Zach's Strange Corner of Thought
You Made A Wrong Turn Awhile Back!
Several McLean County Republicans, like Sheriff Jon Sandage and District 10 County Board member Chuck Erickson, claim District 7 Board Member Sharon Chung repeatedly, viciously, and with extreme malice attacks the Sheriff every chance she gets. Agitation Rising investigates these claims only to discover the SHOCKING truth!
Video originally posted on District 8 Board Member Shayna Watchinski’s Facebook Page.
The insufferable Sheriff Jon Sandage has announced he will not be seeking re-election for a third term in 2022. Sheriff Sandage was first elected in 2014. He came to the decision after “after extensive thought and discussions with family.
“I have had the honor of serving the citizens of McLean County for 30 years, the last 6 and a half as sheriff, in one of the best departments in the state of Illinois. This decision has not been an easy one as there are still many challenges ahead for our department, and I will face them with the same dedication and vigor as I have throughout my career. I am proud of the progress we have made in my two terms as Sheriff, and this has only been possible because of all the dedicated people I work with.
“I would like to thank my family and friends for their continued support, the citizens for their faith and trust in me and our department, my staff for their hard work and professionals, but most of all, I want to thank my wife and children who have sacrificed in order to allow me to pursue the profession I love.”
The contentious debate around qualified immunity will be introduced at the McLean County Justice Committee this Tuesday, March 2nd, 2021.
Qualified immunity is a Supreme Court legal doctrine that protects individual officers from being held personally responsible if they violate a person’s rights. The bar is so high for proving an officer’s actions disqualify them from qualified immunity, that unless a previous court ruled that the exact same actions with the exact same circumstances were unconstitutional, qualified immunity will hold regardless of the underlying constitutional merits of the case.
“For example, the Ninth Circuit U.S Court of Appeals recently held that police accused of stealing $225,000 while executing a search warrant were entitled to qualified immunity because that court had ‘never addressed whether the theft of property covered by the terms of a search warrant…violates the Fourth Amendment.’ It did not matter ‘that virtually every human society teaches that theft generally is morally wrong.’”1
Sheriff Sandage has said he worries if qualified immunity is abolished, no one will ever want to be an officer again. Police unions have claimed it would become open season on officers being sued for frivolous issues. Normal Police Chief Rick Bleichner opposed abolishing qualified immunity as well.
The chair of the McLean County Justice Committee Chair, Distict 10 Board Member Chuck Erickson, introduced a resolution affirming the boards unwavering & uncritical support of law enforcement in response to Governor J.B. Pritzker signing criminal justice reform legislation in late-February. Included in the resolution is support for qualified immunity.
The law HB 3653 does not get rid of qualified immunity, but it does create a commission to study the issue and bring forth an opinion. It seems some fear it is inevitable that qualified immunity will be abolished.
Now, some individuals who are far more perfidious than I, will allege that abolishing qualified immunity will have a “chilling” effect on police officers and limit their ability and/or willingness to respond to critical incidents without hesitation. These are split-second decisions after all. Mistakes happen right? Why should police have to worry about frivolous incidents?
However, the “chilling” effect simply doesn’t hold temperature. Law professors Joanna Schwartz & Seth Stoughton carefully explain why this is.
“The Supreme Court’s constitutional standards make ample allowance for officers to make reasonable mistakes. When assessing the constitutionality of a stop, the Supreme Court has said that officers must act reasonably, but, ‘[t]o be reasonable is not to be perfect, and so the Fourth Amendment allows for some mistakes on the part of government officials, giving them ‘fair leeway for enforcing the law in the community’s protection.’ For that reason, officers can constitutionally stop or frisk someone when they have ‘reasonable suspicion,’ and that that low bar is met so long as there is a ‘moderate chance’ that the officer’s suspicion is correct. An officer can get a warrant or arrest someone when they have ‘probable cause,’ which requires only a ‘fair probability’ that they are right.
In short, officers have plenty of leeway to make mistakes without violating the Constitution. For example, courts have held that officers act constitutionally when:
-officers arrest the wrong person, so long as their mistake was reasonable;
-officers execute a search warrant on the wrong apartment, so long as the apartment numbers were similar;
-officers pull someone over for having an air freshener attached to their rearview mirror and not having a front license plate—neither of which was illegal—so long as the officer had a reasonable but mistaken understanding of the lawQualified immunity does not protect officers who make reasonable mistakes because reasonable mistakes do not violate the Fourth Amendment in the first place. Instead, qualified immunity shields government officials from liability when they have acted unreasonably (taking into account the deference that the Supreme Court has built into that term)—so long as there isn’t another court decision holding virtually identical facts to be unconstitutional. Insisting that officers are so afraid of the consequences for their unreasonable actions that they will refuse to do their job demeans officers”
Schwartz Joanna C., & Stoughton Seth W. “The Unnecessary Protection of Qualified Immunity.” Verdict Comments, 26 June 2020.
Furthermore, McLean County already has indemnification & duty to defend clauses in their union contract. Regardless of qualified immunity, those legal mechanisms still exist to protect officers. There are legitimate reasons to indemnify and defend officers. But, is blanket indemnification truly the right way to go? If something similar to George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, or Elijah McLain occurred here, does the county really want to pay out taxpayer dollars to acts that are unreasonably unconstitutional? Perhaps a mechanism whereby in certain particularly egregious instances, the county could opt-out.
All this being said, this is simply a non-binding resolution. The county does not actually have the power to unilaterally grant their officers qualified immunity, especially if the state chooses to abolish it in the future. This resolution seems to be a performative stunt by Sheriff Jon Sandage, States’ Attorney Don Knapp, and Republican County Board members to show they support law enforcement and anyone who disagrees with this resolution does not.
The Bloomington-Normal Chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America released this statement encouraging the community to leave a public comment for the Justice Committee & contact County Board members to state their opposition to this resolution.
“The Bloomington-Normal chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America strongly oppose the judicial doctrine of qualified immunity. Qualified immunity does nothing but protect bad officers from accountability by preventing victims of police violence & their families from receiving just compensation for blatant constitutional violations. After a year of uprisings by Black Liberation activists & supporters of police accountability, it is in extremely poor taste to turn around & support gross abuses & violations for the police.
We would also like to point out this body does not have the power to enact qualified immunity protections for officers. Furthermore, McLean County already has indemnification & duty to defend clauses in both the Sheriff Deputies & Corrections officers union contract, which protect officers from frivolous litigation. Ending qualified immunity will not alter those protections.
Qualified immunity is bad policy, and it makes all police officers look bad by protecting the worst among them. It encourages officers to be reckless and creates a culture of impunity something which our own local sheriff has brazenly flaunted. The working people of this state support police transparency & accountability. Vote no on this resolution.”
Email Action: email camille.rodriguez@mcleancountyil.gov and admin@mcleancountyil.gov with “Public Comment for Justice Committee Meeting” BEFORE 4:30 PM on MONDAY March 1st. and tell the county board to “VOTE NO on resolution supporting Qualified Immunity.” Contact County Board members.
01/02/2020
I recently discovered that additional cases of COVID-19 in the McLean County Jail occurred back in late November. Since the story broke, there has been no announcements from the Sheriff’s office about whether there are any current cases, how often testing is occurring, and what’s being done to mitigate spread.
This isn’t terribly surprising. I’ve reported before about how the Sheriff lacks transparency around COVID-19 (among other things).
For these reasons, I’m making a CALL TO ACTION:
I am calling on the County Board to pass a resolution asking the Sheriff to report all COVID-19 cases in the jail promptly & accurately. This should be the bare minimum, but apparently it needs to be specified.
Because of the Illinois constitution, County Boards have very little actual authority over the Sheriff’s Office. This allows the Sheriff to operate with almost impunity. However, the board members have a duty to the tax-payers to be fiduciary shepherds for the jail; which they can’t do that if they don’t have the proper information. It’s time for them to prove they are concerned about a transparent & accountable government. While they cannot force the Sheriff to cooperate, a resolution requesting that information shows a clear message.
We should all be able to agree that transparency is key to effectively overcoming this pandemic. The people demand accurate and prompt information, especially regarding tax-payer funded liabilities like the jail. It is unfortunate the Sheriff has chosen to conceal & prevaricate on such an important issue.
Contact your county board members & ask them to pass a resolution seeking transparency & accountability at the jail. I encourage you to e-mail the County Administrator for public comments at both the McLean County Health Committee & Justice Committee.
The next Health Committee meeting is Monday, January 4th, 2020 at 4:30 PM.
The next Justice Committee meeting is Tuesday, January 5th, 2020 at 4:30 PM.
Email public comment statements to County Administration at admin@mcleancountyil.gov. E-mailed Statements will be placed in the official minutes, even if the statement reads longer than the individual/group time limit (5 minutes for individuals or group spokesperson). All requests will be taken in the order in which they are received, and the total time allowed for public comment at Committee meetings per County Board rules is 30 minutes.
06/28/2020
On Thursday, June 26th, 2020 a small group of triggered geriatrics (mostly people of a colonial complexion) stood in front of the McLean County History Museum. Led by McLean County GOP Chair Connie Beard, they decried the creation of a boycott list of about 20 businesses in the Central Illinois Area. The boycott list was created in response to racial tensions in the wake of George Floyd’s murder, and the surprising (and alleged) cultural shift in support of Black Liberation occurring nation wide. The businesses that made the list have a history of racist policies or the owners have a history of racist statements & behavior.
Connie Beard’s employer, Denbesten Real Estate, is on this list because of her outspoken support of President Trump. And, despite her support of some incredibly racist policies, she is adamant she is not racist. She even brought her black friend to prove it.2
“We are all one race. We are all one family and children of God,” Beard said. “To judge someone just on the color of their skin, to treat them differently, is not only foolish, it’s a sin.”
She blamed the creation & distribution of this list on Ward 6 Bloomington Alderperson Jen Carrillo. However, this is
FAKE NEWS!
Carrillo has stated multiple times she had nothing to do with the list. When asked whether she had any proof, Beard said, “I’m not saying she’s lying about creating the list. I’m saying, elected officials should not encourage or promote such damaging action to businesses in our community.”
Typical triggered conservatives. They don’t care about facts, only feelings.
But, that’s not how America works. Even politicians have free speech rights. Boycotting is a proud American tradition. Colonists routinely boycotted British goods & taxes in colonial America. It led to American Independence. American’s also have a strong tradition of boycotting racism. What does Beard think civil rights leaders were doing during the fifties? Has she never heard of the Montgomery Bus Boycott?
(I’d also like to point out most of these people couldn’t be bothered to wear masks, even though COVID-19 cases are skyrocketing. This is the exact same group of covidiots demanding we open up the economy early and saying Americans are responsible enough; yet, they can’t even be responsible enough to wear masks at a press conference.)3
Beard also decried efforts to defund the police. Typical big government conservatives. Just like they want government to control your reproduction, they want to support overbloated police budgets, increased militarization of the police, & our byzantine criminal justice system that disproportionately oppresses people of color. So much for fiscal conservatism, I guess.
Perhaps the most hypocritical facet of this Coronavirus spreading spectacle is these are the same people who fetishize the freedom of the market above all else. Yet, when consumers choose how to spend their dollars in anti-racist ways, these right-wing types start begging for entitlements from society: freedom from criticism. Sorry snowflakes: freedom means the right to free speech & opinion, but not the right to be free of responsibilities. Maybe ya’ll should get some personal responsibility & reflect on why people think you might have racist opinions.
6/11/2020
[FULL DISCLOSURE: The author participated in this protest.]
On May Day, May 1st, Black Lives Matter Bloomington-Normal organized a car caravan action around the McLean County Jail calling for decarceration and to waive the costs of video visits/phone calls during COVID19 for inmates. BLM BloNo also released a contract between McLean County and the telecommunications system, IC Solutions, that shows they are profiting off of these video visits/phone calls, which of course happen more often now that in-person visits are shut down due to COVID19.
ACTION ITEM: Join BLM BloNo and Tell McLean Co: Stop Profiting From Jail Visits During Covid-19!
Check out: Facebook — https://www.facebook.com/BLMBlono/ E-mail — blacklivesmatterblono@gmail.com Contact your County Board representative and tell them they shouldn’t be making money just so people can stay in touch with their loved ones during the Coronavirus.
Rob Hanauer, defense attorney for embattled City Council member Zach Oyler, is trying to get polygraph evidence admitted to court. Councilman Oyler is facing misdemeanor charges of domestic battery and interfering with a report of domestic abuse in Peoria County. The alleged servant-leader took the polygraph under the direction of veteran polygraph examiner Steve Woody. Oyler was asked whether he physically struck or hit his wife in the July 30th incident. Oyler said no. Oyler will be in court November 15th on the motion to include the polygraph test into judicial evidence.
It’s hard to believe such evidence would be admitted into the court. Polygraphs are widely considered scientifically dubious at best. They are generally inadmissable in almost all court settings. This is because there’s no one specific physical sign that an individual is telling a lie or otherwise being deceitful. Dr. Leonard Saxe, a clinical psychologist and professor at Brandeis University near Boston, says virtually the entire scientific community rebukes the efficacy of so-called lie-detectors. “A polygraph test measures anxiety — and anxiety is sometimes associated with lying, but other times is associated with trying really hard to tell the truth… In some cases, there may not be alternatives [to prove truth or innocence], but that doesn’t mean you use unreliable science as evidence.” In fact, the inventor of the Polygraph, John Augustus Larson, eventually came to the conclusion his device was being misused and abused. Larson wrote shortly before his death in 1965, “Beyond my expectation, thru uncontrollable factors, this scientific investigation became for practical purposes a Frankenstein’s monster, which I have spent over 40 years in combating.”
So, why is Rob Hanauer trying so hard to have unscientific evidence included in a judicial system that almost never allows such evidence? Likely to effect the general public’s opinion about this case. People are used to seeing polygraph examinations on police dramas or on tabloid talk shows like the Maury Povich Show or the Jerry Springer Show. It’s going to be hard to find a jury who hasn’t at least read in the news that Oyler passed a polygraph examination.
. . .
Zach Oyler’s survivor, wife Heather Oyler, has now come forward with a full recantation of events. She says she wants charges dropped against her husband and the July 30th incident was a complete misunderstanding that grew out of proportions. In an interview with Chris Kaergard of the Peoria Journal Star, Heather had this to say:
While there was a dispute between the two, her perspective on the specific matters where Zach Oyler is charged are that they were misunderstandings rather than malevolent action.
“Zach and I did get in an argument. To be frankly honest with you, a lot of people get in arguments,” she said. “The problem was something that was said within this argument triggered me to completely get more upset than I needed to.”
Heather Oyler says she’s long grappled with issues of mental health, and she’d had issues with changes in her treatment at the time which might’ve affected how she reacted that night. She had talked through her recollections of that night with therapists and a psychiatrist before speaking to the Journal Star.
“Zach was trying to calm me down,” Heather Oyler says. After having had a couple drinks earlier in the night, “he knew he couldn’t drive, and he knows that if I take my medication I take before I go to sleep for my diagnosis that I can’t drive either,” she says. “I can be walking and talking and not even realize it after I take some of this medication. And it was the time of night where I would’ve taken it by that point. I hadn’t taken anything — I told the police that. But Zach didn’t know that because he’d been in and out of the room for the majority of the night.”
As to another allegation, made in reports after the arrest but not formally part of the charges against him, Heather Oyler said this: “He did not put his hands around my neck.”
“I reached out … because I was tired of waiting for this to get better. And I reached out … because I feel people deserve to know what happened,” Heather Oyler said. “They’ve been screaming at Zach during public comments that he owes an explanation.4 He legally can’t give one right now, but the thing is, I can.”5
“We’re living under the same roof. We’re trying to get back to life as normal,” she says. “If anything, this has brought us closer together because we trust each other more now.
“It’s given us the opportunity to look into some of my challenges a little bit more and I’ve seen that he’s been there for me throughout all of this, and that’s been one of the most amazing things,” she added.
Heather Oyler is critical of the way she feels she’s been treated by state’s attorney’s office, and says she has told officials there that she’d testify “that this is not how it seems, that I was upset.”
She says that she called prosecutors’ offices to ask that charges not be filed, and that she had no warning when they eventually were.
Last week, Heather Oyler said, she spoke with an assistant state’s attorney working on the case, detailing her recollections of the night and her other struggles.
“They didn’t take a single note when I spoke to them the other day,” Heather Oyler said. ”… (The assistant state’s attorney) just said again it’s their job to file charges and she just had a feeling. I asked her, if you just have a feeling that someone’s driving down the street impaired, you can’t pull them over unless you have probable cause. I gave the police probable cause that night because of the case I was in, but I’m telling you that’s not what happened.
″… I explained to them that this was making things with my job difficult, it was making things with Zach’s job difficult, it was making our public life difficult,” she added.
“I know there’s going to be people that say that I was coaxed into this, and I wasn’t. Zach can’t tell me what to do at this point anymore,” Heather Oyler said. “I feel like no one can tell me what I can or can’t do any more, because I’ve been spending a majority of my life listening to what everybody else wants, and at this point all I want is for our life to be better and normal, and I want to help make other people’s lives better.” That includes, she says, being forthright about mental health struggles. “There’s nothing wrong with it. It’s the same thing as having diabetes or high blood pressure or cancer. It’s something that you have to treat and you have to work with,” Heather Oyler said. “And it’s something that you’re going to live with for a long time — those are things that don’t go away, those disorders. Instead of being afraid of it, treat it like it’s a normal person.”6
State’s Attorney Jodi Hoos said that prosecutors would continue to review the case.
Sadly, victims of domestic violence often are not able to help themselves. They look for reasons to stay, rather than leave, blame themselves and rarely cooperate with the prosecution of the abuser,” Hoos said. “As State’s Attorney I represent the public as a whole, and sometimes, that means going forward on a case where there is sufficient evidence to prove it, even if the victim does not want to.”
“In this matter, we will continue to evaluate the victim’s statements along with other evidence, such as the 911 call, body camera footage, photographs taken at the scene, etc.,” she added. 7
If the Peoria County State’s Attorney refuses to drop the charges, Zach Oyler is scheduled for a January 2019 jury trial.
This is an ongoing story and will be updated accordingly. Zach Oyler is innocent until proven guilty under the law. For more info on #OylerGate, see here.
For more Fragments on Playing in Peoria, see here.
