Did jail follow procedures before inmate's suicide?

On February 18th an inmate at the McHenry County Jail committed suicide. The inmate, a 42-year-old Crystal Lake man, had been arrested earlier in the week on a domestic violence charge, and on the day of his death he had been served an Order of Protection (while he was incarcerated).

Following his death a lengthy report (94 pages, according to a March 4th Daily Herald article) was written, and a jail lieutenant and the deputy chief of the jail concluded that "policy & procedures were followed by all staff involved." After reading the report, I'm not so sure.

Regrettably, the summary in the Daily Herald was not quite correct. Although inmates in two cells near the deceased inmate said he had faked seizures, the jail reports also say that the inmate had reported on February 17 that he had had ten seizures since being jailed earlier in the week. (I understand that it may not be uncommon for inmates to fake seizures.)

The article said he "needed to detox from alcohol", but a Mental Health Evaluation form dated February 17, in the 94-page report, indicated "alcohol - lat use 6 mos ago".

On the night of his death, while medications were being dispensed to inmates about 9:00PM, according to a report written four (4) days later, this man became argumentative after he was asked if he wanted the rest of his medications. He was ordered to his cell and escorted there. The report does not state whether he was given the rest of his medications. Since it doesn't say so, one must assume that he didn't get all his needed medications. (Note: this report was not written until four days after his death.)

Earlier that day he had been served with an Order of Protection. A logical assumption is that he was upset.

If the man was upset and argumentative and he didn't get his prescribed medications (he may have been detoxing from a prescribed medication), then he should have been under special watch. Perhaps he should have been taken to a booking cell, where he could have been closely monitored. And the night officers should have been informed of what had transpired shortly before they went on duty.

There is no record in the 94-page report that the inmate's psychological state might have been disturbed or that his medication regimen had been interrupted, until the reports written four days after his death. There is no record that a possible health factor, such as seizures, and the service of the O.P. were reported by the evening shift to the night shift. The absence of any mention of forwarding of such critical information is, to me, an indication that the information was not relayed.

The fact that the evening-shift jailers wrote reports four days later (dated February 22) is a red flag. Why didn't they write these reports as the circumstances occurred? Did they report them to their supervisor(s)?

How does information get relayed? An on-duty corrections officer advises his supervisor of a condition in the jail. The supervisor decides whether a report should be written. Then the supervisor of the shift informs the supervisor of the arriving shift, so that the arriving supervisor can advise the officers coming on duty. The responsibility is on the supervisor to relay the information.

Apparently, that did not happen in this case. Had arriving night-shift corrections officers been informed of the inmate's emotional instability and lack of full medication dosage, would they have moved him to a location where he could have been more closely monitored?

Once the inmate was found in his cell, it appears from the reports that corrections officers acted quickly and did everything they could to save him.

But was there an important breakdown in communications between the evening and night shifts?