Posted on 03/29/2019 8:04:38 AM PDT by FreedomPoster
The Illinois Prosecutors Bar Association serves as the voice for nearly 1,000 front line prosecutors across the State who work tirelessly towards the pursuit of justice. The events of the past few days regarding the Cook County State’s Attorney’s handling of the Jussie Smollett case is not condoned by the IPBA, nor is it representative of the honest ethical work prosecutors provide to the citizens of the State of Illinois on a daily basis.
The manner in which this case was dismissed was abnormal and unfamiliar to those who practice law in criminal courthouses across the State. Prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges alike do not recognize the arrangement Mr. Smollett received. Even more problematic, the State’s Attorney and her representatives have fundamentally misled the public on the law and circumstances surrounding the dismissal.
The public has the right to know the truth, and we set out to do that here.
When an elected State’s Attorney recuses herself from a prosecution, Illinois law provides that the court shall appoint a special prosecutor. See 55 ILCS 5/3-9008(a-15). Typically, the special prosecutor is a neighboring State’s Attorney, the Attorney General, or the State Appellate Prosecutor. Here, the State’s Attorney kept the case within her office and thus never actually recused herself as a matter of law.
Additionally, the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office falsely informed the public that the uncontested sealing of the criminal court case was “mandatory” under Illinois law. This statement is not accurate. To the extent the case was even eligible for an immediate seal, that action was discretionary, not mandatory, and only upon the proper filing of a petition to seal. See 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(g)(2). For seals not subject to Section 5.2(g)(2), the process employed in this case by the State’s Attorney effectively denied law enforcement agencies of legally required Notice (See 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(d)(4)) and the legal opportunity to object to the sealing of the file (See 20 ILCS 2630/5.2(d)(5)). The State’s Attorney not only declined to fight the sealing of this case in court, but then provided false information to the public regarding it.
The appearance of impropriety here is compounded by the fact that this case was not on the regularly scheduled court call, the public had no reasonable notice or opportunity to view these proceedings, and the dismissal was done abruptly at what has been called an “emergency” hearing. To date, the nature of the purported emergency has not been publicly disclosed. The sealing of a court case immediately following a hearing where there was no reasonable notice or opportunity for the public to attend is a matter of grave public concern and undermines the very foundation of our public court system.
Lastly, the State’s Attorney has claimed this arrangement is “available to all defendants” and “not a new or unusual practice.” There has even been an implication it was done in accordance with a statutory diversion program. These statements are plainly misleading and inaccurate. This action was highly unusual, not a statutory diversion program, and not in accordance with well accepted practices of State’s Attorney initiated diversionary programs. The IPBA supports diversion programs, and recognizes the many benefits they provide to the community, the defendant and to the prosecuting agency. Central to any diversion program, however, is that the defendant must accept responsibility. To be clear here, this simply was not a deferred prosecution.
Prosecutors must be held to the highest standard of legal ethics in the pursuit of justice. The actions of the Cook County State’s Attorney have fallen woefully short of this expectation. Through the repeated misleading and deceptive statements to the public on Illinois law and circumstances surrounding the Smollett dismissal, the State’s Attorney has failed in her most fundamental ethical obligations to the public. The IPBA condemns these actions.
This irregular arrangement was an affront to prosecutors across the State, the Chicago Police Department, victims of hate crimes, and the people of the City of Chicago and Cook County. We strongly encourage our members and the public to review the National District Attorneys Associations statement on prosecutorial best practices in high profile cases.
Best Regards,
Lee Roupas President, Illinois Prosecutor’s Bar Association
I’m really leaning toward this leads to Obama and/or Harris, orchestrated for her benefit.
Smollett clearly was granted a big favor by somebody high in IL, or even national politics.
But what could Obama or Harris gain from this?
Just DISBAR Here Permanently to start with....
someone else to sleep with?
Everyone involved, including the corrupt prosecutor, the corrupt judge, the corrupt man-thing assistant of Michelle Obama, and the corrupt ex first “lady” all need to go to prison.
Wow. That was a great article. I hope it gets widely circulated. Thanks for posting this.
The actor probably knows which penises went into which anuses and/or mouths on what occasions in which locations.
No wonder, Rahm told President Trump to butt out of this crime by friends of Obama, still in power in Chicago/Illinois!
All I see is a rebuke in the above and an admonition to “read the rules”. Big deal! How about urging the Illinois Bar to disbar her?
Well there lady apparently your colleagues do.
No call for her to step down, though.
L
But what could Obama or Harris gain from this?
...
It would be Harris who gained if she suggested Smollett commit the crime for her benefit.
There's two possibilities:
1) Smollett did this to raise his visibility and make more money. In which case, I can't figure out why Harris/Obama would risk this, except because they thought their position gave them the power to do it without risk. A family favor that backfired.
OR
2) Smollett was asked to generate an event--after all, he's an actor--which would show that even someone black, gay, and famous could be subject to a racial/homophobic attack by a MAGA republican. That's the theory (hard to believe) that it was an event to boost an anti-lynching bill/resolution, as well as keep the "Trump empowers white heteronormative supremacist diviseness" meme active. In which case, Smollet volunteered for the task and did an amazingly inept, piss-poor job.
I subscribe to #1, but who knows anymore?
You should be asking why an FBI guy who specializes in child crimes/human trafficking was involved. He forwarded a warrant to an fbi analyst.
Is Greg Wing still with that division of the FBI?
Excellent letter. This is not going away.
They went to far. If they had him plead guilty to reduced misdemeanor with acod, pay 100k fine, 100 hr community service and not sealed records for 30 plus year old man, it would not get this scrutiny.
Following the money most likely will take you back to a guy named Soros.
Trey Gowdy probably could have said it better, with the same result.
“How about urging the Illinois Bar to disbar her?”
Can’t, she’s also black and hates Trump, and a new leftist hero for saving FraudCo from scrutiny.
Also there has been question, indeed informed speculation, about the nature of Jussie's relationship with another prominent gay black man in Chicago. Some have just been putting two and two together, and one is inclined to see the point.
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.