A former attorney for convicted killer Drew Peterson is seeking to have a Will County judge recuse herself in a case where he’s accused of violating another judge’s gag order.

Since March 1, 2024, Joel Brodsky has been accused of indirect criminal contempt of court for allegedly violating a gag order by discussing his legal representation of Peterson, 71, in a NewsNation interview.

Brodsky was one of the attorneys for Peterson in a 2012 trial that led to a jury finding him guilty of the 2004 murder of his third wife, 40-year-old Kathleen Savio.

Peterson is a former Bolingbrook police sergeant whose case attracted national attention and was made into a TV movie.

The gag order was placed on Brodsky in 2022 so he wouldn’t jeopardize Peterson’s renewed efforts to overturn his conviction, which was previously been upheld by higher courts.

Brodsky seemed eager to fight the charge by himself about a month after it was filed.

“Let’s put a jury in today,” Brodsky said at an April 4, 2024 court hearing.

But since then, Brodsky has cycled through three attorneys, filed numerous pretrial motions challenging the case and filed an appeal over a separate gag order.

Brodsky also filed a federal lawsuit on Aug. 29 against several prosecutors and Peterson’s public defenders in response to his contempt case.

Because of the lawsuit, Chuck Bretz, Brodsky’s latest attorney, has requested Will County Judge Jessica Colón-Sayre recuse herself from the contempt case.

Bretz’s motion said Colón-Sayre is a witness to “certain events” that form the basis of Brodsky’s lawsuit and she cannot be a judge in the contempt case as well.

Brodsky’s lawsuit was filed more than two months after an appellate court rejected his request to appoint a judge other than Colón-Sayre to the contempt case.

The appellate court found nothing to “support a judicial-bias claim.”

During Wednesday’s hearing, Special Prosecutor William Elward began to say the motion is “all part of Mr. Brodsky’s scheme,” before Bretz interrupted Elward to say he should remain professional and stop “taking shots” at his client.

Bretz said he filed the motion, not Brodsky.

Elward later said Brodsky is trying to delay the contempt case to avoid facing the consequences of his actions.

In a court filing, Elward said Brodsky faces “lengthy incarceration” for his “blatant disregard” of attorney-client privilege.

Colón-Sayre set the hearing on the recusal motion for Jan. 14.

Bretz’s motion said Colón-Sayre is a witness to a Dec. 5, 2024 event in her courtroom that is described in Brodsky’s lawsuit.

The lawsuit alleged Elward made a “Kafkaesque misrepresentations” by denying retired Will County Judge Dave Carlson imposed a gag order on Brodsky after the contempt case was filed.

The lawsuit alleged Colón-Sayre supported Elward’s purported “delusional denial” of Carlson’s gag order.

An appellate court vacated Carlson’s order that restricted what Brodsky could say about Peterson or the contempt case. The appellate court found Carlson’s order was an unconstitutionally broad restriction on Brodsky’s speech.

Brodsky’s Aug. 29 lawsuit was filed against Elward and several people who work for Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow and Will County Public Defender Michael Renzi.

The lawsuit claims the contempt case was filed to keep Brodsky from speaking about “unconstitutional and corrupt actions” that would result in a reversal of Peterson’s conviction if they were publicly disclosed.

The lawsuit alleged there was “serious prosecutorial misconduct,” as well as “judicial misbehavior and collusion” that occurred during Peterson’s trial.

Lawsuits against prosecutors usually fail because they are protected by absolute immunity for any actions related to their job.

Attorneys for the public defenders have also raised the shield of absolute immunity as well.

Eldward’s attorneys with Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul’s Office argue Brodsky’s claims are already under litigation in Will County and any decision from a federal judge would intrude on the independence of state courts.