From the December 30th Northwest Herald:
"State's Attorney [Louis] Bianchi is not personally interested in this matter and a special prosecutor should not be appointed," (Assistant State's Attorney Don) Leist said. "Should there be charges against Nygren from a police agency, Bianchi's office could objectively prosecute Nygren."
and
"A main argument made by Horowitz for the appointment of a special prosecutor has been that there is a conflict of interest between Bianchi's office and the sheriff, who is the State's Attorney's Office's client in other cases."
How could the State's Attorney (SAO) prosecute Nygren? The SAO represents the Sheriff's Department; thus, it prosecutes persons charged by the sheriff's department and defends the sheriff (and the Department) against charges and lawsuits. Yet, in so many cases, it is the law office of James Sotos that defends the Sheriff's Department and Nygren and represents the Sheriff in other cases.
A lawyer (or a law firm) can't wear both hats. And isn't the law pretty clear that the SAO is the Sheriff's legal counsel?
So how could it prosecute him?
This seems cut and dried to me, which means it should be in court for only 4-5 years before a decision is reached.
You never know who is interested…
3 months ago
5 comments:
Gus the States Attorney's office represents county officials in civil cases. In Criminal cases they are in charge of prosecution. As an example when Zane signed a document swearing that a passenger was speeding it would have been the States Attorney that decided whether or not to prosecute him. The Sheriff probably would have preferred saying there was a conflict of interest had request a special prosecutor but alas it is the States Attorney's job.
But Seriously, thanks for explaining that important distinction.
But, it was a warning ticket, there is no swearing involved, no perjury, no crime. He might as well have written it on a napkin because they have no legal value.They are thrown away. But Bruketta can falsify hundreds of real tickets and no investigation, nothing. Maybe Zane was fired for opening his mouth and not the traffic stops.
Gene, or whoever you are (Zane) keep beating that drum. Maybe someone will believe that you didn't write a ticket to a passenger. I personally will wait until it’s all adjudicated.
Has there been a change of the sheriff's legal counsel in the appeal of Judge Meyer's decision, to be heard by the Appellate Court in Elgin?
Post a Comment