"Guilty." (Err, wait, I didn’t mean that)

When a person pleads "Guilty" in court, should it mean anything except that the vocal chords of the defendant are still in working order?

Marco Villegas was arrested on two separate window-peeping charges in Woodstock. As happens with all almost all cases in McHenry County Courts, they drag and drag. Finally, in December Villegas pled Guilty in the first case. The other case was scheduled for trial in February.

The public has little idea how much fancy footwork goes on in the court system and how much time is wasted. In the first case on January 14, 2009, he demanded a jury trial. Why wasn’t it scheduled promptly and held? Instead, every month there was a delay. Then in December he pled Guilty. And then, before the end of December, he retracted his Guilty plea and now he wants a trial.

The second case was set for trial on February 9, after months of the usual delays. Now the first case is set also for February 9.

How does that really work in court? When two similar charges are being tried on the same date before the same judge, are they tried separately, since different victims were involved?

Why do judges tolerate such abuse of the court’s time? Why not set a trial date? Tell attorneys that they will get one continuance apiece and then the trial will be held. If the prosecution isn’t ready, the case will be dismissed. If the defense isn’t ready, the defendant will be convicted. Put the onus on the attorneys to stop delaying the cases with requests for continuance and continuance.

If a guy gets caught in the act of window-peeping – twice!, what is there left to do, except try him? What? He was making a mistake, peeping into someone’s house? His nose got frozen to the glass?

How many more cases are there in McHenry County Courts where this type of nonsense of delay after delay exists? Plenty!

Result of Thomas Haas' Case

Recently I wrote about the Cindy O'Grady civil rights lawsuit against the McHenry County Sheriff's Department, and then I wrote about what led up to it - the arrest of Thomas Haas on a weapons charge by the Crystal Lake Police Department.

When I went to the courthouse last week, I could not find a court record in the public computer there that indicated why Haas' case was Nolle Prossed (dismissed) by Judge Weech. There was no Motion for dismissal in the court computer system, although there was a court order for him to get his guns back from the Crystal Lake PD.

I received a prompt response to my FOIA Request, which was filed after I called a clerk in the court's office, then called the State's Attorney's office (where I was directed to Court Administration), called the Public Defender's office, and then called Court Administration, where I left a message for a woman who never bothered to call me back with the public information.

Katherine Keefe, Clerk of the Circuit Court (the elected Clerk office, not a clerk), replied quickly to my FOIA Request and let me know that there is no written Motion for dismissal, because Judge Weech had accepted an oral motion from the Public Defender's office (which office had told me that they couldn't answer any questions).

All I can guess is that the Crystal Lake police officer who arrested Haas didn't show up in court, and so Judge Weech dismissed the case. Or maybe the officer was there and did not contest the oral motion for dismissal by the Public Defender. Without a written Motion it's hard to know exactly what happened.

Maybe the Court should review its procedures and require a written Motion on such an important matter.

Could somebody, somewhere, in the court system have answered my question last week about the public record in this case, so that a FOIA Request would not have been necessary? Doing so would have saved their time and taxpayer money.

The bottom line?

O'Grady's case was dismissed.
Haas's case was dismissed.
McHenry County Sheriff's Department is embroiled in one more lawsuit.