Zach's Strange Corner of Thought
You Made A Wrong Turn Awhile Back!
Peoria County voters overwhelmingly re-elected Peoria County Auditor Jessica Thomas last November. But the Peoria County Board last week took the unprecedented step to pull funding for Auditor Thomas’ entire staff.
“Since their referendum to eliminate the office failed and they cannot remove an elected official from office, they’ve chosen instead to defund my office so it cannot reasonably function. On behalf of my office, I would like to assure Peoria County residents that I will continue to work to do the job they elected me to do, even if it requires that I file a lawsuit against the County to force it to follow the law.” – Peoria County Auditor Jessica Thomas
Read the full article on Money Bail & the Pretrial Fairness Act
Anyone interested in learning more about the Pretrial Fairness Act or how to join the fight to end money bail, should check out this Virtual Townhall scheduled for Saturday, January 16th, 2021. The virtual town hall will inform our community on the progress being made to end wealth based pretrial detention.
Join us in learning more about pretrial detention, the Pretrial Fairness Act, and what you can do to help end the unjust practice of money bond in Illinois.
REGISTER HERE: https://zoom.us/…/tJMrdO-orD8tEtZVjvyX2WqM0PcHSkofEwoz
Prior registration is required for this event. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the meeting.
Facebook event: https://www.facebook.com/events/131217402026127
Two Peoria-area teens will likely be spending the rest of their lives in prison:
Zaveon Marks, 15, was sentenced to 45 years in prison for the 2019 murder of 16-year old Zarious Fair. Zaveon was charged as an adult. Circuit Court Judge Katherine Gorman made the legal finding that the 15-year old was particularly depraved and beyond the possibility of rehabilitation.
“I hope you prove me wrong, Mr. Marks, and that you take advantage of the opportunities that you will have while in custody,” Judge Gorman said.
The next day, Jermontay Brock was sentenced to 60 years in prison for the murder of two people at a Bradley University party in the summer of 2018. One of the victims, Nasjay Murry, grew up on the southside of Chicago, and chose Bradley University in Peoria because she thought she would be safe from the violence that plagued her neighborhood.
WEEK News
Andy Kravetz. Peoria Journal Star.
Both of these cases involved minors committing senseless acts of violence that ended in the tragic deaths of people. Both judges in these cases found the teens to be particularly depraved and therefore beyond the possibility of rehabilitation. This legal opinion is necessary in order to charge minors with anything over 40 years. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2012 that life sentences for juveniles violated the 8th Amendment; and, the Illinois Supreme Court has found anything over 40 years is considered a life sentence and would not include juveniles except in cases where a legal finding is made that the juvenile is beyond the possibility of rehabilitation. However, both will be eligible for parole after 20 years.
Incarcerating juveniles for life is especially expensive. It costs $38,000 a year to incarcerate a person in Illinois. After the age of fifty, the cost typically doubles.1 If Zaveon Marks serves his full sentence he’ll be released at age 60, and will have cost the taxpayers $2,090,000. If Jermontay Brock serves his full sentence he’ll be in his mid-70s by the time of his release and will have cost taxpayers $3,268,000.
For more on juvenile murderers, see my article To Adult or Not To Adult.
08/13/2020
How do you convince Peorians in Districts 4 & 5 to care about poor people in Districts 1, 2, & 3?
This question may be as old as neo-liberalism in Peoria, and Marc Supreme of 90.7 FM during his Mayoral Mini-Series: A Candid Conversation with the Candidates desperately asked this question over & over of Mayoral candidate Chama St. Louis. I say desperate, because the answer seems so far-fetched as to be fatalistically impossible to answer in any concrete way. We can only respond in the typical abstract homilies about “education” & “community” we’ve heard from Mayor Jim Ardis and At-Large District Councilperson Rita Ali.
But, this question isn’t some antimony or impasse in logic itself.
Let’s try, for a moment, to get out of the neo-liberal austerity that haunts Peoria like a specter.
District 1-3 have largely been disinvested over the last several decades.2 Minorities already have a significantly lower median wealth than people of a colonial complexion, so they’re already paying less in taxes. People who are impoverished and have been robbed of educational opportunity3 are more likely to engage in alternative economies (i.e., non-taxable economies),4 which again, means less tax revenue. All of this leads to higher taxes for District 4 & 5 (especially to pay for bloated PPD budgets which enact Broken Window policing in District 1-3). As taxes in District 4 & 5 get yuuuuuuuuger, there’s more population decline which creates a declining tax revenue and a positive feedback loop of ever-increasing taxes.
Now, instead of spending tax revenue on bloated police budgets,5 say you put that money towards making sure poor folks in District 1-3 have their basic needs met6 so poor folks don’t have to engage in alternative economies to survive (cause people gotta eat); and, say we find a way to raise property values in these districts without displacing residents on fixed incomes; those yuuuuuuuge taxes on District 4 & 5 start to go from being hefty, hefty, hefty to wimpy, wimpy, wimpy.
There’s only one way to find out and the current way Peoria has been doing for four decades hasn’t been going so well, has it? Just cause you live in District 5, and you got your kids going to Dunlap schools, don’t mean crime on the Southside, the Taft, and the East Bluff doesn’t effect you. There’s just more degrees of separation between your privilege & their poverty,7 but you can’t have a privileged person without an impoverished person.
Is Peoria ready for this answer?
Spanky Edwards is currently running for the U.S. Congress for the 17th district of Illinois. He is running against incumbent Cheri Bustos in the democratic primary. Bustos has represented the district since she first won election in 2012. She is also the head of the DCCC which is supposed to work to reelect incumbent democrats.
Edwards was kicked off the ballot when a number of his signatures were rejected because the people who signed it did not live at the address they were registered. He is currently a write-in candidate in the Democratic Primary on March 17th against Bustos. Bustos has refused to debate Mr. Edwards.
Zachary Gittrich: How many valid signatures does it require to get on the ballot and how many signatures did you file?
Spanky Edwards: The requirement is 833 signatures. I filed 996. But the issue as far as the electoral policy in Illinois is ass backwards. The qualifications switch by district, and it gives the 2 party system a huge advantage over 3rd party and independent. To get on the ballot if you’re a democrat is 833 signatures. For a republican is 5-600 signatures. For an independent its over 11,000 for the same position in the same district. That creates this gridlock in congress cause districts are red or blue. We have 700,000 people a district, if you have 1000 signatures you should be on the ballot, it shouldn’t matter what party you’re from. We talk about Russia cheating in an election when we disenfranchise ourselves.
ZG: You’re running against an incumbent Democrat. What are the reasons you think you’d be a better representative of the 17th district than Cheri Bustos? What are the specific differences you have with her representation?
SE:
1. She is afraid of Medicare 4 All. Healthcare is an essential service and a human right. So Medicare 4 All right now would save 70,000 lives a year, and it will provide a higher quality of life where people don’t have to take out loans, file bankrupt, or sell their houses to pay for medical bills. We have one of the most expensive healthcare systems in the world. Too much of our money is spent on insurance, not healthcare.
2. Bustos has no plan or ideas for poor. She talks about Farmers when 12 farmers have lost their farms since she’s been in office. She champions veterans; we have a high homeless veteran rate in 17th district. She talks about her support for middle class, to be middle class in America is to make $150,000 a year; to have a high quality of life to afford cost of living. So when Bustos talks about the middle class: teachers, police officers, firefighters, nurses, public defenders don’t make that much. My proposal is we create a middle class salary for public service. They should be making $150,000 because they provide an essential service that we can’t live without; they maintain order: it would be complete chaos without them. The federal government, and hospitals, democratic enterprise, free enterprise, taxes on luxury items can go to coffers to raise money for those type of programs.
ZG: Do you have any pets?
SE: No
ZG: You have stated you support M4A. Is that single-payer?
SE: Single-payer. No cost at Point of Sale. No middleman between you and your provider. People like their health care provider not their insurer. Doing this would create a cultural shift.
ZG: If enacted, how would the transition from private to public healthcare work for the 160 million people who currently have private insurers?
SE: Bernie’s plan, which I support calls for 5-10 year transition from private to single-payer.
ZG: What kind of assistance would be available to private insurance company employees who may lose their job?
SE: I worked in insurance. So I know these are transferable skills. There are other types of insurance that they could transfer to: car, life, etc. We are going to reinstate the Freedman’s bureau. Hire MBAs, county agents, and retired veterans, in order to build homes.
ZG: Cheri Bustos voted in favor of both articles of impeachment against the President. Would you have agreed with those votes?
SE: Yes.
ZG: How would you rate the democrats efforts to impeach the president? Do you think there were other issues they should have focused on when it came to impeachment?
SE: So, Cheri voted at least twice to delay impeachment. The only reason she voted for those articles was because it was politically expedient. Trump should have been impeached cause he never cut ties with any of his private businesses which he benefits. And that wasn’t even one of the articles. So I think the Democrats did a piss-poor job at going after him; They only brought up two out of the–I would have thrown ten charges at his ass. The Russia investigation wasn’t even brought up in impeachment. So with regards to Russia, either the Democrats used it as political propaganda and Russia did not interfere; or they didn’t care enough to add it to the articles of impeachment. Either they’re bullshitting us with propoganda and it didnt happen-
ZG: … which I wouldn’t be surprised.
SE: Yea it wouldn’t! And, we’re used to the kind of political propaganda: the Willie Horton type propaganda, they’ll say anything to get elected.
ZG: It also obfuscates the fact that billionaires regularly influence our elections, Israel regularly influences our elections.
SE: Absolutely. Absolutely… Israel in particular, we have been prevented from even critiquing Israel in any form or way. That’s problematic when it comes to holding another foreign government accountable when I can’t tell the truth about them. What we have to understand is that Jewish life and Palestine life are equal. So, if I can critique Palestine, I can critique Israel, I can critique Russia and Germany and America as well. We all can be critiqued, no one is above that and it produces a terrible and unfair dynamic when it becomes illegal or there are severe consequences for just giving an honest political critique.
To your original question, Cheri Bustos did not want to go for impeachment, because she feels she lives in a Trump District and she’ll get voted out by Trump people. Lane Evans had this seat for 24 years; 12 terms in 17th district and he ran as a progressive. I would say it one of the most progressive districts in Illinois. So she’s lying. She knows people aren’t going to check her on that, because she was not expecting me to challenge her.
The democrats collectively got schooled, they got their ass kicked by a political novice who is a bully and a thug; they got thugged; they got punked. If this was a high school football game we’d say they got pancaked. That’s exactly what happened.
ZG: Government is regularly viewed as criminally inefficient. Conservatives automatically say everything government is bad; and Liberals argue its better than the private sector and it’s the duty of the government to do these things, but even they seem to acquiesce to the seemingly natural fact that government is inefficient. How would you address inefficiency in government services?
SE: That sounds like another job for people from insurance companies they can transfer over and provide those particular expertise. But in regards to job training. I have a certificate from the University of Rhode Island in nonviolent conflict resolution, so I understand how to resolve that type of gridlock. I’ve been in those offices, too. And the way they treat you, they look down on you; or, they know there’s absolutely nothing you can do cause you need them. You’re probably at your worst moments when you’re in those lines. You’re probably at your worst when your in government offices. They know that and they know you have to be nice to them but they don’t have to be nice to you, and there’s this particular power dynamic over you, and the whole experience is terrible. I would propose legislation to train government workers who work with the public to be trained on conflict resolution, and to be able to understand that they are providing a ministry. That they are providing resources for poor peoples, and it is benevolent. I want people to work in those office who are benevolent and nice and love, and feel like their job is fulfilling not just a check. That’s going to be some of the type of things I’m looking for. And if you have a terrible experience in government lines, blast them on social media! I think that’s how you get anything done in 2020, blast them on social media.
ZG: You have stated you support the Green New Deal. Do you support a complete ban on all new oil drilling and fracking?
SE: Yes on fracking. Case by case for oil. Until we are completely solar, I think that’s the point of the Green New Deal is to transfer our dependency on fossil fuels to renewable energy.
ZG: How do we continue to manufacture all the things that require oil, especially plastic?
SE: There are biodegradable products like hemp. Hemp can replace plastics, clothes; its very strong, its easy to grow, so investing in hemp would be better for the environment and oceans replacing plastics.
ZG: Currently, all products sold do not have to have clear instructions on recycling, would you support a regulation requiring some type of instruction for all products?
SE: I don’t know if regulation as far as mandatory is the best thing cause that leads to going to jail for littering and not recycling. That’s a slippery slope the regulation side. We should do litter campaigns and recycling campaigns. I think all forms of government need to do better jobs at recycling. We need to teach in our schools how to do this.
ZG: Would you support regulation requiring all goods sold be recyclable?
SE: In order to do that, regulations on small business tend to effect them worse. So, again, we could use hemp so you can throw it away.
ZG: Would you support regulations or tax incentives to encourage businesses to take more responsibility in recycling?
SE: I would want the government to work in concert with the free market to change the types of ways we shop and buy things and operate collectively, so it’s not just the federal government mandating stuff, but us seeing what your experience is in your store, so we notice you have these materials, here are other products that are cheaper and more green. I think that’s a win-win for everyone.
ZG: Do you support court-packing to readjust the politics of the Federal judiciary?
SE: I haven’t thought about it. I think it should be done in a non-partisan way. The Democrats let that happen. And the Democrats often work in tandem with Republicans. Obama and congress didn’t put up a fight.
ZG: Are there any current federal judges you would support impeaching and removing? (Both Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh committed perjury at their nomination hearings.)
SE: I would support an inquiry to investigate it. As long as its done in a fair and just way… see I’m a referee by trade, so as long these are the rules and the rules are just and don’t provide an unequal advantage. If you violated the law then you have to suffer some sort of consequences.
ZG: Do you support a constitutional amendment creating term limits for Federal judges?
SE: Yes.
ZG: Do you support granting statehood to Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Washington D.C., Guam, Mariana Islands, and America Somoa?
SE: Absolutely. If North and South Dakota can be there own states than all these can be their own states. Either give them statehood or free them from being American territories. How we treat them is like 3rd class citizens.
ZG: Do you support a constitutional Amendment creating term limits for members of congress?
SE: Yes.
ZG: Housing is increasingly unaffordable, and most people on waiting lists for public housing wait years. What policies would you propose to address this issue?
SE: The Green New Deal has a housing component, and economic reconstruction. In America, your wealth is connected to your home. I support bills creates 100% housing. Completely reconstructing how we do housing.
ZG: Do you support a maximum wage?
SE: No. A maximum wage is unamerican. I want people to make as much money as they can. That competitiveness–I love to see billionaires compete, to see whose going to be on top. That’s what makes America. The problem I have is that they don’t pay their employees $100,000. So anyone who has a billion dollars but has minimum wage workers, you aren’t a true billionaire your a thief!
ZG: What type of taxes do you expect to support?
SE: I support fair tax.
ZG: You recently posted on your FB of your strong support for people benefiting from government programs. Predictably many conservative voices quickly brought up objections that it creates a ‘culture or behavior of dependency.’ How do you counter this argument?
SE: People should have a basic standard of life because we are so wealthy. Many of the people that are poor have been exploited or their ancestors have been exploited. Realistically, there aren’t many opportunities to make living wage. Even teachers don’t make a living wage. That type of ideology is rooted in racism, white supremacists propaganda that they use to break up poor white people and black people coalitions during reconstruction. That’s rooted in Jim Crowism.
ZG: How do you counter this argument in the black community where there is still a strong conservative tradition?
My answer is similar to Dr. King. We talking about two types of people: people that have platinum gold boots, their shoes automatically tie themselves, silver spoon in their month, those people platinum diamond plated platform shoe people are telling people who don’t have boots at all to pull themselves – that’s immoral. To say that everyone is on the same plateau – that’s not the case. America was intentional when engineering this type of disadvantage. So to say everyone pulls themselves up by their bootstraps when the system is intentionally taking your boots. America created this problem. Many poor families have to give up a family member to live in public housing, and that’s bullshit. This has negatively effected Black Lives. So the government says “we’ll take care of you, you don’t need that man. We’ll take care of you; if you have a baby you’re gonna get healthcare, a house, food, you don’t need a man.” So why wouldn’t a poor person take advantage of that, so they’re not homeless and starving.
ZG: We have been in a state of perpetual warfare since both of us were in 6th grade. We are currently in military conflicts with 7 different nations. Do you support these wars? Would you end any of the wars?
SE: We’re in more than 7 countries. I don’t support these. As a proponent of conflict resolution, I think that in 2020 there is enough resources for everyone to have all their needs met. Many of this is rooted in racism and militarism, again, militarism is like 50% of every tax dollar goes to the military. So its a multi-trillion dollar industry. I feel like if we take the money out of it, we’ll end all those wars tomorrow.
ZG: How do we deal with the geo-political consequences of this?
SE: So its about working out a non-violent peaceful resolution so there is a win-win situation for all parties involved.
ZG: We spend more money of discretionary spending on military than anything else and have by far the largest and most powerful military on the planet. Are there cuts you would suggest to reduce this? We currently have hundreds of military bases all over the world, if you could pick certain bases to close, which ones?
SE: Absolutely. America is in about 20 different countries. Why? If we’re there to help and empower them then great, lets do that. But it should sunset. We should be able to be self-sufficient and sustainable in cutting back on our military. A lot of the military budget is waste. There’s a trillion dollars at the pentagon that no one knows where it is. Just to be efficient I’ve talked to military people all the time they have an unlimited amount of money. They literally have an endless supply of it. Our budget is way more than China, and they have a billion people. The question is the types of things the America does to the whole world. Our military should be to protect America and build alliances. We don’t have to do imperialism anymore. We don’t have to be police of the world; lets support them without the military.
ZG: There are some very serious issues happening regarding immigration, especially with regard to ICE & CPB. Some have even called for abolishing these institutions. What would you do?
SE: Were spending multi-billions of dollars on something that is non-violent… I’m not even gonna say its a crime. I don’t understand why America is treating Mexico like that. The entire Southwest used to be Mexico. We annexed that. They have ancestors there before America was even a thought. So for us to treat our friends to the South as 3rd class people or are not just as valuable as us is a problem. Again, ICE is racist, this is a racists system. I disagree with the way we deport and destroy families.
ZG: So you do support abolishing ICE?
SE: Yes, abolish ICE. The idea of deporting people whose ancestors were native to this land is absurd. Since America is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, I would support legislation for a more humane immigration system.
ZG: What about situations where there is a known, credible threat from a terrorist. Would we still not deport them?
SE: That’s a whole different story. That has nothing to do with ICE. The overwhelming majority of immigrants being deported have no criminal record and are not terrorists. If we wanna deport terrorists lets deport KKK members and white supremacists. We wanna deport terrorists, then those are our number 1 terrorists in the country.
ZG: Do you think serious crimes have been committed regarding immigration and the border by these institutions and this administration?
SE: Absolutely. Its putting people in cages. Not creating a humane system or even a plan. They had no plans for the children or for the families. They just rounded them up, sent them to the South and had them waiting. The kids are being raped, dying, sick; they have no plan; that’s a piss-poor plan. And its causing detriment to thousands of lives. So, I would prosecute all of them. Someone needs to go to jail for creating this type of violence on people.
ZG: There are many black conservatives that are extremely skeptical of loose immigration laws? What do you think are the best methods for convincing them otherwise?
SE: I don’t think they have a serious understanding of whats going on. So, as an educator, I would be open to starting an educational program that explains what is going on, these are the conditions in the country these migrants are in, so they are running escaping their country as refugees to save their lives. I think most Americans have a heart, and I feel like if we will be more open to accepting immigrants because they’re refugees.
ZG: The country is obviously in a perpetual state of gridlock, political crisis, and general decline. Do you think parts of the constitution need to be changed in order to guarantee more political stability? If so, what constitutional amendments you propose?
SE: I think every 40 years we need to have a constitutional convention. We live in a completely different America than our forefathers. I don’t think they should be able to dictate to us 200 years ago later how we should operate; we’re just as smart as they are and people living should be able to create our own constitution.
I would also abolish the electoral college. I would abolish slave labor in prisons, remove that from the 13th amendment. How we elect candidates. Abolish the use of private for-profit prisons.
ZG: What are ways would you address issues of voter suppression?
SE: Automatic voter registration at 18. I was kicked off the ballot. That’s a form of voter suppression. The people that signed my petition pay taxes on houses they live in and were not allowed to elect me. All men are created equal, all opportunities for representation must be equal.
ZG: As a prison abolitionist, you think that prison should only be for violent criminals who pose a threat to our society. Mass incarceration is obviously an enormous problem. You offered a number of innovative ideas to punish criminals including: Lower their credit, fine them, beat they ass periodically, public shame them, make them work a minimal wage job, in the projects, take their houses, and cars and wealth away for 10 years. How would you go about rehabilitating criminals?
SE: So, I being very facetious when I said that. But, I think everyone who is in prison for a non-violent offense, 90% of them would take alternatives on that rehabilitation list. Hell, I’ll takes some licks if its five years for a nonviolent offense or lashes for something I actually did. Rehabilitation: non-violent training. This is one of the most effective ways to create a harmonizing society. Again also, creating more opportunities to live in the middles class, that would remove a lot of petty crimes and non-violent crimes, cause people are really stealing to survive. But, you have millionaires on wall street who steal your car, your house, and everything you own. Make them pay a fine, force them to live in special housing, lower their credit, take their stuff away. But I don’t want to spend the tax money to keep those type of nonviolent crimes in prison. Prison should be for people who pose a violent threat to society. That’s what its there for; that’s why the fences, barbed wires are created. With prisons we create supercriminals, so someone who committed tax fraud are in their with murderers. So the tax cheat gets mentored by a professional criminal, and doesn’t get caught again.
ZG: How do you go about articulating prison abolition to the average person who can’t conceive of such a thing?
SE: I didn’t say that I was a prison abolitionist, I said I’m a modern day abolitionist. So, I don’t think non-violent people should go to prison. If you’re a violent threat, then I understand prison. But there are a lot of people in prison who aren’t violent. They just made a mistake. Those are the type of people I would emancipate.
ZG: Is there anything else you’d like to add?
SE: The 2 party system is not working for poor people. Hell, I’ve been poor under a Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Trump administration. Even after getting a Masters degree, I’m still poor. Neither party has resolved issues concerning me.
If you vote for me, I’m the best candidate if you’re making under $200,000 a year. My opponent, Cheri Bustos has no plans to deal with poverty. And she’s our representative because of nepotism (she babysat the right man’s kids), she feels entitled to represent us. Shes not the best candidate. My resume is ten times better than her; I’m more qualified then her, I have more connections than her; she just has more money than me. Nepotism shouldn’t be right in a democracy. Dick Durbin is not a lord, he’s a senator; he represents us. We don’t represent him. She is one of the most powerful position because she is beholden to him. The DCCC ban on backing progressive causes is not right. She is supporting candidates who support overturning Roe v. Wade: that’s not right. She is refusing to support Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Who even is she supporting for president? She is a moral coward. She is doing everything that is politically and financially expedient to her. Shes going to sell us out every chance she gets. To her its just money and whatever the powerful people tell her to do. I’m not that type of person. I can’t be sold I cant be bought. You can hold me accountable. I’m connected with NAACP, Women voters, ACLU, many churches in Peoria. I was the president of the ACLU but I stepped down to run for office. I work with Jehan Gordon, I was one of her first volunteers. I’ve worked for PPS, I’m a Moorehouse candidate, I’m an ICC graduate so I have that experience along with private school, I’m more diverse, I’m a professional dancer, I own my own business, I’m a referee by trade, I do conflict resolution so my thinking is completely different than Bustos. I’m a better candidate than her and my republican opponent. For poor people, I have better solutions than Bustos.
The Illinois primary is Tuesday, March 17th, 2020. Those in the 17th district wishing to vote for Spanky Edwards must select the write-in option and correctly spell his name: S-P-A-N-K-Y E-D-W-A-R-D-S. You can reach out to Edward’s campaign on Facebook.
I got to talk with private attorney Chris McCall, who is currently running in next years election for States Attorney. On the Democratic side, Chris McCall will take on recently appointed Peoria States Attorney Judi Hoos. This will actually be the second time the two have faced off against each other. McCall also applied for the States Attorney position left vacant by the demise of Jerry Brady in June 2019.
Shortly after her appointment, Hoos commented she had no plans to change any of the prosecution teams she will overseas, continuing a long pattern of mass incarceration & racial inequity at the Peoria States attorney that goes back before Kevin Lyons tenure as Peoria’s top prosecutor. Hoos worked for many years as a prosecutor in Peoria County.
Chris McCall presents himself as a break from the status-quo of mass incarceration from the States Attorney office. “McCall has worked for 15 years as both a prosecutor and defense attorney. He founded his private practice in 2005. Most of his work is in family law and criminal defense. He has also served as a hearing officer for Peoria Public Schools District 150.”
He says he has big plans on correcting many of the errors in the criminal justice system.
“At current levels, it costs $180,000 in our county to incarcerate a child for a year,” McCall said. “The programs I am proposing to redirect would-be criminals, to offer parenting classes prior to foster care and to protect victims from further victimization would cost a faction of that cost, while making our communities safer places for all of us to live.” He says his policies will help sever the bonds of generational poverty.
“McCall said he would hire a bilingual social worker focused on redirecting juvenile and non-violent, first-time offenders. He also plans to start a once-a-month evening court for petty offenses, so people don’t have to take time off from work to attend court during the day.
Another top priority: creating an Advisory Committee on Police Shootings to make recommendations about the legal response to such events.”
I spoke with Chris McCall over the phone about his project for criminal justice in Peoria.
Zach Gittrich: You’ve heard about the decision to try 14-year old Zaveon Marks as an adult for the murder of 16-year old Zarious Fair. What are the circumstances where you would be willing to try juveniles as adults?
Chris McCall: As a candidate for States Attorney, I shouldn’t comment on specific cases. When it comes to trying juveniles as adults, there’s a couple of things that have to be kept in mind. For 16 & 17-year olds, certain extremely serious crimes are statutorily required to be tried in adult courts. However, juveniles from 13 to 15-year olds are left up to the prosecutor’s discretion. I think it is very important to take into consideration the crime itself and the circumstances surrounding it (was it a random or pre-planned offense). I would also examine the minor’s history of delinquency and consult the teachers and educators. Finally, I would make sure I consult the victim’s family.
ZG: What are some of the things you’d like to do as State’s Attorney to address racial inequities in Peoria County?
CM: First, I would hire more minorities to the SA office. There are currently very few people of color working there; and, many people of color have left the office because they have not received the same opportunities as white attorneys.
Second, I would assemble a taskforce to review all incidents of police involved shootings. Currently, when deciding to charge officers the SA office only has senior staff review these cases, and I think the current process lacks confidence among the people. Some people see this process and think it’s blue supporting blue.
ZG: Who would you appoint to this task force?
CM: I would include retired judges, senior staff, and retired, diverse police officers to advise on whether to prosecute or not. I believe this would give the community more confidence in the system.
ZG: What about appointing members from various civil rights groups?
CM: I’m open to that; however, I don’t want to be in the process of teaching the law to laypeople. So, whoever is appointed to the task force needs to have a familiarity with the law so as to get to the task at hand.
ZG: What is your position on the use of money bail for those arrested? Are you willing to ban money bail for all nonviolent offenders who are arrested?
CM: I want to work towards banning that. I am supportive of legislative efforts to ban money bond for nonviolent offenses (with the exception of stalking, harassment, and trespassing). Myself, I would likely begin by looking at nonviolent traffic offenses and misdemeanors.
ZG: What are some of the problems you’ve seen from PPD in the way they enforce the law?
CM: It seems that some officers–younger officers–are sent to some areas where they don’t have relationship. There needs to be a more diverse police force. The PPD needs to focus more on relationship building and communication with neighborhoods that may distrust them. Furthermore, anyone who is stopped in a high-crime area, I won’t prosecute just because they look “nervous”.
At the same time, police officers need to understand that as long as they do the right things, McCall will support them. The job can certainly be difficult and involves lots of split-second judgment decisions, but at the end of the day, it’s still a job they chose. I also think most officers are doing good and want to do good.
ZG: What are your thoughts on Peoria’s use of nuisance abatements as a way to remove “problem” tenants from their homes?
CM: That’s more of a city issue than a SA issue. I would have to defer to the city attorney.
ZG: Even though it is not the job of the SA would you be willing to work with school Districts to teach students about the law and the penalties that go with committing a crime? I ask because while most kids know that certain actions are crimes, they often don’t understand the full consequences and penalties that go with committing certain crimes.
CM: Yes, I would, and it’s something I already do as a private attorney. Its something I’ve been doing since 2005. I go to local schools, from grade schools to college. I talk about what happens in court, basic things that can get them in trouble, I talk about trauma, how to interact with police that is respectful but within their rights. I want to continue to do that at a greater scale. I would also send traffic prosecutors into drivers ed to discuss the penalties of driving without a license or insurance.
ZG: Back in April, a black woman was almost murdered by a racist white man who threatened to kill her. He was not charged with a Federal hate crime and was eventually put into veterans court where he received 15 months court supervision and 200 hours of community service. The victim feels she was railroaded. How would you have handled this case differently?
CM: I cant speak about this specific case. But, in general, we must support victims. Talk to victims every point of case, that is what is needed.
ZG: Do you think more should be done to hold the police accountable to the general public? What things would you support to make this happen?
CM: That’s more of a city issue. But, if an officer has a reputation of bias or unfair treatment or has a habit of turning their body camera off, the best way to punish those officers is to make it clear we wont prosecute cases involving those officers.
ZG: Is there anything else you’d like to add?
CM: The primary election is March 17th, and I would love peoples’ support. I want to focus on more intervention programs, help victims of crimes, and do more to treat victims of recent trauma. I believe all defendants should be treated the same under the law.
