Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Why the governor has to appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court
Next Post: Daily Herald: Gary Grasso is the only suburban Republican congressional candidate to publicly reject the RNC’s characterization of the 1/6 insurrection
Posted in:
* Democratic Party of Illinois…
This past weekend, the Chicago Tribune published an in-depth report on Richard Irvin’s 15-year career as a criminal defense attorney, a chapter in his history that Irvin conveniently leaves out of his official made-for-TV narrative. Irvin worked three times longer as a defense attorney than a prosecutor, making money off clients accused of heinous crimes like kidnapping, domestic violence, and sexual assault.
As the Tribune reported, Irvin’s clients included a man accused of kicking a police officer in the face and a gang member who pled guilty to a crime involving the abduction of eight people. A key piece of Irvin’s business was defending those accused of domestic abuse, and his firm’s website gave potential clients tips about how to beat abuse charges. But you won’t see anything about the constitutional right to counsel in Irvin’s slick TV ads, nor will Irvin or his campaign answer questions about his career as a defense attorney.
Ken Griffin and the Rauner Reboot team think they can use big money TV ads to hide the truth about Irvin’s past. They want to remake Irvin as tough-on-crime prosecutor even though he spent far longer defending criminals than locking them up. This comes after Irvin already reversed himself on several previous positions like his stance COVID mitigations, his belief that Black Lives Matter, he effusive praise of Gov. JB Pritzker, and his long history of voting in Democratic primaries.
Clearly, Richard Irvin is happy to say whatever his campaign handlers want as he tries to get elected. But the truth about Richard Irvin is just beginning to come out. So, the questions remain: who is Richard Irvin and what does he actually believe?
This is the story I posted about during the Lincoln birthday holiday break.
* Here you go…
As a Republican candidate for governor, Richard Irvin has promoted himself as a no-nonsense, law-and-order candidate who as a onetime prosecutor put “gangsters, drug dealers and wife beaters” in jail.
Irvin was a prosecutor in Cook and Kane counties from 1998, shortly after getting his law license, until 2003. But he then worked for almost 15 years as a criminal defense attorney, specializing in defending people accused of the same types of crime he rails against in his campaign ads. […]
In a widely aired campaign TV spot, Irvin portrays himself as being on the front lines in the fight against crime. “When I was a prosecutor, I’d go around with these guys. We raided crack houses and busted up gangs,” he says, implying he’s with a police officer. “This apartment complex over here? It was bad. But we took it back.” […]
To be sure, working as a criminal defense attorney is not at odds with support of law enforcement. But voters who only know of Irvin from his TV ads and campaign rhetoric will have only a partial picture of the varied roles he has played in the criminal justice system.
…Adding… As you can see by these redacted (by me) court records, Henry Pratt shooter Gary Martin was twice represented by Reginald Campbell, and the documents have the name of Irvin’s firm on them…
Irvin and Campbell both say Irvin had no involvement in the case.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:25 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Why the governor has to appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court
Next Post: Daily Herald: Gary Grasso is the only suburban Republican congressional candidate to publicly reject the RNC’s characterization of the 1/6 insurrection
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
=== think they can use big money TV ads to hide the truth…===
And they would be correct.
Comment by Bruce( no not him) Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:31 am
Irvin doesn’t know who he is and it’s def not who Griffin wants him to be. How is he any different than a snake oil salesman?
Very different from JB who has more or less a record lined up with all he says he’s supported and who he is.
Comment by DisappointedVoter Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:38 am
The Law Office of Richard C. Irvin & Associates website
That there’s some real ugly.
– MrJM
Comment by MisterJayEm Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:38 am
==And they would be correct. ==
In a vacuum, yes, but since someone else is going to spend big money to reveal the truth…well, maybe, maybe not.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:40 am
I envy advertisers this election cycle.
Comment by Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:41 am
Mayor Irvin is clearly not a hardcore Trumpista. How much of a problem will that be in the primary?
Comment by anon2 Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:43 am
==How much of a problem will that be in the primary? ==
Not much of one if his opponents can’t get the word out.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:46 am
“We raided crack houses”
That ad is full of dog whistles and institutional racism for the GOP base. That Irvin would back something like this after just supporting BLM, and being African-American, says everything about his character. Irvin already trashed his brand with this and being a Raunerite, and he’s just starting out.
Comment by Grandson of Man Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:47 am
There were always going to be hits and this is a clear starting point/low hanging fruit. The question is, is this just the tip of the iceberg or the best thing they have?
Time will tell but so far not so good for the Irvin rollout.
Comment by Perfect Blue Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:47 am
==That there’s some real ugly.==
Big “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?” vibes.
I have to think it was unintentional, as that crosses a big line even for a criminal defense firm. And frankly, that kind of sloppy comms work fits with how Irvin has conducted himself in interviews.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:48 am
==explained how a domestic battery charge can be “successfully defended” in court: “If the victim is the only other person present when the battery occurs, and the victim does not appear in court, the state cannot prevail in the case.”==
Drew Peterson agrees.
Comment by Big Dipper Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:50 am
-Anon2- I am not sure of Irvin not being a Trumpista. He says the favorite dog whistle “all lives matter” in the crime reduction ad.
Comment by James the Intolerant Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 9:54 am
I’ve said multiple times, I think Irvin has done a good job as mayor of Aurora, his record as mayor led to a fairly reasonable re-election. I like going to downtown Aurora, there are places I have that are destination type businesses.
Irvin now has, at minimum today, the $20 million to define himself in a party primary where Irvin can’t tell voters whom he supported for president, or how things before and after January 6th relate to his own thoughts…
… now it’s his record as an attorney.
The choices how one practices law (personal injury, insurance, even criminal defense) that’s fair game, it’s part and parcel to them, professionally.
The question I have after this in the Trib… any of the other four… can any of you make hay, run ads, make things “count”?
===I envy advertisers this election cycle.===
… or those in the radio business, but I digress…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:00 am
==He says the favorite dog whistle “all lives matter” in the crime reduction ad. ==
But he also said “Black Lives Matter” when running for mayor.
Guy’s just looking for a gig. He’ll say what he’s told to say to get elected.
…which, come to think of it, it’s not like Trump was ever steadfast in his ideological commitments.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:02 am
==making money off of clients accused of heinous crimes==
As much as I think Irvin’s rhetoric is hypocritical, the DPI’s response is over the top. All criminal defense attorneys make money off of clients accused of heinous crimes. The DPI should not appear to be maligning lawyers who perform a valuable service to their clients and to society as a whole. Criminal defense attorneys safeguard due process rights, assure that defendants receive a fair trial, make a sentencing court aware of mitigating factors so that an appropriate sentence can be rendered, and serve as a necessary check to over-zealous prosecutors.
Comment by Bourbon Street Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:02 am
Yes, defense lawyers are an integral part of our justice system. The issue is that most defense attorneys don’t represent the worst of the worst, advertise about how to get out of your charges and make money off the whole thing and then try to say they have the moral fortitude to be governor while running on an anti-crime platform. It’s the hypocrisy like this that turns people off because they can’t trust politicians who will fake it til they make it.
Comment by Long year Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:08 am
Democrats finally go on the attack against lawyers but limit the scrutiny only to Republican candidates for Governor
Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:11 am
==now it’s his record as an attorney.==
I know I harp on “structure” a lot, but really, with the way the Republican Party is right now, Irvin couldn’t focus on his tenure as mayor. The things that lead him to an easy re-election are unpopular in a Republican Primary, and the other things on his resume- for instance, being staunchly pro-life- are a problem in the GE. The only thing that’s popular in both is “Tuff On Crime” ™, and while he has to fudge his resume quite a bit on that one, it beats the alternatives.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:11 am
Bourbon Street, you took the words right out of my mouth. How can you knock someone for being a criminal defense attorney?
Comment by Furtive Look Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:12 am
Brings back memories of BrickHeadJoe and the cases he dropped in DuPage. Brick always pushed himself as a big time crime buster, but a check of donors/clients showed some got sweet deals. There was a high correlation with the guys advertising how many feet they were from the courthouse and winning.
Comment by Annonin' Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:15 am
=How can you knock someone for being a criminal defense attorney?=
How can you knock someone for trying to protect people?
But the ILGOP and everyone of their candidates does so pretty much everyday and they use some nasty names and accusations in doing so.
To call the DPI response “over the top” is beyond polyanaism. The ILGOP set the parameters for for this discussion when they accepted the big lie and the all of the other assaults by republican candidates.
The DPI was being nice.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:19 am
No one is criticizing criminal defense attorneys or the fact that he was one. That is a straw argument. The point is that criminal defense attorneys are not in fact “tough on crime.” They are the opposite.
Comment by Big Dipper Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:20 am
- Bourbon Street - Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:02 am:
- Furtive Look - Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:12 am:
I understand that reading isn’t a strong suit of blog commenters, but by actually reading the DPI statement you will understand that it hits Irvin for being a hypocrite and not mentioning his career as a defense attorney and “the constitutional right to counsel.”
Comment by Google Is Your Friend Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:26 am
==“We raided crack houses”==
I caught this comment in the Irvin ad as well. So he was personally raiding crack houses? That is what he said.
LP- I guess you aren’t curious about a guy who defends criminals and tries to spin that he is “tough on crime”? All you can do is the old “what about” dipsy doodle? Care to comment on the Irvin claim that he took part in raids on crack houses?
Bit of a whopper there I suspect.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:29 am
==Democrats finally go on the attack against lawyers but limit the scrutiny only to Republican candidates for Governor ==
Yeah, sure, bud, *that* is the primary hypocrisy to notice in this situation. Whatever you’ve been told to say, dude.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:32 am
==Irvin and Campbell both say Irvin had no involvement in the case. ==
And I’m sure that’s true, but when your name is on the law firm’s door, you get a little bit of extra responsibility, as a treat.
==actually reading the DPI statement you will understand that it hits Irvin for being a hypocrite and not mentioning his career as a defense attorney and “the constitutional right to counsel.” ==
Yeah, but that’s kind of a tough communications needle to thread, and I can see the argument that DPI didn’t do it here.
But Dems aren’t going to lose any votes for being a little too tough on defense attorneys.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:35 am
===Democrats finally go on the attack against lawyers but limit the scrutiny only to Republican candidates for Governor===
… and yet it dies to take long to Google about “ambulance chasing” Democratic candidates who’s records as attorneys are in question.
This idea of finding victimhood everywhere is tiring.
The thing about being a criminal defense attorney, how many folks have… a criminal defense attorney… on retainer?
Soliciting work is part of the trade, and can be scrutinized too.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:37 am
Bourbon street for the win.
Comment by Eric Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:37 am
“So he was personally raiding crack houses? That is what he said.”
He was just looking for clients.
Comment by New Day Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:40 am
Somewhere there’s a GOP pollster who has a list of buttons to push during a campaign. The “I’m a Law-and-Order candidate” button goes back to Nixon’s Southern Strategy.
“I Was a Successful Criminal Defense Attorney” is not one of those buttons. In fact, it sets off alarm bells with the right wing crowd.
The Dems have some legitimate ammo here, but I don’t think it’s going to make much difference to the “Anybody But Pritzker” voters.
Comment by Streator Curmudgeon Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:46 am
So the DPI feels that certain defendants now do not have a constitutional right to an attorney in criminal cases? Or that anyone who ever represented an individual in court on a criminal case is disqualified to run for office? Or that anyone who ever represented an individual in court in a white collar financial crime is disqualified to run for office? Irwin’s former partner keeps saying that Irwin knew nothing about that case or individual at the time, and that former partner is now a judge? Yet that part of this story keeps getting buried and ignored.
What happened to the constitutional right to be represented in court? The only attorneys who can now run for office are those who may try to bend rules of ethics to avoid representing certain clients in court? Is that what the DPI is trying to tell us? I tell my clients to shut up and not talk about their cases to anyone other than myself, not even their spouses, close friends and relatives? Does that advice make me an unethical attorney?
You would think the Bar Associations and the Trial lawyers in this State would be up in arms over these attacks right about now, even the ACLU. But so far all I am hearing are crickets from them.
The farther the DPI travels down this road the more troubling their attitudes and behavior become.
Nice to see Irvin strike such a nerve with the DPI and their various attack dogs. Clearly more Democrats are taking him more seriously as a threat to Pritzker than many of my fellow Republicans right about now. Seems like when I mention Irvin’s name to Democrats, they immediately become triggered.
Put me in the category of believing the DPI attacks are way over the top here.
Comment by Louis G Atsaves Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:53 am
==He was just looking for clients. ==
Damn.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 10:56 am
===Democrats finally go on the attack against lawyers but limit the scrutiny only to Republican candidates for Governor===
- Lucky Pierre -, does this mean you have a greater respect for (gulp) trial lawyers?
You seemed to be less than fond of trial lawyers…
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 11:00 am
His personally raided crack houses is the stupidest thing I’ve heard in a while. Prosecutors don’t do that. And if he did he’s an idiot because he could be called as a witness. The buffer story is a Republican rank and file revolt. Irvin isn’t selling well and suburban moderate women don’t pull Republican ballots
Comment by Watchful eye. Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 11:06 am
==Democrats finally go on the attack against lawyers==
Democrats like the…Chicago Tribune?
Are we sure we’re sure about that?
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 11:06 am
Bigger. Apologies
Comment by Watchful eye. Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 11:07 am
==What happened to the constitutional right to be represented in court?==
Nothing. But if you make your bones as a defense attorney and then turn around and run a “Tuff On Crime” ™ campaign, you’re gonna get laughed at.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 11:27 am
No one says it is wrong to be a criminal defense attorney. However, I’ll more than willingly judge you for soliciting clients with language that appears to minimize getting a little “hot” with your partner, or seemingly helping people realize that if their accuser doesn’t show up then they can get off the charge. Hint hint. Language indicates intent.
Comment by Jibba Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 11:27 am
= “I Was a Successful Criminal Defense Attorney” is not one of those buttons. In fact, it sets off alarm bells with the right wing crowd. =
Until they need one themselves.
Comment by JoanP Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 11:30 am
==who may try to bend rules of ethics to avoid representing certain clients in court?==
…do what now? Attorneys have broad latitude in choosing their clients. I’ve said this before: I was told in law school, “Everyone has a right to an attorney, no one has a right to *you*.”
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 11:31 am
=the DPI’s response is over the top.=
=How can you knock someone for being a criminal defense attorney?=
You can knock someone when they put this on their website: explained how a domestic battery charge can be “successfully defended” in court: “If the victim is the only other person present when the battery occurs, and the victim does not appear in court, the state cannot prevail in the case.”
So, uh, hey, y’know, if she just, uh, disappears, or is, uh, y’know, effectively “persuaded” not to come to court, you’re gonna get away with it.
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:01 pm
===explained how a domestic battery charge can be “successfully defended” in court: “If the victim is the only other person present when the battery occurs, and the victim does not appear in court, the state cannot prevail in the case.”===
Adding….there is not one instance of “alleged” or any other qualifier in this statement. The statement is literally written for the guilty - “when the battery occurs” - not “alleged battery” or “alleged victim”. He’s trying to protect actual criminals here…for a fee of course
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:06 pm
=Seems like when I mention Irvin’s name to Democrats, they immediately become triggered.=
I’m not sure that pointing out the hypocrisy in Irvin’s campaign on crime constitutes “being triggered” but whatevs.
The bigger question for Irvin is what will his priorities be if elected? I don’t believe for a second that this campaign has anything to do with crime.
Comment by Pundent Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:16 pm
==I’m not sure that pointing out the hypocrisy in Irvin’s campaign on crime constitutes “being triggered” but whatevs. ==
There’s a weird tendency on this board to act like doing frankly the bare minimum to run against someone is a sign of fear and weakness. Like, “Oh man, the Rams are trying to convert on third down, they must really be scared of the Bears.”
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:19 pm
If Irvin’s law firm did indeed represent the Henry Pratt shooter, congratulations to Darren Bailey for winning the IL GOP gubernatorial nomination.
Comment by Lake Villa Township Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:23 pm
This is the business we’ve chosen
Comment by Rabid Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:24 pm
=Put me in the category of believing the DPI attacks are way over the top here.=
Did you and LP help Irvin raid the crack houses?
So sensitive.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:28 pm
===“when the battery occurs” - not “alleged battery” or “alleged victim”===
Hadn’t thought of it that way.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:28 pm
==If Irvin’s law firm did indeed represent the Henry Pratt shooter, congratulations to Darren Bailey for winning the IL GOP gubernatorial nomination.==
Hasn’t everyone conceded that it was his firm, just not him personally?
I don’t know that that really makes a difference, either morally or politically, but I think that’s the fact pattern.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:35 pm
“I’ve said this before: I was told in law school, “Everyone has a right to an attorney, no one has a right to *you*.”
Exactly right. When I was in law school I considered the options. Do I work as a prosecutor? I immediately realized - my first year of law school - that that decision leads to a future career as a criminal defense lawyer and realized I’d have to represent a lot of guilty and likely scummy people. I decided against it. Richard Irvin was faced with the same choice I was.
Not only did he decide to represent criminals, but he advertised for them. Nothing wrong with that if that’s how you CHOOSE to earn a living. But it’s a choice. Just like it was a choice to take that background and attempt to use it to run a tough on crime campaign. That’s the issue.
Comment by New Day Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:44 pm
This is the same guy who “called out the National Guard” in spite of the fact mayor’s don’t do that.
Comment by Cheryl44 Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 12:51 pm
=Hasn’t everyone conceded that it was his firm, just not him personally?=
It was his firm. Even though he wasn’t personally involved in the defense the firm wouldn’t take the case without his explicit approval and input. And the Pratt case was no routine matter that would have gone unrecognized by the name partner. In fact it was probably one of, if not the, highest profile case the firm ever had. Unless Irvin is now going to claim that he wasn’t in charge of the law firm that bared his name.
Comment by Pundent Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 1:01 pm
==Even though he wasn’t personally involved in the defense the firm wouldn’t take the case without his explicit approval and input.==
I would argue that that depends on how the firm is set up- I have worked for some *very* checked out partners. But there’s no reason Irvin *couldn’t* know about the case, especially if it was a small firm (and I think it was?). So I don’t know how much that excuse will fly.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 1:07 pm
==And the Pratt case was no routine matter that would have gone unrecognized by the name partner.==
But he didn’t represent the shooter in relation to the shooting, right? Didn’t the shooter die at the scene? I think this was some prior case involving the shooter. Still creates a political problem, but I don’t know if Irvin woulda/coulda/shoulda recognized the name.
Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Feb 22, 22 @ 1:18 pm