Drew Peterson will soon face wrongful-death suit, attorney for Kathleen Savio's family says

And some people thought this would never happen...

I'm curious to know how it would work to have a wrongful death civil suit if the ISP also deterime to open a criminal case. Can the cases be tried in a parallel manner?

Have they said they are going to file this suit, or is this just MORE speculation from the media?

Also, if they "win" a wrongful death suit, where or who does the money go?

Since the article stated that John Kelly said the trial will be filed soon - I don't consider that to be speculation. According to the article...

John Kelly, a New York attorney representing the Savio family who was the lawyer for Nicole Brown Simpson's family in the successful civil suit against O.J. Simpson, said the wrongful-death case would be filed within a couple of weeks.

And the Savio family has said that they want to make sure the money from the estate went to KS's children - not DP.

The Savio family has said it is not seeking money from the estate but simply wants Savio's sons to get whatever money they are entitled to.

"We're ecstatic," she said. "I mean we had every confidence in the world.... Things are going well. We want to get the kids back everything they need, that was rightfully theirs."

Think-About-It wrote:

Since the article stated that John Kelly said the trial will be filed soon - I don't consider that to be speculation. According to the article...
<quoted text>
And the Savio family has said that they want to make sure the money from the estate went to KS's children - not DP.
<quoted text>

Uuhh - Doesn't DP have to be criminally convicted before he can be found civilly liable?

If not convicted per se, at least tried in a court of law and not a court of the media?

Brian Lewis wrote:

<quoted text>
Uuhh - Doesn't DP have to be criminally convicted before he can be found civilly liable?

Definitely not. OJ was found "Not Guilty" by his jury in his criminal case but was then found guilty at the civil trial.

Brian Lewis wrote:

If not convicted per se, at least tried in a court of law and not a court of the media?

That was basically the question I had. Do they have to do a criminal case first? DP isn't even officially named as a suspect yet so maybe that makes them not have to wait?? I'm not sure how that works.

Brian Lewis wrote:

<quoted text>
Uuhh - Doesn't DP have to be criminally convicted before he can be found civilly liable?

REPLY: The answer to that is no. There have been a few cases in Illinois where before there was even a Criminal Trial, a Civil Suit
was allowed to take place. I had looked this uip before, and as soon as I can find the case number I will post it. If I may say so myself, Drew's stellar
defense team didn't look so happy on Thursday.
For those of us who are passionate about seeing justice done in this case,
it was a good day for us. John Q. Kelly is no match for Botchsky. The best is yet to come. Keep the faith. Box of Gavels

This is taken from the GateHouse News Serevice. By Danya Hooker:
Brodsky comment: "We are very pleased that she (Judge Goodman) appointed a guardian to keep an eye on the Savios and make sure they don't do anything adverse to the children's interest. That was our main concern-that they don't take any action that will injure the children's best interest" Brodsky accused the Savio family of having an ulterior motive in filing the suit since they can't benefit financially.

Duh! Hello Botchsky!! Perhaps the Savio family would like to see Drew charged for Murder in the Case of their Sister! Perhaps the Savio family would also like to have visitation rights with their Newphews. Ulterior motive my A$$! Stick around Counselor, and see what a REAL lawyer and honest Judge can show you about the word "Ulterior". Box of hammers!

Think-About-It wrote:

<quoted text>
Definitely not. OJ was found "Not Guilty" by his jury in his criminal case but was then found guilty at the civil trial.

REPLY: TAI..Right on.
This is not speculation, this is what I would call a done deal. John Q. Kelly
for President! JMO

any civil action will be placed on hold, until the criminal investigation is resolved

heard of the 5th Ammendment, even has a nexus to civil lawsuites

any of you who think a civil court judge can force him to testify in the near or far future lack understanding of our legal system

sorry, for all of you who got your hopes up

correction

a civil lawsuit could go forward under certain circumstances, but Drew will not be forced to testify or be deposed

and even if a civil action took place in this time frame, an appeal court would most likely reverse it post haste

even after OJ's acquittal and the successfull big dollar civil verdict against him by the Goldmans...well you all know the story, can't collect from him in Florida or from his football and actors guild pensions

excuse my typos

Stanford, Some good comments from you. I have however found a case where (not a Murder case though, an egregious Fraud case of an Insurance
higher up) where the Illinois Court allowed the Civil suit to proceed, even though it was clear that the Man involved would eventually be charged in the Fruad case, which he was.(The appelate Court ruled in favor of the Prosecutor and the Civil Court) Certainly this is different than a Murder Case. However,like Drew this Man was not charged yet, and still Illinois allowed the Civil Suit to go forward. I will find the case, I just cannot remember my pass word..but I will get it.

Now as to OJ and Florida: They have a homestead act, where a persons home can not be taken away. I don't think Illinois follows through with that. Now we all know Drew is an Actor of the highest degree..but alas he has no Guild card. As to Drew and Football, the only tie I can makeout, is that he was obviiously quite good and thowing passes.(At women that is) Unofrtunatley he was a one man team who's pension thus FAR is from the Police Pension. I would also like to point out that there is another case here in Illinoise where A Chicago Cop committed a crime, I forgot what it was..I'll find that too as it all comes from the same source. He had his pension taken away, after 27 years of service. My point being, that I would not compare Drew with OJ's luck. JMO But you made some good points.

STANFORD wrote:

any civil action will be placed on hold, until the criminal investigation is resolved
heard of the 5th Ammendment, even has a nexus to civil lawsuites
any of you who think a civil court judge can force him to testify in the near or far future lack understanding of our legal system
sorry, for all of you who got your hopes up

I know that they cannot force DP to testify at a civil trial - but remember that the burden of proof is much lower in a civil trial so circumstantial cases often return verdicts in favor of the victim.

Think-About-It wrote:

<quoted text>
I know that they cannot force DP to testify at a civil trial - but remember that the burden of proof is much lower in a civil trial so circumstantial cases often return verdicts in favor of the victim.

REPLY: Hi TAI, I did not know that Drew would not have to answer questions put to him. Does he just plead the fifth or not have to take the stand at all if it goes to trial? Does his lawyer do the talking for him? I'm sure Brodsky will try to appeal
this Civil Case. But from what I have read, Civil trials are very costly. As I said I read the above case with that Kovak guy, and he wanted no part of a Civil Case but had to appear anyway, as his appeal was turned down. He also was not charged yet with his White Collar Crime. It is all so confusing, but I do believe the Savio's will prevail in this Case, even if Brodsky appeals. The judge found Standing...not something either Drew or Brodsky thought would happen. JMO (Nor DOTS either) LOL Going to bed..all this legalese can suck the brain stem right out of one;s
head.

AVALON EWO wrote:

<quoted text>REPLY: Hi TAI, I did not know that Drew would not have to answer questions put to him. Does he just plead the fifth or not have to take the stand at all if it goes to trial? Does his lawyer do the talking for him? I'm sure Brodsky will try to appeal
this Civil Case. But from what I have read, Civil trials are very costly. As I said I read the above case with that Kovak guy, and he wanted no part of a Civil Case but had to appear anyway, as his appeal was turned down. He also was not charged yet with his White Collar Crime. It is all so confusing, but I do believe the Savio's will prevail in this Case, even if Brodsky appeals. The judge found Standing...not something either Drew or Brodsky thought would happen. JMO (Nor DOTS either) LOL Going to bed..all this legalese can suck the brain stem right out of one;s
head.

I don't know how it works to be honest. I'd imagine they would call him to the stand and he would plead the 5th. I think I had read somewhere that one of the differences in pleading the 5th in criminal versus civil is that in a criminal case the jury is told not to take a defendant's silence as part of their decision - while they are allowed to consider it in civil trials.

Civil trials are very costly and take many, many years. I know of a couple of civil trials. One took something like 5 years for them to settle. Most end up going through appeals which eat even more and more of the money away from the victim who often settles instead of going all the way down the trail.

Funny - I was watching Judge Mathis today while eating my lunch at work and there was a guy on there that was being civally sued for a DUI accident. His criminal case was still pending and Judge Mathis told the guy he didn't think it was very wise to go on his show while he had a criminal trial pending. But they let him spew his stupidity anyway.