-
Website
http://capitolfax.com/ -
Original page
http://capitolfax.com/2009/07/29/lessons-that-must-be-learned/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
wordslinger
96 comments · 42 points
-
Rich Miller
147 comments · 56 points
-
LoopLady
16 comments · 6 points
-
theoriginallynns
16 comments · 2 points
-
dupage dan
28 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
Birkett's got dirty hands on the Nicarico travesty and that shame will never go away. Shame to the Republicans if they think otherwise.
if, IF, the system had worked in 1983 and 1984, and instead of framing an innocent man, police and prosecutors had kept the investigation open, Dugan's subsequent victims might still be here with us today.
Now that Brick has totally failed to convict the right guy --- a guilty plea does not count. Can voters, even those in Herald City, sober up and toss the guy?
It sums up why I feel the need to shower after seeing or hearing Birkett
Lets not forget a certain cook county attorney who also made political hay out of a horrific child murder and went on to become mayor of a large midwest city
Please refresh my memory. What mayor and what case are you talking about.
Thanks.
The murder of a child sickens us. As adults we have a biological need to spare them from harm. When a child is mistreated, tempers flare among strangers. This is the way it should be.
It is easier to avoid these natural feelings if you are not bombarded by television, newspapers and radio continually reporting on the crime. It is easier for us to look back 27 years and discover where emotions over-ruled legal procedures and laws. It is easier to look upon Dugan's crimes after your children have grown up and you feel they can be protected from Dugans.
I would suggest that we create a law enforcement agency that does not live within a community where a child murder occurred. Instead of relying on the local neighborhood police in these cases, we should recognize their emotional ties to the victim, and remove them from these cases. This will allow a different group of law emforcement officers with fewer emotional ties to investigate and pursue arrests.
And we simply cannot allow any government to end a human life. Governments should not be empowered to do so. It is the ultimate in denying a citizen's freedoms. While I agree that anyone who commits a child's murder is deserving of the death sentence, we cannot risk killing an innocent person, regardless of our certitude.
Between him raising his profile in failed statewide bids (and somehow endearing himself further to the local GOP in the process) and our utter inability to run a real candidate against him--probably not.
Birkett was handed a pile of garbage and responded in the way most professionals would--he took it and tried to make lemons out of lemonade. Unfortunately, the case was so bad and so torn apart by this time that he might as well been trying to convince us the earth was flat.
Birkett should have questioned what he was handed, but unfortunatley he put 'professional protocol' above any gut feelings or questions. Do we want that in a political leader? That's for the voters to decide.
I feel that he gets piled on much more than he deserves on this and other political blogs however. (I've never personally voted for the guy, so no, I'm not shilling for him either)
This case shows some very fundamental flaws in the system used to prosecute crimes in our society. This isn't Burge beating confessions out of people either. This was law and order DuPage where 'corruption' in prosecutions isn't expected. There was however a huge amount of political pressure to 'solve' the crime that tore apart peoples 'quiet and prefect' suburban neighborhoods. The three originally arested came from 'crime ridden' Aurora and invaded 'peaceful and pastoral' Naperville. What a load of hooey, but several suburbanites still buy into the nonsense about how things are so bad in the cities and life is so much greater in their suburb.
In my opinion the death penalty should never be handed out for convictions based on eye witness testimony, jail house snitches, or confessions. The only time that is could possibly be used is if the physical evidence is so conclusive that there are no questions as to guilt. It should be so conclusive that it can be taken out of the evidence locker 20 years later and conviction can again be established without a reasonable doubt.
train111
There is no moral equivalency between Cruz's bad acts and the actions of people professionally obligated to pursue facts and justice who pursued neither.
As for the settlement- that doesn't "prove" anything other than fitting into a general pattern that settlements and awards aren't as large in DuPage as Cook.
There's nothing worth defending in the actions of police and prosecutors over 20 years in this case. Their actions were the definition "Epic FAIL" criminal or not. They did tremendous damage to the justice system and to their professions.
Joe Birkett finally acknowledged reality- that Cruz was not involved. Something he was unwilling to do a few years ago. Schillerstrom opposed settling with Cruz because he believed Cruz to be involved. What does he have to say? What of county board member Michael McMahon, who said publicly that he wished they could take Cruz et al "to the basement and shoot them."?
the reality is crime and degradation that occurs all too frequently in America. so I harken back to one thing....victims. a person found dead, a woman ( cause it is most often a woman) who is sexually assaulted. and the
undeniable numbers of people who are violated by real evil
people walking our streets, not the police and not prosecutors.
the victims in the Dugan Cruz matters are girls, found dead, lost for their families. i'm so very sorry for their permanent loss.
And you are apparently OK with the fact that the powers that be tried repeatedly to have him executed for that.
And that Cruz statement you refer to was actually a "vision" that Cruz said he had. There were no notes taken and no video or audio recording by prosecutors or police of that "vision statement" by Cruz.
Which is pretty much what I wrote at the top. Not sure what your beef is here.
Jaclyn Dowaliby murdered and Richard M Daley about to run for Mayor who pushed through the arrest of the parents due to the hysteria of the public/media for a solution. Daley was now mayor when the trials began but the mother was acquitted, father convicted then the case overturned when the facts came out.
"With the media clamoring for action, Capt. Daniel McDevitt of the Illinois State Police took over the case and accused Jaclyn's parents, Cynthia and David, of the crime. Given the paucity of evidence, prosecutors were reluctant to act until ordered to do so by their boss, Richard M. Daley, who was about to run for mayor of Chicago"
Lot's more to read. I think they even made a movie out of it but of course this is a subject that the tame media never brings up with king Richie
There is no excuse for Birkett or Jim Ryan's actions. The papers didn't provide a run-down of the false and misleading evidence presented, but it was disgusting. For instance, they were saying a footprint on the door that skewed left could be made by a shoe that skewed right due to the wind. Or they said that shoeprints under a window indicated that Dugan didn't act alone - even though the shoeprints were from a small child. The original confession came when they told a mentally slow young man that he could get a box full of money (which they showed him) and a parade if he could give them evidence. He implicated Cruz and then when they pressed him on how he knew, he said he saw it happen. Then he was charged.
Yes Cruz is a punk, a jerk, and could have handled himself better. But that hardly excuses what happened to him.
You gotta be kidding me. Yeah, it worked after people were wrongly kept on death row for years. After the state Supreme Court repeatedly threw out convictions.
How is that "working"?
Seriously, that was messed up.
In order to be bi-partisan, Attorney General - now Senator - Burris also avoided taking action in spite of the evidence. I remember one of his top aides resigning in protest.
As we can see from the Jon Burge cases in Chicago--a 'full confession' doesn't necessarily mean squat!!!!
train111
Girllawyer did a good job presenting my view.
While I think the vast majority of cops are good/very good. I also know that there are corrupt cops, stupid cops and over zealous cops. Just like there are corrupt, stupid and over zealous people in every line of work.
Putting police,religious leaders, doctors, teachers, or whoever on a pedestal and pretending they can do no wrong is dangerous. We strengthen these professions when we remove/discipline people who violate the trust in these professions. Defending them just because they were able to get hired doesn't help anyone.
Jim Ryan, Roland Burris and Joe Birkett were quite willing to let innocent men be executed in order to protect their political careers. It doesn't get any lower than that.
The mystery in the Nicarico case is how Dugan wasn't Prime Suspect #1 from the get-go. He was well-known to law enforcement at the time.
"Mary Brigid Kenney urged her then-boss, Illinois Atty. Gen. Roland Burris, to confess error, writing in her resignation: "I realized that I was being asked to help execute an innocent man, and certainly a man who had been grossly denied a right to a fair trial."
Burris' response: "It is not for me to place my judgment over a jury, regardless of what I think."
Seven years earlier, John Sam, one of the first Du Page County sheriff's investigators on the case, also quit in protest--and testified for the defense."
OK, that's enough.
You've twisted people's words here one too many times today. Take a break.
the number of wrongful convictions is tiny compared to the montrous actions of the evil who prey on our streets every day.
there were 15 shootings last night in Chicago. find the guilty.
Amy states: "the number of wrongful convictions is tiny compared to the monstrous actons of the evil who prey on our streets every day."
Perhaps Rich or another source can provide us with a date and possibly even a link to a story the Tribune did about 7 years ago. It was about a robbery (and possibly a rape) in the Chicago area where someone was arrested and went to prison. The problem? The convicted prisoner wasn't the person responsible for the crime, and the two guys who did it went on to commit something like 50 more crimes before they were finally caught. The story, however, ran in the middle of the week and probably didn't get the attention it deserved.
If you don't want to oppose wrongful convictions because you feel that anyone who is accused of a crime is obviously guilty, then perhaps you would prefer to oppose wrongful convictions because the real criminals who engaged in the acts that got the wrong guy sent to prison so often go on to commit other crimes after they got away with the first one. They don't stop and say, "Oh, I got lucky. Perhaps I should consider getting a real job and some better friends and start living a better life."
And don't forget, we waste taxpayer's money on trials, feeding/housing/medical care for prisoners when we have the wrong guy (or gal) in prison for a crime they didn't commit.
http://homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-dea...
We are all hopeful that both governmental (or individual) practices, which result in innocent deaths, are constantly minimizing that risk. There are two ways to do that. 1) stop the practice or 2) improve the implementation of the practice, in order to lessen that risk.
In doing so, we need look at both sides of the equations. With the death penalty, usually, anti death penalty folks only look at the possibility of executing an innocent. What they fail to do, is to look at the other side of the equation, which is, what is the risk to innocents without the death penalty, which inquiry results in the reality that innocents are more at risk with a life sentence.
It would help if you clarified your criticisms. Had I thought there were logical fallacies, I would have corrected them, already.
FYI, I get a lot of criticism like yours, meaning, without specifics. Generally, when I ask for specifics, the people just go away.
I encourage scrutiny and a specific review of facts and reason.
So, Lynn, be very specific and I will be, as well.