By G. Flint Taylor

June is Torture Awareness Month, and this year the National Religious Campaign Against Torture has declared its theme to be “healing a culture of torture.” So once again it is time to review what, if anything, Chicago public officials have done to cleanse the conscience of a City stained by the long running Jon Burge torture scandal.  

Lets start with the Feds. After showing great resolve in indicting and convicting Area 2 torture ringleader Jon Burge for perjury and obstruction of justice, the U.S. Attorney’s Office failed to finish the job, allowing the perjury statute of limitations to run out last fall on two of Burge’s “right hand men” who served as long time stalwarts on Burge’s midnight crew of self annointed “asskickers.”

Several of our local U.S. Congressmen have also failed to support the effort to prevent future Jon Burges from escaping justice. When Congressman Danny Davis re-introduced the Law Enforcement Torture Prevention Act early last year, Reps. Jan Shakowsky and Mike Quigley inexplicably refused to join Congressmen Bobby Rush, Luis Gutierrez, Bobby Scott, and Jesse Jackson Jr. in supporting it.  The Bill, which would have, for the first time, made police torture a federal crime without a statute of limitations, quietly died later in the year.

Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez continued her office’s  consistent record of torture denial and cover-up that former State’s Attorneys Richie Daley initiated and Richard Devine continued by unsuccessfully attempting to intervene in cases where torture victims still behind bars sought new hearings and trials, a tactic that further stalled that long delayed effort to obtain justice for more than six months.

Cook County Special Prosecutor Stuart Nudelman, who was ultimately assigned to represent the State in those cases, while taking a more balanced approach than the State’s Attorneys’ Office, is still yet to concede that fairness requires new hearings  for all these imprisoned torture survivors at which they can present all the evidence of systemic torture that was not available when they were convicted decades ago.

After the Illinois Torture Inquiry and Relief Commission returned decisions last June that provided for new hearings for five Burge torture victims, the Illinois General Assembly cut off the TIRC’s funding, leaving  nearly 100 prisoner complaints uninvestigated. Fortunately, in response to community pressure and the work of State Senator Kwame Raoul, the legislature recently refunded the Commission and the complaints are again being investigated and resolved.

Once again, the City of Chicago and Mayor Rahm Emanuel have failed to shoulder its major share of the responsibility for healing the City. While the City Council passed a “torture free zone” resolution last year, the Council continues to look the other way while the “the pinstripe patronage” paid to the private defense lawyers who continue to defend Burge, Daley, and their co-conspirators in several still pending civil torture cases, has balooned  obscenely past $20 million in taxpayer funds. These lawyers continue to resist all efforts to obtain Daley’s testimony, and the City was roundly chastised a few months ago by a Federal Appeals Court panel of judges for their failure to concede that Burge and his lieutenants had covered up the torture scandal for decades.

The Mayor has also rejected repeated calls for him to issue an apology on behalf of the City to all the Burge torture survivors, their families, and the entire African American community, he and his lawyers have also refused to join Attorney General Lisa Madigan in her battle to strip Federal prisoner Jon Burge of his police pension, and he has intervened in New Orleans police matters to promote the candidacy of former Superintendent Terry Hillard, who was himself implicated in the effort to cover-up the Burge torture scandal, as the ‘independent” monitor of a Court ordered consent decree entered to curb similar police lawlessness in New Orleans.

The United Nations has designated June 26 as an “International Day in Support of Victims of Torture.” What if on that day, Mayor Emanuel, on behalf of the City and its Police Department, and Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle, on behalf of the County and the State’s Attorneys’ Office, stood in front of the old Area 2 “House of Screams” at 91st and Cottage Grove and issued a joint apology to all of Chicago’s citizens, together with a pledge to create a reparations fund to compensate those still suffering  survivors of Chicago police torture who were cheated out of lawsuits by the cover-up of the scandal. This fund could also be used to provide treatment for the psychological damage inflicted and for job training.  Perhaps Burge and Daley’s publicly funded lawyers could be “persuaded” by the City and its taxpayers to return a healthy portion of their ill-gotten gains to help to fund this effort.  Then and only then will the true healing begin.

On March 17, 2005, Hassiba Belbachir, a 27 year old woman from Algeria who was being detained in immigration (ICE) custody while she applied for political asylum, died in her cell at the McHenry County Jail. She was found lying on the floor of her cell, her jail-issued knee socks wrapped around her neck with her face purplish in color, indicating that she had died some time before she was found. Throughout her detention, Hassiba had cried out for help, both to jail guards and health workers, continually indicating that she was deeply psychologically injured and suicidal. But her pleas for help were ignored and she died alone, with the jail not even calling her consulate or her family. Hassiba’s family and the local Arab American and Muslim communities were justifiably outraged at the failure of the legal authorities to help Hassiba in her hours of need, and contacted People’s Law Office to bring a lawsuit to expose the blatant failure of the authorities to afford undocumented persons such as Hassiba their constitutional rights.

PLO attorneys have fought the case on behalf of Hassiba for the past eight years. On  June 6, 2013, PLO attorneys presented arguments before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that immigration detainees must be afforded protection under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and that Hassiba’s treatment at McHenry County Jail must not be tolerated. Judges Richard Posner, Ilana Rovner and Diane Wood heard the case and will issue a written decision that will have far-reaching ramifications for the policies and practices of detention facilities as well as the treatment of Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainees.

Hassiba discovered Chicago on the internet and came here to enjoy the city for several months. After her stay, she took a flight to London, but was denied entry to the United Kingdom and the authorities there returned her to Chicago. At O’Hare, Customs and Border Patrol agents questioned her and took her into custody to process her application for political asylum. English was not Hassiba’s first language; in  fact it was her fourth, after Arabic, French and Spanish.

CBP agents transferred her to the lock up of the StonePark police station to await pick up by immigration agents. During the early morning hours of March 9, she was so stricken and upset that she was taken to the emergency room of GottliebHospital, where she was treated and then returned to police lock up. Immigration agents then took her to Broadview Service Staging Area where she awaited transport to the McHenry County Jail. Federal authorities did not screen her for any physical or mental health issues.

At McHenry County Jail she reported a history of suicide attempt and indicated she was currently suicidal. From March 9 to March 14, she sobbed, begged to have her cell door left open, and suffered two severe panic attacks during which she manifested extreme symptoms including physical paralysis, immobility and the inability to respond verbally or to pain stimuli. She told a social worker she could not live anymore and she felt her death “dripping slowly drop by drop.” She was placed in a dark, isolated, medical cell, doped up with anti-anxiety medication and ignored. She received no follow up from medical personnel and corrections staff failed to intervene or properly observe her. On March 15 she wrote an extensive suicide note and on March 16 she began lying face down on her cement cell floor, huddled near the door so that only her legs could be seen through the observation window of her cell door. Finally, on March 17 when a correctional officer brought her a sack supper she was discovered motionless on the floor, but it was too late and she was pronounced dead.

PLO filed the lawsuit in March of 2006 against McHenryCounty officials and the jail medical provider, Centegra, and its employees. PLO lawyers Jan Susler and Janine Hoft deposed scores of County, Centegra and federal employees, and Hassiba’s sister flew in from Canada and her brother from France to be deposed and describe the wonderful but vulnerable person that Hassiba was. Her brother testified that she was the center of their family, and that when she died it was like a meteor hit the earth.

In September of 2012, the district judge assigned to the case granted the defendants’ motions for summary judgment and dismissed all the federal claims against all defendants. We were outraged at this decision to let the authorities off the hook and immediately filed an appeal. PLO lawyers argued that Centegra personnel were deliberately indifferent to Hassiba’s serious medical and mental health needs and that McHenry County had woefully inadequate suicide prevention policies at the jail. Suicide is an unfortunately common phenomenon in jails and prisons and it is well known that detention facilities must have policies and practices in place to protect and safeguard prisoners. There was no written suicide prevention policy at the jail, no  annual or periodic suicide prevention training, although both are required by state and federal standards, and crucial communication between medical and correctional staff did not occur. PLO argued that individuals detained on immigration violations are entitled to the utmost protection of the Constitution and that the Fourth Amendment – which forbids unreasonable seizures – should apply. We are cautiously optimistic that we will obtain a decision in Hassiba’s favor, and that we will be able to present the facts to a jury which will hold McHenry and Centegra accountable for ignoring  Hassiba’s clear medical needs and thus causing her death.

Written by Brad Thomson of People’s Law Office, originally appeared on nlg.org

Today marks 32 years that Puerto Rican political prisoner Oscar Lopez Rivera has spent in U.S. prison for his involvement in the struggle for Puerto Rican independence.

Background

In 1980, 11 men and women involved with the movement for Puerto Rican independence were arrested and subsequently charged with “Seditious conspiracy to oppose the legitimate authority of the United States government in Puerto Rico by force.” At the time, Oscar was not arrested but was named as a co-defendant in the indictment. Oscar’s co-defendants were tried in Illinois and sentenced to federal prison terms ranging from 55 to 90 years.

On May 29, 1981, Oscar was arrested and subjected to nearly identical charges. He was tried in federal court in Illinois, convicted, and sentenced to 55 years in federal prison. By contrast, the average federal sentence for murder that year was 10.3 years, demonstrating that the sentences were disproportionate and meant to penalize the independentistas for their political identity and activity, not for their alleged offenses.

At another trial in 1983, three other independentistas were convicted of seditious conspiracy and faced similar sentences. Subsequently, Oscar was convicted for conspiracy to escape for a plot conceived and carried out by government agents and informants acting as provocateurs that resulted in an additional sentence of 15 years. Oscar along with a number of the other defendants were represented by attorneys from People’s Law Office and the National Lawyers Guild who were deeply inspired by their commitment e to liberating their people and their homeland.

The Movement to Free Oscar

Oscar’s projected release date is in 2023, at which point he will be 80 years old. Having served more than 30 years behind bars, he is one of the longest held political prisoners in the history of Puerto Rico.

Due to his drastic sentence and the fact that his incarceration is punitive and politically-motivated, there are compelling reasons for Oscar’s release. As a result, there is a massive movement among Puerto Ricans on the island and in their communities here in the U.S. calling on President Obama to free Oscar. This movement has united groups from the Puerto Rico Bar Association to the Ecumenical and Interreligious Coalition of Puerto Rico (which includes every religious denomination) to elected officials across party lines, including many who support statehood, like the Resident Commissioner, Honorable Pedro Pierluisi, who represents the almost 4 million people of Puerto Rico in the U.S. Congress.

Today, a mock jail cell has been constructed in downtown San Juan, Puerto Rico to mark the anniversary. All day today, prominent Puerto Ricans will be spending an hour in the cell as a gesture of solidarity with Oscar and to bring attention to his prolonged incarceration. The list of prominent personalities is impressive, including Puerto Rican mayors, senators, writers, entertainers and priests.

In addition, Oscar has received wide international support, including Nobel Peace Prize winners, members of the U.S. House of Representatives and other elected representatives, along with civic and religious leaders throughout the U.S.

There is a clear historical precedent for Obama to release Oscar Lopez Rivera. In 1999, President Clinton commuted the sentences of 11 Puerto Rican political prisoners. At the time, Clinton offered Oscar the possibility of presidential commutation after serving 10 additional years with a clear disciplinary record. While encouraging his fellow political prisoners to take the offer, Oscar declined because it did not include all his co-defendants. In 2010, Oscar’s co-defendant Carlos Alberto Torres was paroled, making Oscar the sole remaining Puerto Rican political prisoner convicted as part of the seditious conspiracy indictments.

Throughout his incarceration, Oscar has been represented by lawyers from the National Lawyers Guild who have advocated for him and continue to fight for his release. This representation is just one aspect of the Guild’s commitment to stand in solidarity with the people of Puerto Rico and the struggle for Puerto Rican autonomy from U.S. rule.

For more information on Oscar, read “The Case of Oscar Lopez Rivera” written by Oscar’s lawyer and People’s Law Office attorney Jan Susler.

If you have not yet done so, please sign the petition for Oscar’s release and mail it to:

National Boricua Human Rights Network
2739 W. Division
Chicago, IL 60622

This year’s NLG Law for the People Convention will take place in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Click here for more information.

By: Sharlyn Grace

In October 2011, over 300 people associated with Occupy Chicago were arrested and charged with violating the City of Chicago ordinance that barred them from being in Grant Park between 11:00pm and 6:00am. Many of those arrested decided to pay their fines or perform community service, but 92 defendants decided to fight back. Those activists, represented by People’s Law Office and other National Lawyers Guild attorneys and legal workers, challenged the ordinance’s restrictions on free speech and assembly.

Nearly one year later, in September of 2012, a municipal judge agreed with Occupy Chicago—declaring the ordinance’s restrictions on speech unconstitutional under both the U.S. and Illinois constitutions. The judge found that the ordinance violated the First Amendment of the United States Constitution both on its face (meaning its blanket restriction on speech during those hours was broader than required by the City’s justifications) and as applied to the Occupy Chicago defendants (meaning the ordinance was enforced selectively based on the content of Occupy’s message). The court also found that the ordinance violated the Illinois Constitution’s right to free assembly. The ruling dismissed the charges against Occupy Chicago participants and invalidated the ordinance. For more details on the judge’s decision dismissing all of the charges, see our article immediately following the decision.

The trial judge’s decision was a huge victory, but it is not the end of the story. Unable to admit its error in arresting the hundreds of peaceful participants for a park hours violation that the City had previously waived for other groups (and failed to enforce when a crowd was celebrating Obama’s victory in 2008), the City is appealing in hopes of overturning the lower court’s order. Arrests for ordinance violations are a crucial tactic in Mayor Emanuel’s efforts to silence dissent in Chicago, allowing the Chicago Police to arrest (or threaten to arrest) demonstrators whose message and presence criticize the Mayor’s corporate priorities. The invalidity of these arrests has, accordingly, been a blow to Emanuel’s authority. On May 8, the City filed its brief in the Appellate Court, arguing that the charges should be reinstated.

The City’s brief primarily argues that the trial court judge’s analysis of the constitutional issues was incorrect. The City attorneys argue that: 1) closing the parks overnight is not more restrictive than necessary to meet the City’s interests in maintaining the park and limiting opportunities for crime; 2) there is no pattern of selective enforcement because there are insufficient incidents to detect a pattern and because the Obama election crowd was different; 3) the trial court made procedural errors that should invalidate his ruling.

People’s Law Office and the other NLG attorneys representing the activists have begun working on a response to the City’s arguments, and will continue fighting to ensure that activists in Chicago are able to access the public spaces of our city in the ongoing struggles for social justice—without fear of criminal punishment.

City’s Brief on Appeal - May 8, 2013

Decision Ruling in Favor of Occupy Chicago - September 27, 2012

Occupy Chicago Reply to City – February 10, 2012

Occupy Chicago Motion to Dismiss - November 4, 2011

To learn more about the work of People’s Law Office in defending dissent, visit the Protest and Free Speech page on this site.

Brad Thomson, Legal Worker at People’s Law Office
Article originally appeared at nlg.org

Today is May Day, also known as International Workers’ Day. It is being recognized by millions of working people throughout the world. For over a century, May Day has been a day of celebration for people struggling against exploitation and oppression. As a result, it is representative of a cross-section of our work in the National Lawyers Guild (NLG).

One of the aspects of the NLG that distinguishes us from most other legal associations is the class analysis we bring to our work within the law. As the preamble to our constitution states, we strive to be an “effective political and social force in the service of the people, to the end that human rights shall be regarded as more sacred than property interests.” This commitment to prioritizing the rights of people over property interests means that the Guild consistently represents workers in disputes with their bosses and supports movements struggling against capitalist exploitation and inequality.

Supporting workers’ rights has been an active part of our work since our founding in 1937. In the early years, Guild lawyers were active in the labor movement, helping to organize the United Auto Workers (UAW) and the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO). While mainstream legal organizations like the American Bar Association actively opposed the New Deal, the NLG drafted and defended New Deal legislation, along with other policies designed to improve the lives of poor people.

Our work supporting the labor movement continues today. In recent years, it has come to include working to oppose lawmaker attacks on unions, such as Scott Walker’s law stripping public sector workers of collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin. One of the NLG’s many committees is the Labor and Employment Committee (L&EC). The L&EC has chapters around the country that work with workers’ centers, unions, and community groups to advocate for economic justice.

Marches, rallies, and civil disobedience are key components of May Day. In recent years, May Day marches have also become important days of demonstration for immigrant rights. This connection has grown demonstrations and helped to highlight the intersections of labor exploitation and racist immigration policies. For years, members of the NLG Mass Defense Committees have provided legal support to May Day demonstrators. Legal support includes litigation for march and rally permits, providing Legal Observers®, and representing activists targeted for their involvement in protests.

For example, the Seattle chapter of the NLG has been representing activists who have faced grand jury subpoenas for an investigation ostensibly related to political vandalism during a 2012 May Day demonstration, as well as The Stranger newspaper, which is seeking to unseal the court records justifying the grand jury. The U.S. Attorneys’ Office has used a handful of broken windows as a pretext for a grand jury seeking to socially map the anarchist movement in the Pacific Northwest. Two activists spent five months in federal prison, including two months in solitary confinement for refusing to answer questions about their political beliefs. Neither has been accused of a crime.

Today, as you celebrate the history of the labor movement by marching in the streets and rallying with your fellow workers, know that NLG stands in solidarity with you and with all movements struggling for economic and social justice.

By G. Flint Taylor

More than twelve years ago, a coalition of activists, frustrated by the decades long refusal of the Cook County State’s Attorneys’ Office to investigate and prosecute Jon Burge and his crew of police torturers, started a campaign for the appointment of a special prosecutor.  This prosecutorial intransigence began in the early 1980s under the reign of States Attorney Richard M. Daley, and continued under Daley’s former First Assistant, Richard A. Devine.

The coalition filed a petition before the Chief Judge of the Cook County Criminal Courts, Paul Biebel, setting forth the deep involvement of the State’s Attorney’s Office in the torture scandal – - – taking confessions from numerous tortured suspects, prosecuting those suspects on the basis of tortured confessions, and refusing to prosecute the torturers  – - – all with the knowledge that torture was the name of the game.  The Petitioners also emphasized that Devine, while in private practice, had been involved in defending Burge against allegations of torture in the Andrew Wilson civil damages case. All of this, the Petitioners argued, established a conflict of interest requiring disqualification of Devine and the State’s Attorneys’ Office (SAO) and the appointment of an independent special prosecutor.

In April of 2002, Judge Biebel ruled that Devine did indeed have a per se conflict of interest that arose from his prior representation of Burge. He disqualified Devine and the SAO, and appointed a special prosecutor to investigate Burge and his confederates. The next year, Judge Biebel ruled that the conflict was continuing, and disqualified Devine and the SAO from further involvement in the post conviction cases that a number of torture victims had brought in criminal court in order to challenge their convictions. Biebel appointed The Illinois Attorney General (IAG) to replace the SAO as the prosecutors in those cases.

In December of 2008, Anita Alvarez succeeded Devine as the States Attorney of Cook County. The Illinois Attorney General’s Office, weary of defending the State in the increasing number of post conviction cases brought by Burge torture victims, asked Biebel to pass the ball back to the SAO, arguing that the conflict no longer existed because it was personal to Devine.  Judge Biebel disagreed, finding that the conflict continued to disqualify the entire SAO, and appointed former Cook County Judge Stuart Nudelman as Special Prosecutor to defend the State in the post conviction proceedings.

In June of 2012, the Illinois Torture Inquiry and Relief Commission decided that five Illinois prisoners, including Shawn Whirl and George Anderson, were entitled to criminal court hearings on the question of whether their confessions resulted from Burge related torture. In October, a class action law suit was filed on behalf of an undetermined number of additional prisoners seeking similar hearings on their claims of tortured confessions. When State’s Attorney Alvarez refused to step down from their cases, Whirl, Anderson, and the class all petitioned Judge Biebel to disqualify her and the SAO on the basis of the continuing conflict and asked that Nudelman be appointed.

On April 11, 2013, Judge Biebel reaffirmed his prior rulings and once again found that the SAO’s conflict of interest was not abated by Alvarez’ replacement of Devine. According to Judge Biebel, this was so because Devine’s conflict had irreparably “infected” the entire office, including Alvarez, who was one of his top assistants. However Judge Biebel further ruled that he was not free to simply appoint Judge Nudleman as Special Prosecutor in the class action and TIRC cases because a new statute, passed by the Illinois Legislature in 2012, required him to first seek cost free representation from various public prosecutorial agencies. Hence Judge Biebel announced that he would contact the Illinois Attorney General, the States Attorneys’ Appellate Prosecutor, and States Attorneys from twelve of the largest counties in Illinois to determine, before May 7, whether any of them would accept the job. If not, Judge Biebel will, in all likelihood, appoint Judge Nudelman, who has already billed the County almost $2 million for his work in twenty Burge related post conviction cases.

It has been clear from the beginning that States Attorney Alvarez, like Daley and Devine before her, would be committed to the same delay and deny tactics that have derailed justice for the scores of African American men who still remain behind bars as a result of confessions they claim were tortured from them. Hopefully, Judge Biebel will swiftly appoint a special prosecutor not beholden to these extremely powerful Cook County politicians, who will agree that these long suffering men are at long last entitled to a fair hearing, with all the evidence now at hand, to determine whether their confessions were tortured from them.

The People’s Law Office has been integrally involved in the special prosecutor struggle from the beginning, represents Shawn Whirl, and, along with the MacArthur Justice Center, brought the class action lawsuit that is the subject of Judge Biebel’s most recent decision. To access the decisions discussed and the most recent Chicago Sun Times Editorial:

April 11, 2013 Special Prosecutor Decision:

April 8, 2009 Special Prosecutor Decision:

April 9, 2003 Special Prosecutor Decision:

April 24, 2002 Special Prosecutor Decision:

April 11, 2013 Chicago Sun Times Editorial: Clear up all cases tainted by torture claims

by Sharlyn Grace

On Monday, April 8, 2013, U.S. District Court judge Amy St. Eve issued a permanent injunction preventing Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez from prosecuting members of the general public who openly audio record on-duty police officers in public places. The court’s order in DuMelle v. Hanover Park, et al., which was agreed upon by both the plaintiff and Alvarez, stipulates that the section of the Illinois Eavesdropping Act that made such recordings a felony violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. This is a huge development for those who wish to prevent and document police misconduct within Cook County.

Last May, in ACLU v. Alvarez, the Seventh Circuit declared that “[t]he act of making an audio or audiovisual recording is necessarily included within the First Amendment’s guarantee of speech and press rights,” and in December, U.S. District Court judge Sharon Johnson Coleman enjoined Alvarez from prosecuting ACLU employees or agents under the Eavesdropping Act. Incredibly, Alvarez and other State’s Attorneys continued to pursue such prosecutions.

The plaintiff in this case, Kristopher DuMelle, suffered from one such prosecution of protected First Amendment activity. DuMelle is a 22 year-old resident of Hanover Park who decided to record Hanover Park Police officer Santos Diaz as he stopped DuMelle and a group of friends last October. Concerned that he and his friends were being stopped without legitimate reason, DuMelle began recording Diaz on his cell phone—leading to DuMelle’s brutal arrest and subsequent charges under the eavesdropping law, resisting arrest, and obstructing a peace officer. DuMelle’s eavesdropping charges were dismissed only after that judge found the Eavesdropping Act unconstitutional.

It is now clear that Cook County State’s Attorney cannot prosecute people for openly recording on-duty police officers in public places. Other State’s Attorney’s offices should follow suit, refusing to bring charges against anyone exercising this clear First Amendment Right.

Would-be cop watchers and observers should, as always, take note that while Monday’s order may make that activity technically safe from prosecution, police may still respond negatively or aggressively to being recorded. In such a case, a slew of discretionary charges such as those that DuMelle faced (obstructing a peace officer and resisting a peace officer), as well as other malleable charges like disorderly conduct, are available to police and prosecutors and are frequently used to punish lawful conduct. It should also be noted that the injunction appears to limit protections to those openly making audio recordings.

DuMelle v. Alvarez Agreed Order

If you received a check for your share of the settlement proceeds YOU MUST IMMEDIATELY CASH THE CHECK. We have been notified that 13 checks have not yet been cashed and will be void as of April 8th which is next Monday. If you or someone you know has not cashed your check please do so now.

For more information on the lawsuit, visit:

By G. Flint Taylor

Visit the Chicago Police Torture section on our website to learn more about this issue.