Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Catching up with the federal candidates
Next Post: It’s a law
Posted in:
* Something that’s almost never discussed about the SAFE-T Act is how tough it is on alleged domestic violence perpetrators compared to the old cash bail system. It’s why numerous groups which serve domestic violence survivors staunchly supported the law change. Kudos to the Herald-News for this story…
The pretrial provision of the SAFE-T Act could have kept a man in jail and potentially prevented the escalation that led to a Joliet woman’s murder, according to an advocate for domestic violence victims.
On July 28, a Will County jury found Willie Banks, 48, guilty of the 2023 first-degree murder of Alicia Cole, 40, of Joliet. Banks broke into her residence on Dec. 13, 2023, and shot her multiple times with a gun, according to prosecutors.
By the time Banks was charged with Cole’s murder, he was out on bond and facing almost 20 charges across three Will County cases that named Cole as the victim. […]
The Herald-News contacted Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow’s Office to ask if Glasgow believes the SAFE-T Act would’ve been more effective in keeping Banks in jail and away from Cole.
A representative of Glasgow’s office said they have “no comment at this time” until after Banks’ sentencing on Oct. 7.
Glasgow and numerous other prosecutors in Illinois opposed cashless bail in lawsuits that led to an appeal before the Illinois Supreme Court. Glasgow’s lawsuit argued that cashless bail would cripple his ability to prosecute cases.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 9:52 am
Previous Post: Catching up with the federal candidates
Next Post: It’s a law
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I’m sure there must be legitimate concerns about the act, but most of what we hear sounds like local officials who resent having their bail revenue cut off.
Comment by Excessively Rabid Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 10:10 am
- Excessively Rabid - Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 10:10 am:
I’m sure there must be legitimate concerns about the act, but most of what we hear sounds like local officials who resent having their bail revenue cut off.
and who will make up for that shortage? The taxpayers who have 0 to do with having criminal charges
Comment by smile politely Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 10:22 am
–
Glasgow’s lawsuit argued that cashless bail would cripple his ability to prosecute cases.
–
Things Glasgow has failed to prosecute at all;
1) Will County Sheriff sniper shooting unarmed man with his hands up (Sheriff deputy was fired last week).
2) Crest Hill police officer shooting and killing his girlfriend (the officer lost in the civil case the family brought though)
3) Registered sex offender arrested for other crimes last week, although Glasgow is failing to prosecute him for not registering his address for years, as the law requires.
Jim Glasgow doesn’t need anything else to fail to prosecute cases. He’s able to fail all on his own.
–
A representative of Glasgow’s office said they have “no comment at this time” until after Banks’ sentencing
–
For a guy who was doing the press rounds and using ongoing cases in his alarmist examples of the ‘end of days’ he was literally claiming the SAFE-T act would cause, standing on a state with the likes of Dan Proft, and jumping in front of anyone with a camera for a photo-op, he sure seems to have suddenly become quiet.
I’ve been watching the arrest records in Will County showing arrest and release time. While I don’t have hard numbers recorded, domestic abuse is not taken very seriously at all in the County with serious domestic violence offenders regularly released despite the SAFE-T act allowing them to be detained. There has been more than one story showing up in the local news over the past months which contains the phrase ‘despite xyz being a detainable offense, prosecutors did not submit a petition to detain’.
I’m sure it would be eye-opening to see the actual statistics for the county relating to domestic abuse cases. I can’t prove it with any evidence, but to me it seemed there was a lot of tantrum-throwing by the local police and prosecutors after the SAFE-T act went into effect. Far more than one case never even had a petition to detain presented to the court. The ones which did, often lacked completeness in meeting the requirements of the petition.
Although for his office, it could just as easily be incompetence as intent.
Alicia Cole would more than likely be alive if Jim Glasow had not delayed the implementation of the SAFE-T act. He needs to own this now.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 10:36 am
Surprise, surprise (thinking of the best Gomer Pyle rendition), an opponent of the Act doesn’t want to comment on the benefits of what he opposed. The opponents have never been straight about their opposition.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 10:54 am
None of the arguments in favor of cash bail every made sense. There are only two reasons to keep someone in jail pre-trial: flight risk, or provable risk of danger to others. Neither of those is changed by the fact someone has enough money to pay their bail. (In fact the flight risk is likely *higher* for someone able to pay bail)
Comment by Homebody Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 10:58 am
Homebody is spot on. The arguments against the Act, both before and currently, never made any sense to me. No doubt weaknesses have been shown which can be fixed next GA but the sky is falling histrionics by much of law enforcement have not come to fruition. As Excessively Rabid noted, their concerns are financial.
Comment by Original Rambler Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 11:05 am
Mixed reactions to the Safe T Act legislation. Never liked the idea of bail as being used as a cash cow for local governments. But concerned about releasing violent people back on the streets. Under Safe T Act it is up to the Judges to determine if individuals pose a safety risk. Their decisions carry the upmost importance in the effective continuation of this legislation. The Judges who make these decision must be held accountable, both positively and negatively, on this important issue.
Comment by Mason County Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 11:05 am
If you believe in term limits, Jim Glasgow is not your guy…
Comment by low level Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 11:14 am
Last week we received a taxpayer paid flyer from State Representative Charlie Meier. Subject of flyer was, “Protecting Our Communities. First bullet point was about the SAFE-T Act being soft on crime & tied the hands of law enforcement. No proof of either claim.
Anyone else notice if their GOP representative was also sending this to their voters?
Comment by Highland, IL Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 11:16 am
= Under Safe T Act it is up to the Judges to determine if individuals pose a safety risk. =
Who else? Of course, the prosecution has to present actual evidence of a safety risk, which, apparently, some don’t bother to do.
Comment by JoanP Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 11:29 am
-Who else? Of course, the prosecution has to present actual evidence of a safety risk, which, apparently, some don’t bother to do.=
Would be prudent of the Judges to ask probingquestins of the prosecution on saftey risk if not presented. Especially if the case at hand involves anytyoe of violence.
Comment by Mason County Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 11:51 am
== Would be prudent of the Judges to ask probingquestins of the prosecution on saftey risk if not presented. Especially if the case at hand involves anytyoe of violence. ===
It’s not the place of a judge to do the prosecution’s job for them.
Comment by Leap Day William Monday, Aug 4, 25 @ 12:22 pm