Drew Peterson will regain possession of his vehicles Tuesday, and more property seized by police will be returned to him this month, but the former Bolingbrook police sergeant will have to wait another week to learn whether he can get back his 11 firearms, a judge said Monday.
Last month, Will County Circuit Judge Richard Schoenstedt ordered state police investigators to return Peterson’s GMC Yukon Denali and Pontiac Grand Prix, 11 firearms, computers and other items. The property was seized via search warrants in October and November as part of the investigation into the disappearance of Peterson’s fourth wife, Stacy. Authorities have named Peterson a suspect in the investigation.
The judge’s order was contingent on a stipulation by Peterson that he would not challenge the authenticity of any photos, documents or other type of evidence gleaned by police from his property if the case were to ever go to trial. The order allowed police to retain the original computer hard drives and return the computers with copied hard drives installed.
Regarding his firearms, the judge also said Peterson had to have a valid Illinois Firearm Owner’s Identification card for the weapons to be returned. That same day, Illinois State Police director Larry Trent revoked Peterson’s FOID card at the request of Will County State’s Atty. James Glasgow.
On Monday, Peterson’s attorney, Joel Brodsky, asked Schoenstedt to have the weapons placed in the custody of Peterson’s son, Stephen, an Oak Brook police officer, while Peterson tries to have his FOID card reinstated. If the judge agrees, Stephen would be ordered to keep the firearms from his father and inform state police if he sold them.
Assistant State’s Atty. John Connor objected to Brodsky’s suggestion. “The state feels that under the circumstances, it would place his son in an awkward position, given that he is a sworn police officer with another department and would be holding evidence in a grand jury investigation,” Connor said.
But Schoenstedt set the matter aside for a March 25 hearing, saying he was concerned he would be unable to enforce the terms of such an order.
Brodsky said the son understood his obligation and would be willing to sign an affidavit or appear in person before Schoenstedt to assume responsibility for the weapons.
Peterson, 54, has been under intense public scrutiny since his wife, Stacy, who was 23 at the time, vanished Oct. 28. The investigation into her disappearance led authorities to re-examine the death of Peterson’s ex-wife, Kathleen Savio, who was 40 when she died mysteriously in a bathtub in 2004. Her body was exhumed in November, and last month, Glasgow announced a new autopsy had determined that her death was a homicide.
Peterson denies any wrongdoing in either case.
Monday was his first court appearance in connection with his current wife’s case since he testified before a Will County grand jury in November. Peterson did not speak with reporters before or after the hearing, but he told the judge he understood the conditions governing the return of his property.
“Drew’s very pleased that he’s getting his property back,” Brodsky said afterward. “The judge has reviewed the secret testimony of the state, he looked at the affidavits, and still found that there was no compelling reason for the state to retain the property any longer. I think that says something, if you want to read between the lines.”
He said Peterson and his legal team reviewed the more than 250 evidence photos produced by police as part of the order.
“There’s nothing very remarkable about the photographs, and we’re more than willing to stipulate that those photographs show the condition of the vehicle on the date that the photographs were taken,” Brodsky said.
Also on Monday, Will County Circuit Judge Carmen Goodman scheduled an April 17 hearing for oral arguments regarding the Savio family’s pursuit to reopen her estate, which would pave the way for a potential wrongful-death lawsuit against Peterson.
In January and February, Savio’s brother and sister filed a petition in Will County civil court, as did her father, her other sister and a half-brother. The two factions later filed a joint petition seeking to remove James Carroll, Peterson’s uncle, as executor of Savio’s estate and appoint Savio’s relatives as co-executors.
In a response to the filing, Peterson’s attorneys argued that the statute of limitations to reopen Savio’s estate has expired and noted that Savio’s family had made no objections during the initial proceedings after Savio’s death.
———-
mwalberg@tribune.com
eslife@tribune.com
