Undersheriff Andy Zinke has definitely been set on "Attack" by his boss. I wonder if he knew when he accepted the promotion, that he'd be expected to load up a quiver of flaming arrows and take aim at so many targets so soon.
Today he is going for Lou Bianchi's throat. Easy, boy. Down, boy. You swallowed the big blue pill too quickly.
I met Mr. and Mrs. Pavlin in the Fall after they were injured. But it was not until just before the State's Attorney dismissed the criminal charges against them that they told me the full story. In some small way, I feel that I played a part in the dismissal of the unfair charges against them. The criminal charges against them dragged on far too long but, as soon as the State's Attorney knew what really had gone on in their home, the charges were dropped.
Could that information have gotten to the State's Attorney sooner? Like, maybe, months sooner? Yes, it certainly could have. I suspect it will all come out in their civil lawsuit against the sheriff's department and the deputies who were there that night.
As you read the stories in the Northwest Herald and the Daily News, pay close attention to the discrepancies.
I hope Undersheriff Zinke has a small foot. His attacks on Mike Mahon and me, and now on Lou Bianchi, are going to give him a very sore mouth, if he has a big foot. If I were he, I'd tell Nygren to get out there in front of those reporters himself. Nygren is the guy running for re-election. All Zinke is doing is burning bridges, and he might just find himself on the wrong shore.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Gus, you are right on the mark this time. Zinke is clueless and is obviously being used as a pawn by Keith. It is impossible for me to believe that Sheriff Nygren would have made these remarks. They show a profound ignorance of our court system and procedure. This is remarkable. For the guy who has been hand-picked to replace Keith when he retires to express such ill-informed opinions (they cannot be facts if they are incorrect) simply shows Nygren's poor judgement, and that Zinke has risen to his level of incompetence. Time for a change of administration!
AMOS...What are you smok'n? (Quote) "They show a profound ignorance of our court system and procedure." (End quote) Please look in the mirror........
Any first year law student knows that as a prosecutor, you do not DISMISS charges in a criminal case, you Nolle Pros.
As long as a jury trial has not been commenced, the entry of a Nolle Pros (prosequi) is not adjudication on the merits of the prosecution, and the legal protection against double jeopardy will not automatically bar the charges from being brought again in some fashion. When charges are DISMISSED, this effectively bars further prosecution and opens a whole new plethora of liability problems.
Clearly Bianchi fumbled the ball and opened the county to liability. He should have waited until the ISP was able to investigate, clarify any issues Bianchi had, just as Nygren suggested. But what political purpose would there be in that, NONE.
Here ends the lesson.
I was in the courtroom when the State's Attorney's Office dismissed the charges against the Pavlins. She made a point of dismissing them WITH PREJUDICE, and then she went a step further. Obviously, the judge and the Pavlin's attorney knew what "with prejudice" meant. However, she explained it to the Court in layman's terms for the Pavlins' benefit, and the judge let her do it.
The charges never should have been filed in the first place!
The State Police didn't "clear" the deputies. They just didn't find enough evidence to charge them. Why didn't they find it? They didn't talk to everybody they should have talked to.
But her opinion is just that, her opinion. Based upon WHAT investigation? Some 16 (?) months after the original indictment was handed down? About the same time that Ron Salgado came to precinct committeemen trying to gather support for tossing his hat into the sheriff's race? Bianchi's office apparently tried, but failed, to get indictments against the officers involved in the Pavlin case the second time around. Any prosecutor worthy of the title can get a grand jury to indict a ham & cheese sandwich. What happened?
The NW Herald said "Basic results of a state police investigation clearing those deputies of criminal wrongdoing were released Friday" Now, I don't know if that's merely their interpretation, the sheriff's, or what the report actually says. I haven't seen the report and I'll bet you haven't either. Here you are though, as usual, painting it in your own fashion based on what? Your own prejudice and biases. Name one other case in McHenry County, Cook County or... make it easy ANY court in this state where there has ever been a CRIMINAL charge "dismissed with prejudice." It simply is not done. It's as crazy a concept as the person who ordered that it be done without any substantive investigation being conducted. There's only one explanation for it to have been done and as the months unfold and a NEW, special grand jury gets rolling, I suspect that we'll all find out what really happened and why. In the meantime, you've managed to convince me! Convince me that no matter who investigates the case, no matter who they talk to, you will never let this rest unless your political ends are satisfied.
Post a Comment