The Illinois State Police can retain several items seized Nov. 1 as part of its investigation into the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, a Will County judge ruled this morning.

The Illinois State Police can retain several items seized Nov. 1 as part of its investigation into the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, a Will County judge ruled this morning.

Judge Daniel Rozak ruled police can keep the items after attorneys for Drew Peterson, former Bolingbrook police sergeant, filed a motion last week seeking the return of two cars, several guns and other items obtained by investigators after executing a search warrant at the Peterson home, 6 Pheasant Chase Court, Bolingbrook.

Following the motion by Drew Peterson’s attorneys, the state filed a counter motion asking to keep several items it considers pivotal in the investigation.

According to Chuck Pelkie, spokesman for the Will County State’s Attorney’s office, the state has agreed to return several CDs and an iPod seized Nov. 1.

“We are satisfied with the judge’s ruling this morning that we can retain the other items,” Pelkie said.

The state will retain 11 guns and computers seized in the raid, as well as two vehicles — a 2005 GMC Denali SUV and a 2002 Pontiac Grand Prix.

Arrangements have been made to return the other items to Drew Peterson, Pelkie said.

Joel Brodsky, an attorney representing Drew Peterson, this morning filed a letter with the courts asking for a special prosecutor to look into possible leaks coming from a grand jury investigating Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.

Judge Rozak did not respond to the letter, but did set another hearing for Friday, Jan. 25.

Brodsky could not be reached for comment.

Pelkie said the request by Drew Peterson “is just an attempt by Mr. Brodsky to try and taint the grand jury and its process.”

Over the past month several published reports have identified individuals who have reportedly been questioned by the grand jury, including Drew Peterson’s son, Stephen Peterson, a 28-year-old Oak Brook police officer.

“To suggest any leaks are coming from the grand jury itself is highly speculative,” said Pelkie.

State police continue to investigate the disappearance of Stacy Peterson, Drew Peterson’s fourth wife, who disappeared Oct. 28. Three days later state police executed a search warrant and confiscated several items from the Peterson residence.

Drew Peterson has denied any involvement in the disappearance of Stacy Peterson.

Drew Peterson has been under intense police and media scrutiny since Stacy Peterson disappeared Oct. 28, and shortly after that investigators from the Will County state’s attorney’s office began re-examining the death of Kathleen Savio, Drew Peterson’s third wife.

Savio was discovered dead in her bath tub in March 2004. At the time of her death Savio was divorced from Drew Peterson but lived in the same subdivision.

Savio’s body was exhumed Nov. 13 and an autopsy was conducted by the Will County Coroner’s office. Results from that autopsy are expected in a few weeks, the coroner’s office said recently.

This morning’s ruling in Will County followed a motion filed by the state last week in response to Brodsky’s motion seeking the return of items seized in the Nov. 1 search of Peterson’s home.

But the state’s motion filed Dec. 11 argued the vehicles required being seized in order to be searched.

“A warrant must be read to allow for a reasonable search for specified items,” the motion said. “Items not listed in a search warrant may also be seized ... when it is not practical to sort through them on the premises,” the motion said.

Peterson’s motion claimed the state’s initial warrant failed to specify items were to be seized, only searched.

The state’s counter-motion motion called the request by Drew Peterson a “fishing expedition designed to determine what information the Illinois State Police may or may not be developing into Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.”