home

Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed

by TChris

Chicago police tortured black suspects in the 1970's and 1980's. This was no secret at the time, but now that a belated investigation confirms the outrageous misconduct, it's too late to prosecute.

''It is our judgment that the evidence in those cases would be sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt,'' Robert D. Boyle and Edward J. Egan wrote in a long-awaited report.

Their four-year investigation focused on allegations that detectives under the command of Lt. Jon Burge beat suspects, used electric shock on them, played mock Russian roulette and started to smother at least one man to elicit confessions. ...

Boyle and Egan's report said they found three cases with enough evidence to seek an indictment, including the suspect whose abuse allegations led to Burge's firing. That suspect, who was convicted of killing two police officers in 1982, claimed Burge and two detectives beat and tortured him with electric shocks. The special prosecutors also said they believe there was abuse in other cases that they reviewed but that the evidence wasn't as strong.

< Bye Bye Reed | What Lakoff and Obama Do Not Understand >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 10:30:42 AM EST
    The suspect convicted of murdering the 2 police officers- any chance he gets off due to the civil liberties violation??

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#2)
    by Discovery on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 12:21:29 PM EST
    I hope you are not advocating that the criminal be released. Misconduct he received doesn't negate his two murders or punishment.

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#3)
    by Sailor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 12:51:09 PM EST
    the article didn't mention the case, but if it is the one I recall he was torured and beaten until he confessed, but scratched out a denial to the confession on the underside of his chair seat. If they tortured a confession out of him then damn right he should go free so cops know in the future if yyou f@#! up that bad the suspect goes free. It would be their fault a cop killer went free ... that is assuming he did it.

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 12:59:11 PM EST
    Discovery wrote:
    I hope you are not advocating that the criminal be released. Misconduct he received doesn't negate his two murders or punishment.
    Are you kidding with that comment or have you just missed the point entirely? The thread is talking about people who were tortured into confessing to crimes that they very likely didn't commit . . .

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 01:45:14 PM EST
    Discovery- I'm not necessarily advocating the release of the prisoner. I am asking if there is any chance that he could be released. Whether or not he should be is a question for an appeals court. I assume it would depend on the amount of evidence that exists if you put aside the confession which, it seems to me given the cicumstances, would be inadmissable. My question, and please forgive me if it was not articulated well the first time around, is this: Given that prosecution of the officers is impossible, will the appeals court even look at the conviction to decide if it should be overturned? OR Will they just let this guy rot in jail because 'what's done is done'? If he is guilty, I imagine there should be some evidence to prove that, aside from a coerced confession (weapon, id, motive, etc.)

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 02:00:00 PM EST
    Sailor, I'm afraid I disagree with you. If he really killed 2 cops, I think he should rot in jail. I just think that the individuals who tortured him should be right there with him. I think that would deter officers from exercising these techniques in the future while still serving the public interest by keeping a cop killer behind bars.

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 02:16:31 PM EST
    Read COURTROOM 302: A Year Behind the Scenes in an American Criminal Courthouse by Steve Bogira. These allegations were widely known for years but people who were convicted and said they were tortured until they confessed still face an uphill battle getting new trials. Maybe it's time for Illinois to look at all these cases... It's sad this kind of stuff can happen in the US.

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#8)
    by Peaches on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 02:23:38 PM EST
    Canuck, Sailors point is that if a confession was obtained through torture then the case should be thrown out. We can't know if the suspects are guilty or not b/c justice was not served properly. We are a nation of laws and justice. Police are there to serve justice. They failed in this case. The torture victim should be set free if the confession was secured through torture. That is justice.

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#9)
    by Discovery on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 02:26:49 PM EST
    Thanks Canuck,eh. I agree with you. Wasn't sure if that is what your advocating. I also agree, that it would be upsetting if the officers were not sentenced ackordingly. I appreciate the banter Labyrinth13. My question was to Canuck,eh.

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#10)
    by jen on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 02:33:05 PM EST
    I would advocate throwing out every single confession obtained by torture. And yeah, retrying cases. If they don't have any other evidence then they would go free, yes. Resposibility doesnt end at the courthouse steps.

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#11)
    by peacrevol on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 02:37:38 PM EST
    i agree w/ jen. if the confession is bogus and there's not enough other evidence for conviction in the new trial, then the case should be thrown out and the convict released to teach cops that if they beat a confession out of you, it wont do anyone any good.

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#12)
    by aw on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 06:38:18 PM EST
    Can cops pick us up and torture us? For any reason?

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#13)
    by Sailor on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 07:44:59 PM EST
    Can cops pick us up and torture us? For any reason?
    Nope, not any reason; you were in the wrong place at the wrong time ... you were driving while black ... you objected to being pulled over while driving while back in the wrong place at the wrong time ... etc. or you had an abortion when the state you were in said it was illegal and the Supremes hadn't overturned it yet. Yes, Patrick, it was over the top and snarky, but not out of the ballpark. Especially in Chicago. As I've said before, there are only 2 places in the world that I have been solicited for a bribe; Juarez, Mexico and Chicago, Ill.

    Peaches, Why wouldn't you be able to try the case again, with the confession excluded? If a jury finds that there is still enough evuidence to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the suspect committed the crimes, how is justice not served? A 3 year statute of limitations on crimes of torture- that's where justice is not served.

    Chicago is a very corrupt city and they have been firmly under the control of the Democrats for decades.

    Re: Chicago Police Torture Allegations Confirmed (none / 0) (#16)
    by Peaches on Thu Jul 20, 2006 at 07:55:28 AM EST
    Why wouldn't you be able to try the case again, with the confession excluded?
    Canuck, I am not a lawyer. If there is nothing (Statute of limitations, double jeopardy, etc.) preventing the state from trying the suspect again without the confession, then I agree they should have that right. But, first, the conviction should be thrown out and the torture victim should be let out and the process should begin all over again. If there is not enough evidence to try the torture victim again without the confession, or the jury finds him not guilty in a new trial, what should be his compensation for the first conviction and the torture?