* Tribune…
The [Broadview Six] case was indicted with much fanfare but soon showed signs of cracking. The original prosecutor who had led the grand jury, Sheri Mecklenburg, left the U.S. attorney’s office in February for a job with the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington, D.C. Reached by phone Thursday afternoon, Mecklenburg declined to comment.
Weeks after she left, all charges against two of the defendants were dismissed. And in April, prosecutors announced the lone felony conspiracy count was also being cut.
From February 23rd…
Assistant U.S. Attorney Sheri Mecklenburg, a 20-year veteran of the U.S. attorney’s office in Chicago, has been assigned to the Senate Judiciary Committee under Sen. Dick Durbin, a committee spokesperson confirmed Monday.
Mecklenburg’s LinkedIn…
The October indictment news release is here.
* The case began to publicly wobble on February 5th…
Federal prosecutors in Chicago say they fear a tainted jury pool if the public is allowed to see evidence from the upcoming conspiracy trial of six people, including four Democratic politicians, involved in protests at an immigration holding facility in Broadview.
U.S. District Judge April Perry said Thursday that, “we’re going to have to deal with that, regardless,” as she scheduled the trial for May 26.
* Back to yesterday’s Tribune story about the grand jury proceedings…
Before two separate grand juries last year, a federal prosecutor repeatedly stepped over the line, including “vouching” about the strength of the evidence, telling panel members who disagreed with the prosecution’s theory of the case that they could just leave, and having “ex parte” communications with a grand juror outside the proceedings, according to a series of bombshell revelations in court Thursday.
The first grand jury refused to return an indictment, leading to a second panel being convened, the transcript showed. That time, several grand jurors “made comments” and walked out of the proceedings. The testimony of the agent ended abruptly, and they had to start anew the next day to get the indictment.
NBC 5…
What were the errors? Unsealed court documents reveal a grand juror was kicked off for disagreeing and a prosecutor communicated with a juror outside court, among other issues.
* From the judge’s comments during yesterday’s hearing…
First, improper prosecutorial vouching to the grand jurors, with the AUSA putting her personal credibility and trustworthiness on the line in support of the charges.
Second, improper prosecutorial communications of a substantive nature with the grand jurors outside of the grand jury room.
And, third, the prosecutor excusing grand jurors who disagreed with the government’s case from the deliberations process.
Which brings me to problem Number 4, which is the fact that all of this was redacted out of the versions of the transcripts that I got.
Hat tip: Meredith Shiner, who pointed to Mecklenburg’s detail to Durbin’s committee staff with suspicion and disgust months ago.
It’s doubtful that Durbin knew of the problems with this case when he brought Mecklenburg to his committee staff. But he had to have known that she was one of the lead prosecutors of the Broadview Six, all but one of whom were politically active Democrats. As Shiner wrote, “Dick Durbin is completely oblivious to current politics and thinks he’s operating in 1986 instead of 2026.”
…Adding… The usual deflection…
- Roadrager - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 8:47 am:
Well, Dick Durbin wouldn’t want to appear partisan, which as we know, is the absolute worst thing a politician can do in the current year of 1986. That’s why he has no choice to vote yes on so many Trump nominees, you see.
- Candy Dogood - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 8:50 am:
===“Dick Durbin is completely oblivious to current politics and thinks he’s operating in 1986 instead of 2026.”===
Senator Durbin shouldn’t have run in 2020. We’d all have nothing but great things to say about him if he’d retired in 2020. His last term has really changed how he will be remembered by the state.
He did not need to stay in office until his 80s only to have his career be defined by his cognitive decline and feckless leadership that is probably driven by his age more so than any specific decision to be an ineffective and inconsequential voice.
- Irreverent - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 8:51 am:
Durbin is just continuing his long, proud tradition of being utterly useless in all ways that matter.
- Candy Dogood - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 9:03 am:
===all but one of whom were politically active Democrats===
In fairness to Durbin, they may have been the wrong kind of Democrat based off of his endorsement of Paul Vallas and several positions I won’t directly address because it is a Friday and the sun isn’t shining on Illinois today and we don’t need to have one of those discussions in the comments again.
- Occaisionally Moderated - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 9:08 am:
A perpetual dud. As I suspect the lukewarm, uninspiring next placeholder will be. How do we keep doing this.
- Google is Your Friend - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 9:28 am:
Making Diane Feinstein proud!
- ChicagoVinny - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 9:43 am:
I certainly will think twice about any future candidate for office who has staffer to Senator Durbin during this term on their resume. They didn’t have to stick around this term and stand by while he tarnishes his legacy, but they did.
- Dirty Red - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 9:45 am:
Benefit of the doubt argument: If she has 20 years in the Chicago office, then her public service career might not be best summarized by the prolific case at the end of her time there. What’s more: Perhaps her association with the case can lend special insight into how the Dept. of Justice and U.S. Attorneys offices are functioning today as compared to the Obama, Trump 1, and Biden administrations. Those insights could be valuable to the Committee.
- Three Dimensional Checkers - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 9:45 am:
Could one interpret Macklenburg’s detail as an implicit admission that she did not want to work as an AUSA in this Justice Department?
Honestly, I thought “well you cannot just bang on cars because you are upset” when I first saw the indictment, but the more that comes out about the grand jury, the more awful the government’s conduct comes to light. You really have to ask yourself if your conduct is ethical at all times, and you cannot rely on supervisors or any “oh everyone is doing it” type of excuses.
- Former Chicago - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 9:52 am:
There was one female prosecutor during the indictment phase of the Broadview Six. That was Sheri Mecklenburg. She was the prosecutor who improperly “vouched” for the case against the Broadview Six by putting her personal credibility and trustworthiness on the line in support of the charges. You are not allowed to do that as a prosecutor - this is just one thing that she did. It caused targets of her prosecution to go through hell. There is no way that she should keep her job - this conduct is sanctionable (even Judge Perry yesterday said sanctions were possible). What she did was amoral and unconscionable.
- JS Mill - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 9:52 am:
=We’d all have nothing but great things to say about him if he’d retired in 2020.=
Not all of us.
- Jocko - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 9:53 am:
After ending the shutdown and his reliable “yes” vote on judicial nominees, Durbin seems intent on outdoing Fetterman.
- Leslie K - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 10:00 am:
I’m being cautious about this because I’ve crossed professional paths with Sheri a few times (back in the early 2000s), and didn’t see this in her. But I didn’t know her well, and the facts seem to be pretty clear. Maybe Durbin, as commenters have said, just thinks it’s 1986. Or even 2007.
- Anyone Remember - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 10:08 am:
“… being utterly useless in all ways that matter.”
Apparently you weren’t in Springfield during the Voting Rights Lawsuit. Know it was a long time ago, but it mattered then, and still matters now.
- Streator Curmudgeon - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 10:09 am:
Further proof of my theory on the need for term limits.
We’d all rather hold our nose and vote for an ineffective incumbent of our own party than vote for a more qualified candidate from “the other side.”
- Fayette County - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 10:29 am:
Former Chicago said it better than I could. Agree 100%.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 10:38 am:
The ex parte communication thing should result in serious consequences for the attorney involved, whether it’s Mecklenberg or someone else. Can there be attorney discipline in Illinois for this?
- Chicago Democrat - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 10:46 am:
It’s Dick Durbin. What do you expect? He just voted to confirm a judge who won’t say Biden won the 2020 election, as well. His political legacy will be one of disgrace.
- Stephanie Kollmann - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 11:01 am:
Fascinating to see how much benefit of the doubt is given to an attorney committing misconduct on the record considering how she treated the rights of people who carried the presumption of innocence while she carried the burden of proof.
- JoanP - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 11:09 am:
= Can there be attorney discipline in Illinois for this? =
As long as the attorney is licensed to practice in Illinois, yes.
- Sue - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 11:28 am:
Haven’t liked him since he usurped Terry Bruce’s seat in the earlier district consolidation
- Rich Miller - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 11:38 am:
===Haven’t liked him since he usurped Terry Bruce’s seat===
I have some grudges, but that’s a long one. Also, nobody owns their seats.
- Annon'in - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 11:39 am:
“It’s doubtful that Durbin knew of the problems with this case when he brought Mecklenburg to his committee staff.”
Really…nobody woodsheds staffer candidates? especially those who worked for Trump aka TACO DOJ? Very hard to believe.
- Rich Miller - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 11:44 am:
===nobody woodsheds staffer candidates? ===
That would presume the US Attorney was upset enough to woodshed her.
No evidence to support that.
- Amalia - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 12:42 pm:
so, she will get disciplined and should lose her current job, right? but are we saying he knew those facts when she came to his staff? Or did it appear that she,like many, wanted to flee from the way things are working over there now, a different pressure and he took her in. things would have gone another way if they just charged a misdemeanor.
- Rich Miller - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 12:43 pm:
===like many, wanted to flee from the way things are working===
She was making them work that way.
- Amalia - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 12:46 pm:
and she was terminated, so done.
- Excitable Boy - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 1:04 pm:
Congrats Senator Durbin, in a short time you’ve transformed your legacy from a well meaning but milquetoast Senator to the biggest embarrassment the Democrats have to offer. Well done.
- @misterjayem - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 1:22 pm:
“Errors”
These weren’t whoopsies — these were the deliberate unethical and unlawful actions of prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office.
Calling them “errors” gives them an undeserved pass.
“and she was terminated, so done”
Ever notice how some people are mercilessly “throw the book at ‘em” tough on crime until the law turns its attention to them or their allies?
Weird, huh?
– MrJM
- Rich Miller - Friday, May 22, 26 @ 1:23 pm:
===and she was terminated, so done. ===
She still works for DoJ.
- Amalia - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 8:25 am:
the Durbin part done, topic. she still works for DOJ and will rightly be referred to IARDC and perhaps fired.
- old guy - Tuesday, May 26, 26 @ 9:53 am:
If DoJ assigns them and Durbin rejected her as soon as the misconduct was disclosed, how does this turn into a Let’s Condemn Durbin event?