Red-Light Cameras Not So Special?
Cubs Combat Casino
PHOTOS: Peaches And Amanda Blank At Metro
The Return of The Chicagoist Reader Meet-Up
County Sales Tax Rollback Vetoed - Here We Go Again
The Illinois State Senate yesterday unanimously approved legislation that would allow the dead to testify (in addition to voting) from beyond the grave. This piece of legislation appears to help Will County prosecutors in their case against Drew Peterson, who is suspected of killing two of his wives, by admitting hearsay statements as evidence in murder trials. That means if I tell you, “I saw Chicagoist Editor-in-Chief Marcus Gilmer kill Anderson Cooper,” and I turn up dead the next day, my statement to you can be used as evidence against Marcus for the death of Cooper and myself. [Ed's note - I would never dream of ruffling a hair on Anderson's head. Hunter, on the other hand, took the last donut in the Chicagoist breakroom this morning. - M.G.]
So, how does this affect the Peterson case? Well, a minister says Stacy told him Drew killed his previous wife, Kathleen. If the House passes this legislation next week, the minister’s statement can be used against Drew. Although, how it will be used in the Peterson case is unclear. Hearsay statements can only be accepted if the source is deemed credible, and convictions cannot be made solely on these statements. So yes, we did learn something from the Salem Witch Hunts.
Although, this latest move by the senate begs the question, which is scarier: Drew Peterson or our state government trying to pass a law that’s arguably aimed at one person?
AP Photo/Richard Drew
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
To answer your rhetorical question: unquestionably the latter! I would love to see this smug SOB in prison where he belongs. But I am unable to believe that special attention from our state government (which incidentally, would erode away at one of the fundamental principles of our legal system) is necessary in order to put this guy where he belongs. Does anyone really think that he is capable of perpetrating such a perfect crime that this is the only way to get him?
These guys trying to do an end run around the "hearsay" problem are wasting everyone's time.
If they get a conviction with their fun new law, that conviction will eventually be overturned.
Maybe the State Legislature should focus on running the state and stop watching television crime shows.
As much as it pains me to agree with Justice Scalia, I don't think this will stand up to judicial challenge. See this Washington Post article Peterson's a scum bag but the Legislature should be working on more important things.
Seriously, can we get legislators to be required not to vote for laws that are clearly not constitutional? How exactly can you confront the witnesses against you if they are dead?
This doesn't make sense, please correct me if I'm wrong. Stacy is still "missing" and hasn't been declared dead as of yet, right? So if this law is designed to allow the "dead to speak" it doesn't apply (yet) in this case.
Has anyone ever noticed that Drew Peterson looks exactly like the cowardly lion?
Reference the picture above against this one:
If I only had the noiiiive!
Are they going to apply this law retroactively? Because normally this would apply only after the law had passed? Correct?
Exactly how does this law even remotely be constitutional?
Article I, Section 9 of the US Constitution: No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Ex post facto means after the fact. The murder[s] took place already as did any statements Peterson is supposed to have said, therefore this law is ex post facto!
Doesn't the Legislature have someone on the payroll to explain this to them?
Apparently not as all the lawyers down there probably voted for this bullshit law!
Shameful and stupid, but it's Springfield so don't be surprised.
If they try to hang Peterson on this they might as well save the taxpayers time and money, it's bad law.
The notion of the state making up new laws so they can go after individuals, even individuals as sleazy as this jamoke, should make your blood turn cold.
this whole story is so disturbing. the fact that this dude appears on larry king and the today show and shit.. is super jacked up.
I don't care how hated this man is. Hearsay is completely unconstitutional and goes against all previous cases in the past.
If the gov can't pin this asshole then let him go. When they can do so, nail him.
Until then let's not change the law as this will affect others in cases down the road.
You are missing one important part of this: the law says that the party (DREW) must have been the person to have MURDERED the declarant (STACY). But that murder doesn't even need to be proved, it can basically be presumed. So it can't be that the declarant ends up dead by just anyone. It must be a murder at the hands of the person who the statement is being used against.
I am also concerned with Ex Post Facto issues. How can this be applied retroactively? Although I am in favor of the amendment...
We need a Star Chamber for sociopaths like Drew.