This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

JOLIET, Ill. — Convicted wife killer Drew Peterson has an unlikely ally in his efforts to keep his former attorney from sharing the ex-cop’s secrets. 

The man who prosecuted Peterson — the same man who Peterson was later convicted of attempting to hire a hit man to kill — Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow has filed a brief supporting a gag order against Peterson’s ex-lawyer.

“The parties and trial court in this case could not risk [Joel Brodsky] revealing whatever knowledge he possesses,” Glasgow’s office wrote in a filing with an appellate court reviewing the gag order.

It’s a far different tone than the tough talking state’s attorney sounded during Peterson’s trial for killing his third wife Kathleen Savio, and the subsequent trial on solicitation of murder for hire. 

Peterson was convicted in both cases but has never been charged in the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy.

Peterson’s public defender requested, and received, the gag order following a May 17 WGN Investigates report in which Brodsky said, “I know everything about both of his wives – everything.” He added: “I feel bad about Drew still not taking responsibility and Stacy still being missing.  I’m thinking about maybe revealing what happened to Stacy and where she is.”   

Brodsky is appealing the gag order.

Peterson’s current lawyer, now joined by the Will County state’s attorney, are arguing that if Brodsky reveals what he knows it could jeopardize a new trial if Peterson’s long-shot bid to have his conviction overturned is successful. 

Peterson claims Brodsky provided ineffective counsel during the murder trial, in part by not allowing him to testify in his own defense.

“This may be the most vile crime in the U.S. but [defendants] still have a right to speak in confidence with their attorney,” Will County Judge Ed Burmila said in court when granting the gag order on May 19.

Brodsky insists that he has the right to defend himself against Peterson’s claim that was an ineffective counsel and to do that he can breach attorney-client privilege to demonstrate the jeopardy Peterson was in. 

“Once again Drew’s big fat lips are getting him in trouble – he just can’t keep his mouth shut,” Brodsky said outside the courthouse May 19. 

Brodsky said he still wants to reveal “the whole story” of what happened in the Peterson case, perhaps in a long-form podcast. He’s not ruling-out being compensated for sharing the story but insists that not his motivation.

The Will County State’s Attorney’s Office did not respond to a request for comment on why it’s seeking to silence Brodsky from revealing information that could help them finally bring charges in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson. 

In the court filing, Glasgow’s office wrote: “Defendant would likely never receive a fair jury trial…if his former attorney violates the most basic tenet of the attorney-client relationship and, say, reveals that defendant confessed to him to murdering Kathleen Savio and/or Stacy Peterson.”