Why Drew Peterson being found guilty should keep you up at night.

       I will begin with by stating that I know the man is guilty.  We all know he is guilty.  But what did not occur is the state proving he was guilty.  Or even that a crime occurred.  There are a host of other issues as well.  I will detail them all and then explain why you should be scared.
       First, Illinois passed a law specifically to allow hearsay evidence, in this case.   There is a fancy Latin term for that which my brother knows, but escapes me currently. (and my best effort with an hour searching online.)  The reason there is a legal term for this type of law is that it is unlawful to pass such a law.  But hey, this is Illinois, we've never let that stop us.
       Part of this complaint is that the law was passed after the crime was committed and before the trial.  He should have been "grandfathered" into a group to which this law could not legally be applied.  Any other time this would have been the case.  But again, welcome to Illinois.
       The reason this is bothersome is that it removes a defendants right to cross examine.  In this case third party testimony from the deceased was allowed to be weighted as first hand (from the deceased) instead of removed as hearsay.  Remember this important fact.
       Second, the state could not prove there was a crime committed.  Their own expert witness stated, under oath, that there was a possibility that the death was an accident.  That alone should have been enough for a "not guilty" verdict.  Not to belabor the point but, Illinois.
       Third, They could not illustrate, let alone prove, he was anywhere near the scene where this "possible" crime occurred.  Again, that should have been enough for a "not guilty" verdict.  But again, law has never stood in the way of political expedience in Illinois.
       Why should the bending of the law to convict the obviously guilty bother me so?  The obvious answer is because the next guy might not be so obviously guilty, or even guilty.  He might just be someone who had an unrelated argument with a vengeful neighbor.
       Say there was a "suspicious" death.  I decide that my neighbor "Bob" is really pissing me off lately.  What with his always mowing his lawn early and leaving his grass clippings on my sidewalk.  I find someone, say my brother, or wife, or brother's wife, to come with me and claim we heard the deceased person say they were afraid Bob would come and kill them.  If the case went the way Drew Peterson's did, he would be cooling his early-mowing heels behind bars.
       That is exactly what happened here.  Any of you could be singled out.  Say someone who was extraordinarily vocal about the obvious corruption in this festering  cesspool of a state.  Hey, I know that guy.