There is no special prosecutor "game"

This morning's editorial in the Northwest Herald reads, "End special prosecutor game soon."

The special-prosecutor request isn't a "game".The County Board lost control of the checkbook, when it decided it had to pay the first bill submitted by Special Prosecutor Henry Tonigan in what turned out to be the failed prosecution of McHenry County State's Attorney Lou Bianchi. It was like handing a no-limit American Express card to Judge Graham. Why in the world the Board continued to approve a near-endless stream of billings, we'll probably never know.

And what about the still-unbilled time and expenses of Attorneys Tonigan and McQueen in that case? They should have billed monthly from the start. And now? They should bill the balance "Net 30" and then sue McHenry County for payment.

Read the "For the record" that accompanies today's editorial carefully. Here's what the paper published: "Taxpayers should not fund a special investigation into whether Sheriff Keith Nygren is appropriately using a star for political and official purposes."

The editors can relax. That's not what the request for a special prosecutor is for. Here is what it is for:

"... a special investigation into whether Sheriff Keith Nygren is inappropriately using a star for political and official purposes." And it's not even for that.

The Northwest Herald editors think that Sheriff Keith Nygren shouldn't be investigated by a Special Prosecutor. County Board Chairman Ken Koehler says it's "baloney." No, Ken; it's not. And the Northwest Herald editors are wrong, if they think that Seipler and Nygren are the only people who care about the petition for a special prosecutor.

Almost everyone has known from the start that the State's Attorney's office couldn't go after Nygren. Why not? Because they are the legal representative of the Sheriff. A 5th Grader could figure out that a lawyer can't defend a client in one case and turn around and sue him in another. Well, duh... It's called Conflict of Interest. That's probably covered in the first year of law school.

The editors have apparently not read the petition on which Judge Meyer is expected to rule soon. If they had, they would know it's not about a "seven-point" star (badge). It's about the mis-use of thousands of dollars of County money to plaster that star, which is Keith's own design resembling the official emblem of the office, all over County property.

Frankly, that petition ought to be amended yet again, this time to include the cases where the Sheriff (and the sheriff's department) have chosen the path of "administrative review" involving misdeeds of deputies, instead of criminal charges, and violations of the State's criminal code.

Feldkamps & Bloom follow-up

The McHenry County Sheriff's Department seems to have washed its hands on the investigation of the deaths of Jack and Audrey Feldkamp and Doran Bloom. I say this, because the report of the investigation of the Sheriff's Department is now available under the Freedom of Information Act.

If the MCSD were still investigating, they would not release the report.

What is there still to investigate? Well, let's start with what happened that night. I was amazed at the declarations by Sheriff Keith Nygren so quickly after that night's events. He flew back to McHenry County and took the spotlight at a press conference. He declared, in event, "Case Closed." (He did not see fit to return to McHenry County after another murder just a week earlier - that of Kurt Milliman. But that's another story.)

One of my earliest questions was about the weapon used by Scott Feldkamp to shoot Doran Bloom. The first thing I wondered was, "How did Scott just happen to be so accurate with his shooting?" And another question was about whether Scott Feldkamp was in legal possession of a firearm in Illinois. In this state we have a requirement that any adult in possession of a firearm or ammunition must have a Firearm's Owner Identification (FOID) card. Did Scott Feldkamp have a FOID card? If not, why wasn't he charged? Were firearms allowed in the parents' home?

What do police and deputies understand about dealing with subjects who have a mental illness diagnosis? And, in an investigation in which they cannot interview the subject, such as this case, did the investigators and Sheriff Nygren jump to some conclusions?

Someone must speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves.

Are there known circumstances or history that might cause any thorough investigator to ask some deeper questions than have apparently been asked? What if some of those investigators suspected there was more to the story and wanted to pursue their hunches or intuition, or facts? What if they came up with information that sharply contrasted statements by their boss, the sheriff?

Would Nygren allow the investigation to be re-opened? Would he risk embarrassment, or would he admit error if findings contradicted his original, very emphatic explanation of that evening in Marengo?

And today's winner is ... Zane Seipler

Case No. 10MR000011 was scheduled for decision this morning. This is Zane Seipler's request for a Special Prosecutor. In a hallway conversation with a long-time McHenry County attorney (one not involved in the case) before court, he clearly felt that Seipler would not prevail.

In a long and drawn-out battle over whether a special prosecutor will be appointed to investigate and prosecute McHenry County Sheriff Keith Nygren for criminal conduct, Judge Thomas A. Meyer has decided that the battle will continue. While Judge Meyer did not today grant the request for a Special Prosecutor, he put a stop to the near-endless round of courtroom fights and granted Seipler's request as it pertained to Paragraphs 1-30 and 66-78. Those stay in. Paragraphs 31-65 were stricken.

It would have been nice to hear everything that was said in the courtroom today. See a separate article about the lack of decorum in today's courtroom.

Seipler's attorney, Blake Horwitz of Chicago, has 14 days to file a document, and then Donald Leist, Assistant McHenry County State's Attorney, has 28 days to respond.  The next court date is September 22nd at 9:00AM in Courtroom 201, the chambers of Judge Meyer.

The bottom line seems to be that the alleged facts about Sheriff Nygren's use of County taxpayer-supported assets for political purposes are sufficient for a cause of action to continue. There are viable claims. Today's decision was about about those claims, only that they are viable. Now discovery will begin.

According to Blake Horwitz after court, the February 2011 letter from State's Attorney Lou Bianchi that the State's Attorney can only defend the sheriff is evidence of the inability and unavailability of the State's Attorney's Office to investigate or prosecute criminal conduct by Sheriff Nygren, if any.

It was a long road for Zane Seipler and Blake Horwitz. During many of the hearings it appeared to me that Judge Meyer was wanting to keep in case moving. There were many opportunities where he could have ruled and shut it down.

Dec. 15 Hearing - Part 8

Be sure to read www.mchenrycountyblog.com/ today for Part 8 in the publication of the December 15th hearing transcript in Seipler v. Cundiff et al.

Capt. Anton Cundiff? Where is he in all this? How did his name end of first in line? Who are the defendants in this lawsuit? Sure wish the Federal Court records were as easily accessible as those in McHenry County (at least, part of them). The case is No. 08 C 50257 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division.

Who is mentioned in Part 8?

Depositions of Jose Rivera and Gary Pack were apparently scheduled for December 16. The deposition of Jill Tutt was still to be completed, after it was interrupted on July 15. There was a little jousting about just who deposed Jill on July 15, with Sotos claiming that Horwitz did, and Horwitz saying that one of Sotos' associates took up 3 1/2 of the 4 hours, at which point Jill left.

When the judge asked who Jose Rivera was, this exchange took place in court:

"THE COURT: Who’s Jose Rivera?

"MR. HORWITZ: He’s a business partner of Sheriff Nygren.

"MR. SOTOS: The criminal coconspirator."

Sotos is really helping out his client (Sheriff Nygren), right? Which causes me now to wonder, does James Sotos represent all of the defendants? Will some of them decide at some point that they'd better have their own counsel? Will some of them decide they'd better distance themselves from some of the others?

Special Prosecutor sought regarding Sheriff Nygren

On Monday, December 27, 2010, a Motion for Leave was filed in McHenry County Circuit Court involving Keith Nygren as Sheriff of McHenry County (Ill.). The Motion by Blake Horwitz, Esq., attorney for Zane Seipler, requests a Special Prosecutor be appointed to investigate "allegations of criminal wrongdoing by Sheriff Nygren". (Click on the images to enlarge them; then click on the Back button on your browser to come back here.)

Statements of Deputy Scott Milliman, until recently an on-duty Deputy Sheriff of the McHenry County Sheriff's Department, who is referred to in a hearing in U.S. Federal Court in Rockford on December 15, are the basis for the motion. The Motion includes the following:

"The transcript also reveals that Sheriff Nygren was observed to have committed and/or participated in the following:

"Engaged in 'Solicitation of Murder,' in violation of 720 ILCS 5/8-1;

"Facilitated and promoted the trafficking of illegal aliens from Mexico to McHenry County, in violation of 720 ILCS 5/8-2 and the Federal Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii));

"Covered up racial profiling in the McHenry County Sheriff's Department where at least one member in 2008 falsified the race of Hispanics drivers on at least 140 occasions, in violation of 720 ILCS 5/8-2.1; and

"Participated prior to 2007 in a pay-off scheme with a member of the McHenry County State's Attorney office, whereby pending criminal prosecutions were dropped as nolle prosequi in exchange for money, in violation of 720 ILCS 5/33-1 and 720 ILCS 5/33-2."

Also, stated on Page 2 of the Motion is the following:

"There is one other item of information that is in the public domain regarding Sheriff Nygren's alleged criminal participation in a conspiracy to murder: Deputy Milliman testified that one victim of attempted murder was a political adversary of Sheriff Nygren."

The next court date in this case is January 6, 2011, at 10:00AM in Room 201 of the McHenry County Government Center. The Case Number is 10MR000011.

Explosive Court Transcript - Part 3

I wish I had the software to re-post the full transcript of the Dec. 15 hearing in U.S. Federal Court in Rockford in the case of Seipler v. Cundiff et al. I mean, I enjoyed reading all 48 pages at one sitting, but some say I am a glutton for punishment. Thanks to Cal Skinner for breaking it up into digestible pieces on www.mchenrycountyblog.com/

Part 3 is there now.

Who said, "The best defense is a good offense"? Carl von Clausewitz, Prussian soldier and German military theorist (1780-1831). This is also attributed to the heavyweight prizefighter Jack Dempsey (1895-1983).

What does this have to do with the Dec. 15 hearing?

See the statement by Sheriff Nygren's own legal counsel, James Sotos. The following is from the transcript:

"He (Deputy Milliman) said the sheriff (Keith Nygren) told him to murder somebody, too. He said a lot. He said the things that Mr. Horwitz said he said, and he said the sheriff told him to push a guy in front of a train who was a political opponent and that he told him to hang another guy and make it look like a suicide. And he said some of the stuff that Mr. Horwitz said, too. ..."

Nice of the sheriff's own lawyer to put something like that into the record, isn't it?

Go and read the transcript at www.mchenrycountyblog.com, Part 3.

When the judge asked if Milliman was still working for the sheriff, Sotos answered, "Today he is." That was December 15.

Then the judge asked Sotos whether any proceedings had been started against Milliman.

Sotos answered: "I don’t have — I can’t really comment on what’s going on internally, but we did provide the sheriff with the deposition, Judge, and – "

It seems to me that Sotos caught himself just in time. It appears to me that he was about to say, "I don't have any knowledge of proceedings" and then he realized that he'd better not say that. It's a really, really good idea not to lie to a judge. And he didn't.

No one should doubt that Nygren and Sotos had conferred about what to do about Milliman, in view of his deposition on about November 23.

On what date was Deputy Milliman suspended?

NWH omits online story about sheriff's plan

On Wednesday, October 21, the Northwest Herald carried a story in its print edition (Page 3C) about the plans of McHenry County Sheriff Nygren to appeal an arbitrator's decision to a circuit court judge.

For some reason, the Northwest Herald omitted to carry that story online. Or perhaps I looked so hard for it that I just didn't see it. The last story online is about Zane Seipler and the positive decision by the arbitrator (i.e., that Seipler should have had a three-day suspension, not termination, and that he was awarded all back pay, except for three days).

A reader searching for information would conclude that Seipler was going back to work and would receive his back pay.

According to the print edition, however, Nygren plans to appeal the arbitrator's decision to a circuit court judge.

How long will this take and how much will it cost taxpayers?

My guess? Over a year and tens of thousands of dollars.

30MPH now on Island Road in Chemung

On July 30, 2009, there was a Letter to the Editor in the Northwest Herald from Chemung resident Jim Jeschke asking for speed limit help. Jim described his efforts to get speed limit signs installed on Island Road, which runs south from IL 173 into the County.

He had approached the County, was bucked back to the Township, and two 25MPH signs got posted. Then the County said they were the wrong signs; the speed limit had to be 30MPH. Then the County did a speed survey and determined that no signs were needed. No matter that one car had left the roadway and hit a house nearby and another car had left the roadway and mowed down four mailboxes on a post. It took 1 1/2 hours for a deputy to arrive that time.

Jim's letter ended with "So how about it, Sheriff Nygren, can we get some help before someone gets killed?"

On August 1st I called Jim and offered to help. I made a few phone calls, and the ball seemed to be rolling. By August 19 Jim told me that the new signs were to be installed by the County and by the end of the following week.

Jim's efforts started two years ago, and the signs are finally up. Here's Jim and the K-9 Unit of the Chemung Neighborhood Watch. Jim has the best-behaved group of dogs I've ever met!

By the way, he never heard from Sheriff Nygren.

Publishing Home Addresses

Check out the article found at this link on Major League Baseball (MLB) Fanhouse. http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2009/07/16/riverfront-times-has-credential-revoked-after-publishing-players/

It seems that The Riverfront Times published the home addresses of current and former St. Louis Cardinals' players. MLB didn't like it and revoked the credentials of The Riverfront Times.

The author of that article wrote, "To publish the home address of an athlete, or anyone in the spotlight, is wholly irresponsible. ... A person's home is their home. It is not public domain."

I wonder what the folks at the Northwest Herald would have to say, now that they have published the home address of senior citizens whose case against them was tossed by the State's Attorney's Office.

Later in the week I received a comment with the home addresses of Sheriff Nygren and Undersheriff Lowery. Because there are some real kooks in the world who might harm their families or them at home, I decided not to publish their addresses. I appreciate all the other comments received from the person who sent them to me and hope that person will understand and accept my reasoning for not publishing the addresses.