Peterson prosecutor speaks out
James Glasgow weighs in on guilty verdict
- Duration 6:42
- Date Sep 12, 2012
James Glasgow weighs in on guilty verdict
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
But my next guest has reaffirmed our faith in the criminal justice system when he -- a case against all odds.
Are known as the State's attorney.
For will county thanks so much for being with us this evening that -- didn't really appreciated it's -- it's an exclusive.
But I the first question to ask you is you're relentless in your efforts to indict and convict Drew Peterson -- Well when he went.
It is public cure event on national television writers is -- -- -- television.
And basically mocked.
You know violence against women domestic violence and just taunted law enforcement.
I took it is is that a challenge and also.
Yeah I've been working for twenty years battling domestic violence and people like this just cannot be allowed to continue and you know we.
Obviously -- they have the evidence so we started working a grand jury.
And that went on for I think a couple of years.
They were amazing the number of amazing things that happened throughout the process we were able to get legislation passed.
You know create a statutory rule.
Yeah but but but -- let's talk about that you know so many people think that hearsay is not real evidence I mean from the time of the common law.
It is evidence -- and you really didn't need that -- isn't a common law.
Yes it was in the common law but it in in our particular state it was difficult convince judges based on the case law.
So we had to have a -- what you're saying is our judges who need to see something.
The statue before they understand that this is -- and even when we got the statute passed they were questioning it.
And if there was a lot of criticism.
From the media the liberal media and it was funny when the Supreme Court finally affirmed everything I was doing they went -- maybe he's right.
And the images they did a 180 and I'm thinking -- wait a minute you read that one way not your -- the other what good is your opinion.
And again when you're being criticized by.
Law school professors who never step foot in -- courtroom it's kind of common.
Well and you know if it wasn't just before the indictments and during the investigation.
It was during the trial I was there urgent it was a beat down of the prosecution every day -- say against all odds it's not just almost a perfect crime.
But what -- -- this was a judge who beat you down constantly I know -- don't perform again.
But were -- days -- just wanted to say this is crazy.
You know there was -- there a number of rulings that were very different called the first week.
There seem to be something in the air that maybe.
The the victory ahead with the appellate court allowing certain statements in was going to be reversed at the trial court level.
And you know I I have one of my sisters was up arguing and it wasn't going anywhere and I -- I got up and I stood behind her waiting for my turn.
And then I just let loose with five years of frustration.
Arguing the law and then the judge ruled our way -- and that that was the turning point for me in the case and then we never lost focus after that.
Well I you know with someone to watch -- -- -- you ever lost focus but.
The question that everyone is asking now.
What's gonna happen with the Stacy Peterson case the fourth wife missing since October of 2007.
We had a hearing in 2010.
And we -- one of the things we had to prove that hearing is that Drew Peterson.
Killed both Kathleen Saudi -- Stacy Peterson by a preponderance of the evidence and that's what judge white found.
Some reporters came away from that saying we had a they thought we had a pretty good case with regards to Stacy Peterson so we're gonna.
Go back and review that and not just because -- reporter said so but.
Yet when it whenever you don't have a body judge you know it's it can be difficult and -- he's been missing for five years now.
And in this electronic society we live -- it's almost impossible for five years to not have any any.
But is counter at -- time period in the state of Illinois.
But after which he can be presumed that someone instead as is seven years in some states.
Yes but you know again for the criminal case that would be.
Not that -- -- yet when -- but that wouldn't necessarily be binding on anyone and we have to -- we have to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
That she's dead of course okay.
November 26 the sentence he can get anywhere from twenty to sixty years what we'll ask for.
I'm -- -- for sixty years without hesitation.
He was a police officer he uses his badge to commit this crime.
If you think about it than that next night when he alleges that he was knocking on the door trying to return the kids he's in uniform he's concealing a homicide.
Because he's a policeman is committing official misconduct.
And hopefully the pension mortal take notice of that because I understand that -- because.
He technically he committed the murder -- off duty.
That that may not be sufficient to terminate his.
-- what doesn't the -- say that if he used.
I don't know evidence or what he learned as a police officer in the course of his business but that could be used to take away the pension.
I'm not an expert on pension law but it's but it's it's difficult and -- it's done in in the course of your employment.
So you know some people.
What about the hit man didn't wasn't he employed and then a police car where -- is gone when he tried to hire a hit man.
That's -- good to point -- It's a good point but he was never yet and we that was never charged in again that was that was admitted as to his intent only in our trial.
But it was I think it was powerful evidence.
Real quickly will this -- -- appeal absolutely.
You're not worried now we we did a lot of I flew to Washington DC and watched.
The argument in -- vs California were Anton Scalia one of most conservative justices laid it out.
He he basically is a strict constructionist if the if the concept wasn't around the framers did the constitution he won't buy it so that's why the 400 years is really important.
But also he's he you know he's Crawford hurt the Crawford case were you confront your witnesses he's one of the biggest proponents.
And he was that he's a 100% the it's an equitable forfeiture.
If you if you hit especially in this case if you murder the witness you can't going and -- -- the judge and say how high you can't prove your case now.
Well I have to tell you State's attorney James Glasgow you have reaffirmed our faith in the criminal justice system you fought for battered women.
You heard the cheers when you came out of that courthouse.
Those cheers -- were all over the country I want to thank you on behalf of all of us and all of the of victims' advocates in this country.
They thanks so much and thanks for being with us.