You are on page 1of 5

Bollyn Trial

- April 23 -
Video Evidence Destroyed
by Christopher Bollyn
29 March 2007

Bollyn Trial Scheduled to Begin April 23

Police Destroyed Video Evidence of Assault and TASERing

The police should have several videos,

like the one below, to prove their innocence!

Every police
dashboard video
that documented
the arrest of Bollyn
was destroyed!

First of all, I want to thank the many people who have supported me in my ongoing legal
struggle. It is only thanks to their concern and kindness that I have been able to challenge
the unjustified police assault and malicious prosecution I have been subjected to since
August 15, 2006. This ordeal has been a tremendous burden on my family - financially
and emotionally.

Because this case involves the police and their conduct, I have retained an expert witness
on police procedures and a private investigator to help my lawyer prepare my defense.

My trial has been rescheduled to April 23, which is now the final date. The jury trial is
scheduled to begin on Monday, April 23, at 9:00 a.m. in Room 107 of the Circuit Court
of Cook County at 2121 Euclid Ave. in Rolling Meadows, Illinois.

It is very important for people interested in this case and my supporters to attend the
trial, which is expected to last one or two days. I have requested a jury trial. I hope to
have some media coverage of the trial as well.

Today, I appeared in the Circuit Court of Cook County (Third District) before two
judges. At 9 a.m., I was called with my new lawyer before Judge Thomas P. Fecarotta,
who is usually a felony judge. He appeared to be filling in for Judge Hyman I. Riebman.
I was the first person called and there was no court reporter present.

We received most, but not all, of the material we had requested from the police through
subpoenas. We received a tape, which I hope is the complete tape of my 911 call and
subsequent police transmissions.

Dick Williams, the attorney for the village, was in court standing beside the state's
attorney to object to turning over the personal records of the three police officers
involved. He also objected to presenting the body armor vests used by the tactical team.
The reason we requested the vests is because the police report begins with the claim that
they were "clearly marked with a badge and the word 'Police,'" which none of us saw.

Judge Fecarotta told Mr. Williams that he had no standing and did not belong in court,
but he sustained the objection regarding the personal and medical records of the three
men involved in the attack. We were told that we could photograph the vests at the

I wanted to see the personal and medical records of the three men in order to understand
if medications or military experience may have played a role in their unusually brutal
and vicious assault. Many police use anti-depressants or steroids which impair their

Judge Fecarotta was unwilling to move the trial date beyond April 10. When Judge
Riebman arrived with a court reporter, we appeared before Judge Riebman. The judge
looked through the material that had been turned over and approved its transfer to my
lawyer. Riebman also considered our request to have the date moved to April 23 and
granted the request.

Judge Riebman seems to be a fair and considerate judge.


Williams shocked the court during the first session with Judge Fecarotta when he said
that the police videotape evidence of the assault and TASERing had been "recycled."

"Recycled" is not the right word to use in this case. Destroyed or deleted are more
correct because the Hoffman Estates Police Department uses digital video recording in
all of its cars. This means that the video recording of the police assault and TASERing
was willfully deleted or destroyed although the police had filed criminal charges against
me based on the incident they had videotaped.

I asked Williams why the police department would destroy video evidence from a
criminal case that was being tried in the court. He said he did not understand it either
why the video evidence had been destroyed.

Williams also feigned ignorance of the fact that there were at least 5 police cars on the
scene during the incident. I find it hard to believe that, after 7 months, the attorney for
the village is unaware that an unusually large number of police vehicles and officers
were involved in this incident.

Last night I tried to call Wesley Schulz, the police sergeant who denied me medical
attention at the scene and during the entire time I was in police custody. This is a
violation of police policy – and the law. I had been TASERed and my right elbow had
been fractured yet Schulz, who was well aware of my injuries, refused to allow the
paramedics to examine my condition.

The state's attorney tried to complain to Judge Fecarotta about my attempts to reach
Schulz by phone. Fecarotta wouldn't hear it and scolded the state's attorney for bringing
such a ridiculous request up in court.

"What do you want me to do," Fecarotta, a judge who usually handles felony cases,
asked, "shake my finger at him?"

Judge Fecarotta told the state's attorney to "act like a lawyer." If I had broken the law
then the state should file charges. Ridiculed by the judge, Williams went back to
Hoffman Estates and told Schulz to try another method to block my inquiries.

A couple hours later I received a call from an Officer Berry from the Palatine Police
Department warning me not to try to contact Sgt. Wesley Schulz again. I asked
patrolman Berry why I was getting a call from the Palatine police officer about an issue
with a Hoffman Estates policeman. I understand it is because Sgt. Schulz does not live in
the village that he works for, but in neighboring Palatine.

Due to the incompetence and treachery of my first lawyer, Jack Craig Smeeton of
Wilmette, Illinois, essential evidence has been destroyed and my case has lingered in
court for an unusually long time. Smeeton did everything, acting completely against my
wishes, to "railroad" me into a bench trial in which no evidence would be heard and I
would accept a plea bargain.

After retaining Smeeton on 29 September 2006, he did not make himself available for
the first consultation before January 2007. Smeeton always acted more like the
prosecutor than a defense attorney. He tried to walk out from our January meeting
pretending to be upset, saying, "See you in court!"

Smeeton does not have an office and never had any time for me. He was always in a
hurry to get away.

He humiliated me and my wife and said we have "no case." Smeeton demonstrated
extreme arrogance, disrespect, and utter incompetence while misrepresenting me. The
only reason we had "no case" while he was my attorney was because he refused to do
any discovery. I had to fight hard to get even a copy of the full police report from him
and other documents, which had been sent to him thanks to my prior FOIA requests.

Smeeton did absolutely nothing except protect the police and the state. I have filed a
complaint with the ARDC, a disciplinary board for attorneys in Illinois – but I will
probably have to go further. Smeeton's treachery and sabotage of my case has seriously
jeopardized my defense.

Smeeton did not subpoena any evidence during the time as my lawyer, although I gave
him a completely prepared rider thanks to Peter A. Cantwell of Cantwell & Cantwell, a
LaSalle Street law firm I had considered hiring. Smeeton refused to issue any subpoenas
and wasted months of valuable time which could have been used to collect crucial
evidence, such as the police video of the assault.

When I gave Smeeton a letter asking him to withdraw on January 31, he finally went
through the motions of issuing a subpoena for the 911 tape on January 31, but his
undated and un-notarized subpoena disappeared from the 911 office – if it was ever even
there – and the requested 911 tape did not surface in court on February 20.

Because Smeeton failed to file any subpoenas, I had to dig for the evidence myself and
use FOIA requests. This has led Dick Williams to impose a gag order on the employees
of the police and fire department regarding my case.
Important: Bollyn's provides his articles for free.

Bollyn depends on sales of his ABC book for children, and on donations.

Take a look at his charming ABC book:


Please consider donating to Bollyn's legal fund, or to help support his research:

If you cannot afford to donate to Bollyn, please pass links to his articles around and try
to find more people to join us in our struggle to expose corruption.

You might also like