Will Drew Peterson get a new trial?
Legal panel weighs in on murder case
- Duration 2:58
- Date Feb 19, 2013
Legal panel weighs in on murder case
Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Right now we are awaiting news from inside.
The courtroom at the Drew Peterson murder trial his lawyer is expected to argue.
That the former cop deserves a new trial because his last attorney botched the case.
If the judge rejects that notion Peterson will go directly to sentencing for the murder of his third wife Kathleen -- deal.
Now he of course is also a suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife Stacy Peterson her body has never been found.
Let's talk about it -- least -- Fox News legal analyst Doug burns is a former federal prosecutor and criminal defense attorney.
There's so Doug I don't understand a lot of things that you lawyers do and I -- -- nothing about -- want to because you've got to lawyers who had used to be on the same team defending Peterson now one is charging the other with what basically malpractice.
-- -- -- making an excellent point because let me just explain normally what happens is a lawyer tries a criminal case.
And then when there's a new lawyer on appeal they will often say that the trial lawyer was ineffective write the name of the claim ineffectiveness.
Now -- your -- an excellent one usually or let me rephrase that you almost never see two lawyers who try to case together.
And then one of them accusing the -- a lawyer out of being ineffective and police can explain the legal.
And you're right hander to this because it's a really high burden to to bear here what they've got you this this -- that's charging the other lawyer.
Is that gonna show that was so incompetent beyond their normal standard in the community.
I don't see how they get there I think -- -- pretty good job with the backpacks they had.
And then the second Strickland V Washington you -- it.
He's got to show that even if they weren't competent or even if they you know.
Failed that standard that it would have made a difference -- the ultimate outcome of the trial and again I don't see here it's the prosecution they had such good evidence against this guy that he is gonna go in a matter of those lawyers are but we are still -- that at the criminal trial level right so if there is to be an appeal of -- -- there was some sort of some some some ground broken in the law that allowed Kathleen have you statements from the grave to be used at that -- -- into the process better look into the -- of the prosecution that was that -- -- law that was changed the hearsay evidence of being allowed -- Absolutely that had nothing to do with the defense and in his defense.
-- just another very good intuitive we've appointed just made which is normally ineffective counsel would be raised on appeal right.
But the appellate courts say wait a minute we need a record of this if only so what they do is they're gonna call Joel Brodsky as a witness.
They're gonna call other witnesses to establish whether or not by the way it's interesting -- they want to call -- actual state attorney.
I as a witness and he came in and tried to block -- not surprising -- saying some type of prosecutorial immunity but again they need the -- they need to make a record and then if they want to appeal the question of ineffective counsel they can appeal it.
And that record I think your point is that some because they're making -- record who think that I get there once upon a plugin that they're making a record because you know why guys because they know this guy is going on the sentencing of wanna have a record it for you -- -- let's.