1

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
STATE OF ILLINOIS
COUNTY OF COO K
)
)
)
SS.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT - CRIMINAL DIVISION
THE PEOPLE OF THE )
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)
vs. ) 10 CR 8092
) 08 CR 10502
ANNABEL MELONGO )
REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS
BE IT REMEMBERED that on the 12th day of
January, 2011, this cause came on for hearing
before the Honorable MARY M. BROSNAHAN, Judge of
said Court, upon the indictment herein, the
Defendant having entered a plea of not guilty.
APPEARANCES:
HON. ANITA M. ALVAREZ, State's
Attorney of Cook County, BY:
MR. ROBERT PODLASEK,
MS. JULIE GUNNIGLE AND
MR. LUKA JANKOVIC (711 Student),
Assistant State's Attorneys,
on behalf of the People;
MR. NICK ALBUKERK and
MR . MATT PRENGAMAN,
on behalf of the Defendant.
ROBERT J. MADOCH
Official Court Reporter
Circuit Court of Cook County
County Department - Criminal Division
C.S.R. 84-1194
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
I N D E X
People v Annabel Melongo
DATE: January 12, 2011
PAGES: 1 through 200
VOIR DIRE
Opening Statement By Ms. Gunnigle 175
Opening Statement By Mr. Albukerk 184
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE CLERK: Annabel Melongo.
THE COURT: Good morning. Annabel Melongo
is present, dressed in civilian clothes, pursuant
to the order.
Counsel, your name.
MR. PODLASEK: For the record, Robert
Podlasek.
MS. GUNNIGLE: Julie Gunnigle.
MR . JANKOVIC: Luka Jankovic, practicing
under Supreme Court Rule 711 .
MR. ALBUKERK: For the record, Nick
Albukerk.
THE COURT: This matter is set down for
jury trial. The parties have informally off the
record indicated they are both ready to proceed.
That is still the case?
MR. ALBUKERK: Right .
MR . PODLASEK: Yes.
THE COURT: Any preliminary issues or
motions before we get started?
MR. PODLASEK: One motion in limine, Judge.
I've already tendered a copy to Counsel.
MR . ALBUKERK: Can I have one second?
(Brief pause.)
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MR. ALBUKERK: Judge, I have received that
motion in limine today. I have reviewed it. I
would object. The only part of it I would object
to --
THE COURT: Let me take it one by one, so
the record is clear. With respect to the motion in
limine, point one, the State is asking the defense
be precluded from making any reference to possible
sentencing or punishment options if the Defendant
is convicted. Do you intend on doing that, sir?
MR. ALBUKERK: Judge, you know, the only
thing I might do is make a reference that this is a
felony. And that, you know, potentially it could
result in consequences for her, maybe deportation
or worse.
THE COURT: I'm going to preclude you from
doing that. I think case law is very clear you
cannot make any reference to sentencing and
punishment. That is obviously the purview of the
Court, should there be a finding of guilt.
In the closing instructions that is
one of the paragraphs and one of the points of law
I instruct the jury on. They are not to consider
possible punishment. Not to weigh in their
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
decision.
Certainly, we're in a felony
courtroom. They will know it is a felony. They
know that. Beyond that, I'm going to preclude you
from making comments regarding immigration
consequences, time in jail, etc. Nothing of that
nature.
Point one is going to be granted, in
part, over defense objection.
Number two, they are asking the
defense be prohibited from introducing defendant's
prior statements through her testimony or
examination of witnesses. I guess if you choose
to call Miss Melongo to the stand, certainly she
can testify.
MR. ALBUKERK: Right.
THE COURT: I wouldn't make any rulings what
she can or can't say. It appears to me the State
is asking you be precluded from buttressing her
in-court testimony with prior consistent
statements. If she said the same thing to other
people.
Am I reading that right?
MR. PODLASEK: Yes, your Honor.
5
----
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MR. ALBUKERK: To that extent, I don't
object. The law is clear on that point. However,
I think the way it is written, it may go further.
We certainly -- There are e-mails,
there are other statements between parties that I
may have to use in cross examination on certain
witnesses. I know formally I have spoken to the
State. It sounds like it is not going to come up.
For the record, I would reserve the
right to use, you know, previous statements of my
client, if they were with other witnesses, to
cross examine those other witnesses.
MR. PODLASEK: I'm not sure I understand what
Counsel is saying.
MR. ALBUKERK: In other words, let's say I
had to impeach a witness. The way I would impeach
that witness, I would have to read both my
client's previous statement and that witnesses
statement, because it would be an interchange,
back and forth.
THE COURT: So I am clear, you are talking
about a conversation ongoing basically during the
course of the entire eavesdropping, while the case
is going on. Nothing post arrest.
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MR. ALBUKERK: Nothing post arrest.
Everything would be before the arrest. You know,
around the time.
In other words, if there was a
witness which, you know, said something to my
client, which, you know, bore on my client's
understanding of what was going on, you know,
as far as the criminal activity that she is
alleged to--
THE COURT: The one simple point we already
addressed, you have no objection to not introducing
through Miss Melongo, should she choose to take the
stand any of her own prior consistent statements.
MR. ALBUKERK: Correct.
THE COURT: That will be granted, without
objection. That's regarding Defendant on the
stand. And prior consistent statements of
Defendant.
There seems then another part. I
don't know if the State is addressing that. Are
you talking about, State, any communications by
Miss Melongo via e-mail or anything on tape, etc.?
MR. PODLASEK: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: You are going to ask he be
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
precluded from using that? Isn't that part of the
case though, what she said and how she went about
the eavesdropping.
MR. PODLASEK: The e-mails that are
pre-eavesdropping. I have no objection to the ones
post eavesdropping. We have many objections
because they go to the other case, which your Honor
already told us we can't comment on.
THE COURT: Here's the thing. I can't rule
in a vacuum. I don't know what the witnesses are
going to testify to. So, State, you are not
intending on getting into any of those e-mails.
MR. PODLASEK: No.
THE COURT: At all.
MR. PODLASEK: No.
THE COURT: On any level. Post charge, pre
charge, anything she said to the victim in this
case. No conversations at all.
MR. PODLASEK: She didn't send any to the
victim. The only thing is conversations that were
recorded.
THE COURT: Okay. Defense, if you feel some
point it is relevant, during cross examination of
any of these witnesses, to touch upon any of the
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
e-mails, I'm going to require you ask for a side
bar.
MR. ALBUKERK: Okay.
THE COURT: I'll deal with it at that time
and give you my ruling then. Right now, I'm not
quite clear on what the testimony is going to be.
I don't know if they would be relevant or not.
Number three, the State is asking that
you be precluded from arguing personal opinions or
telling personal stories.
Did you intend on doing either of
those?
MR. ALBUKERK: I didn't.
THE COURT: Okay. Number three will be
granted then without objection.
MR. ALBUKERK: I hope I have some leeway in
closing argument, of course. I mean if you are
talking about the testimony, obviously not.
THE COURT: All right, I'll grant it without
objection.
Number four, that you be prohibited
from making any reference to possible ongoing
investigations. Through her testimony or
examination of witnesses. Is there any ongoing
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
investigation?
MR. PODLASEK: That we don't know, Judge.
MR. ALBUKERK: Well
MR. PODLASEK: There i s going to be - -
MR. ALBUKERK: Well, the truth of the matter
i s we don't know. We have been told that the
attorney general is looking into save a life
foundation. Of course, that covers your previous
ruling, saying we can't go into the eavesdropping,
the tampering case.
THE COURT: Neither of you are aware whether
or not it is going on. I'm not going to allow
anybody to comment on it. It wouldn't be relevant.
Nobody even knows if that is happening. I don't
see how it bears on this case. I'm going to grant
number four.
MR. PODLASEK: If I can make one observation
on number four. There is going to be, to my
understanding, a defense witness who is an FBI
agent. If Counsel were to ask that FBI agent are
there any ongoing investigations on --
MR. ALBUKERK: I'm not.
MR. PODLASEK: I'm not at liberty would be
the answer, mostly likely.
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT: My rule is clear. I'm not
allowing anyone to get into it. If you have a
witness, warn him. I don't want it spilling out by
accident. I don't care if there is an ongoing
investigation. It is not linked to this case. I
don't want anybody talking about it by accident.
Please, you have the FBI agent that
possibly is testifying for you, you need to
admonish him, I don't want that coming out, period,
about ongoing investigations.
MR. ALBUKERK: She's already informed me.
Her name is Depooter. She's already informed me
she's not allowed to go into any of that. She's
not going to let it slip. Not going to be a
problem.
THE COURT: I don't want that answer, I
can't talk about it. Believing there is a lot to
talk about that I'm not at liberty to tell you.
Don't go there at all.
MR. ALBUKERK: Okay.
MR. PODLASEK: Second housekeeping, we do
have a stipulation we'd 1 i ke to read to the jury.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. PODLASEK: We'd 1 ike to make copies of
11
it
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
and present it to the jury.
THE COURT: Defense, any objection to this?
MR. ALBUKERK: I've gone over it. And the
problem is I haven't had a chance to go over it
with my client. I believe it is now only factual
that I --
THE COURT: All right, here's what I'll do.
We can deal with this after my opening remarks to
the jury. Here's what I'd like to do. I'll give
you a chance to go through it with her. And then
MR. PODLASEK: There is a problem. We're
going to not be allowed to use the stipulation,
we'll need a date because we need more witnesses.
We worked on this between ourselves.
MR. ALBUKERK: Right. Unfortunately, I had
a lot of trouble. I tried to get to visit her
several times. They barred me. Cook County barred
me a couple times.
THE COURT: Take time right now. I know you
have been working on stipulations. I assume there
is not a problem with it. Of course, I'm going to
allow you to go through that with Miss Melongo.
I'll bring you back out in ten minutes.
MR. ALBUKERK: Thank you.
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Judge.
MR. PODLASEK: We do have a witness list.
THE COURT: All right.
(Whereupon the above
entitled cause was
passed, after which the
following proceedings
were had outside the
presence and hearing
of the jury:)
THE CLERK: Melongo.
MR. ALBUKERK: We do have a stipulation,
THE COURT: Back on the record with
Mr. Albukerk. All parties are present in Court.
With respect to the stipulation, it is
basically a two-page stipulation with signatures on
page number three. Any changes or corrections to
it, typos, anything you saw.
MR. ALBUKERK: We did put a few little ones
in there. I initialed it. We added a little
something.
THE COURT: All right, we do have that
stipulation. With respect to the witness list, the
State has possibly four witnesses. Wo that you
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
listed, of course, other than possibly Miss
Melongo.
MR. ALBUKERK: Correct.
THE COURT: Did you have motions in limine
we have to address?
MR. ALBUKERK: One moment. My client does
want me to make a motion regarding her earrings.
She would like to have her earrings, to be able to
wear those earrings. She believes it will help
her presentation before this jury.
THE COURT: Okay . It is my understanding,
and we do have a deputy. I may ask our deputy, as
Miss Melongo is in custody, there are certain
requirements that the sheriff has to follow with
respect to the Cook County Department of
Corrections guidelines. And it is my understanding
that one of those guidelines is that defendants in
custody, females or males , cannot have earrings.
Am I right?
DEPUTY MORENO: You a re co r rect . I checked
with my supervisor , Sergeant Widarza.
THE COURT: Your name for the record?
DEPUTY MORENO: Alice Moreno.
THE COURT: Okay. That's our regular deputy
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
in the courtroom. Based on that, it is one of the
policies of the Cook County Department of
Corrections, I find that it will have no bearing
one way or the other on her appearance in front of
the jury.
I would note she has on a beautiful
light pick silk shirt and a very tailored and
professional looking business suit, dark gray or
black, pin stripe. She looks pretty much like a
lawyer. So, I don't think that earrings one way or
the other are going to effect the outcome of this
case. Your motion to have her wear the earrings
or any jewelry will be respectfully denied.
MR. ALBUKERK: If I can have one more
minute.
THE COURT: Sure.
MR. ALBUKERK: Judge, the only other thing
we need to cover, this is something we brought up
to you before. That is that we have a non IPI jury
instruction, which is really pretty instrumental in
the case. It encompasses the defense.
I don't know if you have a copy of it.
I'd like to be able to give that to you to look at.
If nothing else, to consider eventually. You will
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
have to rule on it.
THE COURT: If you have it, I'll take it
under advisement. Also, pursuant to statute, which
is 720 ILCS 5/14-5, under the eavesdropping section
of the statute, it talks about evidence being
admissible. It goes on to basically say that
evidence of eavesdropping can't be permitted in any
type of administrative court, civil or criminal
proceeding, without it being determined as a matter
of law by the Court in chambers that it is clearly
relevant to the proof of the allegations.
Therefore, it would be admitted.
So, during the lunch break, I will
listen to the proffered recording, eavesdropping,
and discuss specifically what part or if all
parties will be admissible.
Let he just get the position of the
parties, since you heard the conversation. Of
course, I haven't. State, what are you seeking to
be admitted with respect to the conversations you
are going to be tendering to me?
MR. PODLASEK: We would seek to admit the
three phone conversations recorded between Miss
Melongo and Pamela Taylor.
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
In addition, there is a message left,
I believe by Pam Taylor, on Miss Melongo's
voicemail or some kind of recording device, which
preceded these three phone conversations. We can
probably put those in for continuity.
THE COURT: Are you in agreement with the
State's position?
MR. ALBUKERK: Yes, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. Then I will take
that under advisement and here would be my plan for
selecting the jury. They should be up momentarily.
It is now twelve o'clock. I'll bring
them in, give my opening remarks. Probably takes
thirty minutes, give or take. Thirty to forty
minutes. I'll send them to lunch.
We'll then have the cards. They will
be numbered one through fifty or however many we
get. The parties will be provided a list of the
jurors. And in what order we'll be getting them.
That will be there on the list.
I shuffle the cards personally and
they go numbered one through whatever. Say fifty.
They are put on so you know who is coming. I'm
going to seat them twenty at a time in front of me
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
and talk to them in panels of twenty.
I'll do the general questions. Pretty
much I go through the jury cards. I'll tender the
first panel to the State for followup questions.
You will get followup questions next.
With the second panel, if we don't get
our jury, the followup questions will start with
you first. We go in the back. Miss Melongo will
be in the back. We'll pick in panels of four. No
back strikes. The first panel will be tendered to
the State . You can keep challenging until you are
satisfied with the panel. Then it goes to the
defense. You will then get to dismiss anybody.
We'll proceed that way. Seven strikes per side.
MR. ALBUKERK: Seven?
THE COURT: Seven strikes per side.
MR. PODLASEK: All right .
THE COURT: The parties are in agreement
then. Anybody have any questions? If you have
something you want to be heard on, let me know.
If I deny it, I'll let you make a record when we
take a break. The parties are confident we'll
finish tomorrow completely?
MR. ALBUKERK: I would think so.
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT: When I'm talking to the jurors
about the schedule, the plan is to select today, do
opening and possibly stipulations and possibly even
a State witness, depending on how fast we move.
Then if you are ready with your witnesses,
depending on how fast we go, we can do that. We
should finish tomorrow without a doubt then.
MR. ALBUKERK: Yes.
MR. PODLASEK: When would you anticipate
coming back tomorrow?
THE COURT: You know, actually ten-thirty.
That will give me time to get through the regular
call.
MR. ALBUKERK : I told my witnesses to be
here at one-thirty tomorrow.
THE COURT: I think that will be --
MR. ALBUKERK: I can call them and tell them
different. I assumed they would take the first
part of the day. We'd take the second part of the
day. Maybe you can check back with them. But we'll
see. A lot of this we're talking in a vacuum. I
don't know how long it will take to pick. We
finish quickly , then we should be able to get at
least opening and a State witness and stipulation
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
in without a problem. That's if you pick quickly.
If it goes longer, that may change.
MR. PODLASEK: How long do you normally go,
Judge?
THE COURT: If we're not going to argue, we
can go to six. If we have to go longer, we can.
I don't have any constraints.
MS. GUNNIGLE: I have a child care conflict.
If we can break at five or 5:15. I apologize.
THE COURT: We can do that. We'll move
through jury selection and see where we're at.
MR. PODLASEK: As far as the CD, Judge,
these are all part of one large file.
know if you want
I don't
THE COURT: Here's what I'll do.
MR. PODLASEK: We do have a transcript.
THE COURT: Give me the CD as well as the
transcript to review. I'd ask when I break for
lunch, after opening, that the parties stay in the
courtroom for a few moments to make sure I don't
have any technical difficulties getting it to play.
Our deputy is here. I take it we have
the jurors in the hallway. Now I need to see the
cards. Everybody take a seat at Counsel table.
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MR. ALBUKERK: Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT: State, there are currently six
counts in the indictment. Are you going to be
proceeding on all six counts?
MS. GUNNIGLE: We are, Judge.
THE COURT: Ready? Let's bring in the
jurors.
THE COURT:
(Whereupon the following
proceedings were had in
the presence and hearing
of the jury:)
Good afternoon, ladies and
gentlemen. My name is Mary Margaret Brosnahan.
I'm the Circuit Judge presiding over the jury you
were called here for today.
Counsel, if I could just ask you,
please, could you move that to the side so I can
see some of the jurors.
MR. ALBUKERK: Sorry.
THE COURT: This is obviously a criminal
case, folks, since we are in the criminal court's
building. The People of the State of Illinois are
represented by two Assistant State's Attorneys,
prosecutors. At this time, State, I'd ask you to
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
please introduce yourselves, as well as any members
of your team you want to introduce to the jury.
MR. PODLASEK: Good afternoon, ladies and
gentlemen. My name is Robert Podlasek. I'm an
Assistant State's Attorney.
To my left is my partner, Julie
Gunnigle. Luka, stand up.
MR. JANKOVIC: Luka Jankovic. I'm a law
clerk.
THE COURT: The Defendant in this case is
represented by a defense attorney. Counsel,
please introduce yourself as well as your client to
the jury.
MR. ALBUKERK: Good morning. My name is
Nick Albukerk . I'm defending Annabel Melongo.
THE COURT: Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, the Defendant is
charged as follows: The grand jurors, selected,
sworn, in and before the County of Cook and State
of Illinois, in the name and by the authority of
the People of the State of Illinois, upon their
oaths present that on or about December 15, 2009
continuing on through December 21, 2009, at and
within the County of of Cook, Annabel Melongo
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
committed the offense of eavesdropping without
consent, in that she knowingly and intentionally
used an eavesdropping device, to wit: An audio
recording device for the purpose of recording a
conversation, to wit: Recording a conversation
conducted by telephone between Annabel K. Melongo
and Pamela Taylor of the Cook County Court
Reporter's office, and without the consent of all
parties to such conversations, and without
authorization provided by article 108A, or Article
108B of the code of criminal procedure of 1963,
approved August 14, 1963 as amended in violation of
Chapter 720, Act 5, Section 14-2A1 of the Illinois
Compiled Statutes 1992 as amended and contrary to
the statute and against the peace and dignity of
the same People of the State of Illinois.
It is further alleged that on or
about December 15, 2009, continuing on through
December 21, 2009, at and within the County of
Cook, Annabel K. Melongo committed the offense of
eavesdropping without consent in that she
knowingly and intentionally used an eavesdropping
device, to wit: An audio recording device, for
the purpose of recording a conversation, to wit:
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Recording a conversation conducted by telephone
between Annabel K. Melongo and Pam Taylor of the
Cook County Court Reporter's office and without
consent of all parties to such conversations and
without authorization provide by Article 108A or
Article 108B of the Code of criminal procedure of
1963, approved August 14 , 1963 as amended, in
violation of Chapter 720 , Act 5, Section 4-2A1 of
the Illinois compiled statutes, 1992 as amended and
contrary to the statute and against the peace and
dignity of the same People of the State of
Illinois.
It is further alleged that on or about
December 15, 2009 and continuing on --
back up.
Let me
On or about December 15, 2009 and
continuing on through December 21, 2009, at and
within the County of Cook, Annabel Melongo
committed the offense of eavesdropping without
consent in that she knowingly and intentionally
used an eavesdropping device, to wit: An audio
recording device for the purpose of recording a
conversation , to wit: Recording a conversation
conducted by telephone between Annabel K. Melongo
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
and Pamela Taylor of the Cook County Court
Reporter's office , and without the consent of all
parties to such conversation and without
authorization provide by Article 108A or Article
108 B of the code of criminal procedure of 1963,
approved August 14, 1963 as amended, in violation
of Chapter 720, Act 5, Section 14-2A1 of the
Illinois compiled statutes, 1992 as amended and
contrary to the statute and against the peace and
dignity of the same People of the State of
Illinois.
It is further alleged that on or about
December 15, 2009, and continuing on through
December 21, 2009, at and within the County of Cook
Annabel K. Melongo committed the offense of
eavesdropping, divulging information in that she
used or divulged any information which she knew or
reasonably should have known was obtained through
the use of an eavesdropping device, to wit:
Divulge an audio recording of conversations between
Annabel K. Melongo and Pamela Taylor of the Cook
County Court Reporter's office in the form of an
audio file and accompanying transcript and
published said file and transcript on the web site
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
www.Illinoiscorruption.net. knowing such a
recording was obtained without Pamela Taylor's
consent and without authorization provided by
article 108A or Article 108B of the code of
criminal procedure of 1963, approved August 4, 1963
as amended in violation of Chapter 720, Act 5,
Section 14-2A3 of the Illinois compiled statutes,
1992 as amended and contrary to the statute and
against the peace and dignity of the same People of
the State of Illinois.
It is further alleged that on or about
December 15, 2009 and continuing on through
December 21, 2009 at and within the County of Cook,
Annabel K. Melongo committed the offense of
eavesdropping, divulging information in she used or
divulged any information which she knew or
reasonably should have known was obtained through
the use of an eavesdropping device, to wit:
Divulged an audio recording of a conversation
between Annabel K. Melongo and Pamela Taylor of the
Cook County Court Reporter's office in the form of
an audio file and accompanying transcript and
published said file and transcript to the web site,
www.Illinoiscorruption.net. knowing such a
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
recording was obtained without Pamela Taylor's
consent and without authorization provided by
Article 108A or Article 108B of the code of
criminal procedure of 1963, approved August 14,
1963 as amended, in violation of Chapter 720, Act
5, Section 14-2A3 of the Illinois compiled
statutes, 1992 as amended and contrary to the
statute and against the peace and dignity of the
same People of the State of Illinois.
It is lastly alleged that on or about
December 15, 2009 and continuing on through
December 21, 2009 at and within the County of Cook,
Annabel K. Melongo committed the offense of
eavesdropping, divulging information in that she
informed or divulged any information which she knew
or reasonably should have known was obtained
through the use of an eavesdropping device, to wit:
Divulged an audio recording of a conversation
between Annabel K. Melongo and Pamela Taylor of
the Cook County Court Reporter's office in the form
of an audio file and accompanying transcript and
published said file and transcripts to the web site
www.Illinoiscorruption.net. knowing that such
recording was obtained without Pamela Taylor's
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
consent and without authorization provided by
Article 108A or Article 108B of the code of
criminal procedure of 1963 , approved August 14,
1963 as amended in violation of Chapter 720, Act 5,
Section 1402A3 of the Illinois compiled statutes,
1992 as amended and contrary to the statute and
against the peace and dignity of the same people
of the State of Illinois.
The Defendant has pleaded not guilty .
At this time I'm going to read a list
of possible witnesses who may be called to testify.
I'm going to ask you to raise your hand if you
believe you know any of these witnesses . For those
of you on my far left, some of you I can't see,
maybe the last couple of people. That's okay. But
if you want to raise your hand and I'm missing
it, I'm going to ask you climb over and make sure I
don't miss it.
Here are possible witnesses that may
be called to testify. Cook County State's
Attorney's Office investigator Kate O'Hara, Pamela
Taylor, James Flood, Assistant State's Attorney
Paul Chevlin, Court Reporter Laurel Laudien, Dana
Depooter from the FBI, Robyn Suklao, who worked for
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
the clerk's office. Please raise your hand if you
think you may know any of those folks.
No hands are up, indicating for the
record nobody has their hand up.
At this time I want to let you know
how the day is going to go. I'm going to talk with
you now about jury service in general. Before we
actually get into the individual questioning of you
folks, I'm going to take a lunch break. You will
be allowed to go and get a bite to eat. When you
come back we'll start with the actual jury
selection.
The reason we bring you over before
twelve, they give you a long lunch over there,
about an hour and a half. By the time we get you
again, it is close to two o'clock and it really
delays the day. This will speed it up some
fashion.
I want to talk with you now about the
qualifications to act as a juror and tell you that
you do have them. This call upon your time does
not come frequently, but it is a part of your duty
and obligations as a citizen of the United States
of America.
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Nobody should avoid fulfilling their
jury service except under the most pressing of
circumstances. I'll give you an idea of what I
consider to be a pressing circumstance.
If you got one of those hospital tests
scheduled in the next couple of days that takes two
or three months to get in, again, if you have proof
or a phone number if the attorneys need to verify,
let me know about something like that. You have
non refundable plane tickets for a trip and you
have them with you, there is a number that can be
called and you are going to be going the next
couple of days, let me know about that.
Other than those typo of scenarios,
there is nothing too much that would qualify as a
pressing circumstance.
Service on a jury affords each of you
the opportunity to be part of the administration of
justice. The way in which the legal affairs of
your fellow citizens are carried out here in this
building on a daily basis.
Now, I'll make every effort to make
sure that we don't waste your time. We'll move the
case along as quickly as possible. To that end I
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
talked with the attorneys about the length of time
they anticipate this case taking. I know some of
you have followed cases in federal court that have
been going on the past year. They go on for months
and months at a time. It is not unusual for cases
in this building to sometimes go on for weeks at a
time.
By those standards this is a very
short case. It does not lessen itself for either
side. The attorneys have indicated to me that they
believe the case is going to go to the jury for
deliberations no later than some point tomorrow.
Basically, with respect to your time, we're talking
about two days. Which is about the shortest
possible service you could have.
Now, I'm going to tell you in advance
I will not ask any of you if you want to serve as
a juror. Frankly, because we're probably afraid of
what the response would be. That's not going to be
the line of questioning. I won't ask you if you
want to do it. Rather, the line of inquiry is
going to be could you do it, could you be the juror
both sides are looking for.
They are truly looking for the same
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
thing, a fair and impartial juror. Jurors who will
not prejudge the case. Will not prejudge any of
the witnesses. Will not prejudge the defendant.
Jurors who are just going to sit back and listen
to the evidence as it comes in.
When I say evidence, I mean witnesses
who testify here from the witness stand and any
exhibits, if there are any, that get admitted.
That's what evidence is.
People who will not make up their
mind. You want to keep an open mind at all times .
That's what both sides are looking for.
While this is a short case, I do want
to impart to you how important jury service is.
When you think about it, I know the country is not
in a great state right now, but neither is
anywhere. It still is quite simply the greatest
country in the world to live in.
How many new stories do you see where
people are literally dying trying to get into this
country. There is twenty people in the trunk of a
truck, trying to smuggle their way into the
country. Coming over on a boat and they get
drowned trying to get in here.
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
You never read stories about anyone
trying to smuggle themselves out of the county.
Because there is no place in the world that affords
everybody the freedom this country does. The only
thing that you have to do for the great privilege
of living in this country is you have to pay your
taxes, if you have a job. You can't get around
that.
There is such a small portion of
individuals who serve in the military. Maybe some
of your family members now serve. Maybe you are in
the reserves. Maybe you have served in past wars
or your mothers, fathers, brothers, aunts or uncle
have. If that's the case, we owe you a great debt
of gratitude.
A small small portion of people go out
and do that. The only other thing you are asked to
do maybe once or twice in a lifetime, for the great
privilege of living here is possibly serve on a
jury.
two days.
And this case, I'm telling you, is
In the great scheme of things, it is
not that much of an imposition upon your time as a
citizen of the United States . I do feel very very
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
strongly that it is your duty.
I want to talk about a girl who is now
gone almost two years who I had in this courtroom
who impressed me. I now tell her story to all my
juries.
As you can imagine, when we select a
jury, they pretty much all get my same old remarks
you are getting. It doesn't matter what the
charge is. The duty is the same, regardless of the
charges or length of the case, etc.
So, we had gone into the individual
questioning after my opening remarks. It was a
girl sitting in the third chair in the front row.
I remember where she was sitting. She was
twenty-eight years old. So, after hearing the big
part of the talk, we got to her. I asked her about
her background, etc.
She told me that she had already
served two tours on the front lines as an medic in
Afghanistan. And in three or four weeks time she
was set to go back for her third tour of duty on
the front line.
I said to her, something I never said
to anyone before or since, on my own I said to her,
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
you know, I want to thank you for your service.
Based upon everything you have done for the
country, it was going to be a longer jury, about a
week and a half jury we were picking . I said to
her based on everything you've done and what you
are going to be dong, I'll excuse you from service.
I was quite certain nobody coming
after her was going to have that kind of
background. I wasn't worried about a domino effect
happening. I gave her that option. I thought she
would do what I would have done if I was her. I
thought she would get a smile on her face, gather
her purse and coat, say thank you and skip out of
the courtroom. That's what I expected.
Much to my shock, without skipping
even a beat, she responded, you know , no, thank
you, your Honor. I would consider it an honor and
a privilege if the parties would have me serve on
the jury. I respectfully decline your invitation
to be excused.
So, here, you know, in every day terms
she blue me away. You know what, the parties did
pick her to serve on that jury . She was with us
over a week and a half. That's i s an example of
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
somebody who most people could not compare to.
I want you to keep something like that
in mind and put it in perspective when you are
being asked to step away from your regular life for
a total of only two days. That's what we're asking
here.
It used to be long ago, before any of
our times, the attorneys and mine, certain people
were excused from jury duty because their jobs were
too important. That's not the case any more.
Everybody gets called for jury duty.
Again, it is part of your duties as
citizenship. That case where we had the
twenty-eight year old I told you about, that same
jury we had an orthopedic surgeon serve on the same
jury. He had to cancel procedures coming up. He
was with us the week and a half.
I myself have been called to one of
our suburban courthouses. The fact that I knew the
people in the courtroom and handled the case on
trial or a couple of court dates, I knew I
wouldn't be picked. I knew something about the
case personally . It didn't save me from staying to
seven-thirty at night. I can promise you all you
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
will be out long before seven-thirty.
That's my part of the talk where I
talk about citizenship and how important it is. At
all times I want you to know both parties are
seeking the same thing, fair and impartial jurors,
who are going to be free of bias, sympathy,
prejudice. Jurors who are not to speculate or
guess as to what might have happened during the
case.
You can only base the verdict on the
evidence here in court. That's it. So, while I
don't believe it would be relevant in this case,
but no independent crime scene investigation, if
you heard an address or something that was familiar
to you, you can't do your own drive-by to or from
court to assess what you think of the scene. I
don't think that will apply in this case.
The other thing is this, which would
be important. You can only confine your decision
to the evidence you hear in court or exhibits
admitted. Again, you can't do any kind of internet
search about anything. The fact that there is a
web site mentioned, absolutely you cannot go to it,
period. You cannot go to the web at all on any
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
level to look up anything at all about this case
while you are sitting as a juror.
Also, if you are a juror, you can't
communicate with anybody at all about the case. I
know it is only a couple of days. When you go home
tonight, rest assured if you have been selected as
a juror, and we'll see how long the jury selection
takes, but I do believe you are going to hear some
part of the case today, opening statements,
possibly evidence. We'll see.
When you get home, if you are
selected, those family members you live with, the
friends you talk to regularly are going to say what
were you picked on, what kind of case, what is it
about.
You can absolutely not tell them
anything about the case. Once the verdict has
been delivered in open court, then you can go
ahead and tell them whatever you like about the
case and what your experience was. Not before
then.
When I say you can't talk about it,
you can't e-mail about it, blog on it, can't go on
Facebook or Twitter. Or anything else, social
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
media. Rest assured you can't do that.
Basically, when you are picked, you
can't talk about the case at all. You cannot even
talk about the case with your fellow jurors. You
can talk with your fellow jurors about anything
else. You know, current events. You can't talk
about the case or start deliberating until all the
evidence is done and you get my jury instructions
on the law in Illinois that you swear to uphold and
to follow.
I'm going to talk with you a little
bit about the broad fundamental principles of law
that apply to all criminal cases that would assist
you in judging the law and evidence in this case.
Whenever I use the word jury
instructions or the law in Illinois, I want you to
understand those are interchangeable terms. The
law in Illinois is going to be read to you in jury
instructions. Conversely, the jury instructions
contain the law in Illinois that's going to apply
to this particular case. Those are called the jury
instructions.
The important thing about the law in
Illinois or the jury instructions is this. If you
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
raise your right hand and you take an oath to
become a juror in this case, you take an oath to
follow the law as it exists, as it is read to you.
That means even if you as a private citizen
disagree with it, you think to yourself I don't
like that law, that law doesn't seem right to me
or fair to me, doesn't matter. You've got to
follow it. And where the evidence takes you, it
takes you, along with your fellow jurors.
The only place to change laws is down
in Springfield. They are obviously doing quite a
bit of that lately. That's where the legislators
take old laws off the books and put new laws on the
books. That's the only place. It doesn't get
rewritten and does not get changed in a jury room.
Absolutely not.
When you think about it, the reasoning
is clear. We would have a system of justice unlike
anywhere in the world, if I were to be able to
read the law to you in Illinois and you as jurors
would be free to go in the back, toss them in the
air and make it up as you go.
Obviously, we'd have no system of
justice. There would be no reliability. We'd have
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
a system in shambles. Obviously, that is not what
we have.
So, I don't want to hit you over the
head with this. I say it so many times, so many
different ways because it is that important. You
raise your hand and you take an oath to follow the
law. Even if you don't like it or don't agree with
it. You must follow it.
Now, the charge I read to you a short
while ago, they are contained an indictment. That
was the People of the State of Illinois vs. Annabel
K. Melongo. That is nothing more than the title of
the case. The fact that somebody is charged is
not any evidence of proof, etc. It is simply the
way the prosecutors have not only in this state but
across the country of bringing an individual before
the fact finder, which is the jury in this case.
So, it is simply the legal mechanism to get
somebody in front of the jury to be tried on the
charges. It is no proof whatsoever.
Under our law a Defendant is presumed
to be innocent of the charges placed against them
in the indictment. That presumption of innocence
remains with the Defendant throughout all stages of
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
the trial and even in your jury deliberations on a
verdict and it must be kept in your mind at all
times during the presentation of evidence.
The presumption of innocence is not
overcome unless from all of the evidence in the
case you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant is guilty.
The defendant in this case, like every
other case across the land, is not required to
prove her innocence, nor is she required to testify
or put on any evidence whatsoever on her own
behalf. That's the law not only here, but across
the land, across the entire country.
The State always has the burden of
proving the guilt of the Defendant beyond a
reasonable doubt. That burden remains on the State
throughout every stage of the proceeding and during
your deliberations on a verdict.
Those of you that are picked as
jurors, you folks become the sole Judges, the only
Judges of the believability of the witnesses and
the weight that you are going to give to the
testimony of each of them.
When you consider the testimony of any
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
witness that testifies in court, you may take into
account their ability and opportunity to observe,
their memory, their manner while testifying, any
interest, bias or prejudice they may have, as well
as just the general reasonableness of the testimony
when you put it together with everything else that
you heard.
As I said before, it is essential you
not arrive at any decision or conclusion of any
kind until you heard all the evidence and the
attorneys get a chance to argue to you what they
think the evidence showed.
At the end of that, that's when I'm
going to read the law to you in the form of jury
instructions. Once you have those, that's when
deliberations begin. You then take the facts and
you determine them only from the evidence in the
case. You apply the law to the facts and as a jury
you come together and ultimately make your
decision. Along the way, neither sympathy nor
prejudice should influence you.
I want to tell you at this time, and I
know, as I said, it is going to be a couple days.
I'm going to ask you bring realistic expectations
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
here with you. It seems to me all these crime
shows are the rage on TV. I don't watch them.
Probably doctors don't watch doctor shows. This
is not realistic, if you know the profession.
Probably how lawyers feel about lawyer shows or
crime shows.
Having said that, if you like those
shows, of course, that is not a problem. That's
entertainment. Most of them are written by folks
that have never set foot in a courtroom. What you
see on TV bears little resemblance to real court
proceedings.
While I'll tell you I'm going to make
an effort to move the case along and not keep you
sitting back there too long, I can tell you we
won't be done in sixty minutes, including
commercials. All wrapped up to a tight
conclusion. That's not going to happen either.
Please be realistic.
It is funny, as I was flipping through
the channels, there is one show, I can't remember
what it is, but it is supposed to be set not only
in Chicago but here at 26th and California. I
happened to catch the inside of the courtrooms, how
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
they are supposed to look, as well as the jury
room. It was this beautiful, shiny, mahogany
paneled courtroom and some jury room with stylish
art deco type lighting and the jury room was huge,
like a giant suite. I was thinking oh, my God,
the poor Cook County jurors watching this and
coming to the building and thinking that's what
they are going to get are going to be
disappointed.
I think you have seen that's not what
the inside of the building looks like. It goes
along with my point, be realistic about your
expectations here, okay. Very different from TV.
When the trial is going, part of my
job is to tell you what evidence you may hear and
what evidence you may consider. I will always stay
the Judge of the law in the case. You as the
jurors will be the Judge of the facts. You will
determine what those facts are based on the
witnesses and testimony and what you think about
that testimony collectively as a jury.
While the case is going on Let me
back up. At the end of the case I'm going to give
you the law. You will go in the back and
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
deliberate and you will have written verdict form,
which all of you have to sign. It is your absolute
duty to accept the law as defined in the formal
instructions and follow it.
If you become convinced beyond a
reasonable doubt from all the evidence in the case
that the Defendant is guilty as charged, it is your
duty to find her guilty in this case.
So, in the instructions, my opening
remarks, I think I slipped out a him and her. If I
ever said him, it is a generic him. We're
obviously referring to Miss Melongo in this case.
On the other hand, if after hearing
all of the evidence in the case you are not
convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the
Defendant is guilty as charged, it is your duty to
find her not guilty.
During the trial, you may hear the
attorneys make objections. They do it in most
trials. It is a formal part of trial practice.
They are not trying to keep anything from you.
They are merely trying to make sure that you hear
only relevant and reliable evidence.
So, when an objection occurs, I might
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
rule from the bench and we'll go on. The attorneys
might ask for a sidebar. So, a couple of things
may happen. If I grant it, maybe you have been
sitting for a while and you to take 10 or 15
minutes. I'll send you back and we'll hear it out
here. Maybe we'll go off into a sidebar. So,
because it's so small, we'll huddle over in the
corner with the Court Reporter. The goal is you
are not supposed to hear us.
We'll try and deal with the issue in
the corner and come back into session. Anyone of
those things may happen during the course of the
trial. It is normal trial practice.
In a short while I'm going to be
asking you questions about yourself. It is funny.
My notes tell me to say we're not trying to pry
into your personal 1 i fe. Of course, we are.
We're trying to pry into your personal life to find
out a little bit about you, your family, your
background.
The attorneys really just have a few
minutes, as you will see when we come can from
lunch. We'll take up a large part of your day
being down here. Really, in terms of one on one
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
questioning of each juror, it is just a few
minutes. They don't really have much time to
assess whether or not you could be what they both
deserve, fair and impartial jurors.
So, again, I'll ask you to be open and
frank with your answers. Unfortunately, I
basically ask the questions off the juror cards.
There are people that have been perhaps victims of
crimes that are of a sensitive nature. I, of
course, I understand if you don't want to discuss
that in a room of strangers.
Again, our goal, while we need to find
out about you and you r fami 1 y 1 i fe, etc., what you
do in free time, our goal is not to make this a
horrendous experience for anybody.
If that's the case where you or a
family member have been the victim of a very
significant crime and you are uncomfortable, let me
know and we'll talk about it but we can do it more
privately. Our goal is not to make you feel
horribly uncomfortable. Hopefully, that may not be
the case. Sometimes we do, unfortunately have that
situation.
A couple of other thoughts before I
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
let you go to lunch. Even though we won't have you
that long, I want you to know the attorneys are
under orders from me not to have contact with you,
jurors that are selected. If you come to court
tomorrow, you might see the attorneys in the hall
or on the elevator. They are not going to be
engaging in pleasantries with you and asking you
how your evening was.
I don't want you to feel they are
being, you know, snooty or aloof or something like
that. It is because they are under orders not to
have contact with you.
You know, between tonight and
tomorrow, if you happen to hear anything about the
case, coming from court, or anyone tries to say
something, let myself or the deputy know, whoever
you see first. I don't anticipate that happens,
and it never happened in any of my cases, but you
need to know the procedure.
Generally speaking, when something
like that happens, it is inadvertent on an
elevator. And you know, everybody who works here
knows that they shouldn't say anything on an
elevator because you never know who is going to
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
court and who is not or who is on what case or what
side, etc.
Once in a while you might be in the
back of an elevator. Low and behold, you hear
something about the case. No one knows you are
there. You have to let me know. I don't expect
it. You have to know the procedure on that long
shot that it would happen.
Now, before I let you break, what I'm
going to do is swear you all in. This will be to
answer all of the questions truthfully when you
return from the lunch break.
Could I please ask you all to stand
and face me. Raise your right hand for me.
(Venire sworn.)
THE COURT: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen.
It i s now quarter to one. We'll return at quarter
to two, back here i n room 303.
You can take any seat, but once I have
you all here, I'm basically going to be moving you
out of these seats because we have a particular
order we will sit you in.
jurors now.
We will excuse the
(Whereupon the following
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
proceedings were had
outside the presence and
hearing of the jury:)
MR. ALBUKERK: There is one little thing.
THE COURT: You want to put something on the
record before we break for lunch?
MR. ALBUKERK: Something to consider. I was
going to ask. I think this would be easier to show
them. One of the issues in this case --
THE COURT: Hold on.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. ALBUKERK: One of the issues in this
case is the arraignment and whether or not it took
place. You know, transcripts and all this.
Well, the quest i on becomes what is an
arraignment. Any way, I pulled some criminal
procedure, the actual statute. I'd ask you take
judicial notice of it. This way we can talk about
it. We can talk about what an arraignment is. It
is in the Constitution. Obviously it is in the
Code of Criminal Procedure. If you want to look at
what I'm talking about.
THE COURT: Okay. What I would think the
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
parties might want to consider between themselves
is there is no question it was an arraignment,
supposedly, right. The State is conceding it
occurred -- Not conceding. The State's position
is she was there for it and the transcript shows.
She has another position.
Perhaps the parties want to work on a
definition of an arraignment, as opposed to the
attorneys attempting to explain what that is. I
believe the Court Reporter is going to say it was
an arraignment transcript.
MR. ALBUKERK: Right.
THE COURT: Do you have any objection to
that, State?
MR. PODLASEK: No.
THE COURT: Okay. Why don't the attorneys
work on that. Perhaps you can have a stipulation
as to what an arraignment proceeding is.
Definition.
MR. ALBUKERK: Right.
THE COURT: You might want to show that to
the State and see what you can come up with.
We'll be in recess.
(Whereupon the above
52
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
entitled cause was
passed, after which the
following proceedings
were had outside the
hearing and presence
of the jury:)
THE COURT: All right, get the attorneys out
of the back, please.
(Whereupon the following
proceedings were had in
the presence and hearing
of the jury:)
THE COURT: We have everybody back present
in the courtroom now.
Defense, before you get started, I
believe you would like to introduce your partner.
MR. ALBUKERK: Judge, yes.
MR. PRENGAMAN: My name is Matt Prengaman,
and attorney with Mr. Albukerk in this matter.
THE COURT: For those of you in the first
row, gather your belongings, stand up here in the
well of the courtroom. Just stand up here and
we'll see if you get called. Bring your coats and
things.
53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
In the first black chair, closest to
the lawyers, Lisa Lerose Hoerler. That will be
seat Number One.
Seat two is Cicily Kutty Elakatt.
Seat Number Two.
Seat three is Joann Brown Johnson.
Daniel Pizano is seat four, front row.
Seat five is Christopher Dozois.
The last chair in that front row is
Avelino Benzon.
Jurors in the second row, if I can ask
you to do the same. Sometimes you get called, but
we don't know. I don't want to send you allover
in the gallery and back up.
Second row, the seat closest to the
lawyers in the rose colored chair is Donald Hughes.
Mr. Hughes.
Next to Mr. Hughes is Donald Hampton.
Second seat in that row is Donald Hampton. Make
sure to stay in order. Mr. Hampton, Number Two.
Seat three is Daniel Dunne.
Fourth seat is Michelle Diaz.
Fifth seat is Daniel Rohrman.
The last seat in the second row,
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Richard Miller, please.
Those of you in the third row, do the
same for me. Thank you.
The chair all the way over in the
third row, Ashley Brumbaugh.
Next is going to be Diego Prado.
Second chair is Diego Prado.
Third is Brendan Sullivan. Third
chair.
Fourth chair, Garry Moye. Seat number
four.
Seat number five, Constance Crockett.
Now, Constance Crockett.
Then Carmen Claudio.
Brenda Reed Martin is second to the
last chair.
I'll read the last three names.
There we go. I think we're fine now.
Raymond Sabo is the last seat.
If we didn't call your name, folks,
have a seat in the gallery and we will get to you
in the next panel most likely.
For the twenty of you now in front of
me, I'm going to ask you about four separate
55
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
principles of law. I'm going to be asking you
first if you accept the principle that I talk
about. If not, I'm goi ng to ask you to rai se your
hand. I'll ask you about the same principle.
I'll ask you not only do you accept
it, do you understand it. Fi rst of all, do you
understand and then do you accept it. The first
principle I want to address with the twenty of
i s this. I already talked about it.
Under our system 1 aw, across the
country, state and federal court, all the same,
anybody charged with a crime, that's called the
Defendant, any Defendant and every Defendant is
presumed to be innocent of the charges placed
against him.
you
Do you all understand that?
raise your hand.
If not,
Nobody is raising their hand.
A slightly different question. Even
though you all understand it, is there anybody here
who cannot or will not accept that basic principle
of our justice system.
Raise your hand if you can't or won't
accept it.
56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
No hands are up.
The second principle I want to discuss
is this. Again, all of these principles are part
of our criminal justice system, state and federal
courts across the country. Not just here in Cook
County.
The second principle is that before
any Defendant can be convicted in a criminal case,
the State has to prove that person guilty beyond a
reasonable doubt.
Does everybody understand that that is
also one of our cornerstones of criminal justice
here? Everyone is saying yes. If you do not
understand, raise your hand.
No hands are raised.
Again, slightly different. You all
understand it. Everybody here, will you and can
you accept that principle of law? Everyone is
shaking their head yes. Raise your hand if you
can't or will not accept that.
No hands up.
The third principle, again, this case
is like every case, ,across the land. The
Defendant is not required to offer any evidence on
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
her own behalf. Does everybody understand that
principle of law?
Okay.
Slightly different question, even
though you are all saying yes, shaking your head
and up and down. Anybody here who cannot or will
not accept that principle of law?
if you can't or won't accept it.
No hands are up.
Raise your hand
The last principle I want to discuss
before we get to individual questions is this. The
defendant's failure to testify cannot be held
against him. That goes along with the concept we
talked about. If you don't have to put on evidence
at all, that means you yourself do not have to
testify.
Everybody here understand that basic
principle of our criminal justice system?
Everybody is saying yes. Is there anybody here who
cannot or will not accept that principle of law?
Raise your hand if you can't or will not accept it.
No hands are raised.
Okay. I'm going to go into the
questions. There is one question I want to
58
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
explain. I think it is written rather inartfully.
So, if you didn't understand it or you
misunderstood it when we got to it, you can correct
your answer.
Here ' s the question. It says --
I'll tell you what it says and what we mean by it.
Have you ever been an accused, a complainant or a
witness in a criminal case. What we might mean by
that is when it says have you ever been an accused,
it means have you ever been arrested. Okay. It
doesn't -- If the case was thrown out or nobody
showed up, etc. We're not asking about that. It
means have you ever been arrested . So, even if you
are in your fifties now and when you were nineteen
years old you and your buddies got caught drinking
in a public park and got arrested and taken in and
they threw the case out, the answer to that
question is still yes.
The second part, have you ever been a
complainant, have you ever signed a complaint
against somebody. You know, to go to court.
The last one, have you ever been a
witness in a criminal case. That could be one of
two things . It could be that you literally
59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
witnessed a crime like right in front of your eyes.
And/or, in addition to being a witness, you
testified in court. Sometimes it could be because
you saw a crime and you got called as a witness.
In other cases there is a small possibility maybe
as part of your job you testify in court regularly.
For example, chemists at the crime lab on narcotics
cases. They go to court all the time. They have
been a witness in a criminal case. It could mean
anyone of those things. That's what we mean by
that.
If you were confused, let me know and
I'll change it as I go through the answers.
Also, this is going to come up
probably with our first possible juror. If you
have children 18 or older, I'll be asking you what
that child is doing. If they are married, what
occupation their spouse is in. If the spouse is
working. I'll ask all of you what are your
hobbies, activities, interests, things you do
outside of work, if you are working.
Maybe you volunteer, maybe you are
involved in the PTA or little league or a church
group or book club. You know, a myriad of other
60
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
thins. I'll be asking you about that.
We'll start there. Maybe a few things
I want to address with the rest of the group.
We'll see. We'll start with Miss Lerose Hoerler.
LIS A L E R 0 S E HOE R L E R,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Miss Lerose Hoerler, you are living on
the south suburbs and you currently work as a
mortgage consultant for a company .
employed as a dock man.
I have to ask you this.
any up signs the Chicago housing is
or a lot of refis?
Your spouse is
Do you see
doing better
A. Refi s are gone. The rates went up.
We're hoping the market is going to pick up. Got
to be better than last year.
Q. The rates are going to come back down?
61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. It will pretty much stay where it is
right now. They are not high. Below five. If you
can get four, you would like four.
Q. Right. You have five children. Is your
18 year old in school?
A. They are all in college. One is not in
college. The rest are.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
23?
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
The rest are in college?
Yes.
Are any of them married?
No.
You have five children, 18,20, 21,22,
Yes.
Which child is not in school, how old?
He's 21.
What is he doing?
A. He is a mechanic. He went to mechanic
school, looking for a job.
Q. Okay. It indicates you never served on
a jury, never been an accused, complainant or
witness in a criminal case, never been the victim
of a crime. Neither has anybody in your family.
All the other questions are answered no.
62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Can you tell us, Ma'am, a little bit
about yourself; hobbies, activities, interests you
may have?
A. Very involved in my church. A lot of
event activities, where I run actual events. I
meet a lot of people, in charge of volunteering.
I enjoy that part of my life. I like to read and
my family.
Q. Thank you.
C I C I L Y K U TTY E L A KAT T,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Next we have Cicily Kutty Elakatt?
A. Yes.
Q. You are living in a north suburb. How
long in that general vicinity?
63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
How long?
About.
About approximately an hour and a half.
You are saying an hour and a half away.
I should be more clear. How long have you been
living in that general area?
A. I was living there for twenty years.
Q. You work as a staff nurse at one of the
hospitals. Is it one of the medical surgical
floors you are on?
29?
that
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
child
A.
Q.
I work on the heart, telemetry support.
For cardiac patients?
Yes.
Your spouse is employed as a technician?
Yes.
What type of technician?
Electronic .
I see. You have three children, 26, 28,
Yes .
Start with your youngest. What i s
doing?
He i s an auditor. He's working.
An auditor?
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Yes.
Is he married?
No.
Your middle child is twenty-eight?
Yes. Computer consultant.
Is she married?
No.
Your oldest is 29?
Yes. She's a nurse. She's married.
All right.
They have a kid.
A child?
Yes.
Is her spouse working?
Yes.
What type of work?
He is also a computer consultant.
I see. It indicates you previously
served on a jury?
Yes. A.
Q. In one of the suburbs. Did you actually
get selected and sit and deliberate on a jury?
A. No.
Q. Like today?
65
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. No, no. I didn't get selected.
Q. You came down like today, but never made
it to the jury?
A. Right.
Q. We'll see if we can change your luck
today. It indicates you have never been an
accused, complainant or witness in a criminal case.
Never been the victim of a crime. Neither has
anybody in your family .
All the other questions are answered
no. Can you tell us a little bit about yourself,
hobbies, activities, interests that you have?
A. Besides working, now I'm enjoying more
of my life. A grandchild.
Q. How old is your grandchild?
Six weeks. A.
Q. All right, brand new then. Thank you.
J 0 ANN B ROW N J 0 H N SON,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Next is Miss Joann Brown Johnson. You
are living on the south side of the city. How long
in that general vicinity?
A.
Q.
24 years.
You presently work as a teacher at one
of the high schools?
A.
Q.
No. El ementary school.
I'm sorry. My eyes are bad. One of
the elementary schools.
teach?
What grade level do you
A.
Q.
A.
to 2nd.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Second.
Have you always had the little ones?
No. I've had from 8th all the way down
What is your favorite ones?
Second.
Second?
Yes.
Q. They can't really get in too much
trouble yet, can they?
A. They can.
67
--- -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q. Different kinds of trouble?
A. Different kinds. They are all the same
though. What they do in second grade, they
probably do in 8th.
Q. The trouble makers in second grade tend
to be the standouts in 8th grade too?
A. Absolutely.
Q. It indicates you yourself have one
child, 18. Is that child still in school?
A. Yes.
Q. And you have never served on a jury,
never been an accused, a complainant or witness in
a criminal case. However, you have been the victim
of a crime. So has a family member. Tell us
briefly about that.
A. Yes. My home was burglarized a couple
times. So was my sister's home.
Q. Anybody caught in any of those cases?
Yes. A.
Q. Okay. Out of the three cases, two with
you, one with your sister, how many times was
somebody apprehended?
A. In my case, twice.
Q. Really?
68
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Two separate people. They weren't
connected at all.
Q. Did you have to go to court and testify?
A. I went to court, but it was always
continued. It is still being continued.
Q.
system?
The case is still pending in the
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know if it is in this very
building or do you have any idea?
A. No.
Q. Okay. You don't know or it is not here?
A. I don't think it is here. It was at
111th Street.
Q. I see. Is there anything about the fact
that that happened to you and your family, the
victims of burglar, that would stop you or prevent
you from being fair here in this unrelated case?
A. No.
Q. Okay. All the other questions are
answered no. Can you tell us a little bit about
yourself, hobbies, activities, interests?
A. Yes. I'm very active in my church. I
sing in the choir. I teach Sunday school. And I
69
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
work with the youth groups.
Q. What ages are they? Teenagers or
little ones?
A. I work with the 12 to 18 year olds.
THE COURT: Thank you.
DAN I E L P I ZAN 0,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Next is Mr. Pi zano?
A. Yes.
Q. You are living on the south side of the
city. How long in that general vicinity?
A. Like 12 years.
Q. And you work for an established club.
What type of work do you do, sir?
A. I clean tables, serve tables.
Q. And your spouse is not working outside
70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
the home, you have two children, nine years old?
A. Yes.
Q. It indicates you were at the Daley
Center in 2002. Did you actually get picked and
deliberate with a jury?
A. I got picked.
Q. So, did you deliberate and reach a
verdict in the case?
A. I'm sorry, I didn't get it. You know,
my English is not -- it is so-so.
Q. The acoustics in here are terrible also.
I'm going to miss some of what you say. I'll ask
you to repeat yourself. Back in 2002, did you get
picked for a jury?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Do you remember what ki nd of case
it was?
A.
Q.
Was it criminal or was it a car accident?
It was like a car accident.
Is there anything about your service on
that other jury that would stop you from being fair
here to both sides?
A. No.
Q. Okay. It indicates that you have never
been accused, complainant or witness in a criminal
71
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
case . You have never been the victim of a crime.
Neither has anybody in your family. Everything
else is answered no.
Can you tell us a little bit about
yourself, any hobbies, activities, things you do
outside of work?
A. No. Just play with kids.
THE COURT: Thank you, sir.
C H R 1ST 0 P HER D 0 Z 0 I S,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Next is Mr. Dozois.
A. Yes.
Q . You are living in the city, or a
northwest suburb. How long in that vicinity?
A. Year and a hal f.
Q. You work as a manager for a company.
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Without the name of the company, tell me what type
of work with it does?
A. Manage network security services.
Hard compliance. The payment card industry,
compliance. For banks, shops. They have to be
compliant to the credit card in terms of security
and what not.
Q. Sounds like a hands on computer job over
my head.
It indicates your spouse is employed
in the field of medical billing. You have never
served on a jury, never been accused, complainant
or wi tness ina cri mi nal case, never been the
victim of a crime, neither has anybody in your
family. Everything else is answered no.
Tell us about yourself?
A. Marri ed, 1 ast year and a hal f, moved to
the city. Played with computers and technology, go
to church. About it.
Q. All right, thank you, sir.
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A VEL I N 0 BEN Z 0 N,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Next ;s Mr. Benzon. Living on the
north side of the city. How long in that general
vicinity?
A. I've been living there since 1977. 33
years.
Q. You indicate you work in the fleet
service for one of the major airlines. I have to
ask you this. Do you get a lot of free trips all
over the place?
A. I guess so, but I don't do that much.
Q. You don't?
A. No.
Q. Your spouse i s employed as a medical
secretary. You have three children. The 17 year
old in school?
Yes. A.
Q. How about your next child, 29?
74
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. She's working for -- She's a web
designer, a certain company in the suburbs.
Q. Is she married?
A. This October.
Q. What field i s her fiance in?
A. The same field.
Q. Then your oldest child, 30, tell me
about that child?
A. She's married. She just got married six
months ago.
Q. What type of work does she do, if she is
working and her spouse?
A. She's a communications manager. A firm
in downtown, law firm.
Q. Do you know what kind of work the law
firm does, civil or criminal?
A.
Q.
I think it is civil.
Okay. Anything about any conversation
you had with her about the lawyers she works with?
A. No. Never mentioned anything about
those.
Q. Okay. The lawyers probably wouldn't be
happy to hear that.
A. I'm not interested in those things.
75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q. Okay. What about her spouse, what type
of work does her spouse do?
A.
the city.
Q.
He's a manager at the University near
You indicate you have never served on a
jury, never been an accused, complainant or witness
in a criminal case. But you as well as a family
member have been the victim of a crime. Tell me
briefly about it?
A. My car was stolen from my house. More
than a year ago.
from
from
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Anybody caught?
No, nobody.
How about the friend or family member?
My wife and daughter got mugged, a block
my house.
Q. About how long ago was that?
A. Five years ago.
Q. Were they injured in the case?
A. No.
Q. Anybody caught i n that case?
A. No.
Q. Anything about that which would stop you
being fair here to both sides?
76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. No.
Q. The other questions are answered no.
Can you tell us a little bit about yourself,
hobbies, activities, interests that you have?
A. I work eveni ngs. I do all the work at
home during the day.
Q. Okay.
A.
Q.
I cook at home.
You do all the cooking at home?
A. Yes. I'm a home father.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you, sir.
DON A L D HUG H E S,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Next is Mr. Hughes, 1 i vi ng on the south
side of the city. How long in that general
vicinity?
77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Three years.
Q. And you work in the field of
housekeeping for a large company?
A. Yes.
Q. Two children, 24 and 26. Start with
your 24 year old. Tell us what that child is
doing?
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
He works with me.
Okay. Is he married?
No, he isn't.
How about your oldest, twenty-eight?
He's at Fed Ex.
Is he married?
A. No, he is not.
Q. It indicates you have never served on a
jury, never been an accused, complainant or witness
in a criminal case, never been the victim of a
crime. However, a family member has been. Can
you tell us briefly about that?
A. My mother, she got robbed one day .
Q. About how long ago was that?
A.
Q.
A.
That was back in the late nineties.
Was she hurt in that case?
No.
78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q. Anything about that case or the fact it
happened that would stop you from being fair here
to everybody?
A. No.
Q. The other questions are answered no.
Could you tell us a little bit about yourself, any
groups, hobbies, activities?
A. Besides playing in the over fifty
basketball tournament every year, that's about it.
Softball in the summer.
Q. Okay, thank you.
DON A L D HAM P TON,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Next is Mr. Hampton. You are living in
the west suburbs. How long in that general
vicinity?
79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A.
Q.
About eleven years.
You are a package handler for a large
company. This one I have to ask you. It says your
spouse or domestic partner is employed and you said
yes. What type of work?
A. She's does medi cal records for a group .
Q. Medical r,ecords, all right. It
indicates you never served on a jury, never been
accused, complainant or witness in a criminal case.
Never been the victim of a crime. Neither has
anybody in your family. Everything else is
answered no. Tell me a little bit about yourself?
A. Free-lance photographer. Also I'm in
charge of audio and communicational system at my
church .
Q. With the photography, I'm curious, black
and white?
A. Portraits and weddings.
Q. Okay, thank you, sir.
80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
DAN I E L DUN N E,
a prospective juror, having been first duly
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
sworn,
O. Now Mr. Dunne. You are living in the
northwest suburbs. How long in that general
vicinity?
A. Little over 30 years.
O. And you are a certified public
accountant and your spouse is a retired teacher.
You have four children. Start with your youngest,
25?
A. 25, he's in education related coaching
type position. Next one, 27 or 28.
O. 27 according to this.
A.
IT person.
children.
She's a marketing person, married to an
Next is 33. Stay at home mom with two
Married to a high school teacher. The
last one, 35, community outreach program for a
university. Husband is sales.
O. Your youngest is not married, the 25
81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
year old?
A. Correct.
Q. You indicate you have never served on a
jury, never been accused, complainant or witness in
a criminal case, never been the victim of a crime,
neither has anybody in your family. Everything
else is answered no. Tell me a little bit about
yourself, hobbies, activities, interests that you
have?
A. Church volunteering, reading, a small
CPA practice.
Q. Thank you, sir.
M I C H ELL E D I A Z,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Next is Miss Diaz.
the south side of the city.
82
You are living on
How long in that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
general vicinity?
A. Basically about probably most of my
life.
Q. All right.
A. There was a brief time I went to school.
Then I stayed in the area in Bloomington about
three years.
Q. Now you are back. This indicates, I
don't want the name of the company, but you said
occupation tell me what your occupation is?
A. It is basically an assistant manager.
Q. Assistant manager for like a cafe type
company?
A.
Q.
Right, a restaurant. Working.
It indicates you never served on a jury,
never been accused, complainant or witness in a
criminal case. However, you as well as a family
member have been the victim of a crime. Tell us
briefly about that. Start with you.
A. I've had my purse stolen before.
Q. Anybody caught in your case?
A. No.
Q. How about the friends or family members?
A. Family members, as well.
83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
work.
Q.
A.
About how long ago?
It was within like half a year ago.
Okay . Was that person injured at all?
She was. She had to take time off
Was anybody caught in that case?
Yes.
Q. Have you ever gone to Court with your
family member, attended any court proceedings?
A. No. When I was very small, actually a
kid, my parents were divorced.
Court for that.
I had to go to
Q.
A.
Q.
That was the only thing?
Yes.
Anything about those experiences that
we discussed that would stop you from being fair
here to the State and the defense?
A.
Q.
No.
This indicates that all the other
questions are answered no. Can you tell us a
little bit about yourself?
A. I went to school for art. So, ki nd of
like drawing and stuff on the side too. Reading,
watching movies.
84
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q. No groups or clubs or anything like
that?
A. No.
THE COURT: Thank you.
DAN I E L R 0 H R MAN,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
O. Next, Mr. Rohrman. In the northwest
suburbs. You are in the field of sales. Generally
speaking, what type of things do you sell?
A. Parts for machine tools.
O. This indicates your spouse is employed
in document management, IT. Two chi 1 dren, 14 and
16. Never served on a jury, never been accused,
complainant or witness in a criminal case. However,
you have been the victim of a crime and so has a
family member. Tell me briefly about that?
85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Both just car vandalism, break-ins.
Anybody caught in those cases?
No.
Anything about those that would stop you
from being fair here?
A.
Q.
No.
The other questions are answered no.
Can you tell us a little bit about?
A. I work during the day in sales. I have
two web page businesses, a buddy of mine and I are
running. Anything outdoors, hunting, fishing,
camping, hiking.
team.
A member with the Palatine CERT
Q. The Palatine - - I'm not familiar with
the CERT team?
A. Community emergency response team. Like
the civil defense type of thing.
Q. Okay.
A. Emergency, you know, we help out police
and firemen.
Q. Okay. Is there anything about the fact
that I assume you must know some of the police,
police officers and fire fighters in the area that
would in any way impact your ability to be fair
86
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
here to both sides?
A. No.
Q. Thank you.
A. One fi nal note. I do have a fl i ght out
on Monday afternoon. I don't know if that's going
to affect anything.
Q. We will be done tomorrow.
what time. You can't hold me to time.
I don't know
But I
anticipate closing arguments tomorrow. You will go
into your deliberations. For sure Monday is not a
problem.
A. Okay.
THE COURT: Okay .
RIC H A R D MIL L E R,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Next is Mr. Richard Miller.
87
You 1 i ve
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
in the south suburbs.
vicinity?
How long in that general
A.
Q.
I lived there right at eight years now.
Currently retired. Tell us what field
you were in before?
A. I was in maintenance all my life. I was
a supervisor of maintenance for the last 25 years
before I retired.
Q. It indicates your wife is employed as a
medical coder. You have four children, 30, 35, 39,
40. Your youngest child, tell us about that child?
A. He works as a mechanic now for a Ford
dealer. Took him a long time to get there, but he
final got married, bot a good job and settled
down. Doing fine.
Q. All right. Is his wife working
outside the home?
A. His wife is a, what they call it,
phlebotomist. Takes blood.
Q. At the hospital?
A. And runs a home health care for the
same county she works in, County Hospital. She
runs a home health care for them also.
Q. Okay. Then your next child is 35?
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. He works for the city, in the electrical
department. He has his own lawn care business on
the side.
Is he married? Q.
A. Yes, he is married. His wife is a
surgical nurse at a hospital in the quad cities.
Emergency surgery.
Q. For emergency surgery, okay. Then your
second oldest is 39?
A. Correct. He is unemployed at the
present time. He had a brain aneurism here two
years ago, January 1st.
Q. So sorry to hear that.
A. He still is disabled right now and can't
go back to work. He's getting there. He improved
tremendously. He still has trouble with his right
arm and little walking problems. Much better. He's
working hard to get back to work.
Q. Is he married?
A. No.
Q. What field was he in before?
A. Him and another guy own, it was a carpet
business. They totally renovated hotels and motels
allover the country. He was in New York doing one
89
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
when this happened.
Q.
anything?
Unbelievable. No forewarning or
No. A.
Q. And then your oldest is forty. Tell me
about that child?
A. Boy, exactly what his job is I'm not
sure. But he does computer work for a company that
does networking in like banks and insurance
companies.
Q. Sounds like another one of those jobs
over my head?
A. Over mine too.
Q. Okay. Is he married?
A. Yes.
Q. What type of work does his wife do, i f
she works outside the home?
A. She was a manager of a high view food
store down there, a big chain. She got lime
di sease. Ri ght now she is on medi cal. Hopefull y
will get back to work.
Q. Okay . This indicates you have never
served on a jury before, never been accused,
complainant or witness in a criminal case. Never
90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
been the victim of a crime. Neither has anybody
in your family. All the other questions are
answered no.
Can you tell us about any hobbies,
activities, or groups you may belong to?
A. Since I retired, me and my wife camp as
much as we can. The rest of the week when she's at
work I spend most of the time on the golf course,
golfing. I work at a golf course as a ranger,
something to do, keep myself a little busy on the
side where I remodel bathrooms, you know, little
carpentry work.
Q. Since you are handy. Is it the
situation where the cobbler's kids have no shoes
or is your house completely done?
A. Mine is done.
Q. It is?
A. Mine is done.
getting ready to sell it.
As a matter of fact,
The market, like she
said, is not very good right now.
Q. Okay, thanks so much.
91
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ASH LEY B RUM B AUG H,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Next is Mr. Brumbaugh. I'm sorry. Miss
Brumbaugh. You are living in the north suburbs.
How long in that general vicinity?
A. I grew up there. My home base. My
fiance and I own an apartment in Bucktown.
Q. And you are an administrative assistant
with a large bank. Your spouse is employed as a
sales rep. Generally speaking, what type of sales?
A. Hospital beds.
Q. This indicates you never served on a
jury, never been an accused, complainant or witness
in a criminal case, never been the victim of a
crime. Neither has anybody in your family. All
the other questions are answered no.
A. Yes.
Q. Can you tell us a little bit about
yourself, hobbies, activities, interests?
92
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. I'm getting married in May. I've been
really busy with that. Looking for a new job. In
networking. Not sure what to get into. Just
social.
Q. All right.
DIE G 0 P R ADO,
a prospective juror, having been first duly
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
sworn,
Q. Next Mr. Prado. Living on the south
side in the city. How long in that vicinity?
A. The past 12 years.
Q. You presently work in an auto parts
warehouse. This indicates you never served on a
jury, never been an accused, complainant or witness
in a criminal case. Never been the victim of a
crime. Neither has anybody in your family.
Everything else is answered no.
Tell us a little bit about yourself?
93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. I 1 i ke to read. I go to school. Stay
active, play sports.
Q. Are you in school now?
A. I plan on going back.
Q. What is it you like to take?
A. I haven't decided. Something around
like statistics or maybe accounting.
Q. All right. Thank you.
B R END A N S U L L I V A N,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Next, Mr. Sullivan. You are living in a
north suburb. How long in that general vicinity?
A. About 18 years.
Q. This indicates you are currently working
in substance abuse technician. And also grad
student. Tell us what degree you are pursuing?
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A.
Q.
Doctorate in psychology.
This indicates that you have never
served on a jury, never been an accused,
complainant or witness in a criminal case. Never
been the victim of a crime. Neither has anybody in
your family. All the other questions are answered
no.
Let me ask you about, back for a
moment to your studies, thus far in your studies
have you worked with forensic population at all or
had any interplay with the court system? When I
say forensic population, I mean with a view toward
work in criminal court, something that had to do
with psychology?
A. I worked at Elgin Mental Health.
Actually wrote court reports and a lot of those
things.
Q. Were you ever called to testify as a
witness?
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
No.
On a fitness hearing?
No. I was not. My supervisors were.
Okay. Anything about the fact that you
had some tangential contact with the courts, even
95
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
though you didn't testify as a witness on the
fitness case, that would stop you from being fair
here to both sides?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Thank you, sir.
I may have Usually when I get to
the last row I repeat myself. I apologize if I do.
I can't recall if I asked you about hobbies,
activities or interests?
A.
Q.
No. I got a wedding coming up.
Are you going to be planning the wedding
or be uninvolved and say yes to everything?
A. I say yes.
Q. All right. For the record, if I
didn't tell the attorneys, after have you ever
served on a jury, all the other questions were
answered no.
GAR R Y M 0 Y E,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
96
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Moving on to Mr. Moye. You are living
in the south suburbs. How long in that general
vicinity, sir?
A. Over twenty years.
Q. You presently work as a courier for a
large transportation company. This indicates you
previously served on a jury in '07 here at 26th
Street.
Let me ask you. Did you actually
deliberate and reach a verdict. I don't want to
know what the verdict is. Did you deliberate and
reach one?
A. Yes.
Q. Is there anything about your experience
on that jury that would in any way stop you or
prevent you from being fair here to both sides on
this case, an unrelated case?
A. No.
Q. Okay. I'll ask you how long was that
case, hoping you say three or four weeks?
A. No. No. Three days.
97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q.
A.
Q.
Only three days?
Yes.
Okay. This indicates you have never
been an accused, complainant or witness in a
criminal case. However, you as well as a family
member have been the victim of a crime. Can you
tell me briefly about that. Start with you.
stop
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
you
A.
Q.
A car, you know, both cases.
Anybody
No.
Anything
from being
No.
Okay.
caught i n those case?
about those cases that would
fair here?
The other questions are
Well, the other questions are answered no. This
one is blank. I'll ask you to tell me yes or no.
It says has any member of your immediate family
ever been party to any lawsuit.
A.
Q.
Not that I am aware of.
Okay. Sir, can you tell me about
hobbies, activities, interests that you have?
A.
Q.
A.
Movies, sports, cooking.
Any sports in particular?
I love them all.
98
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q. Baseball?
A. Baseball, hockey .
Q. I have to ask you. Cubs or Sox?
A. Neutral.
Q. Neutral. Got Switzerland back there in
the back row. Thank you, sir .
CON S TAN C E C ROC K E T T,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Now, Mi ss Crockett. You are 1 i vi ng ina
northwest suburb. How long in that general
vicinity, Ma'am?
A. About eight years.
Q. You work -- You work for a
rehabilitation facility. You work as a direct
support professional. Is that like assistant to
somebody disabled, so you are helping them along?
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. A group home.
Q. I can't hear you?
A. A group home.
Q. Okay.
A. Six or more.
Q. Six or more. You work i n direct care
with the residents. You have to help them with
daily activities, depending how severe their
disability?
Yes. A.
Q. Very tough job. This indicates your
spouse or domestic partner is employed as a
student. What is that person studying?
A. Homeland Security.
Q. You never served on a jury, never been
accused, complainant or witness in a criminal case,
never been the victim of a crime. However, a
family member or very good friend has.
tell us briefly about that?
Can you
A. My brother was killed in '96 at Julian
High School.
Q.
A.
So sorry to hear about that.
Thank you. And my cousin was killed by
multiple cars in March. That case is continuing
100
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
here.
Q. Okay. Going back to the incident
involving your brother. Was there anybody caught
or charged in that case?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Yes?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you go to any court proceedings or
attend any of that?
A. No.
Q. That would not have been here at 26th,
that would have been a different courthouse.
Because I believe Joliet wouldn't be around here.
Somewhere else. You didn't go to any of those?
A. No. I think his case was here. Because
we was living in Chicago. His case was here.
Q. Did it happen when he was out at the
high school in Joliet or no?
A. No. Julian High School.
Q. I'm sorry. I'm telling you when we get
to the back row I twist your words around with
these acoustics. Percy Julian, of course it would
have been in the city. The incident involving your
cousin. Somebody was criminal charged with the
101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
offense?
A. Yes. One, I don't think she was
charged, but the second car was. Drunk driving.
And then the last car, they never found.
Q. Have you gone to any court proceedings
with respect to that?
A. No.
Q. Is there anything about the fact that
those two instances happened to your family that
would any way stop you or prevent you from being
fair to both sides in this unrelated case?
A. No.
Q. This indicates that the other questions
are answered no. Can you tell me a little bit
about yourself, hobbies, activities, interests that
you have?
A. I'm a student right now. I was in
nursing. They cut it from my school. I'm in
social services. I just got married so I'm still
hoping. I like to play basketball.
Q. How long ago did you get married?
A.
Q.
nursing?
In June.
Okay. Are you thinking of going back to
102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. I was thinking about it. But I just
have to go to another school.
Q. They cut out the program?
A. Yes.
Q. Thank you, Ma'am.
CAR MEN C L A U D I 0,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Next is Miss Claudio. You are living on
the north side of the city. How long in that
general vicinity?
A.
Q.
15 years.
You are presently retired. And this
indicates you have three children, 41, 44, 50.
Start with your youngest. Could you tell us what
that child is doing?
A. My youngest is a police officer. He
103
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
works for the homicide investigators.
Q. Does he work in the city or one of the
suburbs?
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
City.
Okay. And is he marri ed?
He's married. He's got a boy and girl.
Does his wife work?
His wife had a nursing home, baby
sitting at home.
Q. Okay. What about your middle child,
44?
A. Okay. My little one, he worked at
construction. He's tuck pointing and a bricklayer.
Q. Okay. Is he married?
A.
Q.
A.
records.
Q.
He's married and he's got two kids.
Is his wife working?
Yes. She's an assistant in medical
And then your oldest child is 50?
A. My 01 dest chi 1 d, he is a supervi sor at
the post office. He's also a co-pastor.
Q. Is he married?
A. Yes, he's married. He's got one child.
He is in the field of medical billing.
104
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q. Okay. Is there anything about the fact
that one of your children works as a homicide
Detective, anything about that fact that would stop
you from being fair here on this eavesdropping case
today?
A.
Q.
No, not at all.
Okay. This case you did previously
served on a jury about ten years ago at the Daley
Center, without telling me the verdict, let me ask
did you actually deliberate and reach a verdict?
A. Yes, Ma'am.
Q. Do you recall if it was a civil case,
meaning like a car accident or medical malpractice
or was it a criminal case, some kind of DUI?
A. Medical malpractice.
Q. Okay. I want to poi nt out, I thi nk
somebody else was on a jury, the burdens of proof
are different in a civil case and a criminal case.
If you served on a civil case, the burden of proof
was called preponderance of the evidence. Here in
criminal court it is called beyond a reasonable
doubt.
I just want you to understand the
difference. Although I'm quite certain you don't
105
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
remember the jury instructions ten years ago. I
don't know who would. I'm going to highlight that
for you.
This indicates that you have never
been accused, complainant or a witness in a
criminal case, never been the victim of a crime,
neither has anybody in your family. Everything
else is answered no.
Can you tell us your hobbies,
activities, interests outside of work?
A. Right now, because of my health, I stay
home. I like to read, watch movies. I do like to
go to different places.
THE COURT: Thank you, Ma'am.
B R END A R E E D MAR TIN,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Next is Brenda Reed Martin. You are
106
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
living in a west suburb.
vicinity?
How long in that general
A. About twenty years.
Q. And you work as a respiratory
practitioner. Like a respiratory therapist?
A. That's correct.
Q. For a home that takes care of disabled
individuals?
A.
Q.
That's correct.
You have two children, 20 and 22. Can
you tell us what your twenty year old is doing?
A. My twenty year old is in school.
Q. Okay. How about your 22 year old?
A. Just graduated from Robert Morris
University.
Q. What did she get a degree in?
A. A degree in, a Bachelor's in
administration, hospitality management.
Q. Either one of your children married?
A.
Q.
No.
You indicate you never served on a jury,
never been an accused, complainant or witness in a
criminal case, never been the victim of a crime.
However, a family member or friend has been. Can
107
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
you tell us me briefly about that?
A. My first cousin was a school teacher.
On her way to work, she was car jacked and raped
and beaten. Left for dead in the trunk of her
car.
O.
A.
O.
A.
O.
That's horrible. How long ago was that?
Maybe about 15 years ago.
Did your cousin survive?
She did.
Anybody caught and charged in that case?
A. I'm not sure. It wasn't here.
O. Is there anything about that case, the
fact it happened to your relative, that would
impact your ability to be fair here to everybody?
A. No.
O. Okay. Thi s i ndi cates that you have
been a party to a law suit and so has a family
member. Is that some kind of civil case that's
now over?
A. It is over.
O. The other questions are answered no.
Can you tell me a little bit about yourself,
hobbi es, act i vi ties, interests?
A. I go to church. I love sports. I'm a
108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Bears fan and Bulls fan.
Q. No baseball?
A. Little bit. I'm a Bears fan and a Bulls
fan.
Q. All ri ght. What do you thi nk they are
going to do Sunday?
A. They are going to win.
Q. I think if we have a show of hands, you
are in the mi nori ty, I have to say. I am hopeful.
I hope they do. That would be nice. Thank you,
Ma'am.
RAY M 0 N D S ABO,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Next is Mr. Sabo. You are living in the
southwest suburbs. How long in that general
vicinity?
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Majority of my life.
Q. You are currently working at a high
school as the Dean assistant. This indicates you
never served on a jury. I'll back up. What year
do you like the most, Freshman through Seniors. Or
do you have a favorite?
A. About Junior. Too much going on with
the Seniors.
Q. Who gets in the most trouble, Freshman
to Senior? Who gets in more trouble?
A. This year was going to be the Freshmen
with us.
Q. But it depends?
A. It depends.
Q. This indicates you never served on a
jury, never been accused, complainant or witness in
a criminal case. Never been the victim of a crime
and neither has anybody in your family. Neve been
a party to a lawsuit. You have a family member who
is a party to a lawsuit. Is that a civil case that
is over?
A.
Q.
A.
Long over.
The other questions are answered no.
There was one I must have misunderstood.
110
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
I was in college and arrested for an altercation.
Q. No problem. I'll change that to a yes.
We'll go back to that question. That was outside
of Chicago?
A. Yes.
Q. Anything about what transpired in that
case that would stop you from being fair here to
everybody?
A. No.
Q. Okay. The last two questions are
answered no. Can you tell us a little bit about
yourself, sir, hobbies, activities, interests?
A. I coach two sports, wrestling and
baseball. And I coached football too. I'm in grad
school now. That was too much so I just coach two
sports. I get married in June.
Q. Are you a yes man for the wedding or
deeply involved in all the details?
A. No, no. I got ki nd of bri bed into goi ng
to the food tasting next week.
Q. You have to show up at something. You
have to accept you are going to have to show up at
something. By and large you are just giving
approval?
111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A.
as well.
Yes. She's real organized. She teaches
Q. You are not arguing over the color of
the bridesmaids' dresses?
A. No at all.
Q. Thank you.
THE COURT: Folks, just a couple of comments
to everybody. We've already talked about this,
along with my opening remarks. It is important
that we have unbiased jurors, people who don't
formulate any opinions ahead of time but sit back
and listen to the evidence. We don't want you to
pre-judge the case.
You are not to formulate an opinion
one way or the other, unti 1 the 1 ast wi tness has
testified, the arguments are done and you get the
law, and you go in the back with the other jurors.
The other important thing, we don't
want you to pre-judge any witnesses in the case.
You know, meaning that all of the witnesses, it is
only fair they all start out at the same point, a
level playing field. And as the case goes forward,
obviously you, picked as jurors, you are going to
decide who and what you believe as the case goes
112
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
on.
It is important that before a witness
even opens their mouth you don't formulate an
opinion on them. For instance, I don't know that
it is really going to be relevant in this case, but
it is important to talk to the jurors about, for
instance, say it was a police officer. Maybe
someone in your life had a positive experience with
the police. Someone has had negative experiences
with the police. Again, those are just your
personal experiences. Those individuals have
nothing to do with the folks that might testify
here.
If someone were to walk in in uniform,
a police officer, if you are sworn in as a juror,
you know, that person should be on a level playing
field. You should have no opinion one way or the
other. You can't be thinking this is a police
officer, I'm going to automatically believe them.
The converse is you can't think to
yourself, that's a policeman, I'm not going to
believe what they are going to say. Of course,
they don't know anything about this person, what
they have to add or possibly not add to the case.
113
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
You don't know anything about them.
be pre-judging them.
That would
They are starting off above the base
line or below the base line. We don't want that to
happen on either level. So, does everybody
understand what I mean about we don't want you to
pre-judge any witnesses. Is there everyone here
who would not be able to follow the law and would
pre-judge the witnesses, one way or the other.
Okay, nobody is raisin their hand.
Okay.
Before I turn the cards over, the
attorneys are going to have a chance to ask any
follow up questions. They have already been
instructed not to go over the same things I already
have. If they do, I will cut them off.
Can I just see the attorneys. We
don't need the Reporter. Just off the record off
to the side.
(Whereupon a discussion
was had outside of the
record, after which
the following
proceedings were had in
114
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
the presence and hearing
of the jury:)
THE COURT: At this time, with this panel,
I'll tender the cards to the State. They can ask
any follow up questions. And one other thing off
the record, first.
THE COURT:
jurors.
MR. PODLASEK:
THE COURT:
to the defense.
(Whereupon a discussion
was had outside of the
record, after which
the following
proceedings were had in
the presence and hearing
of the jury:)
Any questions, State, for the
Nothing, Judge. No.
All ri ght. Pl ease tender them
Do you have anything additional,
defense?
MR. ALBUKERK:
for a minute?
THE COURT:
Judge, can we have a sidebar
With the Reporter, please.
(Whereupon the following
115
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
proceedings were had
outside the presence and
hearing of the jury:)
MR. ALBUKERK: Judge, I wanted to understand
the rules. Do you want us to question all the
jurors now, or the first four?
THE COURT: All of the jurors.
MR. ALBUKERK: Okay. Do you need more time
with this?
MR. PODLASEK: We have nothing.
THE COURT: Okay. It i s the panel. When I
asked earlier off the record, I wanted to ask and I
wanted to avoid the attorneys asking twenty people
the same question .
MR. ALBUKERK: No, no.
THE COURT: All right then .
MR. ALBUKERK: A little question here and
there.
THE COURT: To all twenty then.
MR. ALBUKERK: Probably I'll ask one guy a
couple questions and that will be it.
THE COURT: Whatever you want. All of them
are available though.
MR. ALBUKERK: I wanted to make sure. I
116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
didn't want them to just give the four .
(Whereupon the following
proceedings were had in
the presence and hearing
of the jury:)
THE COURT: Proceed.
RAY M 0 N D S ABO,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
O.
A.
O.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Mr. Sabo?
Yes.
And Miss Johnson Brown?
JUROR JOHNSON BROWN: Yes.
MR. ALBUKERK: These questions are kind of
aimed to you. You are both in education . What I'm
curious about is what sort of qualities are you
looking for or looking to bring out of your
117
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
students, as they mature and become citizens.
First, Mr. Sabo.
THE COURT: I'm going to sustain that as to
relevance to this case, Counsel.
MR. ALBUKERK: All right.
Well, I'll ask this. How about does
anybody here listen to talk radio?
station do you listen to?
Okay. What
THE COURT: Let's identify the individuals
raising their hands.
MR. ALBUKERK: First, sir?
JUROR DUNNE: Dunne. Last name is Dunne.
DAN I E L
DUN N E,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
A,
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Mr. Dunne?
I think it is WLS,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
students, as they mature and become citizens.
First, Mr. Sabo.
THE COURT: I'm going to sustain that as to
rel evance to thi s case, Counsel.
MR. ALBUKERK: All right.
. Well, I'll ask this. ,: How about does
anybody here listen to talk radio? Okay. What
station dO you listen to?
THE COURT: Let's identify the individuals
raising their hands.
MR. ALBUKERK: First, sir?
JUROR DUNNE: Dunne. Last name is Dunne.
DAN I E L DUN N E,
a prospective juror, having been ;first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded a ~ +bllows:
Q.
A.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Mr. Dunne?
I think it is WLS.
118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
WLS?
Yes.
Don and Roma?
That's one of the people on that
station.
time.
radio?
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Anybody else you listen to there?
It depends if I am in the car a certain
That's what goes on in the car?
Right.
Anything else you listen to on talk
Sure. WBBM News, WGN, sports.
Okay.
MR. ALBUKERK: Sir, your last name?
JUROR HAMPTON: Hampton.
DON A L D HAM P TON,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
119
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Mr. Hampton?
Yes.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
You said you also listen to talk radio?
Yes.
What station?
I listen to VON.
WVON?
Yes.
How about newspapers? I'm trying to
find out what newspapers we generally read.
Does anyone here read a newspaper on a
semi-regular basis? Mr. Dunne, your newspaper of
choice?
A. Wall Street Journal.
MR. ALBUKERK: Okay.
Sir in the back?
A JUROR: New York Ti mes.
MR. ALBUKERK: You?
A JUROR: Sun Times.
THE COURT: Counsel, make sure you are
identifying who these folks are. Back it up a
120
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
minute.
MR. ALBUKERK: New York Times, your name?
A JUROR: Sullivan.
A JUROR: Moye.
MR. ALBUKERK: That would be the Sun Times
you said.
A JUROR: Yes.
MR. ALBUKERK: All right. Mr. Dunne, a lot
has gone on, obviously politically. I don't want
to know anything about your political background,
obviously. But I am curious, what are you looking
for in terms of our government? What qualities
would you like to see in our government?
THE COURT: I'm going to sustain that on my
own as not relevant to our jury selection.
MR. ALBUKERK: Mr. Sullivan, how close are
you to finishing your graduate degree?
JUROR SULLIVAN: I've got four years left.
MR. ALBUKERK: Is this a have you done
anything else, any other kinds of work besides
this? Is this a first or second choice career?
JUROR SULLIVAN: This is the first choice.
MR. ALBUKERK: Maybe you worked someplace
else besides this, another field of work before
121
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
this?
JUROR SULLIVAN: Yes. For one year I worked
in marketing, after college.
MR. ALBUKERK: What do you like about this,
your current field of work or current field of
study?
JUROR SULLIVAN: Doing therapy. You know.
It is interesting work.
MR. ALBUKERK: And you like helping people,
is that it?
JUROR SULLIVAN: Yes.
MR. ALBUKERK: Thank you.
Mr. Dozois.
C H R I S TOP HER D 0 Z 0 I S,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
A.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Mr. Dozoi s?
Yes.
122
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q. Is that French?
A. It is.
Q. Do you regularly watch any news
programs?
A. No.
Q. Do you read any newspaper?
A. Mostly text stuff. Maybe the Red Eye on
the train. But nothing i n depth.
MR. ALBUKERK: All right. That's all the
questions. One second.
LIS A L E R 0 S E HOE R L E R,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Miss Lerose Hoerler, you said you do a
lot of work with your church?
A.
Q.
Yes.
Which church?
123
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Christian Church out of Orland Park.
Q . Orl and Park?
A. Yes.
Q. And what exactly, what kind of
activities do you do?
A. All major events. We have about ten
thousand people that come to our church, recently.
We have singers, chat rooms at our church. I ran
that event. We had a hundred sixty-two
volunteers. What type of thing, you know. We just
had George Hamilton at our church last weekend.
Which I have to make sure the event goes well.
MR. ALBUKERK: All right.
DON A L D HAM P TON,
a prospective juror, having been first duly
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Donald Hampton?
124
sworn,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Yes.
O. You also talked about you spend a lot of
time in church, on a regular basis?
A. Yes.
O. Could you tell us what activities, if
any, you are in?
A. I'm in charge of the audio department
for the full facility, audio and communications
that goes on throughout the building. That's
pretty much it.
O. Okay.
MR. ALBUKERK: Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT: Okay. Ladies and gentlemen,
here's how the jury selection will proceed. I'm
going to adjourn in chambers with all the parties
and Court Reporter . We'll be with you when we made
some progress. I can't give you an exact time.
Ball park of ten, fi fteen mi nutes, gi ve or take.
That's kind of what we're talking about. So, can I
have those folks in the back, please.
(Whereupon the following
proceedings were had
outside the presence and
hearing of the jury:)
125
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT: Let's go on the record.
Everybody is back present in my chambers. Before
we get to the jury selection I want to just put
something on the record.
Over the lunch break I did, pursuant
to 720 ILCS 5/14-5, I did review in camera the disc
provided me by the State, which had one
conversation from Miss Laudien, the Court Reporter,
as well as three conversations from Pamela Taylor.
I was provided with a transcript for that third
conversation. I'm going to tender that back.
The State indicated they were going to
be using the three conversations from Miss Taylor,
as well as a voi cemail message.
MR. PODLASEK: Right.
THE COURT: I did review all of those
recordings. I find that they are all highly
relevant to the charge at hand. I'm determining as
a matter of law pursuant to the statute that in
order to prove the allegations in the case they may
be admitted, in their entirety.
MR. PODLASEK: Thank you.
THE COURT: I'm tendering back the disc, as
well as the transcript on the third call.
126
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Can I have the cards. Who has the
cards?
MR. ALBUKERK: Here they are.
THE COURT: Let's start with any challenges
for cause. I don't believe anybody on their face
said they couldn't be fair in this case.
MR. PODLASEK: My understanding, Mr. Donald
Hughes, number seven, has a criminal background.
THE COURT: Let's see if it is the same
person. For Donald Hughes, State, you are
indicating a background. Address and date of
birth?
MS. GUNNIGLE: I have 8-28-62.
THE COURT: 8-28-62. Same date of birth on
the card. What is the background?
MS. GUNNIGLE: PCS and trespass to --
criminal trespass, misdemeanor.
THE COURT: The year for the PCS?
MS. GUNNIGLE: The PCS is -- Pardon me,
this is difficult to read. I have 4-12-05.
THE COURT: Okay. How about criminal
trespass. Does it show an address for him on there?
MS. GUNNIGLE: I believe it does. On Dante
Avenue.
127
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT: He is living now at 8224 South
Muskegon. That's a different address. The year for
the criminal trespass?
MS. GUNNIGLE: 2005, your Honor.
THE COURT: No other background?
MS. GUNNIGLE: No.
THE COURT: Defense, your position for the
State's motion for cause? Same date of birth,
different address. If you are in agreement, I'll
excuse hi m for cause. If not, I'll bri ng hi m back
to see if he is that same individual.
MR. ALBUKERK: I think we should figure out
if he is the same. It is an 80 percent possibility
that he is, but we should.
THE COURT: We'll bring him back. Let me
re-organization you. Miss Melongo, move over to
the couch, closest to the bathroom. Everyone sit
down. Bring him back for me then, Alice. Donald
Hughes.
While she's getting him, any other
challenges for cause?
MR. PODLASEK: Yes. Number ten, Mi chell e
Diaz.
THE COURT: The allegation is what?
128
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MR. PODLASEK: Cri mi nal background.
THE COURT: Do we have that?
MS. GUNNIGLE: I have an arrest, your Honor,
in Shelby County, for domestic battery and
disorderly conduct.
THE COURT: When?
MS. GUNNIGLE: 2003.
THE COURT: Okay. Date of bi rth on her?
MS. GUNNIGLE: Date of birth
THE COURT: One minute.
Sir, have a seat right there in the
gray chair. Thank you. I have a couple of follow
up questions for you. You do have a very common
name so I want to make sure that we have the right
person or not the right person.
Any chance that in 2005 you were
arrested for possession of controlled substance and
also for criminal trespass to land? Does that
ring any bells?
JUROR HUGHES: The criminal trespass, I was
work at Auto Zone, doing mechanic work.
THE COURT: I want to make sure.
defense, follow ups for Mr. Hughes?
MR. PODLASEK: No, your Honor.
129
State and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MR. ALBUKERK: No.
THE COURT: Thank you for coming back and
clarifying that, sir.
THE COURT: Defense, your position at this
point?
MR. ALBUKERK: Judge, he is telling us why
he got a trespass. Was that a conviction?
THE COURT: I made clear i n my remarks an
arrest, even tossed out. I used a drinking charge
that got tossed out. I'm excusing him for cause.
MR. ALBUKERK: For the record, objection.
THE COURT: Okay. Michelle Diaz. You
indicate you were looking for date of birth.
Domestic battery from 2003 .
MS. GUNNIGLE: 12-7-84.
THE COURT: 12-7-83. '84 and then '83.
Any address on there?
MS. GUNNIGLE: Not that I am seeing, Judge.
THE COURT: Defense, your position on
Michelle Diaz? The State is asking for cause on
her. Bi rth date is off by a year. Are you in
agreement or you want to bring her back and have
her questioned?
MR. ALBUKERK: You have a date of birth off
130
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
by a year. What about the address?
THE COURT: They can't find an address.
MR . ALBUKERK: I have to bring her back.
Too common a name.
THE COURT: Bring back Miss Diaz. Anybody
else for cause?
MR . PODLASEK: No.
THE COURT: Nobody else with a background .
Even if you are not making a motion for cause, the
State is aware you still have to tender the
background. Anybody else to talk about?
MR. PODLASEK: Nobody wi th a background. I
would raise the issue of number four, Daniel
Pizano. He indicated his English was so-so. I
don't know if that will be a problem.
THE COURT: My Diaz, have a seat there.
Thank you for coming back. You have a very common
name, as I'm sure you are aware. Almost like a
Smith. I just want to make sure we have the right
records here.
Is there any chance that you were
arrested in 2003 in Shelby County for domestic
battery or disorderly conduct?
JUROR DIAZ: No.
131
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT: Ever been to Shelby County?
JUROR DIAZ: I don't think so. Where is
that?
THE COURT: I don't know myself , to be
honest with you. All right. It was a common name
so we wanted to verify that was not you.
JUROR DIAZ: Okay.
THE COURT: Thank you so much.
Based upon that, State, are you making
your motion for cause?
MR. PODLASEK: I am standing by the motion
for cause. I think the date of birth is too close.
THE COURT: December 7th, a different year.
You haven't given me an address. There is not
nearly enough for cause. That is denied.
Anybody else? You were talking about
Mr. Pizano .
MR. PODLASEK: The fact he indicated English
was so-so to you . Those are his words, not mine.
THE COURT: Defense, your position on that?
I would note he served on a jury at the Daley
Center and rendered a verdict in '02.
MR. PODLASEK: I understand.
MR. ALBUKERK: Judge, I mean, you know, the
132
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
State is right. He did have a problem. He said he
had a problem. Then he seemed to understand
everything being said.
THE COURT: Let me ask you. Are you making
a motion for cause?
MR. PODLASEK: Yes.
THE COURT: Are you in agreement with that?
MR. ALBUKERK: Sure, yes.
THE COURT : All ri ght, then I'll excuse
number four for cause.
State, you indicated that was it,
nobody else?
MR. PODLASEK: Correct.
THE COURT: Okay. We're going to pick as we
discussed in panels of four. First four to the
State. They are going to be Lerose Hoerler,
Elakatt, Brown Johnson, then Dozois.
MR. PODLASEK: The State accepts.
THE COURT: Tender the panel to the defense.
MR. ALBUKERK: All right, Judge. I'm going
to exercise my first peremptory on Number One.
THE COURT: Okay. That's the only one from
that panel? There are no back strikes, you
understand?
133
- - -------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
MR. ALBUKERK: Right.
THE COURT: I'm going to give you Avelino
Benzon to replace the one you challenged. Are you
going to take Benzon?
MR. ALBUKERK: I'm fine with this panel.
THE COURT: That goes back to the State to
review Benzon. You haven't seen Benzon yet, number
six.
MR. PODLASEK: We're fine, Judge.
THE COURT: All right. We have our fi rst
panel of four. Juror 2, 3, 5, 6. The second panel
of four we start with the defense. Defense, you
are going to get juror 8, Hampton; 9, Dunne; 10,
Diaz; 11, Rohrman. Tender these cards to you.
MR. ALBUKERK: Thank you.
We're okay with this.
THE COURT: Tender that panel over to the
State, please.
MR. ALBUKERK: I shall.
MR . PODLASEK: We'll use a challenge on
Michelle Diaz. We're okay with the other three.
THE COURT: Okay. I'll take Diaz back.
The next one you are going to get is Richard Miller
to fill the panel. Are you going to take
134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Mr. Miller?
MR. PODLASEK: I thought Daniel Rohrman was
next.
THE COURT: I'm sorry, let me double check.
Rohrman you had in your hand.
MR. PODLASEK: I did.
THE COURT: Yes . Rohrman you accepted.
MR. PODLASEK: Okay, that's fine, Judge .
THE COURT: Miller is next on your panel.
Are you going to take Miller?
MR. PODLASEK: I didn't see Miller.
THE COURT: Okay, here it is. You just got
rid of Diaz. The panel is now with you until you
are satisfied.
MR. PODLASEK: Okay.
THE COURT: You have to review Richard
Miller. If that panel is complete, they get to
review Miller only.
MR. ALBUKERK: Judge
THE COURT: Hold on.
MR. PODLASEK: This is fine.
MR. ALBUKERK: Miller is fine. We're good.
THE COURT: We have our second panel of
four. So, the second panel of four on the jury is
135
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Hampton, Dunne, Rohrman and Mi 11 er.
The next panel of four is going to go
to the State again. You are going to get
Brumbaugh, Prado, Sullivan and Moye.
MR. PODLASEK: The State accepts Ashley
Brumbaugh. As far as Diego Prado, we're using a
challenge, along with Brendan Sullivan also. We
accept Garry Moye .
THE COURT: I'll give you two more to
complete your panel. Constance Star, who crossed
out the name and made Crockett, and Carmen
Claudio.
MR. PODLASEK: We're going to use a
challenge on Crockett.
THE COURT: You get Brenda Reed Martin.
MR. PODLASEK: We're satisfied with this
panel.
THE COURT: Tender those to the defense.
MR. ALBUKERK: Judge well, okay.
We're going to exercise a challenge on
Carmen Claudio, the elderly woman who is retired.
THE COURT: Okay. I'll give you Raymond
Sabo to take her place.
MR. ALBUKERK: Thank you.
136
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT : Are you going to take Sabo?
MR. ALBUKERK: We are taking Sabo. Let me
look at the rest of them though.
THE COURT: There are no back strikes. You
have to give me all at the same time.
MR. ALBUKERK: Right, right. The last one - -
THE COURT: You were reviewing the panel of
four tendered to me because you hadn't seen any of
them. I said there are no back strikes. Out of
that panel you excused him.
MR. ALBUKERK: Right.
THE COURT: You should only be looking at
the last one at this point.
MR. ALBUKERK: I see.
THE COURT: Is that right?
MR. ALBUKERK: I believe that's the case.
I think we're good. We'll accept this
panel.
THE COURT: All right, State. The only one
you haven't reviewed is Sabo.
MR. PODLASEK: Correct, Judge.
Judge, the State accepts Mr. Sabo.
THE COURT: Okay. We have our jury. The
last four members of the jury in order of selection
137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
were Brumbaugh, Moye, Reed Martin and Sabo. We
just need to pick two alternates.
MR. ALBUKERK: How many strikes for the
alternates?
THE COURT: There is one challenge per side
per alternate.
MR. ALBUKERK: Okay.
THE COURT: What I'll do, we may do this off
to the side, not come in the back. I'll put six
people in the box. State, you know who is coming
next. Are there any criminal backgrounds coming
up?
MS. GUNNIGLE: No.
THE COURT: 21 through 27.
MS. GUNNIGLE: No, Judge. There are none
until juror number 44 rolls around.
THE COURT: Okay. Six should be more than
enough then. I'll put them in there and we'll do
it and take a break and just start it. We'll do it
off to the side.
(Whereupon the following
proceedings were had in
the presence and hearing
138
- ------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
of the jury:)
THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, we have
made some significant progress. As I read your
name off now, I'll ask you to gather up all the
belongings that you have and follow the deputy into
the jury room.
We'll start off. We have made some
significant progress with our jury, but we still
have more to pick. If I read your name off now,
I'll ask you to gather up your belongings, purses,
notes and follow the deputy into the back.
we finish selecting the other folks we'll get
started with the trial today.
Once
The following individuals are on the
jury: Cicily Kutty Elakatt, Joann Brown Johnson,
Christopher Dozois, Avelino Benzon, Donald Hampton,
Daniel Dunne, Daniel Rohrman, Richard Miller,
Ashley Brumbaugh, Garry Moye, Brenda Reed Martin,
Raymond Sabo. You folks can go into the jury room.
To those of you whose names I did not
read off, with our thanks you folks are excused.
I'm going to call up six more people .
I'm going to have you go into the second row.
Juan Ruiz. That second row, closer by
139
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
the lawyers.
John Karas, second seat.
Marianne McCluskey.
Seat four is Elizabeth Robles.
Seat five is Lisa Pometta.
Seat six is Mark Johnson.
Mr. Ruiz, Mr. Karas, Miss McCluskey,
Miss Robles, Miss Pometta and Mr. Johnson.
To the six of you folks sitting in
front of me I just read off, I'll go through those
same four principles we talked about with the last
panel. Do the six of you understand in this case
as well as all cases, that across the country the
Defendant is presumed to be innocent of the charges
against him. Do you all understand that?
Again, I don't mean to insult anyone's
intelligence. There is a distinction between
understanding and accepting. Even though you all
understand it, is there anybody here who cannot or
will not accept that principle. Raise your hand
for me if you won't or can't.
No hands are up.
The second principle. Before any
Defendant can be convicted, the State must prove
140
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
that individual guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Do you all understand that?
The six people are saying yes.
Even though you all understand it, is
there anybody here who cannot or will not accept
it. Raise your hand, please.
No hands are up.
The third principle. The Defendant is
not required to put on any evidence on their own
behalf. Does everybody understand that?
This goes back to, like I said, the
State's burden to prove someone guilty, meaning you
don't have to do anything. Their job, they brought
the charges. Everybody understand that?
Everyone is saying yes.
Anyone who cannot or will not accept
that principle, raise your hand.
No hands are up.
Lastly, the defendant's failure to
testify cannot be held against her. Does everybody
understand that principle?
Is there anybody here who cannot or
will not accept that principle of law? Raise your
hand.
141
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
No hands are up.
I think I'll deal with this general
question now while we're doing the general
questions. As I said with the last panel, it is
important that anyone selected as a juror, you
don't pre-judge the case. Meaning you don't
formulate any opinion until the whole thing is
over, you have the instructions, the law, you can
start deliberating.
It's equally important you not
pre-judge any witness in the case. In other words,
when they walk up to testify, you shouldn't be
thinking to yourself that you are going to believe
them or not believe them.
I'll give an example, as I did with
the last panel, of a police officer. Let's say you
and your wife maybe have a positive experience
with police, family members in law enforcement.
Maybe you have had some negative experiences with
law enforcement.
We don't ask you to change those
experiences because we can't. It comes with who
you are. The point would be this. Anybody who
walks in this courtroom, you obviously said you
142
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
don't know the witnesses, you give all of them, no
matter what their profession in life, be it police
or any other occupation, they all start out at a
level playing field, don't give them any more or
less credibility before they even open their mouth.
If you did, you would be pre-judging them.
As I talked about with the last panel,
a policeman comes in and you think to yourself I'm
going to believe him because they are the police,
you would be pre-judging them in a positive light
above the base line.
Obviously the converse, as I said with
the last panel, somebody comes in in uniform and
you say that you are not going to believe them
pause they are the police, you would be pre-judging
them negatively .
It is important you not do that. Does
everybody here feel they can give all of the
witnesses, all of them, a fair trial, a fair shake
and not pre-judge.
pre-judge the case.
do that?
Not pre-judge the witnesses or
The six of you think you can
Everyone is saying yes, okay.
All right . We'll start with
143
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Mr. Ruiz.
J U A N R U I Z,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
city.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
O. Mr. Ruiz.
A. Yes.
O. You are living on the south side of the
How long in that general vicinity, sir?
A. There about 40 years.
O. You are presently not working. Were you
working before?
place.
A. Yes. I was working for 32 years in a
Q.
A.
O.
What type of work, sir?
Piping.
Okay. And you had three children; 17,
26, 30. Is your 17 year old still in school?
A. Yes.
144
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q.
A.
year ago.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
How about your child that is 26?
She's just become a pharmacist, about a
A pharmacist?
Yes.
Is she married?
Yes.
What type of work does her spouse do?
Construction.
Your oldest child is 30?
Yes.
Okay.
He's going to be a pharmacist too. She
was in the Air Force, she came back, she's going
back to school.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
Is she married, sir?
She's married, yes.
What type of work does her husband do?
They were both in the army. I don't
really know. He just got out recently.
Q. All right. This indicates you never
served on a jury, never been accused, complainant
or witness in a criminal case. But you have been
the victim of a crime. Tell me about that briefly?
145
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Yes. Long time ago my car got stolen. I
found out who steal it. Same guy that sold it to
me. I saw him on the street and followed him.
They took him to court and this and that. They let
him
take
that
go.
Q.
i t you
case?
A.
Obviously, from what you are saying, I
were disappointed with the outcome of
Yes.
Q. You think you can put those feelings
aside and understand that the people involved in
that case had nothing to do with the case here and
could you be fair here to both sides, the State and
defense?
A. Yes, I could be fair. Like I said, I've
been disappointed about the system. Not only then .
After that, I got my car -- My car got stolen.
We found out almost who did it. They didn't follow
through.
Q. You kind of bring up a good point that
comes up in jury selection. Everybody comes with
their own experiences in life. You certainly were
disappointed with how those cases were worked up or
not worked up. How they let it fall through the
146
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
cracks. Or in your view you didn't get service you
should have.
I don't ask you to change those.
That's how you feel. Could you put those feelings
aside and not take it out on the State here or the
Defendant here, because you sort of got the short
end of the stick in a couple of cases?
A. Yes, I could. I could.
Q. Could you be fair?
A. Yes. I could be fair. It is a
different kind of case.
Q. Okay, thank you, sir. The other
questions are answered no. Can you tell us a
little bit about yourself, what you like to do in
your free time?
A. I like bike riding. I practice
racquetball and handball. Those are the main
hobbies that I have.
Q. Thank you.
147
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
J 0 H N K A R A S,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
O. Next is Mr. Karas. You are living in
the south side. How long in that general vicinity?
A. Six years.
O. You presently work as a computer service
engineer for a large company. Your spouse is
employed as a pet groomer. Two children, four
and fifteen. This indicates you previously served
on a jury in 2001 in Michigan. Did you actually
deliberate and reach a verdict?
A.
O.
A.
O.
Yes.
Was it civil or criminal, sir?
Cri mi nal .
Anything about your service on that jury
that would somehow stop you from being fair here to
everybody?
A. No.
O. This indicates you have never been
148
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
accused, a complainant or witness in a criminal
case. But you have been the victim of a crime.
Can you tell us about that?
A. Two criminal damage to property and one
theft. Also I was arrested when I was 17.
Q. Okay. Let me change that for a minute.
We'll go back to that question. You said you were
17 years old. Anything about that case or what
happened with it that would stop you from being
fair here to everybody?
A. No.
Q. Okay. Let me go back then to the
instances you were the victim of crimes. Anybody
caught in any of those?
A. No.
Q. Anything about the way they were handled
that would stop you from fair to both sides?
A. No.
Q. This indicates you had been a party to a
law suit and so has a family member . Is that a
civil case now over?
A.
Q.
Yes.
Okay. Can you tell us any hobbies,
activities, interests that you have?
149
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Hunting, fishing, bike riding, spending
a lot of time with my four-year old son.
Q. Any groups or clubs or anything like
that?
A. Sportsman's club. I'm on the board at
the sportsman's club on the south side.
Q. Thank you, sir.
MAR I ANN E M c C L U S KEY,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Next we have got Miss McCluskey. You
are in a west suburb. How long in that vicinity?
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
Seven years.
You work as a marketing supervisor?
Yes.
This indicates your spouse is employed
as an audio designer. You did serve on a jury
150
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
about 2003 in one of the suburbs. Let me ask you
did you actually deliberate and reach a verdict?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recall now whether it was civil
or criminal?
A. Criminal.
Q. Anything about your service on that jury
that would stop you or prevent you from being fair?
A. No.
Q. This indicates you have never been an
accused, complainant or witness in a criminal case.
Never been the victim of a crime, neither has
anybody in your family. Everything else is no.
Are there any groups or clubs you belong to,
hobbies, activities?
A. I'm an avid reader and a member of a
book club in the neighborhood, active with a huge
family . I like to entertain.
Q. Is your book club like mine, they only
talk about the book for fifteen minutes and veer
into other topics?
A.
Q.
Primarily wine, yes.
All right.
151
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
ELI Z ABE T H ROB L E S,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
O. Next is Miss Robles. You are living in
a northwest suburb. How long in that general
vicinity?
A. My whole life.
O. This indicates that you work as a
an office manager assistant for a company. I
don't want to know the name of the company. What
type of work do they do?
A. They sell and install 1 aboratory
furniture.
O. You never think laboratories have
furniture. I guess they have to sit down. You
have one child, ten. You never served on a jury,
never been accused, complainant or witness in a
criminal case. Never been the victim of a crime.
However, a family member or friend has been. Can
152
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
you tell us about that?
A. My Dad. He had hi s car broken into a
couple times.
Q. Anybody caught in those cases?
A. No.
Q. Anything about the fact that happened
that would stop you from being fair?
A. No.
Q. This says you were party to a law suit.
Is that a civil case over with now?
A. Yes.
Q. All the other questions are answered no.
Can you tell us a little bit about yourself,
hobbi es, act i vi ties, interests?
A. My son and I belong to a boxing club.
I also help my Dad with his business.
Q. Thank you, Ma'am.
LIS A P 0 MET T A,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
153
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Miss Pometta?
A. Yes.
Q. How long have you lived in this general
vicinity?
A. My entire life.
Q. You work as a legal secretary for a
large firm. That is primarily engaged in civil
litigation. Do they do criminal matters as well?
A. Yes. We're pro bono as well.
Q. Pro bono work?
Yes. A.
Q. Do you do any work on any of those
cases, cri mi nal cases?
A. Other than revisions to documents .
Q. I guess what I'm sayi ng, I shoul d be
more clear.
A. Researching for , no.
Q. Do you do work for the attorneys working
on the criminal cases?
A.
Q.
Sure.
Okay?
154
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Yes.
Q. Anything about your experience working
basically in the field of criminal law, experience
with that, that would any way stop you or prevent
you from being fair here to both sides?
A. No.
Q. Do you ever have to go to court as part
of the case preparation or anything like that?
A. No. There is other staff members for
that.
Q. Okay. Do any of those cases take you to
26th and California? I imagine it would?
A. Yes.
Q. This indicates your spouse is employed
as a chemical operator. Three children. Start
with your youngest, 21. Tell us what that child is
doing?
A. The 21 stays home. And watches my
four-year old grandson.
Q. Then you have a 25 year old. Tell me
about that child?
A. Like an assistant director for financing
and fund raising for a fraternity. Northwestern
campus.
155
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q. Your 25 year old married?
A. No.
Q. And then your oldest child is
twenty-eight?
A. Ri ght . He's a servi ce manager at a
garage.
Q.
A.
Q.
Is he married?
No.
Okay. This indicates you have never
served on a jury, never been an accused ,
complainant or witness in a criminal case, never
been the victim of a crime. However, a friend or
family member has been. Can you tell me briefly
about that?
A. My sister's house has been robbed twice.
Once twenty years ago. They caught the people.
They were painters the landlord had come in to
paint the place. I don ' t know what really
happened. Other than the fact she lost a lot of
stuff. And she was robbed like four years ago.
They didn't
Q.
A.
Q.
Didn't get anyone?
Right.
Is there anything about the fact that
156
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
happened that would impede your ability to be fair?
A. No.
Q. The other questions are answered no.
Can you tell us a little bit about yourself,
hobbi es, act i vi ties, interests?
A. I love music. I'm big with music.
Ipod. Other than that, I'm home with the family or
watching my four-year old grandson. That's when my
21 year old goes to my mother's house to get a
break.
Q.
A.
Q.
That keeps you busy?
Yes.
All right.
MAR K J 0 H N SON,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Next is Mr. Johnson. You are living in
157
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
a northwest suburb. How long in that vicinity?
A. All my life.
Q. You work as a school social worker.
What grade level?
A. High school .
Q. So, do you have a favori te, Freshmen
through Senior?
A. I work with all of them. So, not
really.
Q. This indicates that you have never been
on a jury. Never been an accused, complainant or
wi tness ina cri mi nal case. However, you as well
as a family member have been a victim of a crime.
Tell me briefly about that?
A. Myself, it was I was hit by a drunk
driver while I was parked. Like I was parked at a
light. He hit the back of the car. I was
involved in that case. And then a family member
was involved in a car accident. The people got out
of their car and beat them both up. That went to
court.
Q. Okay. In the case involving yourself
with the drunk driver, did that go to court as
well?
158
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Yes.
Q. Did you have to testify i n that case?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you?
A. Yes.
Q. Was that here at 26th Street or
somewhere else, if you remember?
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
It was a long time ago.
That's all, you don't remember.
I don't remember.
Is there anything about your experience
with either one of those instances where you
yourself were the victim and then you had the
family member that would stop you or prevent you
from being fair here to both sides?
A.
Q.
No.
All right. This indicates that you have
been a party to a lawsuit. Is that a civil case
that is now over with?
A. Yes. Well, yes, yes. There is nothing
going on right now.
Q. Okay. Can you tell us a little bit
about yourself, any hobbies, activities or
interests that you have?
159
-------
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. I do a lot of sports. I do weight
lifting and track and running races. I'm involved
in the high school. A lot of outside activities.
Right now the kids are in finals. I'm case manager
for about four or five of them.
Q. Okay. Do you think it would, since
today is almost over, you think we can have one
more day of your time and it wouldn't impact too
much on your ability to then serve your students?
A. Well, it wouldn't have an impact on me
being here or anything. I'm not sure about the
distraction of me wondering how they are doing. I
know you said that's not a big deal, but some of
these kids that I've been working with them for
four years, they don't take tests in the
classrooms. They have been coming down and getting
special accommodations. But I could be fair.
Q. Does that sometimes involve them taking
the test in your office?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Do you have any of those tests
scheduled for tomorrow?
A. Yes, I had them today. One kid is
staying home. He's hoping for either tomorrow or
160
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Friday.
Q. Thank you, sir.
Here's what I'll do with this panel.
Tender these cards to the defense. Do you have
any followup questions? When your are done,
tender them to the State, please.
MR. ALBUKERK: Thank you, Judge.
J U A N R U I Z,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Q. Mr. Ruiz, you talked about two instances
where you were the victim of a crime?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you have any feelings or thoughts
about our criminal justice system one way or
another because of those two?
161
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. Well, that was a long time ago. Long
time ago. I didn't know how the system works. My
car got stolen. The State's Attorney said don't
worry, we got this case, we know this guy. He's
going to go to jail and you get your car back. That
di dn' t happen. The next ti me, I got my garage
broke into, we collected the phone that was stolen.
We traced the calls and everything. Nobody
followed it up.
Q. Do you fault anyone for that?
A. No. Well, no.
Q. No?
A. What do you think?
Q. Well, I don't know. The real question
i s how you feel about it?
A. Bad. We almost knew who the guy broke
into my garage was. Because we followed the car.
I followed the car. I called the Detective. I told
them everything. Nothing came up.
Q. Right. And if you could correct that,
you would?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Did you feel 1 i ke, you know, this
i s an opportunity for you i n any way, here today?
162
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. No, it is not. Like I said, that is
different kind of case, you know.
Q. Okay.
A.
like that.
Nothing to do with break in, nothing
Q. Do you feel like you could be fair to
the State's Attorneys in this case?
A. I don't think so.
Q. No?
A. No.
MR. ALBUKERK: Well, Judge, can I have a
moment?
J 0 H N K A R A R,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Mr. Karas, you sai d you have been 1 i vi ng
at your location for six years?
163
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A.
Q.
A.
Q.
A.
About six years, yes.
And that's on the south side of Chicago?
Southeast side.
Where were you before that?
I was in Oakl and County, Mi chi gan. Near
the Detroit area. Northwest of Detroit.
Q. Were you doing the same kind of work
there?
A. Yes.
Q. This is a computer service engineer.
Sort of like a main frame?
A. Yes. Mai n frames, and networks, yes.
Q. Okay. In your leisure time what do you
do?
A.
outdoors.
Camping, fishing, hunting, anything
MR. ALBUKERK: Okay, that's fine.
MAR I ANN E M c C L U S KEY,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
164
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
What is an audio designer? I'm
speaking, for the record, to Marianne McCluskey.
A. A person who creates sound effects or
sound enhancement for productions, like stage
productions or record productions, movies or TV.
Q. Okay. And that's your husband?
i f --
A.
Q.
Yes.
The company you work for, I don't know
Let me check this. You know what, I'll
just ask you. What is your company, what is it
they do?
A. Marketing programs for clients, nation
wide or world wide clients. We do like sweepstakes
or info commercials or enhancements, you know, to
get involved with the product. Like win a product
or learn more about the product.
Q.
Skokie?
A.
Q.
You said you were a juror in 2003 in
Yes.
Did that Was that an eye opening
experience for you?
165
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Yes. A.
Q.
opening?
What about that experience was eye
THE COURT: Sustained.
BY MR. ALBUKERK:
Q. Do you think you can be fair to the
State's Attorney in this case?
A. Yes.
Q. You think you can be fair to the
defendant in this case?
A. Yes.
MR. ALBUKERK: All right.
ELI Z ABE T H ROB L E S,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
Q.
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Miss Robles, what does
of work does your firm do?
166
what kind
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
A. We sell and install 1 aboratory
furniture.
Q. That's ri ght. You say sell and install,
we're talking about those big tables that you put
the Bunsen burner on, that type of thing?
A. Yes. Steam hoods.
Q. Okay.
I'm going to -- You want me to
tender?
THE COURT: Please tender the cards to the
State, see if they have any questions of this
panel.
MR. PODLASEK: We don't have any questions,
Judge.
THE COURT: All right. I just have a follow
up. I'll will take the cards, State. Thank you.
J U A N R U I Z,
a prospective juror, having been first duly sworn,
was questioned and responded as follows:
167
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
E X A MIN A T ION
BY
THE COURT:
Q. Mr. Ruiz, I want to clear up with you
this point. I know that you are clearly upset with
probably one of your cases in your view, and then
in another case the State's Attorneys assured you
of victory, that everything would be okay and it
didn't work out. You were upset with those State's
Attorneys, that's clear.
You were saying earlier to me that it
is an unrelated case, your cases have nothing to do
with the case here. You could be fair to both
sides.
Then you just said you didn't think
you could be fair to the State's Attorney. I guess
I'm going to ask you another time. I'm looking for
an honest answer, not trying to pigeon hole you.
It is important that both sides get a fair trial.
Could you be fair to the State's Attorneys on this
case and give them a fair shake?
A. Yes, I could. In fact, I didn't know
the State's Attorney was the one bringing the
Defendant to court. I thought it was somebody
168
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
else.
Q. Okay. Now that you know it is the
State's Attorney, those are the prosecutors on all
criminal cases in Cook County, or I suppose the
Illinois Attorney General could be as well. I'm
getting picky. But the majority of them are
prosecuted by the State's Attorneys, which are the
folks to your right, could you give them a fair
shake here, a fair trial?
A. Yes, I think so.
THE COURT: Could I see the attorneys i n a
sidebar.
(Whereupon the following
proceedings were had
outside the presence and
hearing of the jury: )
THE COURT: Any motions for cause?
MR. PODLASEK: Number 21 , Ruiz.
THE COURT: I'll deny it for cause As to
Ruiz, tender to the State , alternate Number One.
MR. PODLASEK: We'll exercise a challenge.
THE COURT: Okay. Defense, Karas?
MR. ALBUKERK: Fine.
THE COURT: Okay. He's alternate Number
169
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
One.
Two.
To the defense, Marianne McCluskey.
MR. ALBUKERK: Fine.
THE COURT: State.
MR. PODLASEK: Fine.
THE COURT: Okay. She's going to be Number
Okay. Thank you.
THE COURT:
(Whereupon the following
proceedings were had in
the presence and hearing
of the jury:)
Ladies and gentlemen, file read
your name off now, just gather up your belongings
and head into the jury room. We'll be bringing you
out shortly for opening statements.
Mr. John Karas and Marianne McCluskey.
You two head into the jury room. The rest of you
in the first row, as well as to the rest of you out
in the gallery, I know that it is, you know, a
little bit more interesting, certainly exciting is
probably a stretch, but more interesting if you get
called into the room to get questioned.
For those of you out there, even
though we didn't get a chance to talk to you, you
170
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
did your civic duty, followed your obligation and
responded to the subpoena. For that we thank you.
For the rest of you, other than those names I read,
you will be excused for the day.
Now, how much time to get yourselves
together. I think we can proceed with the witness
today.
MR. ALBUKERK: A witness, Judge?
MR. PODLASEK: The only witness we'd have
available would be Pamela Taylor. We need the TV
sets to be brought up, set up. Maybe fifteen
minutes.
THE COURT: Okay. Take fifteen minutes.
MR. PODLASEK: Okay.
MR. ALBUKERK: Then we're going to go to
opening?
THE COURT: Opening and the State's case.
I don't know if you are doing the stipulation
first.
MR. PODLASEK:
THE COURT:
Stipulation would be first.
Okay. Fifteen minutes.
(Whereupon the above
entitled cause was
passed, after which the
171
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT:
Melongo.
THE COURT:
jury.
following proceedings
were had outside the
presence and hearing
of the jury:}
All right, bring out Miss
All right, let's bring out the
(Whereupon the following
proceedings were had in
the presence and hearing
of the jury:)
THE COURT: All right, I'll ask the jurors
to remain standing. Everyone else in the court may
be seated.
I'm now going to swear you in to try
the facts in this case. If you could please raise
your right hands and face me.
(Jury sworn.)
THE COURT: Everybody may be seated.
Just a couple of opening remarks
before we get started with opening statements.
First of all, just so you know, there is no
assigned seating here. When you come and go from
172
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
the back room after breaks or a lunch, you can
take whatever seat you like. Up to you.
If there is a witness on the stand and
you cannot hear them, please raise your hand. I'll
be alerted you are having a problem. If there are
any documents in the case or exhibits that the
parties are clearly trying to show you, your view
is blocked, somebody's back is to you or you can't
see, raise your hand and I'll remedy that.
Lastly, if we're doing the middle of
proceedings and somebody needs to use the rest
room, please raise your hand for that. I'm usually
able to figure out which one of those you are
raising your hand for.
Let me explain to you how the trial is
going to go. In a couple minutes, you are going to
have an opportunity to hear opening statements from
the lawyers. The opening statements themselves,
that's not evidence. It is merely the attorneys'
view of what the evidence is going to show.
Remember we talked about the evidence
being what comes from the witness stand. And if
there are any exhibits. The attorneys are not even
required to give opening statements. Generally
173
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
speaking in jury trials they do. So, the attorneys
will have an opportunity to make their opening
remarks to you.
After that, we'll proceed with
evidence. The State will call witnesses. They
will do what we call a direct examination. Direct
examination of the witness. The defense will have a
chance to cross examine each of the State's
witnesses.
When the State is done with all of
their evidence, they will rest their case in chief.
At that time the defense will have an opportunity
to call witnesses, if they choose to.
As you already heard, many times, you
all understood they have no obligation to put on
any evidence at all. That's because it is the
State's burden of proof.
That is going to give you the road map
through the end of the case. When we get there,
we'll talk a little bit more. Having made those
remarks, is the State and defense both ready to
proceed to opening statement?
MS. GUNNIGLE: Yes, your Honor.
MR. ALBUKERK: Yes, your Honor.
174
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT: State, you may address the jury
in opening statement.
MS. GUNNIGLE: Thank you.
OPENING STATEMENT
BY
MS. GUNNIGLE:
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury,
welcome to 26th Street and California. When we all
walked through the front door this morning you may
or may not have realized it, when you are walking
through those front doors you are walking through
the doors of the largest unified criminal justice
system in the nation, if not the world.
When we look at 26th Street and
California, one thing is very apparent. You walk
in that front door, as the Judge said, this is
very very different from TV. On TV you see a
Judge, you see a jury. You see attorneys. You see
defendants.
But TV misses it in one very large
respect. And that's to keep this large criminal
175
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
justice system working there are so many more
professionals in this building that are equally
essential to this process. There are bailiffs,
there are court clerks, there are Court Reporters.
And without all of these people working seemlessly
together, criminal justice in Cook County just
can't happen.
The case you are going to hear about
today and tomorrow is a case about those
professionals and the way we work together at 26th
Street and California.
If you will allow me to introduce
myself, I'm Julie Gunnigle, Assistant State's
Attorney, which means I work for the People of the
State of Illinois. I'm here with my partner,
Assistant State's Attorney Robert Podlasek. And
Luka Jankovic, working under Supreme Court Rule
number 711. Together we represent the People of
the State of Illinois.
We're here today because on
December 14th or on or about December 14th, 15th
16th of 2009, the Defendant, this woman, Annabel
Melongo, tape recorded those professionals I was
talking about, without their knowledge. She put
176
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
those conversations on line for the entire world to
hear.
And she accused the Court Reporter's
office of treason. In doing so, Annabel was
attempting to rewrite the history of what happened
on a single day at 26th Street and California.
I'm going to talk about that day. You
are going to hear a lot about it in the coming
hours and tomorrow. I'm going to talk about
June 18, 2009. That was five hundred
seventy-three days ago.
Now, in our every day life, unless
June 18th has some sort of special significance to
anyone of you, you might not remember what you
did or what you said or what happened that many
days ago.
But here at 26th Street and
California, in these courtrooms, we can tell you
exactly what was going on. And we know exactly
what's going on, because of those professionals I
spoke about. We have clerks in the courtrooms.
Clerk's who part of their duties is to take notes
about what's happening when a case is heard, a case
is called before a judge and something happens in
177
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
open court.
We have clerks that take those notes.
From those notes prepare what is known as a docket
sheet, which is a shorthand way of being able to
look at a case and know on such and such a date,
who was there and very briefly, in a few words,
what exactly happened.
Now, we have something even better
than those clerk's records. Because what if
something is missing from those records. And the
big what if here is we know every single word. We
have a verbatim transcript of what happened inside
the courtrooms on every single day.
On June 18, 2009 we know exactly what
happened. We know exactly what happened because
there was a Court Reporter there. On June 18,
2009, Annabel Melongo, the Defendant, was arraigned
on a completely separate criminal case. And, when
we say arraigned, it is shorthand. Shorthand for
being informed of charges against you. And on
that day, that's what happened in a courtroom at
26th Street and California.
Now, I'd like to talk a little bit
about Annabel Melongo. Because after June 18, 2009
178
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
real significant things happened. During that
time, when that other case was pending, she
maintained a web site. That web site was
www.illinoiscorruption.net. When I say she
maintained that web site, she wrote on that web
site what happened at each of her different court
events. She blogged about it and put it up on the
world wide web where anyone with an internet
connection would see it.
Now, as part of this web site Annabel
also published what she believed to be her theory
on the case. We know this because we're able to
read the web site. And part of Annabel Melongo's
theory on the case, she wanted to get this case
taken out of 26th Street and California and moved
to the federal court system.
But there was one problem with Miss
Melongo's theory. This theory is This problem
is that you have a limited amount of time to do
that. According to statute, you have a very short
period of time from the moment you are arraigned to
ask to be moved to federal court. And she missed
it.
MR. ALBUKERK: I'll object.
179
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT: Overruled.
MS. GUNNIGLE: Her web site will show that
she knew about this problem and that when she went
ahead and got the transcript of her arraignment,
she realized she had missed this date.
As a result, she tried to rewrite
history. She tried to rewrite what happened to her
at 26th Street and, in doing it, accused the Court
Reporter's office of forging a transcript,
producing a completely fraudulent transcript and of
treason.
She did this on the web. Part of the
State's case in chief, you are going to hear from
Pamela Taylor, one of the head of the Court
Reporters here in Cook County. You are going to
hear that during the time of December, 2009 she
received several phone calls from the defendant,
Annabel Melongo. During that time Miss Melongo had
some questions about the transcript. She had some
questions about the docket sheets, docket sheets I
was talking to you about earlier.
And she explained to Miss Melongo some
of the intricacies of what happened here at 26th
and California. So she could understand what
180
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
exactly happened in her case. But what never
happened on those telephone conversations was the
moment in time when Miss Melongo told Pamela Taylor
of the Court Reporter's office that she was being
tape recorded.
Not a moment in time occurred when
Pamela Taylor was asked to consent to having her
voice, what she thought were personal
conversations, tape recorded. Nor did she
consent to placing them on the web for everyone to
hear.
One of the things that Pam Taylor
talks about in these conversations, and you will
hear that, she tries to explain to Miss Melongo
what Miss Melongo believed to be a discrepancy. A
discrepancy between the docket sheet, which is
prepared by the clerk, and the official transcript,
which is prepared by the Court Reporter. Two
people sitting in a courtroom, taking notes about
exactly what happened here.
And the discrepancy was this. The
discrepancy was on one of the docket sheets it
appears on June 18, 2009, there is an entry stating
courtroom 101, Annabel Melongo, not present. Then
181
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
later, when you see the courtroom and Judge
Schreier's courtroom, Annabel Melongo was in fact
arraigned and you see an entry she was there. She
was there on bond.
Miss Taylor tried explain to her why
that is. I'd like to explain to the Jury why that
is. What was Miss Taylor's words. Miss Taylor's
words in the conversation, she said welcome to 26th
Street. When your criminal case first comes here
at 26th and California, one of the first moves is a
call in courtroom 101, called an assignment call.
As Miss Taylor put it, an assignment
call happens very very quickly. Cases are called
and you are told what courtroom to go to and you go
there. Defendants don't have to be present.
According to Miss Taylor, in her own
words, you are not there, they call the next case,
and it happens like that. But we know that Miss
Melongo ended up in the right courtroom. We know
she heard the assignment or at the very least knew
which courtroom her case was assigned to that she
made it there, in front of Judge Schreier on
June 18, 2009. She was in fact arraigned then.
Yet she still tried to rewrite
182
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
history. And she tried to rewrite history by going
on the web and accusing the Court Reporter's office
of treason. She recorded these phone calls with
the Court Reporter's office. And in the State of
Illinois that is against the law to tape record
someone without their consent or knowledge.
Further, it is agai nst the 1 aw to
publish all this information to the public. When
the Judge spoke today of the six counts pending in
this case, the six counts that will ultimately go
to the jury to decide, we have three conversations,
the three times she was recorded. And the three
separate times it was published. All six counts,
six separate illegal acts.
The People of the State of Illinois
intend to present to you evidence that Annabel
Melongo did this. She did this alone and she did
it without any legal reason for recording any of
those conversations.
As such, at the close of evidence, we
will ask you to find Annabel Melongo guilty on six
counts of eavesdropping, which is a crime under
Illinois law.
Thank you so much for your time.
183
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
THE COURT: Thank you, State.
Defense, you may proceed, sir.
MR. ALBUKERK: Thank you, Judge.
OPENING STATEMENT
BY
MR. ALBUKERK:
Just to correct this. The date in
question is not June 18, 2009. Miss Gunnigle made
four errors. June 18, 200. June 18, 2008. Not
2009 .
Ladies and gentlemen, Annabel Melongo,
you are going to hear the audio recordings of this
conversation that took place. You are going to
hear a very thick and heavy accent by my client.
The reason she has a very thick and heavy accent is
because she is from Cameroon. She's not a native
of the Unites States.
I would like to echo some of the
comments the Judge made to you when we started this
case. And this United States of America is yet the
greatest country to live in. And people are dying
184
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
literally to get into this country. Because all
the freedoms that are afforded here.
What freedoms are we talking about.
Primarily we're talking about justice. You are
that justice. The fact that we have a jury and we
don't have some imperial politician sitting there.
Well, in Cameroon things are, as you
might imagine from a third world country, quite a
bit different. There is no difference between the
State's Attorney and the Judge. There is no
difference between anyone, because in third world
countries justice is whatever the power that be
says it is.
Now, my client -- Now, there was
some discussion there by Miss Gunnigle about the
law. And what you are going to find is quite a bit
of this case is going to be read to you as a
stipulation. Meaning that the parties have agreed
on a lot of stuff.
Yes, we have agreed. We've agreed
that my client did in fact record those
conversations. But the other half of the law, the
other half of the law that Miss Gunnigle didn't
mention, our Legislature said that it is okay, you
185
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
are allowed to record another person's conversation
if you have a reasonable suspicion. Sorry, Judge.
A reasonable suspicion. A reasonable suspicion
that in fact you think that criminal activity is
going on.
That's what this case comes down to.
This case comes down to whether or not my client
had a reasonable suspicion that criminal activity
was going on.
Now, the fact that was going on, the
thing that my client was so worried about is
something called an arraignment. One of the first
things that happens in a case.
My client was charged with computer
tampering. My client was extremely upset about
these charges. She didn't like these charges.
And because she was so upset, because she wanted to
make sure that she had all of her rights, she
couldn't believe she was being charged with this,
she did in fact start a web site to detail what she
considered to be the injustices of the case.
She was What you should know
about her is that she has studied to be a computer
professional. She completed all of her course work
186
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
in computer sciences. And she works or did work in
the field of keeping data bases and stuff like that
for companies.
And then she got charged with this
computer tampering. Obviously, she was very
concerned because that was going to drastically and
horribly affect her ability to make a living and
some other things too.
So, when these charges occurred, she
wanted to make sure that she was afforded all of
her rights. One of those rights you are going to
learn about, something called an arraignment. An
arraignment is mentioned right in our Constitution,
Article I Section VIII. It is also mentioned
elsewhere throughout our criminal code.
And it is a right that every Defendant
has. What an arraignment is is the formal
presentation of exactly what the charges are to the
Defendant. The Defendant must be prepared for it.
And the Defendant must either enter a guilty or not
guilty plea.
Now, my client had no -- On June
18th of '08, my client found out that someone was
saying that she had been arraigned on that day.
187
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Well, my client was sure she had not been arraigned
on that day. In fact, she was sure she wasn't even
in court on that day.
And you are going to hear from the
stipulation later on, because all of this is
detailed on her web site, what she did, what
anyone would do. She asked, well, how do I know
whether or not I was arraigned.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, behind me,
right behind me is perhaps, in a way, the scene of
the courtroom, if you will. Because right behind
me are all of the different ways that we record
what goes on in a courtroom.
Starting over here, this is, that lady
sitting here, she's the clerk of court. She's the
one who arranges these files. And in the file you
can see there is a yellow piece of paper in these
files. Those are some notes. Usually the Judge or
clerk will write these notes. They will say all
the important things that happened. An arraignment
is one of those important things.
Also, separate from the file,
completely separate, are the court sheets, like
this. The Judge writes on these. These are the
188
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
orders of the day. Again, this is something that
the Judge should be writing the important things
like whether or not the Defendant was arraigned.
Then, finally, the clerk of the court
puts information into a computer, a data base,
right here. And this computer data base is used by
everybody. It is used by the State's Attorneys,
used by defense attorneys, used by everyone.
If you want to know if somebody pled
guilty, you want to know if somebody was arraigned,
you ask for a certified transcript of the
information that goes into this computer.
So, you've got court sheets, you've
got half sheets, you got the computer. All of
which should tell you whether or not my client was
arraigned on June 18th of 2008. All three of
those items on June 18, 2008, not 2009, all three
of those things said that there is no mention at
all of arraignment. It should have been in there.
And it wasn't.
But that's not the only thing, not the
only thing. Okay. So, we have the Judge's notes
don't have it. The court sheets didn't have an
arraignment. The computer didn't have an
189
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
arraignment. But that's not all.
Let me come over here. And this is
the Court Reporter. The Court Reporter is typing
away. Now, they use different systems. Some of
them use, still use the old fashioned system with a
tape of paper coming out. And there are these
marks on there. Normal people like you and me, we
can't read it. Because it is not typed in actual
letters. It has to be interpreted by a Court
Reporter, who understands what's going on.
And then, finally, almost all of the
Court Reporters, but not all of them, but you see
this right here. That right there is a microphone.
Everything I'm saying, not only is it being typed,
it is being audio recorded as well. There is an
audio recording of what happened on June 18, 2008.
But you will not be hearing it.
At some point my client had to
represent herself. And she issued a subpoena to
Pam Taylor. Pam Taylor is the person who she
recorded. She issued that subpoena and she said,
look, I really like to hear the tape recording from
that day. It's never been produced. We don't have
it. And we still don't have it.
190
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
So, my client had a reasonable
suspicion that a transcript was tampered with,
because the transcript did mention something about
an arraignment. But the Judge's notes don't, the
court sheet doesn't, the clerk's computer doesn't.
And the tape recording was not produced.
The arraignment is important, one of
the most fundamental rights any criminal defendant
has. And, yes, she was extremely upset about those
charges. She did want those charges, computer
tampering not to be against her.
She could have filed a motion to
dismiss. She wanted to bring that information to
the Judge. But she's got to have all the evidence.
So, she tried to find out what's going on. She was
trying to have transparency in this case, trying to
get the information.
And, yes, she put that, made the
recordings, put that information on her web site.
She also put all of the other information on this
case on the web site. She put the information
about certified transcripts, about the Court
sheets, about the notes.
The bottom line is the law allows to
191
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
you tape record if you have a reasonable suspicion
that criminal activity is going on. And she did
have a reasonable suspicion. That criminal
activity was going on. Because there was a huge
discrepancy between all the records in this room.
There should be five independent
records that state that my client was arraigned on
June 18th of '08. There isn't. There is only
one. That gives rise to a reasonable suspicion
that my client has.
Ladies and gentlemen, you are going to
hear all this evidence, the stipulation, you are
going to hear from various people that will support
all the things I just said.
At the end of this I'm going to ask
you to find my client not guilty. Not guilty
because she did have a reasonable suspicion. And
that is an exemption from the law and it is
permissible to tape record someone's conversation
if you have such a reasonable suspicion. Thank
you.
THE COURT: Thank you, Counsel.
State, you may proceed. I believe you
are going to be proceeding by way of stipulation,
192
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
is that correct, at this time?
MR. PODLASEK: That's correct.
THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, let me
explain to you what a stipulation means in the
legal context. Basically whatever the State is
going to say, I believe the defense already
reviewed and they are going to stipulate to it or
agree to it. Everything in the stipulation is
considered evidence in the case. You give it the
same weight as though it were testified to from the
witness stand by a witness.
The only difference with a stipulation
as opposed to a regular witness who takes the
stand, with the stipulation the parties are in full
and complete agreement to everything read to you.
Again, no disputes.
With that having been said, State, you
can proceed with your stipulation.
MR. JANKOVIC: Yes, Judge, we're ready.
It is hereby stipulated between the
parties, the People of the State of Illinois by
their attorney, Anita Alvarez, through her
assistants, Robert Podlasek and Julie Gunnigle, and
by the Defendant , Annabel Melongo, through her
193
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
attorney, Nick Albukerk, that Annabel Melongo has
maintained a web site, www.illinoiscorruption.net
beginning on or about November 3, 2009 and
continuing through and including March 3, 2010.
That Annabel Melongo recorded
telephone conversations with Pamela Taylor on or
about December 14th, 15th, 16th, 2009. That on or
about December 18, 2009 Annabel Melongo posted
three audio recordings and accompanying transcripts
of those three audio recordings, conversations
between Annabel Melongo and Pamela Taylor of the
Court Reporter's office on Annabel Melongo's web
side, www.illinoiscorruption.net.
That the web site,
www.illinoiscorruption.net is a web site on the
world wide web which is accessible to the general
public.
If called to testimony the keeper of
records for the Wild West Domain, the registrar and
host of the web site www.illinoiscorruption.net
would testify that the web site
www.illinoiscorruption.net was maintained and
controlled by Annabel Melongo beginning on or about
November 3, 2009 and continuing through and
194
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
including March 3, 2010.
That on or about December 18, 2009
the web site, www.illinoiscorruption.net had a
posted -- had posted three audio recordings and
accompanying transcripts of those three audio
recordings of conversations between Annabel Melongo
and Pamela Taylor of the Court Reporter's office.
That the post states that on or about
December 14th, 15th, 16th, 2009 Annabel Melongo
called the Court Reporter's office on three
separate occasions and spoke to Pamela Taylor.
Posts forth further state that Annabel Melongo
recorded the conversations.
That on or about January 13, 2010,
members of the Illinois Attorney General's High
Tech Crimes Bureau, Digital Forensic Lab in Chicago
digitally preserved the true and accurate copy of
the web site , www.illinoiscorruption.net. which is
offered as People's Exhibit Number One into
evidence.
So stipulated?
MR. ALBUKERK: So stipulated.
THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, that
stipulation is going to be admitted into evidence.
195
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
At this point in the day we're going
to adjourn for the evening. So, like we talked
about earlier, you now can't talk with anybody at
home. They are going to find out you got picked
and they are wanting to know about the case. You
can't tell them.
And also, as I highlight generally
with all my juries, but in particular with this
one, you can't go to the internet or look
everything up on your own, no independent
investigation. Whatever you are going to hear
tomorrow that's relevant to the case from the web
site, if there is anything, that will be presented
tomorrow in court.
You are only going to hear things that
are relevant. You can't look up anything on your
own from any web site, period, regarding this case.
Much less the one mentioned in court.
Everybody have a good evening. I'll
ask you return tomorrow at ten in the morning.
So, when you come tomorrow, we'll have coffee and
rolls for you. We'll get started once we have you
all here.
I'm going to be in the middle of a
196
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
regular court call when you get here, unless I'm
doing a conference in the back. You will feel like
you are interrupting, but you aren't. There will
be attorneys in front of the bench. Probably
people on other cases. The deputies are waiting
for you, they know you are coming. Don't feel like
you are interrupting. Walk on through. Do not sit
in the gallery and observe any proceedings
unrelated to this case . Just walk right through
and go into the back.
As I said, once you are here, we'll
get started. Now, I'll tell you this . First of
all, I'll tell you a story. Probably about a year
and a half ago we had a jury deliberating. One of
the women on the jury needed some medicine that was
back at her house and in some far flung suburb of
Cook County . It was injectable medication and an
syringe, etc. Obviously, once you start
deliberating, it is not like you can check out and,
you know, go to the store and come back. You are
deliberating with your fellow jurors. She couldn't
leave to get the medication. We had deputies go
out to someone's house with their keys. Nobody was
home. It was dark in the house. Looking for
197
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
medication.
Obviously, that was a logistical
nightmare. It will never happen again to me.
That's why I tell you. Not that I expect to have
you that long. If you have medication, special
dietary needs, anything like that, bring everything
tomorrow you will need for 24 hours. I don't want
to have to worry about anything like that again.
Not that I expect to have you that long. If I tell
people that, I figure they will come with whatever
they need and I'll never have that problem again.
Since we know we are finishing
tomorrow, but no idea as to what time. Have your
schedule cleared for tomorrow evening, if you have
any arrangements that need to be made on a personal
level.
All right, so with that, we will be in
recess unt i 1 tomorrow at ten a. m . All ri se for the
jurors, please.
THE COURT:
(Whereupon the following
proceedings were had
outside the presence and
hearing of the jury:)
Everybody just stay until they
198
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
walk out. Any other issues?
MR. PODLASEK: May I approach?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. PODLASEK: Do you mind if I substitute in
a copy of the stipulation? That's just for the
original.
THE COURT: That's fine. For the record,
State, you will mark the stipulation as what?
MR. PODLASEK: People's Exhibit Number Two.
I'm going to mark the disc containing the web site
as People's Exhibit Number One.
THE COURT: Contained in there.
MR. PODLASEK: Yes.
MR. ALBUKERK: No objection.
THE COURT: Any other issues? No, okay.
Parties remain seated. We're in recess for the
day.
(Which were all the
proceedings had . )
199
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
STATE OF ILLINOIS )
)
COUNTY OF COO K )
SS.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY
COUNTY DEPARTMENT - CRIMINAL DIVISION
I, ROBERT J. MADOCH, Official
Shorthand Reporter of the Circuit Court of Cook
County, County Department-Criminal Division, do
hereby certify that I reported in shorthand the
evidence had in the above-entitled cause and that
the foregoing is a true and correct transcript of
all the evidence heard.

Circuit Court of Cook County
County Department-Criminal Division
Dated: __
C.S.R. 84-1194
200

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful