Crime, punishment, reform and rate hikes
Thursday, Sep 19, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* No indictments…
Nearly 10 months after former Mayor Richard M. Daley’s nephew Richard J. “R.J.” Vanecko was indicted in the 2004 death of David Koschman, a grand jury investigation into the way police and prosecutors handled the case has ended and no new indictments will be issued.
Special prosecutor Dan K. Webb’s office said Thursday the grand jury has completed its work and that the statute of limitations has expired on bringing additional charges in the case.
Webb said that he, “after having thoroughly reviewed the evidence, has determined that no additional indictments would be sought because: (1) any prosecution as to actions taken by Chicago Police Department or the Cook County state’s attorney’s office personnel in 2004 are barred because of the three-year statute of limitations period, which was not otherwise extended under applicable state criminal law; (2) there is insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any violations of Illinois criminal law as to actions taken by CPD personnel in 2011; and (3) there is no evidence of any kind suggesting any violations of Illinois criminal law as to actions taken by SAO personnel in connection with its participation in the Koschman investigation in 2011 and 2012.”
* Meanwhile…
After two days of deliberations, a federal jury on Wednesday found Eugene Mullins, a friend and onetime aide to former Cook County Board President Todd Stroger, guilty of seven of eight counts at his corruption trial.
Mullins was acquitted of one count of wire fraud but convicted of three other wire fraud counts and four counts of bribery. The charges stemmed from four contracts he was accused of steering toward contractors in exchange for nearly $35,000 in kickbacks.
Mullins faces a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison on each count of wire fraud and 10 years in prison on each count of accepting a kickback. U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve set sentencing for Dec. 19.
The verdict follows a colorful trial in which defense attorneys told animated stories to illustrate their points. In closing arguments, Mullins’ attorney Brunell Donald-Kyei barked like a dog and later meowed to illustrate how four contractors changed their stories after being questioned by investigators.
* And…
Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s administration is changing the way it awards insurance brokerage contracts in the wake of former city Comptroller Amer Ahmad’s indictment and a Chicago Sun-Times report about the awarding of insurance business to a company whose lobbyist has ties to a top deputy in the comptroller’s office.
The move reverses a change made nearly two years ago — months after Emanuel took office and appointed Ahmad — that gave the comptroller’s office “the power to purchase, directly or through an insurance broker that he engages, and subject to the approval of the budget director, insurance for the city.”
* And while it may not belong here, this could turn out to be a big story…
The city of Chicago is asking the state to change its method of buying power for utility customers in a way that almost certainly would hike electricity rates for those still getting their electricity from Commonwealth Edison Co.
The move, also endorsed by retail power suppliers, would make it easier for the city’s supplier, Chicago-based Integrys Energy Services, to beat ComEd’s rates when its contract with the city comes up for renewal in May. But it likely would boost electric bills in large suburbs like Joliet and Waukegan whose constituents have rejected referendums that would have allowed their city officials to buy power on their behalf from outside suppliers. […]
David Kolata, executive director of consumer advocacy group Citizens Utility Board, opposes changing the IPA’s procurement process.
“It’s not a good policy to artificially increase (utility) prices to artificially claim there are savings,” he said.
Yikes.
- Amalia - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 11:25 am:
even if there are no criminal charges, is it possible that the report will be used for disciplinary charges against police and prosecutors?
- RonOglesby - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 11:36 am:
@Amalia
you would hope so… But then again this was a Daley and those that did the work to try to keep this out of court need to be protected (protect the system that is).
I knew a guy I used to work out with, got in a bar fight outside of a club on rush in 2002… Broker a guy’s a nose and 1 rib. He was in cuffs that night and had to do 30 days eventually. Stupid thing from an otherwise good guy. But here: someone dies and apparently no one is accountable.
- Anonymour - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 11:41 am:
That the statute of limitations barred actions by the CPD and SAO in 2004 implies that Webb thought there were enough grounds to indict the conduct in 2004. According to the press release shown in the link, The details are in his report, which he asked to be sealed until after the Koschman/Vanecko trial, out of fairness to the defendant.
Webb found that there were no grounds under state law to extend the statute of limitations. Federal law could (potentially) be different, if the U.S. Attorney’s Office looks into this matter.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 11:49 am:
===But here: someone dies and apparently no one is accountable.===
Just to clarify, Vanecko was indicted and is awaiting trial. What Webb was asked to do was to investigate whether police or prosecutors did anything criminal regarding allegations of a cover-up or preferential treatment of Vanecko. Several media reports raised important questions along these lines, but apparently Webb didn’t find anything worth pursuing.
- Thomas paine - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 11:53 am:
Who threw the first punch is the key to the whole ordeal. I’ve seen men walk scott free after pummelling other men in self defense.
- Anonymour - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 12:06 pm:
47th Ward — not quite; Webb said he didn’t find anything else that he could charge that wasn’t barred by the statute of limitations. He did not say that there wasn’t evidence of a cover-up by police or prosecutors.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 12:13 pm:
Fair point Anonymour. I guess we’ll find out when the report is released after the trial.
- Buckeye State - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 12:36 pm:
The number of Ohio people that Amer brought is quite strange
- Formerly Known As... - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 12:43 pm:
Chicago… the more things change, the more they stay the same.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 2:27 pm:
ruff, ruff, ruff.
- reformer - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 5:53 pm:
== there is no evidence of any kind suggesting any violations of Illinois criminal law as to actions taken by SAO personnel ==
By announcing his findings to exonerate the SAO personnel involved, Webb showed more consideration for them then they show to those whom they investigate but never charge, since the CCSOA never pronounces the subject exonerated.
- Anonymour - Thursday, Sep 19, 13 @ 6:42 pm:
Reformer, you didn’t include the rest of the sentence - which limited the exoneration to 2011-12. (I know that wasn’t your point.) There was no exoneration for the earlier period for the SAO.
- Chicago Publius - Friday, Sep 20, 13 @ 9:29 am:
We dont know what sort of political game Dan Webb is playing on this, but he’s certainly being disengenous. For starters, the standard of proof for a grand jury indictment is NEVER “beyond a reasonable doubt.” That’s the standard for the trial (or petty) jury. The legal standard for a grand jury to issue an indictment is “probable cause” or “preponderance of evidence.” Secondly, there is a fat body of statutory and common law under which the statute of limitations is tolled (that is, held in abeyance) when prosecutors, cops, and other bad actors hide or cover-up the evidence of a crime. For Webb to claim that no indictments are forthcoming because of the beyond-reasonable-doubt standard or the statute of limitation is truly legal malpractice, or a reprhensible effort to shave the truth.