That ruling in Cook County Circuit Court came on Friday, and I’m going to have to respect the judgment because I wasn’t there during the civil trial to hear every bit of evidence for myself.
BUT
I HAVE to admit that reading the reports that came from the trial make me
wonder about the logic of what was repeatedly called police “protocol” to
justify the way the cops handled the scene.
This
particular lawsuit wound up getting coverage because the woman killed in the auto
accident wound up being stripped partially naked when photographers taking
pictures of the scene as possible evidence in future criminal proceedings.
The
girl’s mother seems to feel her daughter was violated by such acts,
particularly since the fact wound up spurring rumors that the girl was somehow
naked and having sex at the time of the car crash.
As
it turned out, the driver of the vehicle tried claiming the girl was straddling
him at the time – claiming that was what caused him to lose control of the
vehicle.
BUT
INVESTIGATORS WERE able to show that it was impossible for any such act to have
occurred. Meaning the driver, himself, was to blame for losing control of the
vehicle. He wound up being found guilty of criminal charges and is now serving
a prison sentence. The photographs that were the focus of this lawsuit were
supposedly key evidence in gaining his conviction.
Sheriff’s
police claimed during the trial that their investigators were merely following
the standard procedure for gathering up a crime scene (which is what the accident
site near 147th Street and Oak Park Avenue had become). Since crime
scenes are never pretty and often garish, it is only inevitable that the
evidence would be less than proper.
I
don’t doubt that those crime scene photographers wind up seeing grotesque
images that would wind up bothering the sensibilities of the deceased’s
relatives.
But
I never did read anyone explaining just why some of the photographs of the
accident scene wound up showing the girl fully-clothed, and others showed her
body moved to a tarp placed on the open ground where she was then stripped partially
nude.
MY
GUT REACTION is to wonder why this wasn’t construed as tampering with a crime
scene – somehow altering the reality of what was there. No clear explanation
was ever provided that I am aware of, and now I doubt that one ever will.
Not
that it seemed to bother the jury that spent a good chunk of the day on Friday
resolving the testimony they heard during all of last week. They seem to want
to believe the police behaved professionally. Then again, some people will always argue on behalf of the police, no matter how extreme the evidence against them seems to be.
That
is the verdict reached by a jury of peers, and it is what will remain as the
outcome of this case – unless someone wants to try taking this to the Illinois
appeals court and can come up with a specific bit of evidence that was wrongly
excluded during the lawsuit’s trial.
After
all, merely not liking a jury’s verdict is insufficient reason to justify
granting an appeal.
PERHAPS
THE MOTHER realizes that, since I read in newspaper accounts during the weekend
that she is pleased she was able to publicly say her daughter wasn’t having sex
or being naked or doing anything else that might be considered sordid at the
time of her death.
For
her sake, I hope she is capable of getting on with her life – which for the
past five years and for the remainder of it will be without her daughter.
No
amount of money that she might have received from Cook County as a financial
reward from her lawsuit would have brought her daughter back.
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment