[Peace-discuss] Non-interaction with Champaign police

Mon Jul 19 09:34:47 CDT 2010

I'm 100% w/ David on this. I was on the STANGO 1 end of a similar situation re a witness reporting something that happened when police were not present. My situation was that a Tolono Unit 7 school bus driver told the police that I had passed him one morning in front of Sidney Grade School in Sidney IL when he had his stop sign out (not true -- I was off the road at the time). I knew nothing about the report until a couple of weeks later when the police appeared at my front door for a friendly chat during which I incriminated myself re my presence at the time and place, even tho' I was not guilty of the charge... (Btw,  live in Champaign, IL, ironically on the corner of Hessel Blvd and Elm St). It ended up that I did appear in court, and -- because the whole thing freaked me out -- I opted for a lesser charge and ultimately paid more than $500 in fines and lawyer fees. I'd say pursue this, David, if you have the heart and stomach for it, and heaven
 bless you for it! --Jenifer 

--- On Sat, 7/17/10, John W. <jbw292002 at gmail.com> wrote:

From: John W. <jbw292002 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Non-interaction with Champaign police
To: "David Green" <davegreen84 at yahoo.com>, "Laurie Solomon" <ls1000 at live.com>
Cc: "Peace Discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>, "C-U Citzens for Peace and Justice" <discuss at lists.communitycourtwatch.org>
Date: Saturday, July 17, 2010, 4:33 AM

I would add to what Laurie says a further practical, legal perspective.  If a police officer doesn't make an arrest based on something that s/he has personally witnessed, where does the probable cause for arrest come from?  And how is the prosecutor going to prosecute the case?

You the citizen, David, would have to press charges against the offending driver, and give testmony in court.  Are you willing to do that?  Will you change your mind later, out of fear of retaliation or some other motive?  You got the license number of the car, but can you identify the PERSON who was driving the car, beyond a reasonable doubt?  Can you find at least one other witness who can and will corroborate your testimony as to the identity of the driver and the facts of the incident, and will they also testify in court?  How does the police officer know that you're not pressing charges simply because you have some sort of personal vendetta against the driver or owner of the car?

In short, there has to be independent, corroborating evidence of a crime beyond your mere word as an alleged eyewitness.  If any element I have described above is dicey, as a matter of both law and practicality the prosecutor doesn't have a good case, the police officer doesn't have probable cause to make an arrest, and the state will have wasted a fair amount of time and money following up on your complaint.

I totally understand your frustration, having had similar experiences myself.  But I've also come, over the years, to recognize some of the practical problems standing in the way of the administration of "justice".

John Wason

On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Laurie Solomon <ls1000 at live.com> wrote:

Without details and specifics, it is difficult to draw any conclusions as to  why the male that you talked to responded  in the way that he did.  First, the other people who you mention as having called the police called specifically who - the Champaign police department, 911, or some other local police jurisdiction. We do not know for sure that they even really did call the police; they might have just told you that they were calling or had called the police. It also is quite possible that if the calls were placed to 911 or to another police department the information was never passed on to the Champaign department's front desk but got transmitted over the radio to police units, who may not have been in the immediate area so as to visibly respond to the call in what you might consider a timely manor or they might have had higher priority calls that kept them tied up.  We have no knowledge of the situation nor do we know if the complaints were
 passed on to investigation to do further investigation of the complaints the next day when the investigators come in to work. 

Second, the male who you spoke to on the phone was probably at the front desk at the Champaign Police department and a civilian receptionist or an intern, who was new to the job, not in the communications loop, or not very knowledgeable about the incident or how to handle your call.  But even if he was an officer, he may not have had any information about the incident or complaints concerning it.  The Champaign PD has some of the same internal communications problems as many bureaucracies; information often encounters delays when transmitted from one shift to the next, from one operating unit to another, and from one person to another.  Aside from time lags, information has been know to get lost in the communication process.  I know this from personal experiences as well as the experiences of my neighbors regarding actions with respect to their mentally challenged adopted daughter.

Moreover, the male you spoke with from what you say indicated that the officers on duty patrolling the streets if they had been alerted to this complaint were in fact acting on it by keeping their eye out for the vehicle bearing that license plate and would take some action if they came across the vehicle - e.g., question the owner or driver.  Since there were no police who saw the incident happen or who were able to respond immediately to the scene of the incident, this was the only action that they could take until either an officer sees that vehicle being driven recklessly or upon stopping it finds some evidence that it was indeed involved in some abnormal event.  Other than that, the complaint and information (including the license plate data) typically would be passed on to the investigation unit for further investigation; however, unless it is an emergency or serious incident or crime requiring the investigators on call to be called
 in, investigators usually have normal business working hours from Monday to Friday.  So it would not be until the next day, Monday, that the investigators would begin to check the license to see who owns the vehicle with that license plate, interview the owner to find out who was driving the vehicle and where at what time, possibly examine the vehicle, interview the complainants and witnesses, etc.  Thus, your impression that he case was either closed or being ignored may be wrong.  Similarly, your feeling that the case was being treated with disinterest may also be misplaced.  We only have your impressions but none of the substantive details and specifics upon which an assessment can be made.

From: David Green 
Sent: Friday, July 16, 2010 6:56 PM
To: Discuss Courtwatch ; Peace Discuss 
Subject: [Peace-discuss] Non-interaction with Champaign police

This past Sunday, sometime between 6:00 and 6:30 in the evening, I was walking around the paved track at Hessel Park. As I approached the entrance to the park (north side, Elm St.), I witnessed a white Mustang convertible with a young, white, male driver (along), speeding along Grandview, the street the semi-circles the park from Kirby to Elm to Kirby.  He was travelling east towards Elm at at least 60 mph. Again, this was on a nice evening with much activity at the park. His car spun out of control and he careened off of Grandview into a front yard, coming to a halt. He drove back out over the short embankment (there are no sidewalks on Grandview), out back onto Grandview, and turned left, going North up Elm St. towards Hessel Ave. He continued surpassing the speed limit. He did stop at the stop sign at the corner of Hessel and Elm. 

I caught his license plate, easier because it was personalized: STANGO 1. As I continued walking around the park, I noticed a gentlemen on his cell phone. I assumed he was calling the police, which was correct. I told him the license plate. Shortly after, there was another man calling police, and I also told him the license plate. 

Later in the evening, I called the CPD--the public number, not 911. I informed the male answering the phone about my experience, assuming he had already heard from the others. I offered myself as a witness. He wasn't particularly interested. He told me that there had been no officers in the area at the time of the incident, and gave me the impression that the case was closed, unless other officers came across this driver during the evening.

I am no making moralistic judgments about this young man driving the car. I have no idea what circumstances may have prompted this behavior. Nevertheless, a car travelling at that speed and going out of control is clearly life-threatening. If there had been someone in that front yard, they could have been killed.

I am quite sure that STANGO 1 is a greater threat to public safety than Kiwane, the young man at Douglas Park, and any number of others.

I assume that the CPD can access information on the basis of the license plate, at least the residence of the owner of the car.

What accounts for this disinterest?

David Green

-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20100719/9dc7d227/attachment.html>