Chicago Police will be conducting DUI enforcement on the North Side Saturday night

According to a Press Report from the Chicago Police:

The Chicago Police Department will be conducting a DUI Saturation Patrol in the Lincoln (020th) District this weekend. The DUI Saturation Patrol will commence at 7:00 p.m. on Saturday, August 12th, 2017 and end at 3:00 a.m. on Sunday, August 13th, 2017.  The purpose of this program is to saturate a pre-designated area with roving police officers that continually monitor vehicular traffic for signs of impaired driving. Patrols also place emphasis on speed, alcohol-related and safety belt
violations. Police vehicles equipped for speed detection are deployed to apprehend speeding violators.

 

From DNAInfo:

Police officers will be on the lookout for drunken drivers and speeders Saturday night during a DUI Strike Force Patrol planned for North Side neighborhoods including Lincoln Square, Uptown and Andersonville.

Officers will also be looking for people not wearing seatbelts and other violations.

The strike force patrol will run from 7 p.m. Saturday-3 a.m. Sunday, throughout the Lincoln Police District.

Headquartered at 5400 N. Lincoln Ave., the district is bounded by Lake Michigan, the Chicago River, Lawrence and Peterson avenues.

Communities served by the district include Lincoln Square, Uptown, Edgewater, Andersonville, Bowmanville and Budlong Woods.

Elmhurst Police to conduct Roadside Safety Checks Saturday night

From the Patch:

On Saturday, Aug. 12, a roadside safety checkpoint will take place on a major roadway in Elmhurst, according to the release. The safety checkpoint will begin at 11:30 p.m. on Saturday night and continue until 3:30 a.m. on Sunday morning. During the safety checkpoint, vehicles will be stopped at a predetermined interval and checked for violations.

Alliance Against Intoxicated Motorists releases its list of Top Cops and Departments

The Alliance Against Intoxicated Motorists has released its annual list of its “Top Cops” and Departments.

The list should be familiar to any attorney who practices in Chicago’s Traffic Court – 7 of the top 10 and 9 of the top 12 issue citations that are heard at the Richard J. Daley Center.  Only two of the top 12 officers are from outside Cook County.

Amazingly, four of the cops are from the same Chicago Police District.

Here is the list of the 12 cops who made the most DUI arrests in Illinois in 2016:

Rank
Title
Top Cops
Department
DUI Arrests
1 Trooper Eric David ISP District Chicago 297
2 Officer Timothy Walter Chicago District #19 210
3 Trooper Lucas Sniady ISP District Chicago 196
4 Officer Elliot Tupayachi Chicago District #19 180
5 Officer Phillip Travis Chicago District #16 128
6 Officer Tesfai Tewelde Chicago District #25 124
7 Officer Carlos Ortiz Chicago District #19 119
8 Investigator Andrew Hartman Rockford 118
9 Officer John Fermon Bloomington 107
10 Officer Dennis Dwyer Oak Lawn 105
10 Officer John Maclaren Chicago District #19 105
11 Officer Mark Januszewski Chicago District #24 103

 

Yes, you read that right.  One officer made 297 DUI arrests in a single calendar year.  Assuming that he gets 2 days off a week, plus one week of vacation per year – even without sick days that means he makes more than one DUI arrest per day.

In terms of Departments, here is the ranking (figures obtained from here and here)

State Police 5,619
Chicago 2,592
Rockford 459
Decatur 401
Elgin 365
Naperville 312
Cicero 305
Carol Stream 305
Bloomington 300
Normal 239
Aurora 234
Lombard 233
Springfield 230
Oak Lawn 223
Joliet 212

Off-duty Chicago police officer arrested in suburban Cook County

From ABC 7 news via WLS:

A Chicago Police officer was charged with driving under the influence after a May 12 incident in north suburban Northfield, police said.

Sean Lynch, 30, was also cited for excessive speeding and illegal transportation of alcohol. He is scheduled to appear in a Skokie court on June 16.

According to Northfield police, Lynch was stopped after he was observed speeding on northbound Interstate 94 at about 3:15 a.m. His Ford pickup was traveling 92 miles per hour in a 55 mph zone.

As police attempted to pull Lynch over, an officer observed Lynch’s truck speeding on an exit ramp and losing control of the vehicle, causing it to fishtail and then stop at Willow Road.

The Northfield police officer noted that he smelled a strong alcohol odor and that Lynch mumbled and slurred. The officer also saw an open can of Miller Lite beer on the front center console.

Lynch failed a field sobriety test and was arrested. After being charged, Lynch was released on $2,000 I-Bond.

Why did Sycamore police not charge an Elgin cop with DUI?

Questions are being raised about the unusual treatment given to an Elgin police officer who was arrested, but not charged with, DUI by Sycamore police.

From the Northwest Herald:

Police Chief Glenn Theriault has been on administrative leave since April 10 as the city investigates why an Elgin police officer arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence was released without charges.

Records obtained by the Daily Chronicle through the Freedom of Information Act show a Sycamore officer was building a driving under the influence case against Elgin Police Sgt. Mark Whaley after an early morning traffic stop Saturday, April 8. Whaley, who has been a police officer for almost 23 years, was handcuffed and driven to the police station, where he was processed. Theriault, who worked with Whaley on the Elgin police force, also went to the police station that night.

Whaley later was released without even a traffic ticket because of lack of evidence, according to the police report.

The report shows Whaley, 46, declined field sobriety tests and declined to provide a breath sample at the Sycamore police station. It does not say whether Whaley was issued a DUI ticket or read the “warning to motorist” that could have triggered a suspension of his license for a year for refusing chemical testing under Illinois law.

Cellphone records show Theriault had three early morning phone conversations with an Elgin police commander and later helped to ensure that a $500 administrative towing fee was waived for Whaley, bypassing a hearing process prescribed by city code.

“Tough position for you and all last night,” read a text sent by Theriault hours later to the arresting officer, Luke Kampmeier. “I’m thinking of the rock-and-glass houses story.”

“A valuable experience for me, albeit unpleasant,” Kampmeier replied. “Tonight we will stick to parking tickets.”

,,,

The episode began around 1:40 a.m. Saturday, April 8. In his report, Kampmeier – who joined the force out of college in 2014 – wrote that he stopped a silver 2005 Ford F-150 pickup on Somonauk Street near High Street after he saw the driver almost cause a traffic crash at the intersection of State and California streets. Reasons given for the stop were noted as “fail to signal, overtake on right, no front license plate.”

In his report, Kampmeier wrote that the driver, Whaley, smelled strongly of alcohol. His speech was “thick-tongued,” his eyes glassy and bloodshot, his movements “slow and deliberate.”

Whaley told Kampmeier he had recently dropped off his wife and child downtown, then changed his story to say he was in the area for training and had one beer in Sycamore before driving, according to Kampmeier’s report. A story by the Daily Herald about Whaley saving a boy’s life with CPR in 2011 said he lived near DeKalb at the time.

After Whaley refused field sobriety tests, Kampmeier arrested him on suspicion of DUI, records show.

A second officer, Blake Powers, a 2016 police academy graduate, searched Whaley’s vehicle and found an unopened bottle of Miller Lite near the passenger seat, according to police reports.

You can read the whole story here.  Normally, in this situation, the person will be charged with DUI.  Often in Sycamore, the police will seek a warrant to obtain a blood draw.  Getting released without being charged is a rare gift indeed.  We should all be so lucky.

Lake Co. Sheriff charged with perjury for testimony in DUI case

From the Chicago Tribune (reported by Jim Newton):

Deputy Sheriff Justin Hill, 28, of Kenosha, was indicted by a Lake County grand jury Wednesday on three felony counts of perjury, according to the Lake County Sheriff’s Office…

According to Sgt. Christopher Covelli of the Sheriff’s Office, inconsistencies were allegedly discovered in Hill’s testimony during a court hearing on the potential statutory summary suspension of a DUI defendant’s driver’s license. The testimony was allegedly given by Hill on Nov. 2.

Covelli and Jim Elliot, deputy chief of the Sheriff’s Office of Professional Standards, said the Sheriff’s Office is working with the Lake County State’s Attorney’s Office to determine whether any other cases in which Hill was involved could be impacted.

According to Elliot, each DUI case in which Hill was the arresting officer or was involved would be reviewed individually, and the State’s Attorney’s Office would decide whether each case would move forward based on all evidence involved.

Elliot said he does not believe there will be any blanket dismissal of cases in which Hill was involved. He added that he was unsure how many cases were to be reviewed.

A spokesperson for the State’s Attorney’s Office said Wednesday the number of cases was not immediately available, but would soon be released.

Following the Nov. 2 hearing, the Sheriff’s Office was notified Nov. 23 that “inconsistencies with Hill’s testimony (that) potentially resulted in perjury” had been discovered, according to Covelli.

Hill was placed on administrative leave and relieved of his police powers following an investigation by the Office of Professional Standards, Covelli said.

“You have a right to an attorney” – but will you actually get to talk to one?

According to the Chicago Tribune, Cook County Chief Judge has issued an order requiring the Chicago Police Department to provide suspects with access to a lawyer upon arrest.  However, the mechanics of how this will work in reality were left murky.

Until this order, when a person is arrested, they are advised of their “Miranda rights” which includes the right to an attorney.  But this is a mere formality; the police will usually encourage the arrestee to “make it easy” on everyone by “explaining” what happened “so you can get out of here.”

Usually, when I get a call from someone that his or her relative has been arrested, it becomes a race for me to get to the station before the “explaining” starts.  If I call up the station to tell them not to question my client until I arrive, I will be told that the “detective is busy right now” and he or she will get back to me “when they get a chance” (i.e., after my client has confessed).

So I was gladdened to see the headlines about Chief Judge Evans Order requiring access to attorneys.  In my mind, I envisioned a public defender or two getting a space at each Chicago Police Station (like the State’s Attorney have) and getting the opportunity to interview and advise each arrestee.  Of course, I also imagined that this would not go over too well with the police, who have no interest in having lawyers interfering with their cases and preventing confessions.

But I am concerned about the lack of implementation in the Order (which I have not read).  According to the Tribune:

But the success of such an order may ultimately depend on the cooperation of Chicago police, who in the past, say legal aid officials, have been reluctant to grant suspects phone calls or give attorneys access to suspects while they’re being questioned.

A Chicago police spokesman said Tuesday the department has agreed to post signs with a phone number for “free legal services” in arrestee areas and outside interview rooms but did not comment on questions about granting phone calls to those in custody.

Posting signs is not much of an improvement.  They are almost certain to go unnoticed.  On the other hand, Cook County Public Defender Amy Campanelli is quoted as saying, “I’m going to make it happen — this is way too important. This is groundbreaking,” she said. “I could have every lawyer do (a rotation) if I don’t get the funding.”  She is an aggressive advocate, and I am convinced she will work hard to provide representation.  But this will be a battle, because I expect that without an Order specifically stating what “access” entails, the PD’s office will face resistance from the CPD.

What do you think?