Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Father of Highland Park parade gunman takes plea deal for 60 days in jail

Posted in:

Illinois

Moments before his bench trial was set to begin, the father of the alleged Highland Park parade gunman pleaded guilty to seven misdemeanor counts after he was accused of recklessly aiding his son in obtaining firearms prior to last year’s mass shooting.

Just as proceedings were set to begin, Lake County State’s Attorney Eric Rinehart announced that Robert Crimo Jr. had agreed to plead guilty to seven Class A misdemeanor counts of reckless conduct, rather than the seven felony charges he had faced.

Crimo Jr. was sentenced to 2 years probation and 60 days in jail, which was agreed upon as part of his plea. He will be taken into custody to begin serving that sentence Nov. 15.

Lake County prosecutors had alleged Crimo Jr. took a “reckless and unjustified risk” in December 2019 when he signed an affadavit supporting his son, Robert Crimo III, in his application for a FOID card. At the time, Crimo III was only 19 years old and could not legally obtain a FOID card or purchase a firearm without his father’s assistance.

* CBS Chicago…

[Crimo] must also perform 100 hours of community service, surrender his own FOID card, and surrender any weapons he might own.

Under the plea deal, Crimo Jr. is admitting he was aware his son “was a substantial risk to others” when he signed Crimo III’s FOID card application.

Crimo Jr. will be allowed to surrender to jail on Nov. 15.

Crimo III’s murder trial date is expected to be scheduled during a hearing in December.

posted by Isabel Miller
Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 11:29 am

Comments

Locking up the dad for the rest of his life won’t bring anyone back from the dead. I think our justice system would be way more effective if we spent less time and effort on ridiculously long punitive sentences that are designed to satisfy our needs for vengeance, and more time and effort on preventative actions.

Some people will get mad that this guy is getting such a light sentence, but I am deeply convinced that their anger is misplaced.

Comment by Homebody Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 11:43 am
This is far too lenient. His actions lead to the deaths of 7 people and dozens of other injured. Just like the parent of the Waffle House shooter, Crimo should be imprisoned for the max allowable sentence.

Comment by JS Mill Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 11:45 am
=Some people will get mad that this guy is getting such a light sentence, but I am deeply convinced that their anger is misplaced.=

With respect, I think you would feel differently if your family member was murdered or shot.

The penalty is about punishment for a crime. His crime lead directly to 7 deaths.

I agree about the need to put appropriate effort into prevention. No question.

But my anger is appropriately placed.

Comment by JS Mill Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 11:53 am
Question, will the dad be brought back to the stand to discuss his son’s mental state? Seems he admits he knew his son’s mental capacity was not great in 2019 when he signed the FOID deal, did it progressively get worse?
Is this considered a felony to sign off on the card? Was it a felony then got knocked down to a misdemeanor with the plea?

Comment by Frida's boss Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 11:54 am
=Some people will get mad that this guy is getting such a light sentence, but I am deeply convinced that their anger is misplaced.=

I’m mad. 60 days for aiding in the murder of 7 people and traumatizing countless others isn’t a just amount of time in prison.

Very disappointed.

Comment by Cool Papa Bell Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 11:54 am
Sorry just reread the article saw my own answer to the plea my bad

Comment by Frida's boss Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 11:55 am
==more time and effort on preventative actions.==
Like hopes and prayers?/S

I hope this outcome is broadcast far and wide…so the Reinkings, Crimos, and Crumbleys of this society think twice before bringing more guns into their homes.

Comment by Jocko Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 11:58 am
= This is far too lenient. =

The SA would never have made the offer if they didn’t think there was a significant possibility that they would lose the case.

You take what you can get.

Comment by JoanP Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 12:02 pm
“The SA would never have made the offer if they didn’t think there was a significant possibility that they would lose the case.”

The SA in Lake County was a Public Defender by background and is regarded by his own ASA’s as weak and ineffectual.

Crimo Sr. is a big 2A guy and no doubt fancies himself a responsible gun owner. That he vouched for his son’s FOID card despite knowing his son to have, on at least one occasion, threatened people with violence while armed, deserves a stiffer sentence.

Comment by AlfondoGonz Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 12:08 pm
== be brought back to the stand to discuss his son’s mental state? ==

Could be a ploy to get a finished capacity finding for the son, and avoid a death penalty type (life in prison) result. Stranger things have happened …

Comment by RNUG Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 12:20 pm
I think while a longer sentence might have been better.. It is an admission of guilt and accountability that really is important here. It will hopefully make other parents step up and be aware of the responsibilty they have for what their “children” do with guns.

Comment by Dupage Dem Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 12:27 pm
“SA would never have made the offer if they didn’t think there was a significant possibility that they would lose the case.”

It has nothing to do with winning or losing. They make offers routinely on cases they don’t think they will lose. The capacity of the criminal justice system or the civil justice system to give everyone their “day in court” is entirely imaginary, and trial work is a grind.

Comment by Larry Bowa Jr. Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 12:28 pm
@Homebody
=== “our justice system would be way more effective if we spent less time and effort on ridiculously long punitive sentences … and more time and effort on preventative actions. ===

Yes, but deterrence is a form of prevention, and it’s an especially important one when other prevention efforts are inadequate. I’m all for comprehensive criminal justice reform that combines reduced sentences with rehabilitative incarceration, restorative justice, mental healthcare, and structural/ecological changes (in this case, vastly reduced gun access). But we can’t just give light sentences to people like this and say that in some hypothetical world it would be just and sufficient.

Comment by 102 strong Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 12:33 pm
=It has nothing to do with winning or losing.=

I’m not so sure. This was a bench trial and the SA was attempting to break new legal ground. The case would be decided on the law not the emotions of a jury. I’d be interested in knowing how the pre-trial motions went. I’d be inclined to agree with JoanP.

Comment by Pundent Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 12:46 pm
We spend a lot of financial and social resources looking solutions to stop a problem that can never be lessened so long as we have morally bankrupt politicians and judges who believe that military grade weapons are acceptable for everyone to own.

Comment by Norseman Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 1:14 pm
=We spend a lot of financial and social resources looking solutions to stop a problem that can never be lessened so long as we have morally bankrupt politicians and judges who believe that military grade weapons are acceptable for everyone to own.=

Mic drop.

Comment by JS Mill Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 1:34 pm
==His actions lead to the deaths of 7 people and dozens of other injured==

Morally, perhaps. Legally, not so much. The son was 21 and fully qualified for a FOID in his own right. The SA was wise to plead this and avoid losing.

Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 1:40 pm
The father knew his sons mental health issues. Instead of endorsing his FOID he should have got treatment for his son.

When the crimes were committed he was 21. No longer in need of a endorsement and fully responsible for his actions.

The failure was not getting his son help.

Comment by FormerParatrooper Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 2:21 pm
== The son was 21 and fully qualified for a FOID in his own right.==

Perhaps. But maybe he wouldn’t have applied for one on his own. The one he actually had he got with his father’s help at 19 and his father lied on the affidavit to obtain it.

Comment by Big Dipper Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 2:33 pm
=Morally, perhaps. Legally, not so much.=

He attested to his sons mental health. Had he told the truth, he would not have gotten a FOID at 18 or 21.

So legally as well.

Comment by JS Mill Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 2:54 pm
=The one he actually had he got with his father’s help at 19 and his father lied on the affidavit to obtain it.=

Those facts will probably play better in a civil case in front of a jury than a criminal bench trial. I’ve got mixed feelings about today’s outcome but understand why it may have occurred. This was by no means a slam dunk for the SA.

Comment by Pundent Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 3:21 pm
“Perhaps. But maybe he wouldn’t have applied for one on his own”

Maybe, but we don’t know. I believe the father perjued a affidavit, For that he should be prosecuted. The rest, being the age when the crime was committed is where it is no longer straight forward.

Myself, I would not have signed off. Morally I couldn’t do it. Instead I would have done as much as possible to get the kid help.

Comment by FormerParatrooper Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 3:42 pm
I actually think 60 days isn’t bad. Especially if he has to spend the whole 60days there. Most sane people don’t want to spend 1 day confined let alone 60.
Maybe it will act as a deterrent to other people in the same boat, though I would think the outcome itself (7 people dead, others wounded, son locked up for life) would do that as well.

Comment by cermak_rd Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 4:58 pm
==Had he told the truth, he would not have gotten a FOID at 18 or 21.==

That’s not how the waiver works. It’s a permission slip. ISP would never know if you refuse to sign it or hold that against your son at 21.

https://www.ispfsb.com/public/Documents/AffidavitGuardian.pdf

Comment by Stephanie Kollmann Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 5:17 pm
I’ve seen cases where someone who sold/provided drugs to someone who overdosed was prosecuted. They could say the victim just would have gotten the drugs elsewhere but that is not a defense. So the fact that Junior could have waited until 21 and obtained a FOID card independently seems analogous. Another scenario could have happened but courts deal with what actually happened.

Comment by Big Dipper Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 5:46 pm
Big Dipper we do agree. I do believe the father was wrong. I believe he should have done something for the mental health of the son. I do believe he shares some responsibility for what happened.

My only point is the crime happened when he was 21 and considered fully accountable and having full rights of an adult. Would we feel the same had the crime happened when he was 25 or 30? My father handed me a rifle when I was 7. If I used that same rifle 50 years later in a crime, does he still bear responsibility? I am just trying to understand where we draw the line for outside responsibility.

Comment by FormerParatrooper Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 6:18 pm
I believe anyone who helps a clearly mentally ill/violent person obtain a gun should be prosecuted where possible but yes there are lines. Obviously you can’t make a straw purchase for the individual. But what about driving someone who lacks transportation to the gun store with knowledge that they are unfit to own a gun? That’s probably legal but definitely immoral.

Comment by Big Dipper Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 7:04 pm
Agreed.

Comment by FormerParatrooper Monday, Nov 6, 23 @ 7:26 pm