McHenry Times

On May 22, 2024, the Second District Appellate Court issued a ruling that has sparked considerable debate. The court found that while the defendant posed "a real and present threat to the community," the McHenry County judge erred in concluding that no set of conditions could mitigate that threat.

The Second District determined that the State failed to provide more than conjecture regarding the possibility of reoffense by the defendant. The court stated it was insufficient for the State to rely solely on "the nature of the allegations that defendant sexually assaulted" the victim as grounds for detention.

In their decision, they acknowledged: "If, as the majority seems to recognize, that proof is evident and the presumption great that the defendant committed the alleged offense," it raises significant concerns about whether such an individual can be adequately restrained by measures like an ankle monitor or a court order.

The dissenting opinion highlighted additional risks, particularly to the young victim who may now live in fear knowing that her alleged abuser is not detained. It questioned public sentiment, suggesting a majority would likely support pretrial detention in cases involving sexual violence against children where evidence and presumption are strong.

The McHenry County State’s Attorney’s Office responded by emphasizing respect for judicial integrity: "We at the McHenry County State’s Attorney’s Office recognize that judges are not 'wholly free to defend themselves' in face of public criticism." They urged readers to review the full opinion available on the Illinois Supreme Court website and clarified their stance: "Nothing in the foregoing should be interpreted as... commenting on qualifications or integrity of any judge involved."

###