JOLIET, IL — In 11 weeks, Will County's Jail on South Chicago Street may become a mostly empty government building as most of the felony defendants will no longer be staying there for several months or years at a time, according to Will County State's Attorney Jim Glasgow.
Last week, there were more than 600 inmates living inside the Will County Jail.
Of those, Glasgow said, "about 500 qualify for consideration of release under the new law. About half (250) would walk out on Day One. The others, we could move for (another) 90 days" of incarceration.
Find out what's happening in Jolietwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
After the Safe-T Act takes effect Jan. 1, hundreds of defendants charged with a host of major felonies won't necessarily wind up inside Will County's Jail as they await trial in 2023 and beyond.
"I won't be able to protect the people of Will County under the new law," Glasgow told Joliet Patch during last week's interview. "The problem is the law is truly unconstitutional and can't be amended."
Find out what's happening in Jolietwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
With cash bail going away in Illinois, the days of Joliet area inmates being held on a significant cash bail at the Will County Jail awaiting trial for burglary, robbery, arson, forgery or kidnapping will become a thing of the past, according to Glasgow.
Serious charges such as second-degree murder, carjacking, intimidation, reckless homicide and aggravated battery will no longer be considered detainable offenses for future Will County inmates. Someone charged, for instance, with aggravated DUI, aggravated fleeing and eluding the police, criminal trespass or drug-induced homicide won't be getting booked and processed into the Will County Jail, either, Glasgow's staff noted.
Also, because of the Safe-T-Act, there will be a 90-day requirement for criminal defendants going to trial "or they get out," Glasgow explained to Joliet Patch.
"Ninety days or you're out, and if you don't show up for your (eventual) trial, I can't get an arrest warrant, there's no warrant," Glasgow said. "We can't use force, and we can't call the SWAT team."
In September, Glasgow garnered headlines as he became one of the most high-profile prosecutors in Illinois to file a lawsuit against Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Attorney General Kwame Raoul in hopes of preventing the Safe-T-Act from taking effect come January.
Glasgow told Joliet Patch last week that he strongly believes an injunction will be put in place to prevent the Safe-T-Act from being implemented in Will County come January.
Patch coverage: Safe-T-Act Lawsuit: Glasgow Wants To Stop Controversial Measure
"I'm confident I'm going to win my lawsuit," Glasgow assured Patch last week.
Glasgow said one of the scariest aspects of the new Safe-T-Act is that repeat drunken drivers and hard-core drug pushers involved with the sale of heroin and Fentanyl will be getting released from custody rather than remain behind bars at the Will County Jail awaiting their trial.
"The repeat DUI offender, that is a person who is obviously very dangerous," Glasgow said. "The person with repeat DUIs is a danger to themselves and society, and we can't detain them."
The odds are slim, Glasgow predicted, that someone given pretrial release on a major drug-dealing offense will voluntarily return to the Will County Courthouse to stand trial.
"A guy facing drug offenses involving fentanyl, he can't truly be detained, a cartel guy, and he'll walk out the door and go back to Mexico," Glasgow vowed.
Glasgow said the expectation that Will County's team of prosecutors must be ready to take every felony defendant to trial within 90 days, "it's absolutely absurd."
Right now, many of Will County's first-degree murder defendants wait four or five years before their case goes to a jury or bench trial.
Most of the time, it's the defendants or their defense lawyers who are regularly asking for delays and continuances, Glasgow said.
But with the new 90-day provision under the Safe-T-Act, Glasgow figures practically everyone will want to have their case go to trial even though "we can't try a sophisticated case in 90 days," Glasgow said, pointing out how the Joliet Outlaws murder case against Jeremy Boshears took five years before the trial finally started in April.
Boshears was first arrested in November 2017.
Jeremy Boshears Testifies: 'I Was Freaking Out, I Threw Up'
As for Will County's first-degree murder defendants, "they've got nothing to lose by demanding trial in 90 days," Glasgow said.
If anybody should remain incarcerated while awaiting their trial, it's someone arrested for repeat drunken driving, but the provisions of the new Safe-T-Act will no longer allow that to happen, Glasgow noted.
He said all of these public safety problems now facing his State's Attorney's Office as well as the Joliet Police Department and other law enforcement agencies were the direct result of the actions of Illinois' state lawmakers in Springfield.
Glasgow has been one of the fiercest opponents of the Safe-T-Act, even though Glasgow is a Democrat, and the bill had overwhelming support from state Democrats, including Pritzker.
Glasgow's lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment and injunction is brought against Pritzker, Raoul, House Speaker Emanuel Christopher Welch and Senate President Don Harmon in their official capacities.
"The legislature cannot turn a judge into a stuffed animal, and they've done that here, and I'm appalled that they've done that," Glasgow said, referring to the end of the cash bail system across the state of Illinois.
"I'm not against bail reform, and New Jersey has a system in place that has significant reform," Glasgow explained.
New Jersey has reduced its jail population by 44 percent, and there has been no significant increase in violent crime, according to Will County's long-time state's attorney.
DETENTION ONLY 90 DAYS
Here is the provision requiring pretrial release if the trial is not held within 90 days:
(i) Detention. If the court enters an order for the detention of the defendant pursuant to subsection (e) of this Section, the defendant shall be brought to trial on the offense for which he is detained within 90 days after the date on which the order for detention was entered. If the defendant is not brought to trial within the 90 day period required by the preceding sentence, he shall not be denied pretrial release. In computing the 90 day period, the court shall omit any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted at the request of the defendant. 725 ILCS 110-6.
New Jersey Statute For Comparison
The eligible defendant shall not remain detained in jail for more than 90 days, not counting excludable time for reasonable delays as set forth in subsection b. of this section, prior to the return of an indictment.
If the eligible defendant is not indicted within that period of time, the eligible defendant shall be released from jail unless, on motion of the prosecutor, the court finds that a substantial and unjustifiable risk to the safety of any other person or the community or the obstruction of the criminal justice process would result from the eligible defendant's release from custody, so that no appropriate conditions for the eligible defendant's release could reasonably address that risk, and also finds that the failure to indict the eligible defendant in accordance with the time requirement set forth in this subparagraph was not due to unreasonable delay by the prosecutor.
If the court finds that a substantial and unjustifiable risk to the safety of any other person or the community or the obstruction of the criminal justice process would result, and also finds that the failure to indict the eligible defendant in accordance with the time requirement set forth in this subparagraph was not due to unreasonable delay by the prosecutor, the court may allocate an additional period of time, not to exceed 45 days, in which the return of an indictment shall occur. Notwithstanding the court's previous findings for ordering the eligible defendant's pretrial detention, or if the court currently does not find a substantial and unjustifiable risk or finds unreasonable delay by the prosecutor as described in this subparagraph, the court shall order the release of the eligible defendant pursuant to section 3 of P.L.2014, c. 31 (C.2A:162-17)
Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox.Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.
"able to" - Google News
October 17, 2022 at 11:23AM
https://ift.tt/cQX1W4U
I Wont Be Able To Protect Will Co. Under New Law, Glasgow Says - Patch
"able to" - Google News
https://ift.tt/cFny5R7
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "I Wont Be Able To Protect Will Co. Under New Law, Glasgow Says - Patch"
Post a Comment