|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Feature
|
|
News :: Protest Activity |
|
Justice is for “Just Us” |
Current rating: 0 |
by Brian Dolinar
Email: briandolinar (nospam) gmail.com (unverified!) |
26 Mar 2006
|
Community Court Watch begins
It was Illinois native Richard Pryor who first told the joke that American justice was for “just-us,” it was only an instrument of white power. Whether Vice President Dick Cheney, lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Enron executive Ken Lay, or celebrity caterer Martha Stewart, these figures are not served the same justice as the rest of the 2.3 million Americans who sit in America's prisons. But we do not have to look to Washington D.C. to find stories of white collar crime, the crimes often committed by white-skinned authorities who hold high-powered positions. Several recent examples have been exposed in Champaign County. |
It was Illinois native Richard Pryor who first told the joke that American justice was for “just-us,” it was only an instrument of white power. Whether Vice President Dick Cheney, lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Enron executive Ken Lay, or celebrity caterer Martha Stewart, these figures are not served the same justice as the rest of the 2.3 million Americans who sit in America's prisons. But we do not have to look to Washington D.C. to find stories of white collar crime, the crimes often committed by white-skinned authorities who hold high-powered positions. Several recent examples have been exposed in Champaign County.
Veteran Officer Hjort Accused of Rape
In Urbana, Officer Kurt Hjort (pronounced “yort”), a 15-year veteran police officer, was accused of raping a 25 year-old woman while on duty and in uniform. A complaint was filed by the woman on July 22, 2005 and further investigation turned up several pieces of evidence. There are surveillance tapes showing Officer Hjort striking up conversation with the young woman at her workplace. There is record that he looked up her address on the police computer database. There are neighbors who said they saw him come and go. There was a rape kit performed finding Hjort's semen. After this damning evidence was discovered, he finally admitted to having sex while on duty, but said it was consensual. The young woman disputes this claim and says she felt intimidated because Hjort had handcuffs and was wearing a gun.
Hjort resigned from the Urbana police force, but quickly found another job in nearby Gibson City. Only shortly after, when news of Hjort's past offences reached Gibson City police chief, was Hjort dismissed from the job.
Urbana attorney John Dedman was appointed by Judge Tom Difanis to investigate the charges against Hjort. He was assigned as a special prosecutor because State's Attorney Julia Reitz had to step down from the case due to a conflict of interest—Hjort was to be the best man at her wedding. In October, Dedman chose not to prosecute Hjort, despite recommendation by State Police for prosecution. In the end, authorities have decided that losing his job was enough punishment for Hjort's sexual misconduct. As Dedman himself said, “of great significance to me is the fact that Kurt Hjort has resigned his position with the Urbana Police Department” (News-Gazette 10/18/2005). Sadly, the victim in this case has still not seen justice.
Lawyer Silverman Found Culpable of Dirty Deeds
Most recently, light has been shown on the dirty deeds of Urbana lawyer Brian Silverman. In a public report filed January 30, 2006, a Hearing Board of the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission recommended suspending Silverman from practicing law for nine months (http://www.iardc.org In re Brian Charles Silverman, Commission No. 04 SH 120). This was a light slap on the wrist given the bizare nature of his sexual habits and the harm he has done to the people already victims of the criminal justice system.
Only in this new report has the full story come out about a 1993 case in which Silverman was hired to represent Ray Rowan, another victim of this country's war on drugs. The official report shows that Rowan's girlfriend, Rita Lewis, raised money for his defense and had several encounters with Silverman. In one of their telephone conversations, Silverman bragged that then State's Attorney Tom Difanis was a friend of his and would do “just about anything” he asked. Silverman then asked if she, Rita Lewis, would meet him for lunch. When she asked what he wanted to eat, Silverman replied, “I want to eat you.”
According to Lewis' testimony, the next time they met Silverman told her he could get her boyfriend's 20 year sentence down to two years if Lewis paid him $5,000 “under the table” for the State's Attorney and if she was “good to him.” After raising the money, Lewis delivered it to the attorney's office. Silverman asked her, “what about the other thing.” Against Lewis' refusal and her crying, Silverman forced himself upon her and ejaculated on her back. Silverman repeatedly told Lewis to do it for her boyfriend, Ray. “I kept thinking [it was] for Ray,” Lewis later explained, “mentally I was afraid because I knew [Silverman] could either hurt [Ray] or help him.”
The Hearing Board reached the conclusion that Silverman:
“(a) committed the criminal act of battery (720 ILCS 5/12-3) that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(3) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct; (b) communicated with a party he knew to be represented by another lawyer in the matter without obtaining the consent of the lawyer representing such other party, in violation of Rule 4.2; (c) engaged in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice, in violation of Rule 8.5(a)(5); and (d) engaged in conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice or to bring the courts or the legal profession into disrepute, in violation of Supreme Court Rule 771 [now 770].”
Lewis filed a law suit but in 2002 it was settled out of court. It remains to be explained why Silverman was never prosecuted for extortion and sexual assault. Perhaps he was exaggerating about his close relationship with then State's Attorney Tom Difanis. Or maybe he wasn't and he knew he was protected by his friend, as the lack of prosecution suggests. Currently, Difanis is the Presiding Judge of Champaign County. He has a reputation for heavy handed judgements given down to drug offenders, especially African Americans. Whether or not Difanis was complicit with Silverman's dirty deeds is uncertain, but what is apparent in Champaign County is that the sexual deviations of well-connected white collar criminals go overlooked.
While Silverman was recommended for suspension, he has still evaded criminal investigation. Again, in Champaign County, police officers and lawyers are treated as if they are above the law.
Meanwhile, the populations of local jails and prisons swell with victims of an unequal criminal justice system. Again, the victims in this case have not seen justice.
Where's the Justice?
In juxtaposition to these two unprosecuted cases stands the case against Patrick Thompson, a local Black activist who the County wishes to put behind bars for 120 years. Patrick Thompson is co-founder with Martell Miller of VEYA (Visionaries Educating Youth and Adults), a group that in 2004 began to videotape traffic stops illustrating the unequal treatment of African Americans in the community, as well as develop a mentoring program with African American youth.
In April 2004, Miller and Thompson wrote the Champaign police to inform them that they would be videotaping traffic stops. On August 7, during an interview with an African American male who had just been stopped on a bike by police, Champaign police seized Miller's video and tape. On August 23, Miller was indicted on felony eavesdropping charges.
On August 24, a day after the eavesdropping charges, Patrick Thompson was arrested and jailed for the alleged home invasion and sexual abuse of his neighbor that morning. Days later, Thompson was also charged with felony eavesdropping. Due to the timeliness of the charges, it appears as if they are acts of legal retribution, and ultimately political persecution.
Thus commenced a lenthy public debate and a grassroots movement led by Champaign-Urbana Citizens for Peace and Justice. In the end, the former State's Attorney John Piland was unseated by Julia Reitz, who made this a campaign issue and dropped the eavesdropping charges when she entered office. But through all this, Thompson's heavy charges of home invasion remained in the background and he spent over three months in jail because of an exorbitant $250,000 bail.
Last July, Thompson defended himself during a brief two day trial. In sharp contrast to the charges against Officer Hjort, there was no evidence, no fingerprints, and no witnesses brought forward. The prosecution relied solely on the basis of the accuser's testimony, which was questionable. Again, Judge Difanis played a role in this case. Earlier in the trial proceedings, Difanis rufused to file a motion to allow for the admission of three Black men who the accuser has made similar unsubstantiated claims against. Additionally, the best friend of the accuser testified in the trial that the accuser told her she was plotting to use Thompson to make her boyfriend jealous. Nineteen days after she accused Thompson, an order of protection was filed against the accuser that indicated a history of drug and alcohol abuse. Three weeks later she was arrested for child endangerment after her year-and-a-half old was found in the street by an MTD bus driver.
Urbana City Council member Danielle Chynoweth has given support to Thompson's cause. “In any sexual assault case,” she says, “I am inclined to believe the victim, because I have so many friends who have been raped and not a single person has done time for it. I was slow to come around on this case for that reason. But if you just look at the details of the case, it is so clear—he didn't do it.”
Incidentally, Thompson's accuser is a white woman. In America, when a white woman accuses a Black man, it always has political repercussions. The jury in Thompson's trial included no African Americans. It ended in a hung jury, a 6-6 split, and a mistrial was declared. A second trial against Thompson is expected to begin in March. Thompson has secured lawyer Harvey Welch but is still raising funds for his defense.
“The case is not about me,” Thompson said. “There are many before and after me who will spend life in prison for crimes they did not commit. The system is broken. Verbal accusations in front of all-white juries should not be enough to make a man disappear for the rest of his life.”
Ultimately, Patrick Thompson is being prosecuted for trying to document a double standard of police behavior. Now he has become a victim of this same double standard. When placed alongside recent stories about Officer Hjort and lawyer Brian Silverman, the case against him looks weak. If special prosecutor Dedman claimed he could not prove beyond a “reasonable doubt” the charges against Officer Hjort, it is questionable how they could be proven in Thompson's case where there is absolutely no evidence.
Only through continued public pressure will justice be served for us too. We are beginning a Community Court Watch program Wednesday, March 22 at 1:15 with a picket in front of the Champaign County Courthouse. To get involved or make donations for legal fees contact Champaign-Urbana Citizens for Peace and Justice at freeshell.cucitizens.org.
For documentation see: http://www.iardc.org In re Brian Charles Silverman, Commission No. 04 SH 120. |
Related stories on this site:
Photos from the court protest
| 
This work is in the public domain. |
Comments
|
Re: Justice is for “Just Us” |
by Lucero
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
27 Mar 2006
|
I agree with Brian Dolinar that Patrick is very likely innocent of sexual abuse charges, certainly beyond any reasonable doubt. However, I must strongly disagree with the tactics being used by CU Citizens for Peace and Justice to bring this point across, particularly the use of race-baiting and black/white community polarization.
Case in point. Brian writes: "Incidentally, Thompson's accuser is a white woman. In America, when a white woman accuses a Black man, it always has political repercussions." Why would Brian make this point? It has nothing to do with Patrick's guilt or innocence. He is perpetuating a racial stereotype that if a white woman accuses a black man of a crime, her motivations MUST be suspect, and there MUST be a political repercussion. He is relying on the mistrust of some in the black community (also a racial stereotype) and white liberal community ("white liberal guilt") for "whitey." Like Martin Luther King, Jr., I too am dreaming of a day when we will be judged not by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character. Brian is not being helpful in that regard. Someone approached me the other day and told me about the CUCPJ's court house vigils, and I initially thought that was something I could support and participate in. After reading Brian's article, I could not in good conscience associate myself with their position on this issue. I like Patrick Thompson. He has done a lot of good for the community, and his prosecution on the eavesdropping charges was unjust. I fully support the sexual assault charges against him being dropped. However, I WON'T justify my position on anything other than the facts. Brian's article overreaches and ends up being a racist tirade pitting white against black, and I don't accept that, regardless of the direction it is aimed. I support getting charges against Patrick dropped, but I'll have to pursue that through some forum other than CUCPJ. |
|
I Think You Missed His Point |
by historian
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
27 Mar 2006
|
I can't speak for Brian when he spoke about these circumstances having "political repercussions," but I really doubt he was talking about the motivations of the woman herself as much as how a racist justice system deals with such accusations.
I also don't think it's "race-baiting" to note that our justice system IS racist. I think the burden of proof is on anyone who makes a claim that somehow the justice system is NOT racist, given the overwhelming preponderance of evidence that it is racist. After all, you yourself admit you're "dreaming of a day when we will be judged not by the color of our skin, but by the content of our character." It sounds to me like you want to have it both ways. The reality is that it is racist.
As for Brian's article itself being a "racist tirade" that is just sheer BS. In fact, it sounds a lot like the formulation that many white supremacists use in alleging that it is now white people who bear the burden of being discriminated against. Could you clarify how your position differs from theirs, as you seem entirely too comfy close to it for me to take much of anything you say seriously, unless you actually mean something else and are simply not being clear abouit what you intend to say.
Finally, I always find it both amusing and discouraging how some people spend such a large amount of verbiage to say they agree there is a problem, that they think something needs to be down, but in the end they always find some convenient excuse to diss what others ARE doing, while making no personal effort to address what they contend is a problem. It must be so convenient to have a conscience that always manages to take the moral high ground without lifting a finger. |
|
Re: Justice is for “Just Us” |
by Lucero
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
27 Mar 2006
|
Agreed, historian, that the system is racist. My disagreement is on tactics. I don't believe in destructive tactics (attacking anything and everything that moves). I believe in constructive tactics (dialogue). Right now, I think that it would be more constructive to work on dialogue with the police department and prosecutors, reserving "direct action" as a last resort. If dialogue has already been attempted, I'd appreciate reading a report of that.
As for how "serious" I am, I don't need to justify my actions to you, historian. If you check out my comments on the school referendum, you'll find that I was 100% in support of the NO position, and in fact, I participated materially in that campaign. I base my decision on who I help and how on the merits of the case. I'll be looking for other ways to help Patrick, I assure you, just not through CUCPJ. |
|
That's Why I'm Scratching My Head |
by historian
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
27 Mar 2006
|
Lucero,
That's why I'm not quite sure what to make of yoru argument. I simply don't see where making comparisons in the obviously racially disparate outcomes, based on the evidence available, is either race-baiting or racist. And you've not bothered to explain that, although it seems to be of some significance to you here. What you mean by that, or even what you're referring to, is completely unclear to the reader.
As for dialogue, that has been tried. The charges remain. And I don't see where CUCPJ is "attacking anything and everything that moves." Rather, theirs is a focused argument, based on substantive evidence of how race is implciated in vastly different outcomes in three specific cases, based on whether the accused is black or white. Or are you suggesting that class is more important here, as both Hjort and Silverman are intimately connected to the workings of the justice system in Champaign County? I still don't see how you can be so dismissive of the efforts of CUCPJ.
However, I'm looking forward to your creative suggestions on how to otherwise help Patrick Thompson, simply because CUCPJ is virtually the only thing that he has in his corner. They've had to work hard just to get the funds together to get him an attorney. Is getting the man an attorney somehow tainted and suspect in your eyes? Maybe you should simply contribute directly to his defense, if you're uncomfortable with CUCPJ's role? In fact, explaining what you think is a viable alternative strategy would be a good first step to explaining what the point really is of your seemingly duplictious statements. |
|
Re: Justice is for “Just Us” |
by Lucero
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
27 Mar 2006
|
Thanks, historian. I was just going to sit down and write and ask you for suggestions on how to help Patrick directly. I see two alternatives for someone in my situation: (1) direct contribution to his defense. (2) letter writing to whomever has influence in this case. If you (or Brian) can provide information on who to contact, I'd appreciate it.
My issue isn't one of class vs. race. The stridency and focus of Brian's article makes it look like CUCPJ is out for revenge rather than justice. Believe me, there is a difference. Maybe that's a misperception on my part, but the article still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. |
|
Re: Justice is for “Just Us” |
by davep
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
28 Mar 2006
|
Lucero,
We have raised all but $170 from the community to pay for Patrick's legal defense for the second trial. If you would like to contribute that would be greatly appreciated. We meet on Saturdays at 4PM at the IMC to work on this and other aspects of the issue.
Also, your idea of a letter writing campaign is noted (as well as phone calls). But, I disagree with you in that I do think that direct action is also valid. This is a very huge and entrenched system run by an 'old boys network' (and a few women by the way) that must be confronted on multiple fronts. I doubt very seriously that any one tactic by itself will pressure them into dialogue let alone actual change. I only wish it were that simple. |
|
Re: Justice is for “Just Us” |
by Local Yocal
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
25 May 2006
|
If Patrick didn't do what the woman claims,... (and there is every reason to not believe her claims: she's accused 3 other men of similiar allegations- all unsubstantiated; she had child endangerment charges pending against her when she testified, which the State concealed from the Defense- and then after testifying, the charges were dropped against her. Her traffic record indicates possible drug use as well, and the State refuses to proscecute her even when she put herself, two of her kids, and two other people in the hospital during a recent traffic accident. The timing of Patrick's arrest is suspicious, and the fact the eavesdropping charges are serious civil rights violations and getting rid of Patrick anyway they can is a real motive for this debacle of justice our state's attorneys are perpetrating.)
...why can't we proscecute the woman making the false allegations for perjury? Why can't we proscecute Special Proscecutor for attempted kidnapping?
I hope the woman is being paid well for her cooperation with the state, otherwise, people are going to be in trouble, and it won't be Patrick. |
|
