Drew Peterson reaches all-time low

April 24, 2009

CBS

Drew Peterson is being sued by his murdered 3rd, Kathleen Savio’s family. He went on Good Day Chicago with his lawyer, Joel Brodsky to discuss his side of it and in the process said something he probably wishes he didn’t. When asked what he told Stacy’s children when they ask where mom is he said:

She’s on vacation still and SHE’S NOT COMING BACK.

See link below for the full interview. (and the others for background of the suit). At the end, Jan Jeffcoat asked him why doesn’t he just be a good dad and not date if the relationships aren’t working out. He got angry.

JEFFCOAT: Why not just be a good dad and stop dating?

DREW (angry): Why? Why? Why does dating make me a bad dad?

JEFFCOAT: Ok.

Then she closed the show. The next day he’s on CBS with his two sons to testify essentially about what kind of dad peterson is. It was sickening to watch. The younger son (14) was there under protest. Watch the body language - how he is stuck on the side and Drew is turned away from him. He looks depressed. Watch how he just stares in to the camera as if he knows something. If the kid didn’t want to talk, why was he forced to sit in front of America. What kind of dad forces his kid to go on TV to make him look like a good father?

The older son (16) did everything he could to sell his dad. It really is so very sad. Especially the way his fiance moved in and out. And they know their dad is a suspect - the crime unthinkable - their future uncertain and now the memories of their mother is dredged back up.

Here they are talking with Julie Chen. The worst part is when the son talks about his mother’s death and peterson looks straight ahead - stone-faced.

John Q Kelly the big name lawyer is in studio. He successfully sued OJ for the wrongful deaths of Ronald Goldstein and Nicole Simpson. He says none of the money would go to Savio’s father or sister - it would just be added to Savio’s estate. Peterson thinks the suit is motivated by greed when the money is just being managed for his children the way it should have been after her death.

Chen asked Kelly what would happen if he’s successful:

JOHN Q KELLY: All the assets that should have gone to the children originally, all the marital assets and things like that, would be properly segregated for the children. And Mr. Peterson would be taken to task and labeled for what he had done, causing (Savio’s) death.

Hard things to say with Savio’s children sitting right there.

What would they stand to gain financially?

KELLY: They have no financial interest in the lawsuit whatsoever. It’s only for the estate and Kathleen’s two minor children.

Savio had a handwritten note (legal?) that peterson’s uncle wrote out, which he gave to Drew “to use at his discretion, rather than segregate it to his children.

Chen then talks to the 16 y/o. I’m not including their names.

What does he think about the lawsuit?

16 y/o: I think it’s ridiculous. Because what they’re trying to do, they’re trying to take money from my dad and basically give it back to us. Now, do the math. He’s got everything put into us as it is. So it just doesn’t make sense to me.

What kind of relationship does he have with his mom’s family?

16 y/o: My grandfather, I don’t remember ever even meeting him..and I haven’t seen his aunt in six years. They’ve made no attempt of contacting me. So I haven’t really seen them.

What does he think happened to his mom? [watch dad's face]

16 y/o: Accidents happen all the time. I highly do not believe that my dad had murdered my mom. Because, first off, he wasn’t there, he was with us during that period of time. And I don’t know what else to say. I don’t believe it.

What’s life been like? Remember Drew is the one seeking the media attention - doing things that bring the media to his house.

16 y/o: It’s been crazy, like, with the news media in front of my house all the time. And like, there really hasn’t been much of an impact ever since my mom died, because nothing could be worse than that. But it’s just made my childhood much harder.

And dad possibly implicated?

16 y/o: That’s just making it even worse. I’m seeing a lot of the world and a lot of the people’s true motives.

What does he want to say about his dad? Poignant and sad.

16 y/o: I would say that he’s the greatest dad in the world. Not a lot of people know that. People see the news all the time and what everyone has portrayed him to be. But to our family — no one could ask for a better dad.

Now watch his body language when Chen brings up the alleged fiance. When she asked if Drew is still with her, the 16 y/o’s head goes down and he can’t bear to look at the camera., when Chen mentions marriage. He looks physically wounded. Does he know that his dad had no intention of marrying her? The 14 y/o stares defiantly into the camera. Even Drew puts his head down at one point. Something bad happened. The 16 y/o feels the shame and the younger one, who dad has his back to, is almost daring someone to ask him what went on.

According to Drew none of the children have therapy to deal with their loses and chaotic lives.

Drew admits Christina moved out [April 4th = see link below]. And with prodding he says she’s still his girlfriend. Even he looks down.

Chen finishes with Kelly who said he will probably wait for the results of a grand jury before moving forward. Drew’s lawyer, Joel Brodsky, said he would make a similar motion to th judge.

KELLY: By all accounts these young men loved their mother. Their mother loved them. To see them thrust on national television to talk about her untimely death right now is unsettling, too.

How could a father do this. Now imagine if he actually did murder their mom. These boys are suffering and I hope someone - a teacher or friend sees this and gets them help.

==========================
Drew Peterson’s “fiance” moved out…again (4-4)
Drew Peterson hit with wrongful death lawsuit
Drew Peterson’s response to wrongful death lawsuit
Drew Peterson’s official statement on Savio wrongful death lawsuit
Kathleen Savio’s sister comments on lawsuit
Drew Peterson reaches all-time low

Octuplets: Linda West-Conforti & Gloria Allred on Early Show

March 26, 2009

(3-24) Updated list of posts

Angels in Waiting Founder, Linda West-Conforti and her lawyer, Gloria Allred were on the Early Show with Julie Chen.

JULIE CHEN: Linda, you were in the house, what is life like in Nadya Suleman’s house?

LINDA WEST-CONFORTI: It’s chaotic, and that’s an understatement. Her older children have no bedtime schedule, no schoolwork schedule. They’re up till two o’clock in the morning, running around the house. I literally, myself, had to get one out of the backyard around 1:30 in the morning, because he was outside playing. He somehow escaped the nanny that was supposedly watching the older children, and he was outside playing. And I asked him to come in. And that was literally minutes before we had an intruder in the backyard at Nadya Suleman’s house because there is no security that has been provided for her, the nurses or the babies that are in the nursery.

CHEN: What did you see Nadya Suleman doing while you describe these children are kind of all over the place?

LINDA: Honestly, I rarely saw Nadya Suleman. She was either out shopping or up in her bedroom or just not available, not available to me, and not available to her children.

CHEN: She said part of the reason she kicked you out was because you made her feel unsafe in her home. And she specifically said she didn’t like what you said about her babies. She basically said you were telling her that the babies were going to be abducted and she said you kept saying it over and over.

LINDA: I was very, very concerned. One thing we have to understand is that these babies’ faces are all over the world. We have — I personally have had threats, that these babies need to be placed in other homes. I was very, very concerned.

First of all, there’s TV programs all over the lay of the house, showing where the lay of the house is or how to get into the backyard. We have locations on where the nurseries are. And I’m very, very concerned. We had no security whatsoever there. We had intruders three times in our backyard. By the time we called the cops, they were gone. And there’s no security at all. My nurses were concerned. The nannies voiced concern. So, I talked to Nadya on several occasions. I talked to Nadya’s dad (and told him) that I am very, very concerned that these infants could be abducted or even worse. Somebody could come in and hurt us all. Where is the security?

GLORIA ALLRED: And in fact, she asked Nadya, Julie, to get a security guard, and I also sent an e-mail to her attorney about the need for security, given that there had been an intruder.

CHEN: And what was her response?

ALLRED: And the attorney did not respond to my e-mail. And in addition, Linda says that Nadya said that she couldn’t afford a security guard, but she said that at the same time she was having an expensive Jacuzzi bathtub installed right next to her master bedroom. So I think that the security for the little babies and her other six children is more important than having a new Jacuzzi put in.

CHEN: Are you going to take legal action to see to it that Nadya Suleman does not have the right to take care of her own children?

ALLRED: No. But Linda, as a registered nurse, who is a legally-mandated reporter, has a legal duty to reports to the authorities if she thinks the babies are being neglected or in any way endangered, has filed three reports. And we hope that the authorities, child protective services, will do what they can do to make sure that these little babies are protected, because, unfortunately, Nadya seems to be AWOL from taking real care of her own babies. She was only there to feed them and care for them eight hours of the 102 hours that Angels in Waiting was in the house. And she needs to get in there and start feeding her babies and bonding with her babies. And I don’t mean just when the cameras are rolling, which is most of the time that she was there feeding them when we were there.

Octuplets: Angels in Waiting’s offer of free 24/7 care for all 14 was REFUSED

February 20, 2009

CBS News, Julie Chen speaks with Gloria Allred, Linda West Comforti from Angles in Waiting, and Jackie Peebles, Infant Developmental Needs Expert. They discussed the services that would be provided that woman 24/7 free of charge - including expert neonatal care, evaluation of the other six children and therapy for the mother. [May be the the sticking point.] They would also train the mother to care for her children.

They would have a home and they would all be allowed to stay together at this point. It is the optimal outcome and yet the mother refused - assuring the failure of those octuplets.

How many foster moms can care for them better than the comprehensive care they would have received?

And how many foster care facilities or families could handle more than one?

And here is where the neglect comes in to the point of abuse. Angels in Waiting was offering full spectrum care for all 14. Meaning the older 6 would have been evaluated and their special needs addressed, which now will not happen. That is child abuse. Period. There is reportedly a child with mild speech delay, who has only a short window, and she is willingly denying her child that.

They project that it would cost $130K/month and none of it would come from Medi-Cal or the California taxpayers - they are privately funded. And I am certain that folks who had been hesitating to donate might now - knowing that she is being watched and the children are truly being cared for and that it won’t be going to fund more IVF or cosmetic surgery.

And their estimate doesn’t even include the care the octuplets have been receiving from minute one. Who paid for her prenatal care? It will probably be close to $2M total bills before they leave the hospital and someone is going to have to eat that - either the hospital or Medi-Cal. If it’s the hospital - her selfishness will directly limit the amount of charity care the hospital can offer to pregnant mothers, sick children, seniors or whomever in the immediate future.

Child Protective Services, please don’t wait any longer.

***

(1-30) Octuplets: Ethics of fertility treatment?
(1-30) Octuplets: What is really going on?
(2-9) Octuplets: Should not go home with that woman
(2-9) Octuplets: Octuplets: already filthy house unfit for children (pix)
(2-23) Octuplets: Mother vs grandmother caught on tape
(2-24) Octuplets: Cosmetic surgery, IVF, food stamps, disability, bankruptcy & foreclosure
(2-24) Octuplets: Mother before/after plastic surgery & Angelina Jolie (pix)
(2-25) Octuplets: Grandfather on Oprah daughter “not mentally complete”
(2-25) Octuplets: Hospital questioning her ability to care for children
(2-26) Octuplets: Video of inside the home
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video (Part 1)
(2-26) Octuplets: Body language mother vs grandmother video (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Man claiming to be sperm donor
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 1)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 2)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother on The Early Show (Part 3)
(2-27) Octuplets: Grandmother’s first interview (Feb 9th)
(2-29) Octuplets: What about the other children?
(3-2) Octuplets: Angels in Waiting’s offer of free 24/7 care for all 14 was REFUSED
(3-2) Octuplets: What is it going to take?

---