Drew Peterson Trying to Get His Police Pension Back

Just days after he was sentenced to 40 years for plotting the murder of the prosecutor who put him in prison for killing his third wife, disgraced Bolingbrook cop Drew Peterson tried to get his pension back.

Peterson’s attorney, Steve Greenberg, filed a petition for administrative review in Will County Court Tuesday.

The Bolingbrook Police Pension Board stripped Peterson of his retirement benefits in June. Peterson had put in nearly 30 years with the Bolingbrook police before retiring as a sergeant in 2007. He cashed in rather than face an internal investigation concerning the disappearance of his fourth wife, Stacy Peterson.

Stacy Peterson remains missing. The Illinois State police did name Peterson a suspect in her “potential homicide” but have yet to charge him with harming her.

While Stacy Peterson's case was never solved, evidence gathered during the investigation prompted police and prosecutors to take another look at the death of Peterson’s third wife, Kathleen Savio.

Nearly five years after Stacy Peterson vanished, Drew Peterson was convicted of murdering Savio and sentenced to 38 years behind bars. Four years after that, he was found guilty of trying to put a hit on Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow and got another 40 years in prison.

Peterson collected more than $70,000 a year in pension money during his near nine years of retirement — including the seven years he spent locked up following his arrest for killing Savio. Sources have said his son, Stephen Peterson, whose mother is Drew Peterson’s first wife, was using the money to take care of his younger half brothers and half sister. Drew Peterson had two sons with Savio and a son and daughter with Stacy Peterson.

The pension board determined Peterson “used his specialized police training, skills and abilities to plan and commit the murder” of Savio, according to the petition for administrative review.

“The pension board’s legal conclusion concerning (Peterson’s) eligibility to receive benefits is incorrect and against the manifest weight of the evidence,” the petition said. “The mere conviction of a felony is insufficient to justify forfeiture of pension benefits; rather, there must be a ‘clear and specific connection between the felony committed and the participant’s employment’ to justify such a forfeiture."