The big question for some now, as a result of Judge Meyer's decision yesterday to dismiss a request for a Special Prosecutor, is whether the McHenry County State's Attorney will open an investigation into the issues raised by an employee of the Sheriff's Department.
SAO attorney Don Leise fought hard to keep one from being appointed. His position was that there is no conflict-of-interest that would rise to such a level that it would impair the ability of the State's Attorney to properly investigate allegations that have begun to surface about Sheriff Keith Nygren.
Did the People win yesterday? Was yesterday's hearing about protecting the interest of the People? About saving the cost of a Special Prosecutor, when an existing taxpayer-supporting agency was already in place? Attorney Leist was quite animated when he said that five Special Prosecutors had been appointed in McHenry County in the past two years, whereas none had been appointed in his previous 25 years years in the practice of law. What did that possibly have to do with how Judge Meyer might decide?
Will the public trust be maintained in the Office of the States's Attorney? Will it begin to investigate the issues for which a Special Prosecutor was being sought?
Was the State's Attorney's Office fighting on principle on behalf of the People, when it filed its Motion to Dismiss (the request for a Special Prosecutor)?
Or was the State's Attorney already representing its client, the McHenry County Sheriff's Department and Sheriff Keith Nygren, when it fought so hard to prevent the appointment of a Special Prosecutor?
Was it a defense of the sheriff to prevent the appointment, because its client's position was that he did not want to be investigated?
When will the State's Attorney's Office begin its investigation?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Yes the people won. This dog and pony show has gone on far too long and Zane & Company should pack his bag and leave town for good. Let the case in Rockford play out and see what shakes there. Why have the SAO and the Feds scratching the same dog?
I couldn't agree more Mr. Green.
Quite honestly Gus, Cal and the other bloggers have shown their bias by editorializing on the legal aspects of these cases before any real facts are disclosed. Everything I've read is the babbling of two discredited and vindictive people. The point that the Fed's are already looking at this may be presumptive. Except for the babblings of Bachmann, I don't know if they (FBI) even think there is thread of truth there.
Maybe the NWH doesn't buy into the fantasies of Zane, MIlliman and Bachmann and you too Gus. Reading the online comments, it appears the majority of commenter’s also think the allegations are too bizarre.
Ned, thanks for your comment.
I am definitely biased, and I admit it. My blog is for my opinions.
I've known Zane for two years, and I don't consider him "discredited and vindictive". He made a mistake, admitted it and accepts the discipline as modified by the arbitrator and supported by Judge Meyer. It's "bizarre" that Nygren wastes more time and money to running off the the Appellate Court.
I don't know Milliman. I don't believe he is discredited or vindictive.
The SAO fought hard to prevent a Special Prosecutor. If they don't undertake an investigation, their credibility is shot.
The online comments to which you refer are mostly from Nygrenite cowards who are too fearful themselves to put their own names to the comments. Why don't they use their own names?
I'm sure some are what you call, "Nygrenite (s)” Many are likely people form Bianchi's office as well. I don't feel the majority are however due in part because I see the same commenter’s posting on any news issue printed and all have nasty negative comments. I have seen flame wars which tend to have follows of Zane Seipler being the most vicious.
Post a Comment