Judge allows critical hearsay evidence in Peterson trial
Legal panel debates murder case
- Duration 4:59
- Date Aug 9, 2012
Legal panel debates murder case
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Provocative testimony driving a key witness to -- -- injury Peterson's murder trial the judge handing the prosecution was being described.
As a huge legal victory allowing them to introduce some hearsay evidence.
That's normally barred from court on that situation to situation is for the gesture really rule on.
The former Illinois cop is accused of killing his third wife Kathleen -- Leo.
I sobbing on the stand was a friend as Kathleen side via us audio.
A critical prosecution witness that testified that -- -- once told her of a threat Peterson made bragging quote.
I could kill you and make it look like an accident.
-- Jenkins is a former prosecutor Fred TC is a former federal prosecutor welcome to you both I just got some new thing he's doing.
Thanks have you as well -- I just got new information from inside the courtroom.
There's another witness on the stand right now a friend of Kathleen -- a fellow nursing students and the -- is also allowing this testimony.
I'm Mary parks is says this that -- -- told her that Peterson had grabbed her by the neck.
Pay injured out and said why don't you jets die.
That's what she says spread that.
This is hearsay.
David is irrespective of this effectively.
To prosecute Drew Peterson.
Well it it looked like -- something done this is a tough case against Drew Peterson from the prosecution standpoint these statements are here say they're out of court statement offered for the truth of the matter asserted.
They teach you that -- first your loss goal.
But there's some edition of truth does the statement by the second witness that he's deadly killer.
I don't put as much weight on that statement.
This statement that he told -- I could kill you and make it look like an accident which is exactly what happened.
I think is a statement that really gets to the heart of the case I think -- the guy.
Have -- this is again the second witnesses coming story that said not only -- these threats made but that -- side BO showed her red marks on her neck.
And what do you think about -- used to think Jeanette you can't convict people of murder based on state needs in their words alone.
You have to be able to prove their actions actions -- constitute that they actually committed a crime.
Here the state cannot even put Drew Peterson at the scene of the crime -- Kathleen -- a guy.
And that it is not -- can see that this was a homicide.
Steele saying this with an accent will ask the first medical examiner.
Won't stabilize so this -- case where in my opinion there's built in reasonable doubt.
Built in reasonable doubt -- what do you do with that because even -- a judge allows hearsay and the jury still -- to think about wouldn't I believe that person that's on the stands.
I believe it and not to convict someone to murder.
Well I any fear I mean that -- the line can convict like sometimes like being at bay -- a confession that would be words alone but in this case we don't have a confession from the guy.
We have a guy who's a big guy he's not a good guy he brings out or anger -- and joining -- to look like Rasputin a jumpsuit.
And I think the jury what what what juries are very very good at is assessing credibility.
And -- the jurors believe these witnesses then I think they're gonna get the guy I mean remember he was a police officer that your theory when you're the state.
He was a police officer he knew he was doing actually sat in on the interview.
When they interviewed his wife -- regarding the missing of -- one before that and the guidance set the whole thing up to make it look like an accident so.
Yeah I hear what they just say again -- -- thought things around the world originally thought this was an accident but.
That's the way he staged it.
The fate but he thanked well I think or person jury could hear about that -- -- why can't we missing they're not going to know that he's a prime suspect in that I think.
Jurors want some type of evidence they want to be able to connect the dots.
I think they're too many missing piece is here when you can even put Drew Peterson at this slew of the crime if the state alleges he is and you can't connect to -- -- This is what he did this is how he did it it's very hard for a juror to convict someone of such a heinous crime without being able to make that connection.
They say they think that what part of I said the prosecutor -- -- tough case -- make clear I know yeah that -- remember one thing do and they and they want and one of things it won't here's a prime suspect but the woman who testified yesterday said that when is that.
Other whites went missing she finally heard back from the state police of the jury has heard testimony that want to -- otherwise some -- disappeared.
But take a final thought from you on this when the judge pastor war on -- hearsay evidence -- it comes out my -- decide -- really what this and maybe this or not.
In this -- is setting the foundation for an appeal.
No matter what the ruling is here and it what does that mean for.
For our eyes that are there watching justice at work if you well.
Right because I mean this is the judges really setting a precedent here because.
You know a different judge gave different circumstance again it could rule the exact opposite -- eighty statements are too unreliable they can't -- me and -- you're absolutely had grounds for possible appeal appeal here.
Faith in Brad thanks have you both with and it will be talking about this case certainly for -- --