It won’t be easy to lock up Jason Van Dyke and ‘throw away’ key, it seems

It seems like not all that long ago that a Cook County jury returned the verdict that turned one-time Chicago cop Jason Van Dyke into a convicted killer, albeit one of the second degree.

VAN DYKE: A legal break? Or justice!?

Remember the elation that some people made a point of showing that day, marching through the streets of downtown Chicago to literally make it clear they were ecstatic at the thought that a white cop was off to prison.

IN THEIR WILDEST fantasies for something close to a life prison term. Something that would show what an outrage it was that he thought he could claim self-defense and “just doing his job” to justify the multiple gunshots he fired at a teenage boy – one who happened to be black.

Some went so far as to claim it was evidence that “justice” had been served against a “killer cop.”

While others, I’m sure, sat and stewed at the very thought that a police officer was being punished for doing his job – which on occasion requires use of physical force.

That was then. This is now!

FOR THE SUPREME Court of Illinois came down with a ruling Tuesday that I’m sure will infuriate the masses who were marching in the streets last year.

Basically, they backed up the way that Judge Vincent Gaughan handled the sentencing. Which basically was to give him a light prison term on the second-degree murder conviction, while ignoring all the aggravated battery charges that the jury piled on to their decision.

Those charges, all 16 – one for each pistol shot Van Dyke fired at his youthful assailant, were the ones that were supposed to add up to so much prison time that we’d literally have Van Dyke agonizing at the thought of decade upon decade in prison before finally dying.

Except, perhaps, for those ghoulish types whose idea of humor would be to have Van Dyke use a bed sheet to hang himself in his cell.

THAT DOESN’T SEEM in the cards.

For the Supreme Court rejected a request by the Illinois Attorney General’s office to reject the just-over-six-year prison term that Gaughan handed down.

They wanted the almighty Supreme Court to force Gaughan to resentence him in a way that would be more in keeping for those who want to see Van Dyke killed like a killer cop. Which now just ain’t a gonna happen!

The reality is that while I’m sure there are still legal motions that could be attempted on the off-hopes that a law clerk might be swayed enough to tell his judge to consider the merits of such an appeal, the point is they’re going to be long-shots.

WE MAY HAVE to accept the fact that the legal merits of the Van Dyke case are resolved. Now it’s just a matter of Van Dyke “doing” his time – which with time off for good behavior will come to about three years. He’s going to have something resembling a life left after he is released.

Of course, there’s always the possibility that the separation will turn out to be too much for the Van Dyke family – which may well be permanently fractured. That is something we will have to wait and see for ourselves.

I’m also sure that Van Dyke, now being held in a prison facility in upstate New York himself will think he’s suffering amply – his case is so notorious there isn’t a prison facility in Illinois capable of holding him without constant repeats of that beating incident while in a cell in Danbury, Ct., got national notoriety.

While others, I’m sure, will forevermore claim his fate is still better than the one Laquan McDonald suffered – an eternal rest in death at a Forest Park cemetery. A suburb whose residents likely would have freaked out and called for the cops if the teenager had ever set foot there while alive.

  -30-

The issue that won’t die; Van Dyke fate

Former Chicago police officer Jason Van Dyke may now be a convicted felon sentenced to serve a few years in prison (although Illinois Corrections Department officials still won’t say exactly which one) for the death of a teenager – but the racially-tinged shooting incident won’t wither away.

VAN DYKE: Case lingers on

For it seems that both the special prosecutor who oversaw the criminal case AND the Illinois attorney general’s office are considering legal maneuvers that could try to force a new prison sentence to be imposed.

SOMETHING, PERHAPS, CLOSER to the 18 to 20 years that prosecutors sought from Judge Vincent Gaughan, rather than the 6-year, 9-month sentence (of which he’s already done 3 months in the Rock Island County jail) that could see him released in a little over three years time.

Van Dyke was found guilty last autumn on a charge of murder in the second degree (implying there was some mitigating factor that could sort of justify the killing) and multiple counts of aggravated battery.

Literally one count for each of the 16 shots that Van Dyke was found to have fired at Laquan McDonald. Which theoretically could have resulted in prison time for each shot and could have added up to something close to 100 years of time,

In my own (admittedly non-law school educated) mind, that combination of charges never made sense. They conflicted with each other, and the real question to me about the sentencing that took place last week was how would Gaughan manage to reconcile the mismatch.

McDONALD: Means more in death than life

HE WOUND UP doing so by basing the sentence for Van Dyke off the second-degree murder charge and ignoring all those additional charges that could have brought about the lengthy, life-like prison term that the activist types eager to see imposed on a white cop for killing a black male who hadn’t even reached the age of maturity back on that October 2014 night that he was shot to death because he was acting erratically (his mind was messed up on illicit drugs that night) while walking around the neighborhood near a Burger King franchise.

It seems the legal minds wishing to appease those activists are wondering if the Illinois Supreme Court could issue a mandamus order – which essentially would say Gaughan screwed up and emphasized the wrong criminal charge.

Which could result in a resentencing with results more satisfactory to those people who back in autumn marched through the streets of downtown Chicago in celebration of the fact that a “cracker cop” got what he deserved by being found guilty.

RAOUL: Will he take on appeal?

We’ll have to see if Joseph McMahon (the special prosecutor brought in from suburban Kane County) or newly-elected state Attorney General Kwame Raoul wants to take on this issue – or is willing to accept the prison time that Van Dyke already must serve.

SOME WILL SAY that Van Dyke is now a former cop with a criminal record – which pretty much ruins him for any type of life he had hoped to live. They’re likely to think that prolonging this legal argument only stirs up more resentment amongst the city’s populace.

Although others will think the resentment lingers for as long as Van Dyke gets a penalty less severe than their imaginations have concocted.

This may be the real harm of the racist policies that were considered legitimate in our society in the past – they’ve created so much anger that it’s almost like we’re going to need white people to suffer unjustly in order to balance things out.

Which would only serve to ensure these racial tensions linger amongst us for decades to come – particularly fed on by nitwits in support of the Age of Trump we now live in who may well want to think that the only victim in this whole affair is Van Dyke himself!

OF COURSE, THERE will be others eager to keep the memory of this incident alive. Consider that newly-elected state Rep. Anne Stava-Murray, D-Naperville, is enhancing her reputation as someone eager to draw attention to herself by ticking off the sensibilities of political people around her.

STAVA-MURRAY: Wants McDonald Act

Stava-Murray introduced as her first bill ever a measure creating the Laquan McDonald Act. A measure applying only to Chicago and creating procedures by which we could have recall elections for mayor and alderman in Chicago and state’s attorney in Cook County.

It really does come across as an attention-grabber from the freshman legislator who already has indicated she’s not seeking re-election in 2020 – and instead will challenge Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., for his post on Capitol Hill. It certainly isn’t about necessary changes to the law – the electorate dumped Anita Alvarez as state’s attorney back in 2016 and Rahm Emanuel didn’t even try to seek re-election, largely because of public disgust over what happened to Laquan.

As though we’re supposed to forever remember Laquan, and not think of that silly clown and his mediocre hamburgers every time we hear the phrase “McDonald” in the future.

  -30-

Everybody upset w/ Van Dyke verdict

I suspect there was a moment, however brief, of joy when Judge Vincent Gaughan said “81 …,” giving people the impression that a former Chicago cop convicted of the shooting death of a 17-year-old black teen was about to put the 40-year-old cop away to rot in prison for life.

VAN DYKE: Nearly 7 years

But then, Gaughan continued with “… months,” not years.

AS IN GAUGHAN decided that his prison term will only last a period of just under seven years – of which he’s already served three months in the county jail out in Rock Island, Ill.

Considering that the family of Laquan McDonald came out and said Friday that they thought a prison term of at least 20 years was essential for Van Dyke to be properly punished.

And, in fact, prosecutors themselves made a recommendation of an 18- to 20-year prison term for Van Dyke.

But Gaughan ultimately chose to concoct a prison term based off the fact that Van Dyke was found guilty of a second-degree murder charge, and not to factor in all those additional counts of aggravated battery with a firearm – which in theory could have made for a prison term of nearly 100 years possible.

“A JOKE AND a slap in the face,” along with a slew of obscenities, was the reaction of McDonald’s family to the prison sentence after the sentence was handed down following a day-long sentencing hearing that occurred Friday.

McDONALD: Gone nearly as long as Van Dyke

But Gaughan made a point of saying he figured “100 percent” of people were going to be offended by his sentence. I don’t doubt that, because Van Dyke’s family made emotional pleas saying they have already suffered severely by the loss of Jason to incarceration for any length of time.

As it was, they argued that a sentence of probation would have been appropriate. Which I don’t doubt was an idea of great offense to the McDonald family. As it was, Laquan’s uncle read a letter into the record on Friday that was written as though it was crafted by McDonald himself.

Telling us that he was trying to make something of his life, give up his drug addictions, and that Van Dyke, by firing the 16 shots into his body, deprived him of that opportunity.

GAUGHAN: Upset 100 percent of people

THERE IS ONE thing that has to be conceded – it could have gone much worse for Van Dyke. He’ll be about 46 years old when he is released from prison. In short, he has a chance to put together a “rest of his life.” Even though I don’t doubt he’ll view the next six or so years as the most hellish experience he’ll ever have to endure.

It’s not going to be a pretty experience for a law enforcement officer. But some people see this whole Van Dyke ordeal as being about making police suffer.

If anything, they’re even more upset by the ruling earlier this week that three police officers facing criminal charges for filing false reports about what it was Van Dyke did to McDonald were NOT guilty.

There are those who wanted Van Dyke to rot in prison, and see a complete crackdown on the Chicago Police Department. Anything short of that is going to cause them to feel nothing but contempt for our legal system.

THEN AGAIN, THERE probably is nothing that would please those individuals. Some people get way too hung up on the concept of retribution. Even though what we as a society ought to be trying to do is figure out the way to move beyond this incident.

McCARTHY: Would win be seen as police victory?

Because the reality of the whole affair is that there’s nothing that can be done to bring Laquan McDonald back to life. There’s nothing that will restore the type of life that Jason Van Dyke had, or will protect his family from the harm they’re suffering as a result of what happened on that October night of 2014.

Of course, there could be one coming blow in the near future that would further “rub it in” the very notion that law enforcement is protecting itself, and NOT the public. What happens if Garry McCarthy somehow wins the mayoral election of February and run-off of April?

For McCarthy was the police superintendent who lost his job because of Van Dyke’s actions. Would the people eager to protect the police image be strong enough to make him our city’s mayor?

  -30-

Do we really give police officers this much authority to use physical force?

Perhaps it is only appropriate that on the first day of activity in the criminal trial of police officer Jason Van Dyke, attention was brought to the concept that the alleged criminal activity was captured on video.

Serving and protecting us? Or harassment?

Let’s be honest – if that video from a police officer’s own camera didn’t exist, it’s very likely that there would be no trial and Van Dyke would have spent the past four years continuing to work his beat and be one of the officers allegedly enforcing the laws for the people of Chicago.

WHEN OPENING STATEMENTS were made Monday at the Criminal Courts building (Judge Vincent Gaughan ultimately rejected all notions of moving the trial outside of Chicago), special prosecutor Joseph McMahon emphasized the video and the number of shots (16) from his pistol that Van Dyke fired into the body of Laquan McDonald.

In a touch of hamming things up a bit, McMahon literally pounded his fist on a lectern to do a count-down of each shot, and even emphasized the point when the eighth shot was fired – so as to imply that Van Dyke wasn’t even close to finishing his gunfire at that point.

Almost as though he thinks (and wants the jury to believe) that everything else is irrelevant, and we all ought to just issue the “guilty” verdict right now – saving us all time and hassle by carting Van Dyke off to prison right now.

But the legal process instead will be spending the next few weeks trying to establish whether there was any justification for the police officer’s actions.

WHICH ACTUALLY MADE another remark McMahon made all the more interesting.

He tried to summarize the incident of Oct. 20, 2014 (the night McDonald died) as one where Van Dyke saw, “a black boy (McDonald was 17) walking down a street with a chain-link fence with the audacity to ignore the police.”

But the reality is that we do give police significant authority to stop people. While they’re supposed to have “probable cause” to justify their actions, the reality is that it really doesn’t take much to give a cop the ability to question someone they find suspicious.

Trying to walk away from the police can be construed as resisting arrest. And if McDonald really was carrying a knife (as has been reported), that may well make this an “open-and-shut” case of a police officer being justified in using force – which would make the case one of justifiable homicide.

NOT THE “MURDER” that many have spent the past few years decrying the death of McDonald as being.

Now I’m not in the courtroom to see any of this. I don’t doubt that the jury is going to manage to offend some people – no matter how they choose to interpret any of this. I don’t expect anyone will be satisfied by the ultimate outcome of this trial.

I suspect the eventual verdict will offend the beliefs of everybody who wants to think this is a clear-cut case.

In reality, there is only one definitive “fact,” Jason Van Dyke did fire 16 shots from his weapon that killed Laquan McDonald.

THE REST OF the story? We’re going to get an up-close lesson as to just how much force police are allowed to use in the act of doing their jobs; which amount to that old cliché about “serving and protecting” the public.

On the one hand, we wouldn’t be issuing police officers those pistols and other countless weapons if we didn’t expect there would be circumstances upon which they would have to use them.

Then again, we do need to have some sense of restraint – otherwise our “protectors” would be nothing more than the official city-sponsored goon squad. Certainly not something anybody with sense would want to see.

Where is the “line” between force and abuse? That question really is the key to comprehending everything that we’ll see and hear during the trial’s coming weeks.

  -30-

Would Chicago be better off if Van Dyke were to get a bench trial?

Jason Van Dyke, the Chicago police officer about to go on trial for a 2014 shooting death of a teenager, has until Friday to decide whether he wants his fate determined by a jury of his so-called peers, or by a judge.

GAUGHAN: Will he, or jurors, decide fate?

I can’t help but think we as a society would be better off if he were to get a bench trial – as in letting a judge decide his fate based solely on the merits of the law.

IT’S NOT THAT I have all that much faith in the mindset of the judiciary. It’s more that I suspect there’s no way any group of individuals will be capable of putting aside their emotions with this case.

We’re more likely to avoid offending the sensibilities of our society if we put this case into the hands of a judge.

Not that we can avoid offending people. When it comes to Van Dyke and the death of Laquan McDonald, there are going to be people who will be grossly offended – no matter how the case is resolved.

As things stand going into Friday, a 12-member jury has been picked, and officials say they expect four alternates who could be called upon if one of the dozen jurors winds up having to withdraw could be chosen soon.

WHICH IS WHY Judge Vincent Gaughan has given Van Dyke and his legal counsel until Friday to make the decision – jury trial, or bench trial?

If Van Dyke ultimately decides on a bench trial, then the outcome will be solely up to Gaughan. All of the jurors who have thus far been chosen will be dismissed – and they won’t ever have to make a decision on what should become of the cop who got captured on video firing 16 shots into McDonald’s body.

VAN DYKE:A decision to make by Friday

Defense, of course, sees this as a case of the teenager wielding a knife while walking down the street and behaving in ways that made it seem as though he was a threat to the public.

It’s apparent that Van Dyke took actions that resulted in McDonald’s death; although police officers are given authority to use deadly force on the job. Which makes this a trial solely about determining the line between justifiable homicide and murder.

IT’S SAD THAT this is going to become a race-tinged case. There already are those upset that the 12-member jury apparently has seven white people, three Latinos, one Asian and ONLY one black person.

The trial hasn’t even begun, and we’re already getting the accusations that defense attorneys went out of their way to eliminate as many black people from jury consideration as possible.

I don’t care if all four alternates wind up being African-American; we’ll get the claims that a group of white people refused to administer justice against a white cop. Although there will be others who will rant and rage about the notion of Van Dyke being prosecuted BECAUSE he’s white.

They’ll think acquittal is the only possible outcome that won’t be a travesty.

THAT IS WHY I’d prefer this to be a bench trial. Even though I’m sure the masses of Chicagoans who have taken an interest in this case will be prepared to decimate the legal reputation of Gaughan if he doesn’t ultimately rule in their favor with regards to Van Dyke. I actually have more faith in a judge to make such a decision than so-called civilians, and to understand the nuances of "the law" than some individual who likely is peeved that his/her life is being disrupted for a few weeks by being called upon for jury duty,

McDONALD: Chgo gets to relive his death

Because for every person determined to think Van Dyke is being unjustly prosecuted, there are also masses determined to believe that the only reasonable outcome is for Van Dyke to be brutalized while serving a prison term.

This truly is an ugly trial; one that will bring out all the nasty elements of our society. A part of me thinks we’d have been better off if Gaughan had accepted the suggestions that this trial venue be transferred to somewhere else.

It also makes me all the more grateful that my own name didn’t get called for consideration of jury duty because (with two uncles who served as Chicago police officers) I honestly don’t know how I’d have handled the questioning over whether I could be impartial in deciding between the gun-wielding cop or the knife-wielding teen.

  -30-

A DAY IN THE LIFE (of Chicago): Call it a ‘win’ for Quinn – for now

One-time Gov. Pat Quinn, the man who’s leading the effort to tell Rahm Emanuel he can’t run for a third term as Chicago mayor, has at least one point going in his favor.

Pat Quinn not likely to 'play nice' … 

The Chicago Board of Elections Commissioners says that amongst the 87,000-plus signatures of support on the nominating petitions to put a term limits proposal on the ballot for the Nov. 6 elections in the city, there are 54,995 that are valid.

WHICH IS IN excess of the 52,533 minimum that Quinn needs to have for his measure to have a chance of being put up for consideration by voters.

Of course, there still are issues of whether there’s room for Quinn’s referendum question because of the City Council’s effort to crowd stray issues off the ballot. There’s also the issue of whether Quinn goofed when his petitions asked people to consider both term limits AND creation of a consumer advocate for taxpayers.

An issue that some people cynically say is meant to create a position that Quinn himself could hold in the future. Which would be a brilliant political move, if he can pull it off.

Eliminate Emanuel (who already has served two terms as Chicago mayor) and gain himself a post to fill – since he lost his bid for Illinois attorney general back in the primary and may not be able to win election to a more-conventional political post.

… as he challenges Rahm Emanuel's political future

THE BOTTOM LINE amongst all this is that there’s a long way to go before we know if the mayoral election cycle of 2019 will consist of Emanuel and a dozen-or-so people who can only fantasize about replacing him; or will it be just the political dreamers on the ballot next year.

Because even if the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners thinks in favor of the Mighty Quinn, this is a case bound to wind up with lawsuits in the courts and all of the rulings appealed all the way to the very top.

It will be the Illinois Supreme Court that ultimately decides whether or not Quinn’s hard-ball political maneuvering actually bears some line of logic within the law.

What other issues are of note this coming week in this wonderous land along the southwestern shores of Lake Michigan?

ORDER IN THE COURT? I’LL TAKE A HAM-ON-RYE:  Anybody who seriously watches our legal system knows that the people who work in at have touches of “control freak” within them.

VAN DYKE: Was his speaking out contemptable

Take the case of Jason Van Dyke, the Chicago cop facing criminal charges for the shooting death of a teenager. He’s supposed to go on trial this week, but the legal proceedings will step up with a special hearing on Saturday – with the great legal issue of whether Van Dyke ought to be held in jail while the trial takes place.

Van Dyke gave interviews to the Chicago Tribune and to WFLD-TV, trying to portray the public perception of himself as something other than a thug. That has the special prosecutor brought in to handle the case upset – and he wants Judge Vincent Gaughan to find the cop in contempt.

Considering that Gaughan has gone to extremes to control what people have been able to say publicly about this case, he may well decide in favor as part of his efforts to maintain order. Anyway, it means the activity around the Criminal Courts building will be more active compared to what usually would take place in the days of a Labor Day holiday weekend,

JAZZ ‘FANS’:  It will be an intriguing weekend for fans of jazz music. The city’s annual Jazz Festival will take place through Sunday, with famed composer Ramsey Lewis scheduled to give on Saturday what some are billing as his final Chicago concert ever. 

Jazz 'fans likely to celebrate this weekend

Although I hear that phrase and can’t help but wonder if Lewis, who has produced more than 80 albums during his lengthy career, has a touch of the Rolling Stones in him. How many times have we heard of that crew making their “last performance ever” – or last until they change their mind and decide to perform yet again.

One other thought. Should the gubernatorial campaign of J.B. Pritzker consider the Jazz Fest, and all other events held at the Pritzker Pavilion in Millennium Park, to be free advertising?

  -30-

Judge trying to keep a handle on what happens during the Van Dyke trial

The legal proceedings meant to ready the Cook County courts to decide the legal fate of Chicago Police officer Jason Van Dyke are taking a unique twist – largely because we don’t know exactly what is happening.

GAUGHAN: Not going to win popularity contest

Judge Vincent Gaughan closed off the hearings related to the legal case on Friday, and also indicated that at least one day’s worth of legal hearings to be held this week also will be closed off.

THERE ARE THOSE who are trying to spin this as a judge behaving like a control freak; although when I think about it I see a judge who’s trying to prevent this particular criminal case from becoming a legal circus.

Which is something that could all-too-easily happen, because of the nature of this particular case. This is the officer who’s facing criminal charges for the shooting death of a 17-year-old boy, Laquan McDonald.

The kind of people inclined to view police as some sort of criminal entity itself are hoping desperately that “justice” will prevail and that the corrupt, killer cop will wind up going to prison himself.

I don’t doubt there are some people who will only be satisfied if Van Dyke winds up in a maximum-security prison and winds up being assaulted by his fellow inmates.

WHILE THERE ARE other individuals who are inclined to believe that far too much is being made of the concept of police brutality and that they want a sense of law and order to prevail. They want a police officer to be rewarded for using a level of force necessary to deal with a dangerous official.

Which means that in the Van Dyke trial, there’s going to be efforts to bring out as much dirt about McDonald as possible. To create a sense that perhaps the officer wasn’t reacting crazily out-of-line when he fired 16 shots at the teenager.

That, according to the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times, was the purpose of the Friday court hearing. Up to nine people who could provide testimony about the teenage boy and his history of bad behavior supposedly were called upon during a more-than-two-hour court hearing.

VAN DYKE: Cop? Or crook?

For his part, Gaughan said the need for secrecy is because the people who appeared in court could wind up facing public harassment IF it became known they said something that could be used favorably on behalf of Van Dyke.

HE’S NOT WRONG. There will be some people determined to ensure that only the most derogatory impression of Van Dyke comes out. They’re going to react hostilely toward any mention of McDonald’s criminal record. They’re going to consider all that irrelevant.

While the “law and order” crowd will want to view it as the only relevant bits of evidence.

Gaughan is in a position where he’s going to have to balance out these conflicting views. He’s going to be deciding now just how much of all this is truly relevant and ought to be permitted to come up during the eventual criminal trial that likely will take place some time this summer.

One mistake now, and we could wind up with the Van Dyke trial being tainted and overturned on appeal.

IT IS A case that likely will offend many Chicagoans, regardless of how it turns out and what verdict ultimately is rendered by the eventual jury that is picked to decide the officer’s fate.

McDONALD: How honest is this image?

Gaughan, I’m sure, knows he’s not going to win any popularity contests, no matter how he conducts himself during coming months.

In fact, my own belief is that the anger over this case is going to be intense whether conviction or acquittal is the ultimate outcome for Van Dyke.

It’s just a matter of which group is going to be screaming the loudest.

  -30-

I’m sure Van Dyke feels picked upon by reporter-type he wanted to silence

I felt a touch of relief when I learned Wednesday that a Cook County judge tossed out a subpoena that would have forced a freelance writer to get into the inner workings of how he learned the details that make us think Chicago cop Jason Van Dyke used excessive force in the 2014 shooting death of a 17-year-old.

VAN DYKE: Wants people to quit talking

For it was clear that the only reason for dragging reporter-type Jamie Kalvan into the criminal proceedings involving Van Dyke and the death of Laquan McDonald was to harass.

TO PICK AT a reporter-type for butting into something the police mentality would think was none of his business to look into. And to perhaps get the reporting process tangled up in so much legalese that when a jury someday does have to sift through the evidence presented in a trial, it will be so confused that it can’t decide anything beyond a reasonable doubt and will have to go with “not guilty.”

Meaning that getting sidetracked off on only marginally-related issues has little to nothing to do with getting at “the truth.”

It was good to learn that Judge Vincent Gaughan (who once presided over the trial of R. Kelly) saw things similarly; issuing a written explanation of his ruling to toss the subpoena for Kalvan’s testimony on the grounds it would be a “fishing expedition” to try to produce “information that the timeline of events, discovery documents and testimony suggest simply does not exist.”

Now in my own time as a reporter-type, I’ll admit to never having been called upon to appear in court.

ALTHOUGH I ONCE did have to give a deposition in a lawsuit filed by a woman who had lost her municipal government job. She was suing for damages, claiming city officials went out of their way to single her out for abuse.

I recall that deposition as being one in which I was asked to recall every petty action and insult that might have ever been directed her way in my presence.

Which was difficult because most of the stuff was so petty and minor I had long forgotten about the details. It was the kind of petty trivia I made a point of forgetting so as to avoid clogging my brain with stupid stuff. I have enough significant detail to remember without the trivia overflowing my mental capacity.

Besides, like many other reporter-types, my view is that anything relevant to a story I report actually goes into the copy I write.

JUST AS I’M presuming Kalvan has done the same with his own stories. My own self-interest would say that my stories could be offered up as evidence.

Of course, defense attorney-types want someone they can have answer back to them, and get caught up in double-talk. Then again, prosecutors will do the same; if it benefits their case.

The legal process is most concerned with coming up with a “guilty” verdict – with “not guilty” being the end result if guilt cannot be proven beyond that shadow of reasonable doubt.

This is an ongoing criminal case involving Van Dyke, who’s going to have to show that the 16 shots he fired at McDonald were not excessive and that the teen male truly was a serious threat who had to be “put down,” so to speak.

I DON’T DOUBT Van Dyke will do whatever he feels necessary to prevent his reputation from permanent damage – although it’s most likely that even an acquittal would not clear him in the minds of a certain segment of society.

The ones for whom only a conviction will assuage their anger.

In short, this is a very serious issue with significant life consequences to many people.

Seeing that the case will get bogged down in just a bit less trivia by refusing to turn the case into a legal proceeding about reportorial process may be the first step to thinking the courts may someday get at “the truth” about why Van Dyke acted the way he did toward McDonald.

  -30-