenges in investigating and solving missing persons and unidentified decedent cases. The result was the formation of the National Missing and Unidentified Persons System or NamUS.

NamUS was set to roll out in three phases culminating in two fully functional searchable databases: the Unidentified Decedents database and Missing Persons database in 2009. This is a huge advancement in the cause for the missing and unidentified.

However, statistics alone cannot capture the fear, horror, frustration, and pain felt by those who know and love a missing person. So what is it like living day-to-day for many of those left behind ?

According to the psychology books, there are four stages of grief: shock and denial; intense concern; despair and depression; and recovery. Rarely does this occur as progressive stages towards the resolution of grief when a loved one is missing and presumed dead. Grief becomes “suspended” and those left behind become victims themselves. The act of confronting and expressing the emotions generally associated with grief does not bring relief or enable a progression to the next stage towards resolution and recovery. Therefore, the emotional changes associated with the four stages of grief can be experienced, and re-experienced, for long periods, sometimes for the rest of one’s life.

I have found in my discussions with victims whose loved one is missing that they usually compare feelings they have experienced at the death of someone else close to them, as if in a desperate attempt to understand or gain a frame of reference in order to try to cope. Virtually all of these surviving victims have pointed out that the emotional changes they feel because their loved one is missing and presumed dead bears little resemblance to the grief they felt when someone else they love had died.

Emotional changes are commonly intensified and prolonged when a loved one is missing. Often these feelings are compounded by guilt—wondering if they did all that they could to find the person, or guilt related to going on with life, such as dating, re-marrying, or having more children because it is often perceived as giving up on the missing person before there is proof of death.

When missing person cases go cold, surviving loved ones frequently feel betrayed and abandoned by police and the justice system, which adds to their feelings of despair, helplessness, isolation, and anger. As the passing of time starts to be counted in years . . . hope, no matter how slight, often remains of finding a loved one alive, even as survivors struggle to balance this with the acceptance of the inevitable death of their missing loved one.

Prolonged intense concern also is often inevitable for many victims. The need to keep the memory of the missing person alive becomes an alternative to the overwhelming despair and depression caused by considering the reality of never finding their loved one, or knowing what their loved one experienced, or who is responsible for their disappearance and death. In many cases, “what if” and countless other questions are all survivors have in the absence of knowing the details of their loved one’s fate.

Dealing with and controlling thoughts of the missing person suffering similar horrifying fates known to have happened to other victims who were discovered months or years after they disappeared is very difficult. How can a person put such a terrible experience behind them when they do not have the barest of details to reconcile the event in their mind?

Currently, traditional victim resources related to missing persons cases generally serve victims of disaster, war, or genocide. In these types of situations, the cause of the disappearance is usually known to some degree, if not readily apparent, and large numbers of people have suffered a similar experience at once. Those left behind when a child is abducted by a stranger, or an adult disappears because they may be a victim of foul play, cannot relate to those circumstances or the emotional effects on their lives. Perhaps because in the case of war or disaster people come together as a group for support and recovery of a shared experience which is a result of something, the cause of their pain is an event shared by all, or a known, common enemy.

These are but a few of the particular issues that influence the emotions of these grieving survivors. And it is but one more consideration in determining the devastation to individuals, and the cost to society as a whole, when offenders are permitted to be free to offend again.

Tweet