Peterson's lawyers withdraw request for mistrial
Legal debate over murder trial
- Duration 4:54
- Date Aug 15, 2012
Legal debate over murder trial
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
This story right now it's amazing developments in the June Peterson.
Murder trial -- earlier today Peterson's lawyers with -- -- a request for in this trial allowing the former Illinois police officers -- and go ahead.
The defense attorneys move follows several blunders by prosecutors.
That are seeking to -- the 58 year old killed his third wife Kathleen -- -- back in 2004.
Peterson of course as we remind you every time we talk about this in Gaza suspects.
And the 2007 disappearance of his fourth wife Stacy Peterson.
I he had never been charged in that case though joining me now former prosecutor Joey Jackson in criminal defense attorney who are -- and generally.
This is the third time.
The third time the prosecutors have done something that angered the judge and also prompted the defense to say hey wait a minute mistrial.
Is the prosecution losing this case.
It's a bit problematic what happens is is that the ground -- us are established at the -- -- that is the evidence that's admissible the evidence that's not an oftentimes is evidence that's relevant to the case but it's overly prejudicial to the jury can hear it and in this instance when you had riveting testimony -- -- law enforcement officer who responded to the sap -- households at an earlier time when there was a domestic dispute right.
Drew apparently shows up in a swat uniform and he's threatening her and everything else and she said.
Just go ahead and do what you came here to do.
And ultimately pulls out -- -- he doesn't killer.
But the judge says don't ask the critical question which is did you request in order protection following that incident.
The judge had earlier indicated that the prosecutor was not that it asked that question the prosecuted then to judge did all done.
Everybody I don't let me ask a question -- -- the judge tells you just a few minutes earlier do -- not asked this question.
And then the lawyers on the -- it totally forgot it's my thought I was just going analyst -- question that has happened to ask get.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Well -- batted out of bed because this -- wobble tell you would still look great when you thought this -- judge's instructions that had that clear it's problematic because the judge can declare -- this trial what does that mean it needs a trial is all but now the judge declared it with prejudice that -- -- you can't even try again for the offense are -- but you declared without prejudice you -- impanel a new jury but I think that the defense likes this year.
OK so wait a minute let's talk more about that part because it wasn't the -- it even had to make a ruling on -- the defense -- on your way out of the goodness of our Hertzberg who want this trial go fine I mean a lot of why is this defense doing this than maybe it -- opportunity here than the judges really not happy with the prosecution is gonna make and start over again.
-- Dudley was not out of the goodness of our hearts I think that -- message that we've gotten so.
Are incidents defense team's minds with this statement this morning that the defense attorney made venture heaters and doesn't wanna hide behind legal technicalities and that he's being tried by a jury of his quote -- What that says to me -- -- very clear indication that.
He's been at he's as confident today as he's been all along similar like this Jerry we had a concert on what this jury he's confident that there's no I had he's gonna get a good result there's so -- -- A testimony we it's hearsay but is doing is putting -- -- there -- this.
Former law enforcement officer that was honest and telling everybody that -- -- you came to her.
And said that this -- -- into my house.
And I told him to kill me and said he went wasn't going means it's a crazy scenario so how -- the defense -- got confident the jury after the jury's heard -- just testimony.
-- I think they're confident because -- now.
-- -- -- Admonished this that I'm prosecution -- it -- a judge to come out and say to the jury.
That the prosecution has violated his order that's a very very -- -- and that's a pretty harsh measure to take.
And I think the ultimate win for -- defense and really what they were hoping for this morning.
Was that the judge was going to throw out.
All the prior hearsay statements.
And tell that prosecution that they couldn't let it anymore hearsay statements because remember this case really for the state is about hearsay and without allowing -- all of these out of court statements made by stop Leo -- -- others the -- -- a very very limited case so that was what they were hoping they didn't get that.
But they still now they have a state that.
The prosecution clearly is uncomfortable sir we saw her to be visibly shake -- And make they'll -- not -- and the defense that can't be in our minds but obviously they're saying that they feel good about how things are going so far we'll see if they test outline again Jerry who say they stood and.
They -- -- an Iowa they better shot about -- -- one misstep this judge is throwing it out with prejudice and it's not being tried again and then he's off.
That's right and got straight and then he's off he's got so we get them for the fourth will -- -- the -- -- had a feeling we're going to be talking about.
Drew Peterson for a long time -- Florida -- expertise today Wayne Indiana -- -- -- I I -- and a question for.