Jason Jenkins at ActiveTrans is helping to coordinate community response. If there is any chance you can attend proceedings, please reach out to him:
See page 2 and 3 of this very same discussion.
For those disinclined to scroll back:
"As has been mentioned in another thread, as courtroom advocates it has been required that we not discuss details of what happened at each hearing, out of respect for the family. Even the most seemingly innocent comment can be potentially destructive or hurtful. So considering the sensitivity of the details of the case and out of respect for for the family, we'll err on the side of caution. Going forward I'll only be posting the most basic logistical update details here."
In keeping with this, I did not post information here about the hearing I attended earlier this month.
Bob, I am sure everyone appreciates your continued interest in the case, a case that interests or should interest all of us. I think your efforts to drum up more publicity about the case's progress should be directed toward media outlets, not ATA.
Back when the two-year anniversary approached and was mentioned here, I sent an email to Keith Griffith, the author of the Chicago Reader article, about the case, suggesting perhaps he could pen a followup piece. (I'm sure I'm not the only person who contacted him.) He responded positively, and a few weeks later, a new article appeared in the Reader:
I plugged that article on Google Plus (I don't do Facebook, and never tweet):
Despite G+'s lack of reach, I've still received a half dozen "likes". Posting to bicycle advocacy groups on Facebook and Twitter would probably do a bit more to publicize the agonizing pace of the case (which, we were warned early on, would likely happen).
So, if you're Facebooker or Twitterer, I say, go ahead and out the new article there. I'm not sure how much effect letters to the editor of the Trib or other mainstream newspapers would help, but you could try that as well.
Good suggestions, Skip. Thanks.
Curious...open court of law and you suggest nobody discusses for fear of repercussion? How is that promoting free speech? Seems awfully weird to not be able to discuss a case that affects every rider in this city.
You are missing the point. This isn't about free speech. This is about respecting the cyclist's family and what they are going through. I have before and Kevin C said it very well yesterday.
It seems to me that getting established bloggers (with a following) to pick this case up would be more productive than one of us thinking, "I know, I'll start a blog. I don't have any followers, but it's bound to make a difference..."
If a tree falls...
I don't know if there are any established (as in, have a following) bike bloggers in the Chicago area, but if not, maybe BSNYC or Wisconsin Bike Fed could be persuaded to mention the Bobby Cann case, despite the fact this is not their immediate geography.
I'm not going to blog about anything. There seems to be at least a partial consensus here that the case has fallen out of the public's eye, and that as a consequence, the odds that the defendant might skate on the charges increases.
Also, while Bobby Cann's family appears to be represented by top-notch talent (I will take your word for that) and thus might well be able to reach deep into the San Hamel family's purse, it's the State's Attorney who brings the criminal case. The last hearing transcript I saw indicated that the defendant's attorney (also no slouch) was there ready to argue some motions, but that the State's Attorney wasn't present, adding to the delay.
I've been following it, and very much appreciate your updates. Just doing it quietly, I'm afraid.
I hate this thread. I hate the persistent brand of slacktivism displayed by individuals who have never shown up for a Court date, yet admonish courtroom advocates for not reporting in detail the substance and content of each status court date, which for the most part, lack substance or content. I hate the presumptuousness of individuals who suggest that because this thread is not sufficiently active for their tastes, that the only possible explanation is that members of the cycling community don't care or have forgotten. And I hate those individuals who believe that their "need to know" is more important than the feelings and wishes of Bobby Cann's family (as communicated in this thread) that this thread was upsetting or unsettling to them.
I love everything Kevin said. Thank you, sir.