Chief of Detectives James Molloy described one of the men as white, with a medium build, in his mid-20s, with strawberry blond hair and between 5 feet 8 inches and 6 feet tall.
Posted on 03/03/2005 2:16:57 AM PST by familyop
Men sought for interviews after slayings of judge's relatives
Chief of Detectives James Molloy described one of the men as white, with a medium build, in his mid-20s, with strawberry blond hair and between 5 feet 8 inches and 6 feet tall.
The second man was described as white, 50 to 60 years of age, from 5 feet 10 inches to 6 feet tall, with hazel eyes and a large build. Molloy said the man was wearing dark green coveralls, a black watch cap and a gray-green coat.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Are these the guys who were seen parked on the street near the home?
?....Father and son?
IMO
....Friends of the Lefkows were stunned that anyone would want to harm Michael Lefkow, an attorney, who, with his wife was active in the Episcopal Church.....
?......His entire 'case' (client) History must be 'completely' investigated....He really may have been the primary target...all along.
I saw the movie,...'Collateral'...(NOT 'collateral damage')....a 3rd world, non-christian film,....3rd world evil
this movie showed a typical 'non-western world view'....one of the 'despotic' 'EAST'.....etc.
....Joseph Stalin adopted this violent (non-christian) way to 'solve' his problems....
Just my opinion......I'd certainly investigate her husband's old world 'connections'....
anyone who has NOT seen the movie in this day and age should see,..."Collateral"....weird stuff, scary too.
.......THESE NEW PICTURES may mean their going to have to go back many years if this involved 'the old man' in the pictures.
He may have served 'time' for years....an 'old' case?
Why aren't they putting this publicity into the Coptic Christian family slaying?
Chicagotribune.com
John Kass
You be the judge of Schakowsky's true intentions
Published March 4, 2005
When I heard that President Bush was being blamed for not caring if federal judges lived in fear, just 72 hours after the mother and husband of federal Judge Joan Lefkow were found slain, I wondered if I had time.
Time to call detectives and tip them to this explosive new angle about White House insensitivity so soon after the terrible tragedy. Instead, I thought I'd write a column.
Lefkow has said she believes the killings may have been a deliberate hit in retaliation for her rulings. The slayings shocked the city, all federal judges and anyone with a heart.
Unfortunately, there are certain time-honored protocols when it comes to public killings. One is speculation, which is natural. The other, which should be unnatural and shocking but isn't, because we're so used to it, is political grandstanding.
Politicians sometimes capitalize on tragedies to leverage newspaper ink and TV face time. Some do it to push an agenda.
Which brings me to U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky, the liberal Illinois Democrat, and her letter to Bush, in which she lectured him about not doing enough to protect judges and their families.
She sent her letter. Then she put out a press release to make sure reporters wouldn't miss it. Then she held a news conference at O'Hare International Airport on Thursday, in case reporters missed the press release.
I guess she wasn't super-interested in a private and meaningful dialogue with the president about judicial safety. But since she worked so hard to draw attention to herself, I thought I'd help her out.
"Dear President Bush," she wrote, respectfully. Then she accused him of not doing enough to protect judges, since he only increased the judicial safety budget by $7.3 million dollars over last year's judicial safety budget of $485.9 million.
"That [$7.3 million increase] is an insufficient budget allocation to insure the safety of our judiciary," she scolded Bush. "This is an urgent homeland security matter. Federal judges all over the country are in need of protection from terrorism, both foreign and domestic. Your current budget request is not sufficient to place additional U.S. marshals on the street or compensate for the need of overtime pay."
Then she went further.
"Mr. President, no federal judge should live and work in fear for the safety of their families. ... I look forward to working with you and my colleagues in Congress to immediately provide additional protection to our federal judges."
I don't want anybody to get the wrong idea. The safety of federal judges is important, and if she really cares about their welfare, she should be commended.
But she forgot to mention something in her letter.
She forgot to mention that Robert Creamer was indicted last year on federal charges of kiting millions of dollars worth of checks and cheating on his income tax, while running the liberal, aggressive good-government group Illinois Public Action.
Creamer was also alleged to have written an "operating manual" for his employees, detailing the steps they should take to prevent the bad checks from being detected. He maintains his innocence.
With her concern about the welfare of federal judges and their families, you think she might have mentioned that Creamer is scheduled to stand trial May 31 before one of those federal judges.
Jan Schakowsky also didn't bother to disclose that Robert Creamer is her husband.
"Oh, my God, I never thought of that," Schakowsky told me over the phone, after she sent her letter to the president, then released it to reporters, then held a news conference.
"I can't imagine you were going to make that connection," she said. "I couldn't imagine where you were going with this. That is just not the case. I never had the thought of doing that, never."
The congresswoman said my questions were fair (which is politicalese for, "Why did I return your phone call?"), but she's also peeved at me for asking.
Bush is a big boy. He's got sharp political elbows, and sometimes they're ruinous. Just ask Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) about the 2000 Republican presidential primary campaign. Not all of his scars are from Vietnam.
So if Schakowsky wants to use the Lefkow murders as a political cudgel before the victims are even buried, that's her business.
What bothers me is this nagging feeling that she might be buttering up a frightened judiciary two months before her husband's trial. She insists I'm wrong, that her concern for the judges is genuine and devoid of personal agendas.
But it brings me back to the issue of timing. When her husband was indicted, she accused the Bush administration of charging him as payback for her criticisms of the president.
"I do think the timing is somewhat curious," she said last March.
She knew about timing then. But she doesn't know about timing now?
jskass@tribune.com
These men look like they can be from the middle east.Is an Arab considered white or do they check the box next to other when it comes to race?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.