Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: After mayor negotiates away other peoples’ money, now comes the (tremendously) hard part
Next Post: Sen. Harris’ voting record was major factor in party choice for county clerk
Posted in:
* Daily Herald…
A man released from jail earlier this month on misdemeanor domestic battery charges shot and killed his wife Friday night in Villa Park, authorities said. […]
Prosecutors did not seek to detain Elguezabal pretrial. He was accused of pulling Julie Elguezabal’s hair, and punching her several times in the face, neck and back, according to court records.
“In the aftermath of this horrific incident, I intend to meet with all stakeholders to enhance protections for victims of domestic battery and improve the manner and timeliness in which information is provided to prosecutors, while still meeting the requirements of the SAFE-T-Act,” Berlin said. […]
Berlin said sometimes prosecutors have limited information when they have to make the decision to pursue detention.
“Perhaps a legislative fix or internal remedy could improve this outcome. Perhaps both,” Berlin said.
Guy punches his spouse “several times” in the face, neck and back and the state’s attorney just lets him go then tries to pin blame on a state law, which specifically gave his office extra time to deal with the accused.
* From the Illinois Coalition Against Domestic Violence, and The Network: Advocating Against Domestic Violence…
What happened to Julie Elguezabal is a horrific tragedy and could have been avoided. Survivors of domestic violence deserve safety, but far too often our systems fail to prevent abusive partners from harming survivors further after they have taken the brave step to seek help that will allow them to leave dangerous situations.
Prosecutors and judges must better listen to the needs and perspectives of domestic violence survivors, many of whom are experiencing extraordinary trauma. To understand what is truly happening and what survivors need, we need prosecutors and victim witness staff to consult with victims directly to ensure their safety concerns are met before prosecutors make decisions about detention petitions or conditions of release.
Our organizations support the Pretrial Fairness Act because we know this law gives courts better tools to serve victims than the old money bond system.
Unlike the old system, the Pretrial Fairness Act now:
● Prohibits people who may be a danger to others from simply paying their way out of jail.
● Ensures that domestic battery is eligible for pretrial detention.
● Prevents law enforcement from releasing someone accused of misdemeanor domestic battery without seeing a judge.
● Gives survivors the right to timely notification before any initial appearance or detention hearing, whereas survivors were not previously required to be notified of bond hearings.
● Permits survivors to participate in a risk assessment interview, something they were previously prohibited from doing.
● Offers survivors the ability to request protective orders for domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking at every court date.
● Allows prosecutors to request a 24-hour delay in a detention hearing for misdemeanor domestic violence cases and a 48-hour delay for felony cases, giving them time to consult with victims directly about what would make them feel safe.The legislature must also take additional steps to better address the safety of domestic violence survivors as it relates to firearm involved cases. While people accused of domestic violence are currently required by law to surrender their firearms, that law is rarely enforced. Right now, common practice in Illinois allows people accused of domestic violence to maintain access to guns, as in this case, where Ms. Elguezabal’s apparent assailant had turned in his FOID card but no firearms were relinquished. Karina’s Bill is legislation currently pending in the Illinois General Assembly that would permit judges to issue search warrants along with orders of protection so that officers can search homes and immediately remove guns from people accused of domestic violence.
Finally, the legal system cannot be our only tool to address domestic violence—it will always be an imperfect response used primarily after someone has already been harmed. A report released by The Network: Advocating Against Domestic Violence, shows that in 2022 only 6% of all domestic violence survivors working with providers reported that they contacted police and filed a report about an incident of domestic violence. Policymakers must increase the resources available to victims of domestic violence so that they can leave dangerous situations. Illinois and local governments have not adequately invested in direct economic support of survivors or funding for housing that allows people to leave unsafe housing situations. Current underfunding of resources for domestic violence survivors contributes to their inability to leave dangerous situations. If policymakers are serious about keeping survivors safe, more money must be allocated to support survivors directly.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 10:42 am
Previous Post: After mayor negotiates away other peoples’ money, now comes the (tremendously) hard part
Next Post: Sen. Harris’ voting record was major factor in party choice for county clerk
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Berlin, March 22, 2024…
“Most of your domestic batteries are misdemeanors. Those would always result in some type of a cash bond and most of those defendants were getting out. Now we’re seeking detention on most domestic batteries. You can see out of 177 detention petitions, 71 had been granted, that’s actually pretty good,” said Berlin.
https://www.nctv17.org/news/naperville-police-chief-and-dupage-county-states-attorney-give-safe-t-act-updates/
“…pretty good…” Not hardly. Total failure in this case.
Comment by Anon221 Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 10:55 am
Clearly, gender is a factor here. Man beats woman. Prosecution empathizes with man. Protects man.
I wonder what evidence the Judge heard. I also wonder why the judge did not pursue this further and reach the conclusion that a severe case of domestic violence and abuse had occurred. Even with failure by prosecutors, judges still play an essential role in protecting women from abuse. The judge clearly failed here, too.
Comment by H-W Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 10:57 am
Oh, a male state’s attorney who’s unaware that domestic violence offenders are at the HIGHEST risk of reoffending, escalating, or violating probation because he doesn’t really consider relationship spats crimes?
Must be a day that ends in y.
These are literally the easiest wins for cops and prosecutors in reducing repeat violence. But since it requires them to take women seriously as victims of targeted relationship violence, they shrug and let their crime rates and recidivism rates skyrocket.
Comment by Suburban Mom Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 10:59 am
@ H-W -
I don’t see how you can say the “judge clearly failed”, while at the same time admitting that you don’t know what evidence was presented.
It may have been none, other than the bare bones of the complaint, as the SA chose not to request detention.
Comment by JoanP Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:07 am
=== Total failure in this case. ===
It’s more than that because his office didn’t even bother to request pre-trial detention.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:13 am
Overall the safety act seems to be working well, with the exception of judicial discretion.
Comment by Old school Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:14 am
So the state’s attorney is blaming the SAFE-T act but didn’t even try to detain him? How would cash bail have helped at all in this case? I still find it crazy that people are allowed to just say ‘Here is my FOID card, scout’s honor I don’t have any guns’.
Comment by Aaron B Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:16 am
“Even with failure by prosecutors, judges still play an essential role”
Judges can only rule on evidence presented to the court. A judge can’t rule on what should have been presented, only what has been. Anything else is grounds for appeal.
As the prosecutors didn’t even bother presenting any evidence to meet the full requirement of being held, much less present even a single prong of those requirements, the judge really has their hands tied.
I’ve already seen this happen multiple times in my county with the new law, since the local SA gets tripped up by the simplest of paperwork requirements. We recently had a murder trial tossed out as a mistrial because the prosecutors were so terrible at their job, the judge had no other choice.
Even when a prosecutor attempts to make an argument, if it is done incorrectly or leaves out pertinent details the judge will have no other choice than to deny the request.
Similar to when a cop gets a DUI, and the prosecutors accidentally forget to submit the required paperwork within the statutory time limit for a summary suspension of a drivers license.
There are an almost infinite number of ways for a prosecutor to torpedo a case simply by missing a deadline. From the outside it looks like the judge is making that decision, but the table was already set by the prosecutor.
The complexities of the new law have the unintended consequence that it is going to be incredibly easy to drag down a judge in the press in situations like this, when in reality the responsibility for the outcome sits squarely on the prosecutor.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:18 am
===with the exception of judicial discretion===
Which played no meaningful role here. Try to read before posting.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:23 am
@Suburban Mom - 100% on board here. We have decades of evidence about correlations between certain offenses, but always still manage to find reasons to brush it off. We absolutely know what things correlate with what outcomes, but people refuse to take action.
It reminds me so much of every time red flag laws for domestic violence and guns comes up. We know this happens, we know this happens a lot, but people are more worried about whether the offender will have to be separated from his poor lonely guns for a few months while the process plays out, rather than worrying about the chance a woman or child will die.
Comment by Homebody Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:24 am
A) 1000 feet does not seem like a meaningful boundary.
B) Why would someone have a FOID card if they did not own a gun.
C) Maybe law enforcement needs a database of gun sales.
Comment by Juvenal Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:36 am
Why aren’t the DuPage Democrats running a candidate against Berlin (other than the fact that he’s formed an alliance with Deb Conroy and contributed to her campaign)?
Comment by Protocol Droid Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:46 am
Berlin, to everyone: “Perhaps a legislative fix, or internal remedy could improve this outcome. Perhaps both…”
Everyone, to Berlin: this sounds like a you problem.
Comment by Socially DIstant watcher Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:47 am
When you are to blame for something but you want to deflect some blame, try to pin it on Springfield and/or Chicago. - County Politicking 101
Comment by TJ Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:56 am
==Elguezabal’s First Appearance Court hearing indicated he did not have access to a gun.==
Based on what? His word? Prosecutors couldn’t be bothered to hold him for a measly 72 hours
Comment by Jocko Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 12:16 pm
If the State does not file a Petition to detain, the judge has NO discretion under the statute and must release the Defendant.
There is one exception, the judge may detain a Defendant on the court’s own motion when a Defendant out on release for a felony and/or class A misdemeanor and is then arrested for another felony or class A misdemeanor.
Comment by BCOSEC Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 12:51 pm
“Why aren’t the DuPage Democrats running a candidate against Berlin?”
Because no attorney collected the requisite number of valid signatures required to get on the Democratic primary ballot and secure the nomination.
tbh, it’s as simple as that.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 1:01 pm
Dear DuPage Democrats: put someone on the ballot The good old boys and girls network is the land of Bob Berlin His time should be up
Comment by Amalia Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 1:05 pm
Robert Berlin could have treated the the repeated punching of a woman’s face, neck and back, by a man with a firearms owner’s card, as a serious violent crime.
But he chose not to, and now she’s dead.
And the SAFE-T-Act had nothing to do with it.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 1:12 pm
Berlin owns this, and playing word games to deflect it is embarrassing. His office blew this one… own it.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 1:34 pm
Legislative fix or internal remedy or both. How the heck is he running the office? the internal is to ask for detention. why did that not happen? if the judge had decided not to detain then it is on the judge. It is on the State’s Attorney now. and it is a death. Ridiculous from Berlin.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 1:40 pm
“Why aren’t the DuPage Democrats running a candidate against Berlin (other than the fact that he’s formed an alliance with Deb Conroy and contributed to her campaign)?”
Conroy and Berlin’s ties run much deeper than a single campaign contribution.
Scott Marquardt and John “Chip” Humes of the lobbying firm Marquardt & Co. are political advisors to both Conroy and Berlin.
The firm also has government lobbying contracts with both of their offices.
Marquardt’s wife, Barbara Skurka Marquardt, is a paid consultant for Citizens for Bob Berlin.
Start pulling on those threads and see what unravels.
Comment by Big Mac Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 2:02 pm
@Big Mac good details The threads of the actual performance in the office are now unraveling
Comment by Amalia Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 2:06 pm
He does in fact own this. But he’s largely done a really good job for DuPage residents. This certainly sucks, but one mistake does not a career make.
Comment by DuPage Moderate Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 4:04 pm
@misterjayem is wrong. Previous to the SAFE-T act a judge could have held the defendant without a prosecutor filing a formal petition. Prosecutors could ask for monetary bail, no bail or recog bond. This is not a defense of Berlin. His office made a mistake. His defense of it is poor.
Comment by Spooky32 Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 8:54 pm
== Previous to the SAFE-T act a judge could have held the defendant without a prosecutor filing a formal petition. Prosecutors could ask for monetary bail, no bail or recog bond.==
No, that is wrong. Detention without bail was NOT an option for someone charged with domestic battery under the old system. The only lawful way to detain the accused person was on a money bond. The Pretrial Fairness Act made domestic battery charges eligible for detention without the accused person being able to buy their release, which is one of the big reasons that advocates for DV survivors supported the new law and continue to defend it today.
Comment by charles in charge Monday, Apr 29, 24 @ 11:50 pm