Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Good morning!
Next Post: Miller does good
Posted in:
* Gee. Imagine that. The Cook County Board wants to hold a hearing about a topic everyone is talking about and the subject of that hearing gets all upset…
“Anita resign! Anita resign!” the group [of protestors staging a 16 hour sit-in at the Cook County Building] chanted.
While the group began its sit-in, Cook County Commissioners John Fritchey and Jesus “Chuy” Garcia said they are filing a resolution seeking to have Alvarez appear before the Criminal Justice Committee of the Cook County Board. They want Alvarez to answer questions about the McDonald shooting investigation and the timing of the murder charges.
“In light of the now internationally infamous video of the shooting of Laquan McDonald, there exist a number of legitimate inquiries as to whether the residents of Cook County, and justice itself, are being properly served and represented by the State’s Attorney’s office in this and other cases,” said Fritchey. “The quickest and most open way to do so is to have the State’s Attorney answer questions in a public forum such as a hearing of the Criminal Justice Committee of the Cook County Board, a body empowered to serve and represent the interests of the residents of the county.”
Alvarez fired back. She said neither of the commissioners called her or asked for a meeting.
“I would be willing to talk in a professional manner. I am not going to be subjected to some political grandstanding and circus, which is what I think they have in mind,” Alvarez said.
Alvarez said she will not resign and has refused to bow to political pressure.
“I absolutely have no intention of stepping down. I was voted in to do a job and I’m doing that job,” Alvarez said. “The people who are calling for my resignation aren’t the people of Cook County…They’re seasoned politicians all with political agendas.”
I’m betting a lot of “people” in Cook County ain’t all that happy with her now. So, she can be in denial all she wants.
And as an elected countywide official, the county board has an absolute right to haul her in to testify. The city council ought to consider doing the same with the mayor.
Yeah, that’ll happen.
* Inciting anti-Alvarez rhetoric? Wow! Goodness gracious, there should be a grand jury!…
Following a press conference with Cook County Commissioners John Fritchey and Jesus “Chuy” Garcia, Alvarez talked to reporters and pointed a finger at her political opponents for inciting the anti-Alvarez rhetoric in recent days.
“That’s disgusting, it’s degrading. It’s degrading to the criminal justice system,” Alvarez said. “The case is pending right now, and I think it’s disgusting what they’re trying to do, to turn this into their own political game. And I think that’s exactly what’s happening here.”
Criticism of an elected state’s attorney is not an attack on the criminal justice system. Equating her political self with that system did not help her cause yesterday.
* And while she makes some good points here, referring to herself in the third person made her seem like a cartoon character…
In addition to the backlash Alvarez has faced about the length of the investigation in the McDonald case, she has also been accused alongside Mayor Rahm Emanuel and former Chicago Police Supt. Garry McCarthy of aiding a cover-up of the shooting. Alvarez vehemently denied this claim, however.
“You’re all intelligent, you get this. Let’s think about it,” Alvarez told reporters. “If Anita Alvarez was going to whitewash a case, if Anita Alvarez was going to look away, if Anita Alvarez wasn’t going to do her job and look at this case and do her review for excessive force, let me think. Hmm. I’m going to conspire to whitewash this to push it under the rug. Hmm. Who are my co-conspirators going to be. Let me see. I’m going to call on the head of the FBI. He could be a co-conspirator with me. Let me call on the U.S. Attorney for the northern district of Illinois and say, ‘Come be a co-conspirator with me, so we can cover this up.’ That is just absurd.”
* More high and mighty Alvarez…
“They can stand up here and they can criticize me all they want,” Alvarez said. “But I have an election coming up, and the people of Cook County will speak. Because you know what? I would rather lose an election than compromise the integrity of an investigation.
“I have done this job for 29 years, speaking up on behalf of the victims of Cook County, the majority of those victims being minority. And to be portrayed in this light by seasoned politicians with political agendas is disgusting and it’s degrading. I’m going to continue to be the Cook County state’s attorney, and there’s no way that I would ever even consider resigning.”
Um, I’m pretty sure that her outburst yesterday was intended to stake out some high ground in her primary bid. So spare us the whining about those bad, old “seasoned politicians.” She’s been elected twice.
* By the way, this is not to deny that the proposed hearing has political motivations. Campaigns elect our leaders, so campaigns do play a role in stuff like this…
Garcia has already called on Alvarez to resign, and Fritchey acknowledged he has endorsed Donna More in the race against Alvarez in the upcoming Democratic primary election in March. Kim Foxx is also running.
Fritchey added that, if he had his preference, Alvarez would not be in office during next year’s budget hearings for the state’s attorney.
“This is not an inquisition. It’s an invitation,” Fritchey added. “We’re not bullying her. We’re inviting her.”
He called it “her chance to give us the facts we don’t know” and explain the delay in charging Van Dyke.
“We’re already known as the murder capital,” Fritchey said of Chicago’s murder rate. “We don’t want to be known as the cover-up capital as well.”
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 8:51 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Good morning!
Next Post: Miller does good
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
She’s needed to go for some time now. And yes, the city council will never stand up to the mayor.
Comment by Cheryl44 Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 8:57 am
The Cook County Dem Machine doesn’t pick the brightest crayon in the box because they follow orders. Then when you cut them from the ticket, all hell breaks loose. Anita Alvarez and Dorothy Brown are classic examples of this. 2016 Dem primary will be fun to watch in Cook.
Comment by Almost the Weekend Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:02 am
Anita has been far from perfect as State’s Attorney, but she has gotten a raw deal here. The Feds are clearly involved, and anyone who has ever participated in a joint investigation with the Feds knows that they go on for a long time before the shoe finally drops. I also don’t think that Kim Fox or Donna More are the answer.
Comment by Anonymouth Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:04 am
The thing is…Alvarez is 100% right.
It is a witch hunt.
She has an election coming up and voters will judge.
Comment by Austin Blvd Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:06 am
As a downstate Republican, I’m curious as to how bad things would have to get for voters to cross party lines in Chicago?
Rosty’s loss is the only one that comes to mind.
Comment by Downstate Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:08 am
=== As a downstate Republican, I’m curious as to how bad things would have to get for voters to cross party lines in Chicago? ===
If you didn’t notice, the voters are moving further to the left - not closer to the Republicans
Comment by Anonymouth Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:12 am
“This is not an inquisition. It’s an invitation…” said a politician who supports Alvarez’s opponent.
These people at the county board have zero authority over Alvarez, except by controlling her office’s budget.
Comment by Austin Blvd Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:15 am
===have zero authority over Alvarez, except by controlling her office’s budget. ===
LOL
Control of the purse strings is control of just about everything.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:16 am
“Invitation”- nice
Comment by Honeybear Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:18 am
C’mon, Anita Alvarez is not a blank slate. There are plenty of previous examples of her failing in the pursuit of justice. The Koschman case, and her use of the necrophilia theory to defend the false convictions in the Nina Glover case (where two teens were convicted of murder despite DNA evidence showing someone else did it) are just two of the biggest.
Then, remarkably she charges Van Dyke just hours before the video is released? To believe that she wasn’t slow-walking this case to death requires a lot of faith, and she used that up a long, long time ago.
Comment by Century Club Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:20 am
Oswego Willy feels that when a public figures decides to go third person, that public figure is losing the argument they say is not ably them, by elevating their own self-worth. Oswego Willy thinks playing out what “Anita Alvarez” would or wouldn’t do, or questioning the thought processes, well Oswego Willy thinks the discription of a cartoon character might be too generous in giving to “Anita Alvarez”.
Oswego Willy wouldn’t want to judge someone’s character by how they handle adversity, and the adversity here is the blatent malpractice in handling this tragic case, because managing this case isn’t an adversity being responded to, but this is not an adversity at all. “Anita Alvarez” is trying to stave off fair and earned harsh criticism that “Anita Alvarez” has herself earned by actual choices, and actual repercussions of poor choices.
…
The video speaks for itself, the actions by Anita Alvarez leading up to the video being publicly viewed are up for scrutiny by many, and that many should be the Cook County Board. Alvarez’s lack of understanding of accountability is as alarming as her self image and ego-driven responses to legitimate questioning of her job performance and choices specifically to the McDonald tragedy.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:20 am
Just hypothetical at this point, but if the County Board had enough members willing to go for it, could they cut off all or some of the funding to the SA’s office as a means to forcing Alvarez out?
Comment by In 630 Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:21 am
I don’t like any of them
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:22 am
Anita Alvarez has worked in the States Attorneys office her entire legal career. As far as I know, she doesn’t have a zoning or property tax appeal or lobbyist legal gig on the side like some other local elected attorney-politicians to fall back on. Witch hunt? Probably. Several jackets have to be worn to at least lessen the stink of the McDonald cover-up, and it seems one was tailored for her. The coming election should prove to be good theater.
Comment by Cook County Commoner Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:24 am
Neither Alvarez or Brown were the endorsed Democratic candidates in their first primary elections for their respective offices. Both scored upset victories to secure their nominations. In subsequent elections, both were incumbents and they were endorsed. During this election cycle no candidate was endorsed for State’s Attorney and Brown was stripped of the endorsement for Clerk.
Alvarez is in a “no win” situation. Toni Preckwinkle has been extremely critical of the prosecutor for opposing low bail bonds for pretrial detainees. Toni’s illogic overlooks the obvious fact that while prosecutors make recommendations judges set the bail or refuse bail. It is also absurd for Preckwinkle to allege that a disproportionate number of minorities are jailed when the same persons are tried and convicted. Getting criminals off the street and into prison is the prosecutor’s job.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:25 am
“This is not an inquisition. It’s an invitation…” said a politician who supports Alvarez’s opponent.
In other news, the spider asked the fly to step into its parlor.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:27 am
Supporters of candidates might remember, you may not be the candidate, but the oppo dump might still come.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:28 am
Alvarez brought in the FBI and the US Atty months ago. Someone please explain how this can be a cover up?
Comment by Mr. Anon Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:31 am
Short version, everyone should be accountable except me, Queen Anita.
She’d better be careful when bringing up the U.S. Attorney’s office. I doubt they’ll have her back.
Comment by Wensicia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:31 am
@Anonymouth –If you didn’t notice, the voters are moving further to the left - not closer to the Republicans–
If you look at the policies that the parties have advocated over the years, it is not the people that are moving, but the republican party. Respected Republicans of yesteryear couldn’t survive a GOP primary today.
Comment by Dilemma Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:33 am
More politicians doing what they do best- scapegoating and making sure that when the music stops they still have a chair to sit in.
Instead of addressing our gun laws and the fact this was a joint investigation with the Feds (hardly being swept under the rug) they need to dodge their responsibilities.
Our gun laws are nowhere near as tough as other big cities like New York.
Plaxico Burress of the New York Giants was sentenced to two years in prison for a weapons charge after he accidentally shot himself. Our laws are much weaker and old murder stats conform this.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:34 am
There was a better way for Alvarez to handle this. She should have used the opportunity to portray herself as the adult she was elected to be in these cases. There is no reason she couldn’t have used her decisions on the McDonald case to demonstrate to voters that she was above politics, above emotions, and capable of handling this red-hot situation in a way they would want her to.
Let the panicked politicians spout out. Let the Mayor sweat. Let the journalists who obviously feel betrayed for having been caught dead-asleep for the past year, run in circles and call you names. She needed to have shown herself as the calm in the middle of the storm.
Now, she blew that.
Everyone knows her job is a tough one. Everyone knows this case was handled oddly. With the right approach and the right level of professionalism, she could have demonstrated what voters saw in her previously, and hoped they would see from her again.
She blew it.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:39 am
It sounds to me that Alvarez was TOLD what she could do and her “going away” package is not acceptable.
A lot more heads are going to roll here.
The national press is all over the cover up and hush money - this will not go way - clearly her head is not enough.
Maybe Alvarez has already made a “deal”.
Where is Luis?
Comment by Cannon649 Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:41 am
funny how everyone is afraid to ask why it is taking the US Attorney so long to take action, you know, the guy who has been involved from almost a year ago.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:43 am
=Someone please explain how this can be a cover up?= The scope of the feds in all of this is largely limited to potential civil rights violations and perhaps misconduct in the police department. I would not expect them to opine on the role the States Attorney’s office played here so Anita pointing to their involvement is a bit of red herring.
Alvarez has the same problem that the Emanuel faces. They fought the release of the dash board camera tape and only did so once compelled by the court. And coincidentally the murder charge against Van Dyke followed upon the release of the tape. Perhaps there’s a logical explanation for that, but if there is I haven’t heard it from Alvarez or Emanuel.
Comment by pundent Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:44 am
Is she under the impression she can weather this storm? That’s asinine. McCarthy was the first to get the axe, but he’s far from the last.
Comment by illini97 Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:45 am
The funniest part of yesterday was when former Chicago cop, longtime police apologist, and “heavy machine operator” Ed Burke backed Anita and all her awesome “collaboration” with the feds.
LOL LOL LOL
Comment by crazybleedingheart Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:45 am
Alvarez was elected by the voters not appointed.
The voters will decide if she stays or goes.
The same goes for the mayor.
Comment by Enviro Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:46 am
I hope Nanci Koschman was at the sit-in.
Comment by Lolo Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:47 am
It is possible for it to be both political AND deserved.
Comment by Anon Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:47 am
==Alvarez was elected by the voters not appointed.==
Oh! Well, somebody better let all those party slaters know that’s just some meaningless time-suck.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:50 am
“Fritchey said of Chicago’s murder rate. “We don’t want to be known as the cover-up capital as well.”
Really, Fritchey? That ship pretty much sailed after the Kochman case.
Comment by Terry Salad Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:51 am
OW- lol! Love your post.
WBEZ posted an interesting article yesterday about why it’s a bad idea to have either the SA’s office or another police agency (one that is not involved in the shooting being investigated) carry out investigations into questionable police shootings. They talked about other jurisdictions who use neutral investigators who immediately take charge of the crime scene in question. I’m sure that’s not a perfect system either, but it seems like all options need to be considered.
Comment by Former Hoosier Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:51 am
so Sam Adam Jr. is going to support Fritchey’s candidate. hilarious.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:51 am
Amalia, because the US Attorney is typically not responsible for bringing murder charges. That is typically the State’s Attorney’s responsibility. The whole waiting on the Feds reasoning is a cop-out on the highest order. How many other times does the SA’s office allow someone wanted for murder just continue going on, still possessing firearms, while waiting for someone else to come in and say it is ok to bring this person off the streets?
Comment by Juice Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:52 am
Amalia, that’s a good question, but it doesn’t absolve Alvarez, Emanuel or McCarthy. The actions on the tape are straightforward and should have produced charges quickly.
Comment by Century Club Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:53 am
She may well follow the termination path of so many pols who have defiantly mouthed “I will NOT resign….blah, blah…” Hello Richard Nixon, et.al.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:55 am
A long defense of herself. In all that time can’t she just put out a general timeline of her office’s activity on the case over the past 400 days? My guess there is about 300 days of waiting on the feds.
Comment by old pol Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:56 am
Elected officials like Alvarez rarely resign. The idea is that people should vote them out. Which seems increasingly likely next time for her.
Comment by DuPage Dave Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:57 am
Both she and the Mayor have pointed out time and again that “the voters have spoken” - meaning they won their elections and will fill out their term accordingly. Unfortunately for Alvarez, the voters have access to at one video for now, and likely more before her primary, they didn’t have access to before either of the Mayor’s recent electoral wins.
She’s been on a downward swing since that abysmal 60 Minutes interview. Two legit challengers declared far before the Laquan shooting hit the press. She won’t lose - she’ll lose big.
Comment by Former City Worker Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:59 am
you know why smart people don’t talk about an investigation and use their words carefully which drives reporters nuts? because they don’t want to do something to compromise an investigation. this case is about more than one murder charge, and one attorney who can bring charges. justice demands that the SA work with outsiders, you know, like everyone is asking for now, but which already happened on a case level.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 9:59 am
Amalia, it’s not too late to save yourself.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:03 am
The Cook County Board of Commissioners -and the president of that Board, not the “President of Cook County,” as she has sometimes referred to herself - does control the budget of the SAO. They do not, however, have anything to do with the day-to-day running of that office, or any other independently elected county office. They can ask her all the questions they want about her budget. They really have no legal authority to ask her about charging decisions, hiring decisions, or promotion decisions,etc. Not that that will stop the political posturing of Commissioners Fritchey (D-More) or Carcia (D-Foxx). The voters will decide in March and November.
Comment by West Side The Best Side Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:04 am
@Amalia - All true statements. But Alvarez didn’t speak in measured words yesterday, she became unhinged. Now maybe her anger at the politicizing of this is justified, but she’s ultimately responsible for her response and she didn’t do herself any favors yesterday.
Comment by pundent Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:07 am
ever watch a prosecutor get angry during rebuttal?
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:10 am
=== The Cook County Board of Commissioners -and the president of that Board, not the “President of Cook County,” as she has sometimes referred to herself - does control the budget of the SAO. They do not, however, have anything to do with the day-to-day running of that office ===
Unless Kim Foxx becomes the next State’s Attorney. Then Preckwinkle really will be running the State’s Attorney’s Office.
Comment by Anonymouth Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:11 am
Anita Alvarez has been a party hack.
But so are many on the Cook County Board. Where was their ==hearing== in October 2014 when Laquan McDonald was shot? Ronald Johnson? Any others killed by the police, or the hundreds killed every year in Chicago?
Now that one of the County Board President’s close allies is running against Alvarez, the Cook County Board figures there is a ==problem== requiring ==hearings==? Now it is a problem that needs public hearings?
smdh. The Cook County Board has been part of enabling this ==crisis==.
Who will do a ==hearing== on them? The media? They should.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:13 am
Funny thing about the cook county board, they gave the unions 10.75 in raises (including retro)and then pushed back the nonunions (asa’s) to 2%, no wonder seiu gave kim foxx 20g, a union with no members in the sao. Anita maybe bad at the many things, but you can actually see the smell on Toni, Chuy, & Fritchy (Donna More, really?). Toni’s perfect world has her proteges, kurt in the mayors office and kim in the sao, all answering to her.
Comment by sadly Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:13 am
Alvares might be able to argue she was not involved in a complete cover-up, but she cannot argue that she didn’t delay open disclosure and charging way beyond acceptable. It clearly calls to question the political reasons behind those delays.
The months-long delay in producing the cam recording, was blamed on waiting for charges to be brought by Alvarez. The delay in charges being brought was blamed on the Feds being involved in the case. Both claims might sound reasonable at first, but neither actually holds much water upon scrutiny. They certainly don’t seem to reflect responsible government or drive for fair justice.
The only way Alvarez escapes with the public is to make arguments supporting both claims clear as day. We’re skeptical, but hopefully willing to learn.
Fritchey and Chuy might be grandstanding a bit, but they are standing on the higher ground.
Comment by walker Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:15 am
=ever watch a prosecutor get angry during rebuttal= Have you ever seen the consequence of an unhinged politician (google Howard Dean). And yes Alvarez is both a prosecutor AND politician. Anita wasn’t facing the jury yesterday she was facing the cameras.
Comment by pundent Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:22 am
wonder why prosecutors win so many juries?
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:24 am
Rich,
It seems to me that cutting the county prosecutor’s budget due to a political vendetta would be a very dumb thing to do.
“The county board is cutting my budget and I have to lay off assistant state’s attorney’s. Fewer prosecutors at a time of increasing crime.”
Just doubt that would happen.
Comment by Austin Blvd Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:25 am
Dear censor:
Sorry you deleted my post which made a perfectly good point.
AB
Comment by Austin Blvd Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:32 am
The kind of quotes you get from Anita-backers:
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/12/04/burke-no-institutional-problem-at-chicago-police-department/
Comment by crazybleedingheart Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:33 am
@Sadly: throwing Toni, John F. and Chuy in the same pot on all those issues, is foolish. They are as often at odds, as together, on anything.
Comment by walker Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:38 am
@pundent–What do you rely on to say that Alvarez fought release of the dashcam footage. That was the City. I think you are making this up. I’ll apologize if you provide support for your assertion.
Comment by Mr. Anon Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:42 am
I don’t care for her, but I do agree that the best way to get rid of her is to vote her out. Calls for her to resign– well you can do that but it’s pretty clear she won’t. Focus on defeating her.
Comment by low level Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:46 am
Guess what kind of trial is starting next week? police officer charged with shoving a gun down the mouth of a defendant. anyone talking about that?
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:48 am
at least she isn’t Dorothy Brown????
Comment by burbanite Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 10:57 am
I don’t think postal is a proper adjective in today’s world
Comment by Also Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:00 am
Mr. Anon - I think it’s unclear at best who fought the release of the video. However, Alvarez is responsible for the timing of the criminal charges against Van Dyke and those charges weren’t filed until the video was released. Now there may be a number of good explanations for that but they haven’t been forthcoming and going postal as Alvarez did yesterday isn’t helping her case.
Comment by pundent Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:02 am
Amalia 10:48: Get your point, (though I am sure you know why this case is the public eye more than that one.)
Question: How many months between when that incident occurred/was reported and charging? Why the delay, and is it justifiable? Or does that case reflect some of the same problems as this one?
Willing to be convinced.
Comment by walker Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:07 am
I’m not siding with the S.A. or Berrios, but they are independent elected officials. Are they more or less equal to Board President? http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-cook-county-board-meeting-met-0521-20150520-story.html
Also, Toni when after Dart about overcrowding, as if the Sheriff can put a “No Vacancy”, over the jail…
Comment by Jockey Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:11 am
“Fritchey said of Chicago’s murder rate. “We don’t want to be known as the cover-up capital as well.”
Well spoken for a candidate who did a deal with Blagojevich and Mell to secure the nomination in his first campaign for RGA.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:13 am
I’ll talk about that, Amalia, and predict that he will be acquitted.
Comment by Independent retired lawyer, journalist Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:17 am
@Walker, the video is clear. but the number of police, the video issues, the number of people involved including the investigation levels at the City and the Civil case in the way, the quick pull in of the FBI to do the investigation which always means longer cause Feds almost always win, all that points to a long look. the Patrick Kane matter involved a few people, two places, evidence evaluation and did not even go to a grand jury. and that took two months to get done. prepare before you act.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:23 am
@Independent retired lawyer, journalist, there should be some interesting discussion about his defense attorney!
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:25 am
MacDonald is to Alvarez what snow plows were to Bilandic.
Comment by Snowplows and guns Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:31 am
Like many, I was calling for Alvarez’s political head a few days ago. But as more info comes out, it becomes pretty clear that she has handled this case appropriately. Natasha Korecki, who has better fed sources than any reporter in town, has the below story up on Politico — it’s a must read. Alvarez wouldn’t call the feds in if she was looking to cover things up, and the feds would absolutely not partner with her if they thought her office was guilty of misconduct or willful ignorance.
http://www.capitalnewyork.com/article/illinois/2015/12/8584709/many-witnesses-laquan-mcdonald-grand-jury-probe-result-far
Comment by PT Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:35 am
At the risk of partial or full banishment, or at the very least a “bite me”, I’d still like to recommend the end of the use of “going postal”. Just sayin’.
Comment by Nick Danger Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:40 am
First,
IrishPirate would like to thank Oswego Willy for his amusing commentary. IrishPirate chuckled and guffawed. IrishPirate needed that.
Alvarez is very likely going to lose the primary. She’s needed to go for a long time. Don’t fret though because once we don’t have Anita Alvarez to kick around we’ll likely have Dorothy Brown.
After licking her psychic wounds Alvarez will be fine. Her husband, successful MD, bankrolled her first campaign and I don’t think she will be hustling for business in traffic court.
If she went quietly they might even slate her for a county Judgeship.
Rahm was clearly the man pulling the puppet’s strings in releasing the video. One McPuppet gone. Next on the agenda is Alvarez.
Rahm’s may not realize, but his abuse of people is coming back to bite him. Outside his family how many people actually like him? The emperor has no clothes and few real friends.
Comment by IrishPirate Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:47 am
PT, how do you figure? From the article. “In fact, sources point out that federal authorities in the past have awaited a state prosecution to benefit from having access to sworn testimony in the case, should the defendant take the stand.
Additionally, state charges against Van Dyke could run into double jeopardy problems if the federal charges were first charged.”
It appears that her delay in bringing an indictment could have had to impact of further delaying the Feds work. And this excuse that she is waiting for the Feds to act would have made it even more difficult for her office to file murder charges.
(And just so I am clear on my position, I don’t think she was covering up anything. Just that she was reluctant to do her job on behalf of the State.)
Comment by Juice Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 12:10 pm
Amalia, you really don’t want to start a game of “look at Anita’s charges.”
Someone would feel compelled to mention that she charged a sex crime victim with a felony in order to help out the cops.
(Tiawanda Moore)
Comment by crazybleedingheart Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 12:13 pm
Anita Alvarez is only a victim of her own decisions. No other political operative can walk in and take advantage of the situation unless you give them an open door. She has done that. I don’t feel sorry for her, I feel sorry for the lack of justice to the victims and their families through police overreach and hyper-reaction. They too are victims of their own decisions. I get that it’s a tough and dangerous job, but that requires a cool head that realizes the last resort in situations like these is to kill another human being. Too often in Chicago and elsewhere, it has been a chosen course of action when it was not necessary and certainly not warranted.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 12:13 pm
Anita was on Chicago Tonight and said she’d take money from the police union that is paying Van Dyke’s defense. http://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2015/12/01/anita-alvarez-re-election-efforts-wake-laquan-mcdonald-shooting
Comment by 50 Shades Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 12:17 pm
Emanuel and Alvarez are spinning themselves dizzy.
Emanuel says he opposed the release of the McDonald video because it would impede the ongoing federales investigation.
Curiously, the feds did not ask the judge to block release of the tape. Why did Emanuel take it upon himself to “aid” the ongoing federal investigation? If the feds thought the release would hurt their investigation, why wouldn’t they go to the judge and ask him to block it?
Meanwhile, Alvarez claimed she had decided “weeks” before the release of the video to charge Van Dyke with murder.
Give that one a think: the state’s attorney believed there was a murderous cop on the streets — and actually working within the police department — but she waited weeks to officially charge him?
Their spin makes no sense.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 12:18 pm
=the quick pull in of the FBI to do the investigation which always means longer cause Feds almost always win=
You do realize that the FBI and the feds have no standing to bring murder charges here right?
Part of the problem here is that Alvarez is pointing to a federal investigation that has no bearing on her ability to bring a murder charge against the officer. In fact the progress or lack thereof of the feds seems to have no bearing on her decision to charge the cop.
Comment by pundent Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 12:33 pm
The “resignation” calls are political theatre and should be ignored. I’m no fan of Alvarez, but letting Preckwinkle and the County Board replace a resigned State’s Attorney with–surprise–Kim Foxx is not going to happen, nor should it. We have elections. You’ll get your protégé into the office soon enough, Madame President.
Comment by Orzo Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 12:36 pm
@CrazyBleedingHeart, the case starting monday is a charge against a police commander, Glenn Evans. that case is right on point to the discussion at hand.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 12:49 pm
all other investigations complicate matters. and there are several investigations surrounding this matter, civil, federal. you want to win a case? make sure you know what else is out there and get things in place.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 12:50 pm
I think Anita cut and pasted that rant from her stock (and improper) rebuttal closing to the jury. Tnbe defendant wants you to believe everyone is in a massive conspiracy! It’s an outrage to claim innocence! You should convict because a prosecutor is z professional! Blah blah. Once a cheater always a cheater.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 1:28 pm
@Amalia said: ever watch a prosecutor get angry during rebuttal?
That reminds me of what an Alvarez supporter told me earlier this week: “Anita is a good prosecutor, but she’s a lousy politician.”
A good politician would have stayed calm and collected during that press conference, portraying herself as a steady hand in city full of emotion and political opportunism. But Alvarez reacted like a prosecutor in front of a jury — pouncing on a defense attorney’s disingenuous argument. That’s her default mode because that’s who she is. Unlike almost everyone who has preceded her in that office, she brought zero political experience to the job. That lack of experience is both a blessing and a curse.
Comment by Anon414 Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 1:37 pm
@Anon414, that sounds right to me! you would think they would be trotting out Glenn Evans right about now, but nothing. that’s because she just does the work and believes it should stand on it’s own. I’d rather have the prosecutor than the pol.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 1:55 pm
Amalia, I’ll be sure to remember that you said that Anita’s work on Evans would stand on its own.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 2:40 pm
@crazybleedingheart, I’m sorry, I just do not speak your language.
Comment by Amalia Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 3:34 pm
Hate to say it, but ….there’s a silent majority right now, who condemns outrageous Police conduct, but is not exactly ‘down with the movement,’ as a whole. I would bet Alvarez wins the nomination if she doesn’t bow to the pressure before then.
Comment by Roscoe Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 3:45 pm
- Amalia - Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 11:25 am:
@Independent retired lawyer, journalist, there should be some interesting discussion about his defense attorney!
None of the other commenters seem to know who is the defense lawyer, or who is the judge on the bench trial that’s about to happen; about their individual professional histories. All I will say is that the defense lawyer was not very long ago a prosecutor, one who made quite a, ahem, name for herself.
Comment by Independent retiree/lawyer/journalist Friday, Dec 4, 15 @ 4:42 pm