03/21/2008 (www.cnn.com) Nancy Grace Show
“Guests: Ric Mims, Joel Brodsky .. Grand Jury and Gun Issue”
PLEASE NOTE: This original official transcript has been (SNIPPED) to include ONLY information discussion on the Stacy Peterson and/or Kathleen Savio case.
Drew Peterson`s Mother, Stepfather Before Grand Jury
Aired March 21, 2008 - 20:00:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
JEAN CASAREZ, GUEST HOST: And tonight, he is the prime suspect in his fourth wife`s disappearance, and the bathtub drowning of his third wife officially has been ruled a homicide. Tonight: A secret grand jury investigating what happened to Stacy Peterson and the homicide of Kathleen Savio. Brand- new subpoenas issued with Peterson`s mother and stepfather appearing behind closed doors. What did they reveal to the grand jury?
Also tonight: Did Peterson hide a pistol from police as they swarmed the former cop`s home, seizing 11 guns and other evidence? Peterson`s friend, Rick Mims -- he joins us live with details on Peterson`s alleged secret folding gun.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Police seized 11 guns from Peterson`s home, but now it appears they didn`t get them all. Peterson`s former friend, Ric Mims, says Peterson showed him a folded gun strapped to his leg the night police took his other weapons, but police never saw that one. Peterson`s vehicles were returned this week, but nobody knows what effect this new development will have on whether Peterson can get the rest of his guns back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CASAREZ: And good evening. I`m Jean Casarez of "In Session," formerly Court TV, in for Nancy Grace tonight.
Well, new subpoenas by a secret grand jury hit close to home for former police officer Drew Peterson, the prime suspect in his fourth wife`s disappearance.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Drew Peterson`s mother called to testify. Peterson`s mother and stepfather reportedly appeared before the grand jury to answer questions about the disappearance of Stacy Peterson and the homicide of Kathleen Savio. Peterson`s stepfather, Al Morphey, confronts reporters as he`s leaving the courthouse, claiming to have no idea where Stacy might be. Stacy`s disappearance has been declared a potential homicide and Peterson remains the one and only suspect.
SHARON BYCHOWSKI, STACY`S FRIEND AND NEIGHBOR: He walked out on the sidewalk. He looked at my house, smiled and then hit the garage door. Then he hit it a second time, as to say, I got your garage door opening, ha, ha, ha. Well, you know what? No one thinks Drew Peterson`s antics are very funny. No one`s going to forget Stacy Peterson. And no matter how much he torments me, the fight to find Stacy will continue. It`s not just my fight to find Stacy, there are hundreds of people that are looking for Stacy right now throughout Bolingbrook. We`re a force and we won`t be stopped by Drew Peterson, no matter what.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CASAREZ: And new witnesses appear before a secret grand jury investigating the disappearance of missing mom Stacy Peterson and the homicide of Kathleen Savio, the fourth and third wives of former police officer and suspect Drew Peterson.
For the very latest, let`s go straight out to Mary Frances Bragiel, reporter with WBBM radio in Chicago. Good evening, Mary.
MARY FRANCES BRAGIEL, WBBM RADIO: Good evening. It was Drew Peterson`s mother and stepfather who appeared before grand jury yesterday. Now, Drew Peterson told me this afternoon that, initially, he was worried because his parents are elderly, but he knew that once his mom came out and she was joking with photographers who were taking her picture, how she wanted copies of these photographs, he knew that she was OK because, according to Drew, his mother is his biggest fan.
Also Ric Mims, who used to be Drew`s close friend, is now saying in published reports that state police missed at least one pistol that Drew kept on his person when they initially looked through the house, the first investigation there, and took out all the guns. Drew Peterson said that he never held onto the pistol. He said the state police just missed it.
CASAREZ: All right. Well, we got a couple new things here. Let`s go straight out to Mr. Joel Brodsky. Mr. Brodsky, thank you so much for joining us. Of course, you are the defense attorney in Chicago, Illinois, for Drew Peterson. First of all, when did you find out that Drew`s mother and stepfather were going to have to testify before the grand jury?
JOEL BRODSKY, DREW PETERSON`S ATTORNEY: Drew called a few days ago about that. He was upset, concerned. He says his mother really has a slight touch of Alzheimer`s, that she doesn`t remember so well. And he was a little bit concerned about her -- you know, her memory, and what the stress this might put her under. But like you said, after she came out and seemed to be in good spirits, he was relieved.
CASAREZ: What is their demeanor? I mean, this had to be difficult for them to go and testify. And do you know anything they talked about in there?
BRODSKY: Well, they don`t -- there`s nothing for them to -- they don`t know anything. We really are at a loss for why the state police or the prosecutors would have wanted to subpoena them or have them testify before the grand jury in the first place. I mean, they don`t know -- they don`t know anything that could -- that could be one way or the other -- other than just an overabundance of thoroughness of behalf of the state`s attorneys. But really, to bother these two old people is just a touch outrageous, I think.
CASAREZ: Well, does his mother -- do they live in the same community that Drew and Stacy did, and Kathleen?
BRODSKY: They don`t live that close. I`m not exactly sure how far they do live apart. But you know, it`s not like they`re neighbors or anything. And it`s not as if they had daily contact. It was a normal family type of contact. But they`re elderly people and they don`t get around so well anymore, and they really don`t know anything. But the state wanted to see them, and I guess -- they actually had to cancel a planned trip down to Texas in order to appear. So you know, it was very uncalled for, I feel.
CASAREZ: All right. We have a very special guest tonight that we have wanted to talk to for a while on this issue. His name is Ric Mims. He`s in Chicago. He is a former very good friend of Drew Peterson. Mr. Mims, thank you so much for joining us tonight.
RIC MIMS, FORMER FRIEND OF DREW PETERSON: Thank you, Jean.
CASAREZ: I wanted to ask you, you have said that Drew Peterson had a gun that he did not surrender to authorities when a search warrant was executed at the home last fall. Start from the beginning and tell us what you know.
MIMS: On Thursday, the 1st of November, the Illinois State Police issued a search warrant there at the house. I was the one that was there. Drew was down at the police department giving a statement. They came with the search warrant and one thing that I remember it read was turn over all weapons. To make a long story short, later that night, after everything had calmed down, we were sitting in the living room. Drew reaches down into his pants leg. He pulls out a little folding gun and goes, Hey, they didn`t find this one, and he starts chuckling. And state police was unaware of that.
And then I was called in Wednesday afternoon because on Wednesday, the 19th, Pat Callahan (ph) with the Illinois State Police said he retrieved Drew Peterson`s folding gun and needed me to come down to identify it. And I went down there and identified it.
CASAREZ: OK. Now, you`re saying the police said that they retrieved the gun. How did they retrieve it?
MIMS: They did not tell me.
CASAREZ: He did not tell you. All right. Let`s go back to Joel Brodsky. Do you know anything about this? Have the police just recently gotten another gun your client had had since last fall?
BRODSKY: Well, first of all, they didn`t retrieve any gun from my client or my client`s house. That`s 100 percent for sure. And I think this is just another story that Mr. Mims is trying to shop to "The Enquirer" because he was just served with papers that he owes $40,000 in back child support, and he`s looking to raise some money. He made money, you know, selling some pictures of a bed to "The Enquirer." Now he`s trying to do it again.
Listen, a search warrant does not say, Turn over guns. A search warrant -- which he just said it did. A search warrant gives the police permission to search a certain premises. It doesn`t order anybody to turn over anything. So his story just doesn`t add up and I just don`t give it any credibility whatsoever.
CASAREZ: Well, let`s go back to Mr. Mims because we just heard Mr. Brodsky talk about "The National Enquirer." And I believe in "The National Enquirer" in December, it was mentioned in an article that you said that there was a gun that Drew Peterson had kept on him that was not collected by police. Is that true?
MIMS: That`s correct.
CASAREZ: OK. Why did it take three months to go to the police about this gun?
MIMS: The police were aware of it before, when I went to the grand jury.
CASAREZ: And when was that?
MIMS: I forget the first time I appeared, but I think it was in November or December I appeared the first time.
CASAREZ: So the police have allegedly known about this gun, and it`s taken all this time for them to call you back in to actually identify it to them?
MIMS: From my understanding, they just retrieved it Wednesday morning, so it`s not like they had it in their custody.
CASAREZ: OK. We have a lot of issues here that I think are unanswered. Mr. Brodsky, did your client keep any guns once that search warrant was executed, do you know at all?
BRODSKY: No. My client, Drew Peterson, did not have any guns in his possession after that search warrant. Now, Drew has had a gun card since he was 17 years old. He`s had -- he`s been a police officer for 32 years. He`s owned a lot of different guns over that period of time. There is a possibility that a gun that he has owned -- that he`s the owner of was in somebody else`s possession. That may have been the case. But there is no missing gun. There was no hidden folded gun in his house. That just simply isn`t the case.
CASAREZ: OK. To Ric Mims. You were very close friends with Drew Peterson. How many years were you friends with him?
MIMS: I first met Drew back in 1980.
CASAREZ: Wow. That`s a long time. Are you friends anymore?
CASAREZ: Why not?
MIMS: Just because of all this.
CASAREZ: OK. But -- but friends stand beside other friends when things like this happen.
MIMS: If they believe in them. If they believe in them.
CASAREZ: So do you not believe in the innocence of Drew Peterson?
MIMS: I`m just going to let the Illinois State Police handle all that.
CASAREZ: When was the last time you spoke with him?
MIMS: I believe that was sometime around -- the second week of November, I believe. It was by phone. It was when they issued the second search warrant to his house, and he had me go to his house to read him what was on the inventory list. That was the last time I talked to Drew.
CASAREZ: Were you living with him or staying with him at the time (INAUDIBLE)
MIMS: I just went over and stayed for a week to help out with the kids.
CASAREZ: What was his demeanor at that time, so close to when Stacy left?
MIMS: Like an upset husband. I firmly believed, you know, that Stacy had left. At that time, I believed what he was telling me.
CASAREZ: So when did you change?
MIMS: About the time he asked me to be a hostage if the police came in, and then about when he showed me the gun and was chuckling and then when he wrote all the checks to Steve. You know, just -- those weren`t actions of somebody that was innocent.
CASAREZ: OK. He asked you to be a hostage?
CASAREZ: Explain that.
MIMS: We were sitting on the couch and he was -- this was Wednesday, December 31. This was right after the press and everybody left. We were sitting on the couch. And he was worried that the police were going to come in and make him go do what he called a "72-hour sweat time." At that point, he says, I don`t want the children going to the Cales family, so I`m going to have to hold you hostage here until my son gets here, Steve, to pick up the kids. And I just looked at him like he was crazy and I says, That`s not going to work.
CASAREZ: OK. Well, let`s go out to the attorneys tonight because we`ve got some legal issues in all of this -- Susan Moss, family law attorney, child advocate, Holly Hughes, prosecutor, and Joey Jackson, defense attorney. Thank you so much for all of you joining us.
First of all, Susan Moss, if Drew Peterson truly has a gun that has not been turned over to police, could there be some charges here?
SUSAN MOSS, FAMILY LAW ATTORNEY: Absolutely. He should never have had an extra gun. This guy gives new meaning to the phrase shotgun wedding. I got to tell you something. If he had an extra gun and there was a legal document that he was required to turn over the other guns and the guns he had in his possession or under his control, he is in some trouble.
CASAREZ: So Holly Hughes, what charges are we looking at here?
HOLLY HUGHES, PROSECUTOR: Well, I got to tell you, I disagree with Susan Moss on this one. A search warrant gives the police permission to enter into the premises or domicile and look for weapons. It is not a court order for a particular person to hand over the weapons they have. Therefore, if the police missed this weapon or it was not located at the location where the search warrant was executed, he didn`t have an affirmative duty to go around, collect his guns from other people and turn them over.
CASAREZ: But doesn`t it make sense to you, Holly, that police would have asked him, because he has talked so much, Do you have any other weapon that we don`t have at this point? They collected 11 guns.
HUGHES: Well, I`d like to think they did that, but I don`t think there`s any proof at this point. You know, as a prosecutor, Jean -- you know this, being a lawyer -- what you have to do is say, Is there evidence? Is there proof to sustain this charge? So before you can charge this man with something -- and believe me, I`d love to charge this man with quite a few things, starting with, you know, two murders. But until they develop evidence or proof, it`s just not going to happen.
CASAREZ: All right. To Joey Jackson, defense attorney. If your client had a gun and all eyes are on your client at this point in time and he didn`t turn it over, what`s the defense, even the defense to the potential jury pool probably out there?
JOEY JACKSON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, let me say this. Before we jump to defenses, we have to examine a couple of things, Jean. First of all, we have to look at the credibility of the person telling the story. That is Mr. Mims. He says that he had a gun and he laughed about it. This was November 1. And now all of a sudden, this is coming out, and then he gives some indication that he told the police at some point after? When after did he say this? Is this just another plot to get some other money? With friends like him, who needs enemies?
Furthermore, 28 years of friendship, this is what he say to say about it? I don`t think so. Now, let`s look at the critical issue, Jean. The critical issue is going to be, Was he holding or harboring that weapon for purposes of preventing law enforcement from doing their job? Was he concealing it? In that case, OK, potentially, you have obstruction of justice or that type thing. But I`m not at this point prepared to buy into that.
Furthermore, I do agree that there is no affirmative duty. The police have an obligation to do their job. Their failure in not doing that job should not make Drew Peterson culpable.
CASAREZ: All right. You bring out a good point, though. Ric Mims, "The National Enquirer," did you get any money for that story? And that`s your right, to get money. That`s not a crime, either. But did you get money for the story?
MIMS: Yes, I did.
CASAREZ: OK. All right. That can be used as a motive.
Joel Brodsky, there`s a hearing next week, next Tuesday actually, involving the guns that your client wants back or at least given to his son. Can you tell us about that?
BRODSKY: Yes. The question is -- that`s going to be presented to the court, or at least that`s before the court, is whether the state`s going to retain the guns until Drew gets his FOID, his firearms owners permit back, or if they`re going to be given to his son, Steve. And the judge wants to have an enforceable order, enforceable against Steve, if he hands the guns over -- over to him.
So we`re working with -- I`m working with the state`s attorney right now to figure out the technicalities of that. We might not get it resolved by Tuesday. It might have to be continued another week or so while they work out the technicalities of making Steve responsible legally and under a court order. So we may not get it over with by Tuesday. But certainly, I think within a week or two after that, we`ll have it fully resolved. And it`s my opinion -- I feel very confident that the guns will be turned over to Steve Peterson to hold until Drew gets his FOID card, his owner`s permit back.
CASAREZ: We`ll be right back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
NANCY GRACE, HOST: Is it true that your client withheld a gun from police, knowing that they were seizing his guns?
BRODSKY: It`s simply another fabrication of slick Ric Mims. He`s trying to sell another story to "The National Enquirer" now that he`s run out of money.
GRACE: Well, isn`t your client trying to sell a story, too?
BRODSKY: Not to "The National Enquirer," that`s for sure.
GRACE: But to who?
BRODSKY: Nobody right now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: Kathleen Savio. I understand that you are fighting any reopening of her case.
BRODSKY: Yes. They moved to reopen the estate...
GRACE: Who`s they?
BRODSKY: The Savio family moved to reopen the estate.
GRACE: Well, do you blame them? I mean, her death`s been ruled a homicide now.
BRODSKY: Right. The problem that they have is that they moved to reopen the estate to administer a wrongful death case. However, the statue of limitations ran over two years ago.
GRACE: Oh, really?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CASAREZ: And I`m Jean Casarez of "In Session," formerly Court TV, in for Nancy Grace tonight. We`ve got so many callers. Let`s go to April in Indiana. Hi, April.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi. How are you?
CASAREZ: I`m fine. What`s your question?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My question is, do we know if any of the Petersons` kids have had any kind of counseling?
CASAREZ: Oh, that`s a very, very good question. Let`s go out to Mr. Brodsky. Do you know if any of the children have had counseling? It is their mother that`s been missing for so many months.
BRODSKY: Not formal counseling. A friend of Drew`s that (ph) they (ph) were at his house for two weeks in Florida and then a few days or as much as a week up in Wisconsin at his house, is a licensed clinical social worker. And he observed them and talked to them and gave Drew advice on how to deal with the situation. But let me assure everybody, these kids are doing great. They`re all doing fantastic. The teenagers are, like, number one in their class at Bolingbrook High. The two little ones are just happy as they could be. So they`re just -- nothing is -- they`re fine. They`re doing great.
CASAREZ: What do they know at this point about their mother, that she`s missing?
BRODSKY: The older two know what`s going on. The teenagers, they know exactly what`s going on. The younger ones, Drew`s been told it`s age- appropriate to tell them that their mom has gone on vacation. That`s what his advice -- the advice that he was given, and that`s what he`s doing.
CASAREZ: OK. A fast question. Jackie from South Carolina. Good evening, Jackie.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hi, Jean. Love your reporting.
CASAREZ: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: My question is, Kathleen Savio had a blow to the head, I believe, at least one or two. And I had had a head injury before and it bled so much. And I was just wondering, where did the blood go, if there was blood spatter there, or did they test for if it went under the -- down the drain or...
CASAREZ: It`s a great question. Mary Frances Bragiel, reporter, WBBM Newsradio, what do you know about that?
BRAGIEL: It`s my understanding that there was dried blood found in her hair. Now, there was an empty bathtub, is my understanding, as well, too, when she was found. But Mr. Brodsky may be able to better answer that question.
CASAREZ: All right. Well, we`ve got one answer.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: When police showed up after Bychowski contacted authorities, why wouldn`t your client hand over Bychowski`s garage door opener?
BRODSKY: Well, he doesn`t know if that`s Sharon`s garage door opener or if it was...
GRACE: He opened...
BRODSKY: It doesn`t matter. Maybe it was -- maybe it`s Stacy`s garage door opener and Sharon just gave Stacy the code.
GRACE: Well, didn`t he open Bychowski`s garage door with it?
BRODSKY: Yes, but that doesn`t necessarily mean it was hers. That only means that the code is in it.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CASAREZ: I`m Jean Casarez of "In Session," formerly Court TV, in for Nancy Grace tonight.
To Lillian Glass, psychologist and author of "I Know What You`re Thinking." Lillian, it`s being reported that Drew Peterson`s parents, elderly people, that they weren`t actually very upset when they left the grand jury and that even his mother, when the photographer tried to take her picture, she said, I`ll take 10 copies of that. Is that a normal reaction for a couple leaving a grand jury proceeding?
LILLIAN GLASS, PSYCHOLOGIST: It just shows you the apple doesn`t fall too far from the tree. Again, it`s kind of that way of communicating and disrespect that her son shows, as well.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: My question to you, Mr. Brodsky, is why did the picture of Stacy Peterson bother your client so much?
BRODSKY: It doesn`t bother him. It bothers his children. The 3-year-old and the 2-year-old have to go out on to the backyard and see pictures of their mom and they start crying.
GRACE: Really? I thought he told them she was on vacation.
BRODSKY: Right. And now they got to go look at pictures of her? They`re wondering what`s going on?
GRACE: Why shouldn`t they. She`s on vacation. What`s the problem of seeing their moms?
BRODSKY: They`re wondering why there`re pictures of their mom in the window. Why does he have to explain that?
GRACE: Well, maybe it`s time for Drew Peterson to tell them that she`s missing and he`s a suspect.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CASAREZ: I`m Jean Casarez of "In Session," formerly CourtTV in for Nancy Grace tonight.
Let`s go back out to Joel Brodsky for a moment. Your client has been saying that he is being stalked, he is being harassed and now you have gone to the FBI on it. True?
BRODSKY: There`s a cyber stalking law that`s obviously clearly being violated. They were -- I look at the posts that are on the Web site that Sharon, his neighbor, is an administrator of, and clearly they were plotting to -- organizing to drive business away from the bar that Drew goes to, to call restaurants that he`s going to attend, to place signs along his route, not just to try to find or to find people who may have information, but simply where Drew Peterson and his children are going to be.
She places signs at her house that face Drew`s house. I mean, clearly there are pattern of conduct here.
CASAREZ: So what did the FBI told you they`re going to do?
BRODSKY: Well, they`re looking into it. They already got their computer people looking at -- looking at the site and they`re going to investigate.
CASAREZ: OK. I want to go out to Bill Majeski. He is a former New York police detective. He`s a board member of the SAFE NOW PROJECT.
Thank you for joining us. I want to get back to this gun, this alleged gun that we don`t even know if Drew Peterson still has or did have. But Ric Mims says it was strapped around his leg. Now I don`t want to generalize at all. OK?
BILL MAJESKI, FMR. NYPD DETECTIVE, BOARDMEMBER, SAFE NOW PROJECT: OK.
CASAREZ: But do police officers normally strap guns to their legs?
MAJESKI: Well, sure. They can. They can strap it around their ankle as a second gun, usually. But the thing is if they went in with a search warrant looking for guns, presumably they asked him if he had any guns on him. That`s their first order of business for their own safety. So I`m going to do a stretch here and make an assumption that they did ask him if he had a gun on him. So therefore if it wasn`t on him, it was some place else in the house or some other location that he had it hidden in.
Now where they found it ultimately no one knows. Now that`ll clearly answer the question as to, you know, where it came from and if, indeed, he has any connection to it.
MAJESKI: As far as Mims identifying a gun, he identified a gun that looks similar to the gun that we saw in that photograph.
CASAREZ: Right. Now what would you say would be the reason that Drew Peterson would want to keep a gun on him?
MAJESKI: Well, I think it`s all about power with this fellow. He wants to be in control of everything. He`s trying to control the media outside. He`s trying to control the way the investigation is being done. He`s trying to show people that, listen, no matter what they`re doing to me, I`m still in control of things. They wanted my guns. Well, guess what? I still have them.
MAJESKI: So it`s all about power with this guy.
CASAREZ: Let`s go out to Karen in Canada. Good evening, Karen.
KAREN, CANADIAN RESIDENT: Hi, Jean. Thanks for taking my call.
KAREN: I was just wondering, do you have to have a license or a permit for each gun that you own? Thus proving how many guns that Drew may have owned?
CASAREZ: That`s a great question. Let`s go out to Joel Brodsky since he is in Illinois and every state is different on this.
BRODSKY: That`s correct.
CASAREZ: There is a permit you have to have to have weapons. Explain that, Joel.
BRODSKY: Yes, in Illinois they register the owner, not the gun. So as long as you have an owner`s permit, which we call it a firearm`s owner ID card, you can own as many guns as you can afford to purchase. I mean, not automatic weapons, obviously. But, you know, long guns and revolvers and semiautomatics. You can own as many as you can afford as long as you`re registered.
CASAREZ: All right. So the answer to Karen in Canada is no, they would not have a list of the particular guns.
Julie in Wyoming, good evening, Julie.
JULIE, WYOMING RESIDENT: Hi, Jean.
JULIE: Hi. I heard Joel Brodsky say a few weeks ago that the cousin of Drew`s that allegedly helped him with that blue tub hasn`t been seen or heard from for quite some time.
CASAREZ: Very interesting.
Joel Brodsky, do you know the answer to that?
CASAREZ: That is the stepbrother of your client, correct?
BRODSKY: Yes. Thomas Morphey. He hasn`t hide nor hair of him for many months, I think, since November.
CASAREZ: Mary Frances Bragiel from -- WBBM Newsradio 780, is that what you`ve heard also? Not hide nor hair?
MARY FRANCES BRAGIEL, WBBM NEWSRADIO 780: Absolutely. Yes, absolutely, nobody has heard a thing since he probably wanted to escape the media because they were all over him or tried to be all over him the minute it was divulged that he may have played a part in this.
CASAREZ: All right. Very, very interesting.
You know, Mr. Brodsky, a question that I think everybody really wants to know at this point, your weather in Illinois is getting better. The search efforts are going to start again.
CASAREZ: .for Stacy Peterson. Is your client going to help in the search efforts?
BRODSKY: You know, Sharon, Drew`s neighbor, said that things that Drew is trying -- wants to stop her from searching. That`s simply not the case. Sharon and all of her friends and people she`s organizing are more than free to search in every bush, every pond, every river in the state of Illinois if they wish. But Drew knows that they`re not going to find Stacy there. Stacy ran off with another man. She`s obviously in hiding somewhere. We believe she has left the country.
CASAREZ: But would he like to sell the house? Because who would want to live where he`s living right now to undergo what he`s having to endure, according to him? Doesn`t he want to sell the house?
BRODSKY: No, his children -- first, his children are comfortable in the house. Their his house and -- it`s their house and their home and to uproot them right now would probably not be the best thing for them. Second of all, Stacy is a co-owner of that house. It`s entitled to her.
BRODSKY: And Drew obviously can`t sell it.
CASAREZ: And that`s my whole point. Wouldn`t he like to find her even if she had run away with another man so he could.
BRODSKY: Oh, yes.
CASAREZ: .sell the house or disperse assets or just do something so he can get on with his life?
BRODSKY: Yes. Absolutely. We love to know where she is and we have investigators who are trying to find her. We`re, obviously, not looking in bushes and ponds because that`s not where she`s at, but we have investigators trying to find her overseas and trying to look for her, you know, using their tools, which are mostly Internet and computer and search items and there are different ways of doing it.
But, you know, I wish that Sharon and other people that are looking would at least devote some portion of their efforts, just on the assumption that Stacy may be alive and trying to find her. If they would give 10 percent of their effort, 15 percent of their effort, Drew would certainly join in that part of it.
To Bill Majeski, former New York police detective, what would you be doing if you were a hired investigator right now to try to find Stacy Peterson who had run away?
MAJESKI: I would go back to the beginning. I think like all investigations, after a period of time they get cold. And I think that you could resurrect concepts and ideas and theories by going back to the very beginning of the investigation and redoing it as though it happened yesterday. And I think by putting a fresh pair of eyes on it in that regard, you`ll see things a little bit differently. And there may be clues that were very obvious then that have since gone cloudy and by resurrecting those new clues you may be able to find out exactly what happened.
There have to be -- if he is claiming that she ran away with another man, there has to be some evidence of some kind of a guy that was in her life. That doesn`t seem to be forthcoming with any of the information that we know about.
CASAREZ: Good words. Very good words. Let`s go back to legally what we know at this point. There is a grand jury. It`s convened and it has witnesses.
Holly Hughes, the parents, the mother and stepfather of Drew Peterson just testified before that grand jury. What do you think they said?
HOLLY HUGHES, PROSECUTOR: Well, quite frankly, Jean, I don`t think they said anything. What they were probably asked was, do you have any knowledge if your -- now, of course, the stepfather, it`s his son that was reported to have helped move that warm blue barrel. So they probably asked him did your son discuss that with you, do you have any knowledge about that, did Stacy ever tell you what was good or bad in the marriage, was she involved with another man, did you have any indication that she was involved with another man.
You know, all we have right now is Drew, who is a suspect in her death, and presumably a suspect in the death of his third wife, saying, oh, well, she ran off with another man. They`re looking for proof or evidence. They`re asking these parents, do you know anything about this? Quite frankly, I don`t think they would have given it up even if they had seen it with their own two eyes, Jean.
CASAREZ: All right.
I want to thank you all of our guests and to you at home for being with us tonight. I`m Jean Casarez in for Nancy Grace. See you tomorrow night, 8:00 sharp, Eastern.
Good night, everybody.