The Chainlink

Bobby Cann Updates: Ryne San Hamel Pleads Guilty, Receives 10 Days in Jail

Jason Jenkins at ActiveTrans is helping to coordinate community response.  If there is any chance you can attend proceedings, please reach out to him: 

jason@activetrans.org.

 

Views: 43859

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on August 11, 2015 at 1:35pm

Probably just one random security guard who decided helmets couldn't go through. From what I understand, that wasn't a problem before today. 

Permalink Reply by Eli on August 11, 2015 at 1:44pm

It's probably something made up on the spot by the guard. I believe it is the Cook County Sheriff's Courtroom Services Division which runs security, so I sent an e-mail to the sheriff's office asking them to reconsider this policy.

For what it's worth, I don't think there was any confusion as to why we were there on the part of the judge or anyone else, helmets or no helmets.

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on August 11, 2015 at 5:42pm

Here's an update from Streetsblog about today's hearing:

http://chi.streetsblog.org/2015/08/11/prosecutor-is-appealing-the-d...

Permalink Reply by Maurice on August 11, 2015 at 6:54pm

Appeals can take a year or longer.  Obviously much longer than an amended charging instrument specifically alleging recklessness.  This should end any talk about the defense dragging out the case.  The prosecution obviously is in no hurry to take this to trial.  

 

Last time, the judge also criticized the prosecutors for producing a photocopy instead of the original signed warrant.  Anybody know whether they addressed that today?

Permalink Reply by Yasmeen on August 11, 2015 at 8:16pm

I was there today and I'd really hesitate to try to speculate on the strategy of the defense or the prosecution. We had 33 advocates there to show our support. 

Permalink Reply by Bill Nedza on August 21, 2015 at 12:02pm

"We had 33 advocates there to show our support."

I think that as long as a good number of advocates stay involved, the judge really "gets' it", the media doesn't let this die, and this tragedy is kept "out front", maybe, just maybe,

we'll see justice done.   

Permalink Reply by Bob Kastigar on August 21, 2015 at 2:35pm

"the media doesn't let this die"

What media?  Other than here, John Greenfield's posts, and a few other bike-related place I really don't see much about this in the mainstream media.

Permalink Reply by ad on August 13, 2015 at 2:03pm

If I had to speculate, and that's all we can really do, I'd say the appeal is driven by two things: (1) the prosecution wants to set a standard that this type of indictment is sufficient to help both here and in future cases, and they feel this is a good case to take the issue up on; and/or (2) they probably feel there is no way to amend the indictment that won't get thrown out. The wheels of justice move slowly, unfortunately.  I don't mean that to be flippant, but it is the reality, and it's why the cases often fall off peoples' radar unless they have a personal attachment to the victim.   

And generally I agree that it's best to just let the prosecution do its job and not speculate too much, and they don't simply do things to just drag things out, but I do think it's healthy to a degree to discuss decisions made.  They're not fool proof.

Permalink Reply by Maurice on August 13, 2015 at 4:27pm

Prosecutors (and other lawyers) absolutely do things just to drag things out, if they feel that dragging it out is in their best interests.

Permalink Reply by Bob Kastigar on August 13, 2015 at 4:41pm

Defense attorneys get paid by the hour, so they benefit from delays.

The prosecution attorneys are paid a salary and will do whatever it takes, no matter how long, in order to get a "guilty" verdict.

Permalink Reply by ad on August 13, 2015 at 5:07pm

That's the point, when it's in their client's best interests.  And when it's the prosecution, it's often to ensure a conviction, or due to the realities of staffing.  They're not doing it because they feel like going to the beach instead of work next Wednesday.  

Permalink Reply by Bob Kastigar on August 11, 2015 at 8:58pm

8/11/2015

This e-mail is to inform you that there is an upcoming court event involving the defendant Ryne Sanhamel and case number 13CR1355001.

A hearing has been scheduled for 8/13/2015 at 10:00 AM. This will take place in Circuit Court 127, located at the following address: 2600 South California Ave, Chicago, IL .

Please be aware that there are often multiple cases set on a particular date in this court. The case you are involved in may not be reached on the scheduled day. You may want to check for updates to this information by periodically calling the VINE service or visiting www.vinelink.com.

For more information, contact the county clerk's office.

Thank you,

Cook County Automated Victim Notification System

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service