Pastor: Cop (Drew Peterson) told fourth wife he killed third wife

[brooklynite]

Source: CNN

BOLINGBROOK, Illinois (AP) -- A former police officer's missing wife once confided in a pastor that her husband admitted killing his third wife, the pastor said.

...snip...

Former Westbrook Christian Church pastor Neil Schori told Fox News Channel's Greta Van Susteren in an interview broadcast Monday that Stacy Peterson told him in August that her husband, Drew Peterson, admitted killing his previous wife, Kathleen Savio.

...snip...

Last month, the Westbrook Christian Church's pastor of spiritual formation told The Associated Press that Stacy Peterson requested an August meeting with a member of their pastoral staff when the church made a routine call to see why she and Drew Peterson had not attended services in recent months.

The church official made a "judgment call" not to alert authorities and did not consult with other church staff, Rob Daniels said.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/12/11/peterson.wife.ap/index.html

---

Nice that he could share it with the media though...

[Lautremont]

1. What's he going to tell the fifth wife?

[tekisui]

2. Peterson told fourth wife he killed third wife...and then killed fourth wife.

Horrible.

[superconnected]

8. Seems like the 4th wife and the pastor should have called the police.

I would have. But then why do that when it's easier to let a murder run free and not make waves.

[ret5hd]

11. Maybe they tithed well.

[rateyes]

3. That church official made the wrong judgment call, IMO.

The church official received evidence of a murder, and sat on it? As someone who has practiced as a counselor...I have always told my clients up front, that I will maintain confidential communications unless I believe that (1.) someone's life or physical well-being is in imminent danger, or (2.) a crime is confessed to.

[truedelphi]

4. You are absolutely right. He is to be commended fior coming out now though

As he and or his church may well be handed a civil suit by Stacy's family.

[pipoman]

17. Neither occurred

It seems to me the pastor had a hearsay statement from the wife in a failing marriage. Keeping her trust was more important than making allegations (against a LEO) which were inadmissible even if she were inclined to swear to them. It was a judgment call, hind sight? maybe, it sounds like the decision to keep her trust was made by a small group of clergy at the church not by the one pastor himself.

[rateyes]

24. A woman says to you "my husband told me that he killed

his ex-wife" and you aren't going to think that there is at least a possibility that HER life or physical well-being isn't in danger?

On edit: This quote from the article: "The church official made a 'judgment call' not to alert authorities and did not consult with other church staff, Rob Daniels said."

[pipoman]

25. Absolutely

and I would discuss that with her. I would encourage her to get out. I would strongly encourage her to report this or let me report it. If she didn't want it reported and just wanted to talk to someone I would honor that. Bottom line is that even if I did report it, 1st who do I report it to? 2nd no matter who I reported it to they wouldn't put much stock in it (without some concrete evidence) as it is the word of a wife in a rocky marriage speaking about a police captain about a case which was investigated and determined to be an accidental death and the case is closed. Police automatically are skeptical of reports made by spouses who are in rocky relationships. Daily they have spouses report their husband/wife for child abuse, or any other number of crimes, they have to be very skeptical so they are not used as the tool of the spouse. Further the pastor said that he had long heard rumors of an "interesting death of Peterson's 3rd wife", so if he had heard it so had the police.

I am sure I heard some place that this pastor consulted with other clergy and they decided to maintain her trust, I don't remember where I heard or read that...it may be wrong.

[Critters2]

19. In many states, he'd be a mandated reporter, and would have to

go to the cops with this. But not in Illinois. Thanks to the Catholic Church, which has lobbied long and hard for clergy confidentiality in ALL cases.

My denomination requires me to act as a mandated reporter, regardless of what the state says. But not all churches require this.

But then, there's always common sense...

[acmavm]

5. Good grief! She stayed with him after that? Did she not think that maybe

she could become a victim as well? (I know, we can't know what she was thinking but that would have instantly popped into my mind.) I mean, isn't there a saying that murder is easier after the first kill?

[Parche]

6. Is this like the Number 2 Al-Kida Wife?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :hi:


Actually do we really care about this story? :shrug: :hi:

[superconnected]

9. The supreme stupidity of the people involved makes it interesting.

I mean the man probably shouldn't be telling about the people he killed if he didn't want to get caught. But, then he told someone that didn't bother reporting him(and in turn got killed) and she told someone that didn't bother reporting him.

That's newsworthy. Nobody cared enough about the third wife or that her family knew the truth, not even a Pastor. Nice to know.

[cliss]

7. Wait a minute.

This dude has 4 wives. What happened to the others?

Did they all vanish under mysterious circumstances? (I don't keep up with the Enquirer stuff).

[superconnected]

10. Rule #1 when killing someone

- surround yourself with people who think murder is acceptable.

Easier to get away with that way if you feel like talking about it, they're there for you. :sarcasm:

[hisownpetard]

12. Don't blame the pastor, I don't think he's old enough to dial the phone himself.

[Missy Vixen]

13. Didn't the pastor just commit a crime as well?

Isn't it mandatory to call authorities when a crime is confessed to?

Of course, IMHO, YMMV,
Julie

[happyslug]

14. No, the police don't want that to be the law

Thus when one of their stool pigeons tell them of the crime the stool pigeon has committed, the Police do NOT have to report it.

In reality do you know if what you have been old is the Truth? You don't, it could be a lie to impress you, or to frighten you (maybe both). merely being told is NOT enough.

Furthermore the Pastor has a problem. I am assuming he is a Protestant Pastor and as such does NOT have a Catholic like Confessional. In most Protestant Churches there is NO Priest-penitent exception. Catholic Priests (and some Protestant with similar doctrines) do have a Priest-Penitent rule against revealing ANYTHING said in the Confessional. Thus if a murder tells a Priest of a Murder, the Priest can NOT reveal that confession to the Police, the Priest must (under Church Doctrine) try to get the person to go to the Police, but that is all.

Many Protestant Ministers know of this Catholic rule and have embrace it as a way for people to get sins of their chests (and to get them to Confess to the Police), while NOT part of their Doctrine, they are hesitant to violate such a trust. The law recognize the Priest-Penitent Confessional as valid (Mostly do to a number of Catholic Priests willing to go to jail over this doctrine in the early 1800s rather then testify what someone had told them in the Confessional).

In my opinion the Pastor has, to a degree, embraced the concept of Priest-Penitent. It is NOT up to the Priest to tell the police, but the Penitent. Thus the Pastor did not want to violate the trust placed in him by her, thus he did nothing and someone died. It is a hard decision to make, to tell the Police of a Crime someone told you of. It is harder if it is about a Police Officer who can retaliate against HER.

As to getting people to re-tell to the Police what they told their Priest is hard. In the 1950 the Vatican issued a paper about what Priest had to do if someone confessed he or she was sexually abused by another Priest. This Paper was in regards to the Confessional only, the Priest had duties to inform the Bishop of the problem Priest IF HE KNEW OF IT INDEPENDENT OF THE CONFESSIONAL, as such knowledge was NOT addressed in the paper.

The paper dealt with the confessional only. Basically it told the Priest that he should ask the confessor to tell the story to the bishop and even told the Priest he should step out of the confessional and try to talk the Confessor to tell the Bishop, but the Priest, himself could NOT inform the bishop since he ONLY knew of it via the Confessional. This is still the Rule, and even the Courts that found against the Catholic Church did NOT hold this procedures against the Catholic Church (The Church liability resulted from the times people DID tell the Bishop and the Bishop did nothing, that is a different Series of threads on DU).

Anyway back to the paper. It was clear in the paper the Priest had to go to extraordinary lengths in such cases to get the Confessors to till the Bishop of the Sex assault (It was assumed the Bishop would handle the accusation at that time) BUT AT NO TIME WAS THE PRIEST TO VIOLATE THE CONFESSIONALS. The same with this poor Pastor, he believe he should NOT violate the trust of the Fourth Wife who told him this about this man's Third Wife, but he did not have the training to keep after her to tell the Police herself. He should have, but could he? I do not know and I refused to pass judgment on the Pastor just point out the dilemma he was facing.

[Critters2]

21. In some states, clergy are mandated reporters.

But not in Illinois. Some denominations require us to act as if mandated, even if the state doesn't. In my tradition, keeping this to myself would have probably gotten me defrocked.

[happyslug]

23. It varies from State to State depending on the Religious Doctrine.

Most, if not all, states accept Catholic Confessionals as exempt from reporting (But only the COnfessionals, for that is the only place were confidence is expected in the Catholic Church). Most of this is Judge found law i.e NOT by Statute but by the Common law of that State. It is a narrow exception to the rule to report.

As to reporting Crime, they is NO LEGAL REQUIREMENT TO REPORT ANY CRIME IN MOST STATES. Now most states do have mandatory reporters of child abuse (Doctors, Teachers Clergy etc) but not for crimes in General. The mandatory Reporters can NOT break a "Confidence" i.e. where the problem is revealed by the person talking NOT by other findings. Confidences include Lawyer-Client, Doctor-Patient, Priest-penitent, but outside of those roles, if the person is a mandatory reporter, he or she must report (i.e. if a Doctor is Told "I was attacked by X", that is a confidence and if that is ALL the Doctor has h can NOT reveal it to the Police, but if the Doctor sees injuries that is consistent with an attack, those findings MUST be reported. Yes it is splitting hairs in many cases but Confidence is considered good is most cases, on the other hand Evidence of a Crime is NOT covered by any Confidence).

Last week 60 minutes had a spot on a Prisoner in jail for a Crime he did not commit. A Lawyer came forward and said his late client told him that he had committed the crime. The Judge dismissed the petition to review the Conviction AND SENT THE LAWYER'S NAME TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT FOR VIOLATING A CONFIDENCE for disciplinary action. It was a violation of a Confidence, even through the Client was dead, and a confidence protected by law. Thus the lawyer is subject to sanction by the Court for revealing that confidence (Clients can reveal a Confidence, Lawyers can not without the Client's permission).

This is a constant headache for lawyers and other people who had this "Privilege", but as a whole it is considered good, for it permit people to talk to the person and advise them what to do. Without the knowledge that whatever you say can NOT be revealed without your permission, people may not be as open as needed to those people who can most help them. Thus most states recognize this privilege in the case of lawyer-Client (All States), Doctors-Patient (All States) and Priest-penitent (Most, if not all states). The main exception is Child abuse cases, but that is more dependent on findings as opposed to what you are told. Privilege is always difficult when you are told things that the Client/Penitent/Penitent do not want other to know. such Privilege has it place, but most professions restrict it, the Catholic Church to the Confessional, Lawyers to places where no third party is expected to over hear the conversation, Doctors to what they are told NOT what they find on physical examination. While confidence is restricted it is still viewed as a good thing.

[LisaL]

16. Nope. It's not mandatory.

[Critters2]

20. Not in Illinois.

I was shocked to learn this, after coming here from Iowa, where clergy are mandated reporters. But in Illinois, clergy are not required to go to the authorities with any information shared in private.

But I would have.

[pipoman]

22. It is only a confession if the person who did it admits to it

not if a friend of a friend claims they once heard the person confess, this is hearsay.

Secondly, who should they report this to? The same police department the murderer works for and who deemed the 3rd wife's death natural even though upon review and exhumation/re-autopsy it appears to be a blatant murder?

[gauguin57]

15. I don't care. I just wanna know whether K-Fed still has custody of Britney's kids!

And has Nicole Ritchie had her baby yet?

What global warming?

[Ellen Forradalom]

18. I am sick of everyone looking the other way when femicide occurs

A wife's life is her husband's property to dispose of as he sees fit. Yeah, 'taint no business of ours.