Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: Afternoon roundup
Posted in:
* WTTW…
During the very first initial appearance hearing in Cook County, 24-year-old Esmeralda Aguilar was released with conditions following her arrest on four felony charges of aggravated battery to a peace officer.
According to Assistant State’s Attorney Lorraine Scaduto, Aguilar was attending the Mexican Independence Day festivities in the 200 block of North Wabash at around 2:30 a.m. Sunday when she allegedly pulled out a canister of pepper spray and sprayed it at four Chicago police officers.
This was captured on body camera video, Scaduto said, adding that three of the officers required hospitalization, while a fourth suffered pain and discomfort, but did not seek immediate medical treatment.
Aguilar’s public defender noted that this was her first Chicago arrest and that she is the sole provider for a young child. Prosecutors did not seek to detain her in jail pre-trial, so Marubio released her with some set conditions, including that she appear for all her hearings and does not commit another crime.
“You need to be in court on time every time,” Marubio said, noting that if Aguilar violated her release order, it would be revoked and she would be taken back into custody.
* Illinois Senate Republican Leader John Curran…
“Reports that on the very first day of no cash bail, a violent offender arrested for attacking four Chicago Police Officers, sending two of them to the hospital, was immediately released because the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office didn’t even bother to file a motion to seek detaining the accused are problematic. This highlights the misplaced priorities of Illinois’ criminal justice system when the prosecutor prioritizes the freedom of a violent offender over the safety of those police officers dedicated to protecting and serving our communities. Is there any wonder why police recruitment is at an all-time low in this state?”
Are we assuming she wouldn’t have been offered bail under the old system?
…Adding… Will has covered bond court for years, so he knows whereof he speaks…
Under the old system, she would have maybe paid a $500 bail before being released. The only difference between now and then is the money. She still cannot pick up any new cases. https://t.co/Xesa6qHbPe
— Will Lee (@MidnoirCowboy) September 19, 2023
Her criminal background, or lack of one would have a lot to do with the bail total. Bail was a math equation; points on and off for certain conditions. She likely would have needed several violent felony convictions to be detained.
— Will Lee (@MidnoirCowboy) September 19, 2023
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:24 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: Afternoon roundup
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
=This highlights the misplaced priorities of Illinois’ criminal justice system when the prosecutor prioritizes the freedom of a violent offender over the safety of those police officers dedicated to protecting and serving our communities.=
Wouldn’t she have automatically been released on bail under the prior system?
Comment by duck duck goose Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:30 pm
=== Wouldn’t she have automatically been released on bail under the prior system? ===
If she had the cash to post bail, then yes. If not, then no.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:34 pm
=== Prosecutors did not seek to detain her in jail pre-trial ===
Why not?
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:35 pm
Leader Curran: what’s the reason police recruitment is at an all-time low in Florida?
Also, leader, why do you think this first-time offender is a high-risk to re-offend?
Comment by Moe Berg Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:37 pm
Until these folks realize that alleged failures going forward will include the failures of the SAs and Sheriffs, we will see more of the same that could lead to self owns to the same folks not understanding the law.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:40 pm
The “why not” is the question that will haunt prosecutors soon as one of these folks does something bad while out of jail. I’m guessing more people end up in jail than under previous system.
Comment by Always something Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:41 pm
What difference does that make? The old system is over. The only question is should she have been detained or not? The fact that her arrest is described as her first in Chicago indicates to me she has a record somewhere else. So I would prefer to see such person detained.
Comment by Captain Obvious Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:42 pm
Has Curran ever articulated an affirmative defense of cash bail? His statement doesn’t include any hint that he prefers release decisions be made based on available cash. Just once I’d like to hear a cash bail supporter actually advocate for cash bail, rather than just opposing everything else.
Comment by vern Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:46 pm
She pepper-spayed some cops. She didn’t murder anyone. Sheesh.
Comment by Politix Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 1:52 pm
It says prosecutors didn’t ask for her to be held. That seems like a good place to direct your outrage
Comment by Perrid Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:00 pm
=== This highlights the misplaced priorities of Illinois’ criminal justice system when the prosecutor prioritizes the freedom of a violent offender over the safety of those police officers ===
So it sounds as if Republican Leader Curran is advocating for the SAFE-T Act to be enforced consistently. Nice to know Mr. Curran is now in favor of the SAFE-T ACT, and opposed to discretion by judges and public defenders and states attorneys.
Comment by H-W Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:02 pm
===What difference does that make?===
Context because these same folks say the law makes things more dangerous. You know this but you want the discussion away from the Obvious silly you want protected.
Example? Very next line…
===The old system is over===
Can’t have it both ways. Can’t say the new act is more dangerous, and ignore a possible “no difference” in citing alleged crimes.
===The fact that her arrest is described as her first in Chicago indicates to me she has a record somewhere else.===
Facts not in evidence. It may be, but you don’t know, Obviously.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:03 pm
“pepper spray and sprayed it at four Chicago police officers….the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office didn’t even bother to file a motion to seek detaining the accused”
All politics is local - do that in most other IL counties you will likely face a hearing due to being a potential threat to community safety or a flight risk.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:06 pm
===do that in most===
Boy, that has the “Try That In A Small Town” vibe… huh.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:10 pm
===do that in most other IL counties you will likely face a hearing due to being a potential threat to community safety or a flight risk. ===
You’re in Elgin … won’t the cops just bring a therapy dog to your hearing and invite you to hug it out?
Comment by Suburban Mom Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:19 pm
Is Class 2 Felony agg bat on a police officer detainable in IL without clear and convincing evidence of flight risk? Don’t think so, but maybe some prosecutors/defense attorneys can weigh in.
Comment by BCOSEC Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:19 pm
@ Captain Obvious
That’s a stretch.
Stick to the obvious. It was obviously her first arrest in Chicago, according to the defense attorney. Obviously, it was not her second arrest. Obviously, the Court in Chicago acted on the fact that it was her first offense in Chicago.
Comment by H-W Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:26 pm
A lot of assumptions being made here, the first of which is the police are even telling the truth. The Chicago Police have really earned the benefit of the doubt? Hardly. Let’s see the footage.
Comment by Google Is Your Friend Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:27 pm
“three of the officers required hospitalization”
I hope the Police officers are OK
Comment by Donnie Elgin Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:29 pm
Cook County has a system of justice. The prosecutors represent what the voters want in a justice system. Kim Foxx won fair and square. No doubts on how the majority feels . It’s amazing that someone can pepper spray 4 police officers and not be in jail .
Comment by Steve Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:33 pm
===and not be in jail===
Do you think it’s over or something? She’ll get a trial or have the opportunity to plead.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:34 pm
-Do you think it’s over or something?-
Good question. She deserves a fair trial like everyone. It’s just the shock of this story. But, I strongly believe everyone deserves their day in court.
Comment by Steve Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:40 pm
Seems like some on here would also want to deny her parole… What about that Leader Curran? Can’t we decide all that before a trial?
Comment by Lincoln Lad Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 2:58 pm
=== Do you think it’s over or something? She’ll get a trial or have the opportunity to plead. ===
Looking into my crystal ball:
She will likely obtain the counsel of a public defender, who will negotiate a plea deal where she will be sentenced to probation (less than a class 1 felony) and not see a day of jail time. Then she will be released back in to the public where she will tell the tale of how she was wronged by the police and the system.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:08 pm
===Looking into my crystal ball===
Lottery numbers. Use it for lottery numbers.
The lesson with the Safe-T Act is so many “crystal balls” and soothsaying visionaries of the future see doom and gloom while also ignoring context of past bail or charges that exist.
Powerball is up to $700 million.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:12 pm
Yes, it’s started The MAGA babble will be relentless from here on.
This was a prosecutorial decision, not a requirement of the Act. And as others have mentioned, she probably would have been released anyway.
=== a violent offender arrested for attacking four Chicago Police Officers ===
Interesting comment from MAGA GOP pol whose party is advocating pardons for convicted attackers of Capitol Police Officers.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:13 pm
===party is advocating pardons for convicted attackers of Capitol Police Officers.===
- Norseman - taking a batting practice fastball yard. Touch em all, bud.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:14 pm
===MAGA GOP pol whose party is===
Don’t lump him in with those folks.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:23 pm
===released back in to the public where she will tell the tale of how she was wronged by the police and the system.
She’s in the public now and on probation. Do we have some sense this is a person who is a general danger or someone who did something really stupid? Probation is a punishment. Do we have any indication she is likely to do it again?
We punish people for more harshly and far longer than any other democracy (and most authoritarian regimes even) and we have a high crime rate to show for it. Punishing people out of behavior hasn’t seemed to work so why are we worried about what they tell people and not what they might do?
Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:23 pm
Have discussed with some in the know.
Detention was likely not sought because Class 2 Agg Bat of PO is not detainable without other factors (out on release for a prior charge/flight risk).
Comment by BCOSEC Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:26 pm
Really this is the first case on the “Edges”. It begins with the prosecutor and why they did not seek to detain. I assume no record, mother, caregiver. For me I look to see what happens next. Does this individual follow the pre-trial release conditions. Do they appear on time at their court appearances. If they don’t then what happens. It’s those issues going forward with her case that make or break the cashless bail system.
Comment by Nadigam Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:26 pm
This is another situation where I wonder if the folks crying foul are genuinely ignorant of how this would have played out in the cash bail era, or they know and don’t want the facts to mess up their narrative.
Comment by Montrose Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:44 pm
IMO the only thing this does is increase the amount of Failure To Appear cases. They just wont show up for court.
Comment by lowdrag Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:51 pm
did they catch the guy who split the cop’s ear open vertically? cause THAT will be a test.
Comment by Amalia Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:56 pm
- They just wont show up for court. -
Are you under the impression there are no consequences for that?
Comment by Excitable Boy Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 3:57 pm
===IMO the only thing this does is increase the amount of Failure To Appear cases. They just wont show up for court.
Except we have studied this and most failure to appears are tied to two things: forgetting or having some barrier to appear such as health, transportation, child care, work, etc).
The best way to reduce these have little to do with bail, but to do with reducing those barriers, sending text reminders, and making the documents people receive less confusing.
You make a Rube Goldberg of a justice system and you get Rube Goldberg results.
Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 4:01 pm
=== Don’t lump him in with those folks. ===
I’d love not to, but the rhetoric and disinformation about this issue is similar to the tactics of “those folks.” We also find very little courage among MAGA GOP leaders to disassociate themselves from those folks, if not actively supporting them.
Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 4:08 pm
=== She’s in the public now and on probation. ===
She’s not on probation for this offense. This was her initial appearance, not her trial.
=== Do we have some sense this is a person who is a general danger ===
People who are willing to pepper spray a police officer is a general danger in my opinion. If this is something they are willing to do to a uniformed officer, what would they do to a civilian?
=== Probation is a punishment. ===
Not severe enough of a punishment for pepper spraying the police, in my opinion.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 4:36 pm
===Not severe enough of a punishment ===
Again, you act as if it’s all over. She would’ve bailed out under the old system and been home right now, and that’s ok with you and this is not? Over maybe $500? Seriously?
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 4:39 pm
===Not severe enough of a punishment for pepper spraying the police, in my opinion.===
The law isn’t an opinion
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 4:40 pm
=== Again, you act as if it’s all over. She would’ve bailed out under the old system and been home right now, and that’s ok with you and this is not? Over maybe $500? Seriously? ===
Rich, I never said any of those things. I am just responding to the comment by ArchPundit that was directed at me. Don’t read into it any more than that.
I think this cashless bail system can work - its just the prosecutors and the judges I don’t trust.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 4:41 pm
=== The law isn’t an opinion ===
Willy, I would like to respond to your comment but I do not know what its supposed to mean. My comment that you cite to has nothing to do with pre-trial release. A comment was directed to me that states that probation is punishment. Punishment comes after trial - not pre-trial (which I am sure you are aware). I acknowledge that probation is a form of punishment - my comment that you cite to was directed back at ArchPundit (who was directing his comment to me in response to an earlier post) indicating the probation is punishment. All my comment was intended to do was respond to ArchPundit saying that this type of crime should not be punished by probation. I acknowledged this was my opinion.
I don’t know what the purpose your pointing out that “the law is not an opinion” but it is clearly not within the context that I was talking to ArchPundit.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 4:48 pm
Was EHM (electronic home monitoring) ordered? This is a first-time offense, and people in the USA are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Comment by Ares Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 4:57 pm
- do that in most other IL counties -
Laughable. I’m from Cass County and know multiple people who have been involved in physical altercations with police officers. They all bonded out by the next morning.
You don’t know what you’re talking about.
Comment by Excitable Boy Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 4:58 pm
===I would like to respond to your comment but I do not know what its supposed to mean.===
Pretty simple.
Your opinion to the “end result”… justice to an opinion of what *is* Justice… welp, that’s where the law, where probation is acceptable, is how our system works.
It’s not perfect, but it shouldn’t be overwhelmingly penal to make you happy either.
That’s what it means.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 5:05 pm
@Donnie Elgin- help me out with this then. ..a 16 year old brought a loaded gun to Dixon High School last spring. Loaded .45. The Lee County sheriff released him to his parents.
He was going to use the gun in a romantic rival.
Released. Well documented.
Now, tell me more about the pepper spray standard in small counties.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 5:15 pm
===She’s not on probation for this offense. This was her initial appearance, not her trial.
Yes, but if she were on probation she would be in the public which was in response to you talking about her being released into the public.
.===eople who are willing to pepper spray a police officer is a general danger in my opinion. If this is something they are willing to do to a uniformed officer, what would they do to a civilian?
Given she doesn’t have at least a recent record in Chicago it doesn’t seem likely she would be attacking people randomly. Did she just flip? Now she is going to become a serial pepper sprayer? Leaving her in jail until trial isn’t protecting anyone unless she does all of a sudden start spraying people randomly and I would guess the next charge would mean she would be denied bail. Figuring out her punishment is for trial though a one time event like this isn’t likely to end up in jail time.
Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 5:20 pm
This is a bad poster child for the new system because she would have been released anyway. But it’s also irrelevant because we can expect this kind of thing going forward and sooner or later, there will be a far more heinous criminal committing a far more heinous crime. And then it will be a lot sticker politically than this dishonest nonsense from Curran and the right.
Comment by New Day Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 5:22 pm
I strongly support the elimination of bail. I have no problem with those deemed a danger to the community being incarcerated prior to their trial. Nothing at all contradictory between these two positions.
Comment by Common Sense Tuesday, Sep 19, 23 @ 7:06 pm