Copyright 2022 All Rights Reserved.

August 12, 2022

Here is the 764-page Bill on “Police Accountability” – debated 58 minutes after introduction –

By John Kraft & Kirk Allen

On January 13, 2021

Springfield, IL. (ECWd) –

For your reading pleasure.

We have not read it yet.

10100HB3653sam002

SHARE THIS

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print

RELATED

18 Comments
  • Sarah
    Posted at 12:45h, 13 January

    Anything in here that is going to hold the police officers who took a knee to BLM and Antifa criminals accountable for breaking their oaths and betraying their trust? Anything in here that holds police accountable when they stand down and let cities burn?

    I used to love the police — my family has been police and military since WWII — but no more. Sick of this.

  • Greg G
    Posted at 15:21h, 13 January

    I love the comment “We haven’t read it yet”. No problem!

    The legislators that voted for it and the house members who will vote on it haven’t read it either!

  • Pete Pivo
    Posted at 15:58h, 13 January

    those idiots! this is the fascist bill by the foundations they are passing all over the country to germinate their US version of ISIS by tying the hands of law enforcement. were screwed now!

  • Robert J Schlereth
    Posted at 16:26h, 13 January

    It is amazing how the left magnifies the actions of a few officers and that propose huge bills on short notice that radically change the guidelines that police must follow. Eliminate felony murder?
    ???

  • Greg
    Posted at 18:16h, 13 January

    The democrats that rammed this thru didn’t read it either!

  • Theodore Hartke
    Posted at 19:22h, 13 January

    I am bothered that this law allows anyone to file anonymous complaints and also file any complaint they want without any risk for those who file a false complaint. Now, a person can file a false complaint and not be held responsible……read pages 94, 95, 96.

    • PK
      Posted at 22:05h, 13 January

      Pages 94, 95, 96 amend statute (50 ILCS 727/) Police and Community Relations Improvement Act. New is the requirement to investigate anonymous complaints for disciplinary purposes. That an anonymous complaints which is false, and which can now be received and investigated by a disciplinary board is cause for concern.

      Let’s presume an anonymous complainant, which would not be investigated previously, was made ‘anonymous’ out of fear of retaliation. Now, to the extent the change does not result in false complaints, the new policy could be toward the original aims of 50 ILCS 727/) Police and Community Relations Improvement Act. However, given the partisan sponsorship of the entire bill, I’m skeptical. however.

  • PK
    Posted at 21:29h, 13 January

    All seven of the senate sponsors have a Chicago office.

    A solution(s) minded general assembly, acting with a sense of urgency, would be capable of finding a few sponsors from the other side of the aisle. After all, the first reading occurred nearly a year ago.

    Unlike the coronavirus response of the Illinois executive branch, house members who did not vote today are indeed excused.

    • PK
      Posted at 21:19h, 14 January

      An alternate senate co-sponsor appeared as an action on the bill taken earlier today, Jan 14th, bringing the total senate sponsorship to eight. All eight senate sponsors have offices in Cook County. It’s not clear how such an action can be taken today after the bill was purportedly sent to the Governor’s office yesterday.

  • Greg
    Posted at 18:58h, 14 January

    “A solution(s) minded general assembly”

    The only solutions these democrats can think of is raising taxes!!

    A new speaker BFD, The new Boss same as the old boss!!

  • PK
    Posted at 10:04h, 15 January

    “The democrats that rammed this thru didn’t read it either!”

    Actions on house bill 3653 are recorded here:

    https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=3653&GAID=15&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=120371&SessionID=108&GA=101#actions

    Evidently, some reading this news article conclude the bill was not read by either the house or senate prior to the latest amendment. However, according to actions recorded, the bill was, in fact, read on the floor of house and senate previously.

    ‘We won’t get fooled again’ – The Who

    • Greg
      Posted at 16:22h, 15 January

      When a bill is ‘Read” on the floor it means the title and short description is read into the record. The entire bill is no longer required to be read, Thanks Mike Madigan! There is not one member of either side of the house that read this! No one can read 700+ pages in the time between when it was dropped on the desk and when the bill was called for the vote. We used to have legislators with integrity now we have Chicago democrats who’s only real job is to ram bills thru and if people don’t like it tough shit!

      How about a bill to make Chicago a state of its own? You vote means nothing in Illinois!

      • NMWTLS
        Posted at 10:41h, 17 January

        Yes, you are correct, as far as presidential elections your vote won’t matter in Illinois if you are not voting along with Chicago. Illinois could become a proportion state vs a winner take all state as far as the electoral college. That would be the process to use if the concern was to have a true representation of the will of the people. Unfortunately, there are only 2 states (Nebraska and Maine) that do not use the winner take all process. Winner take all is not in the true intent of the electoral college. Changing that process would be a good political movement to pursue in all 48 states using winner take all.

      • PK
        Posted at 12:51h, 17 January

        “There is not one member of either side of the house that read this!”

        The latest amendment contains minor changes from what was introduced in February last year. Exclaiming that no member read the bill suggests the back and forth was done without anyone reading the bill; and that’s not in the least likely. If a lawmaker was current on the bill, a review of the changes made on the senate amended bill could be done for purpose of further debate without re-reading the entire bill.

        To be sure, there’s no offer to excuse legislators’ idle deference to the state courts for purpose of working to address shortcomings of the gubernatorial serial proclamations in that assessment.

        • Greg
          Posted at 15:31h, 17 January

          These so called legislators are told by the leadership how to vote!

          You must be new to the way things are done in the overflowing sewer that is the

          Illinois General Assembly.

          The Chicago machine runs the show!

          • PK
            Posted at 19:26h, 17 January

            I’m old to the others’ pessimism, your conventions, and anyone else under the age of 40.

  • Slightly Sightful
    Posted at 23:56h, 15 January

    When the State levies taxation for the purpose of public safety, then returns the burden of public safety back to the individual, while simultaneously denying a required permission slip (FOID) to the people seeking to secure their very lives, the State has hit the perfecta of conditions to create victims and dependents. This bill demoralizes the safety of every Illinoisan, and affords only a robust congregation in the Church of Big Government. The seek a class of dependents. I never read the Declaration of Dependence. I did read a Declaration of Independence that our leadership clearly loathes, as it reduces our leaders to men, and not the demigods they aspire to be.

  • Ang
    Posted at 16:12h, 16 January

    What Illinois really needs is accountability (threat of a federal consent decree) and truly independent oversight for even suburban police departments (especially if they harass government reformers).

    https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2005-04-21-0504210245-story.html

    What a hot mess of a reputation this department seems to have…

    https://prev.dailyherald.com/story/?id=133749

    https://dockets.justia.com/docket/circuit-courts/ca7/09-3155

    Not sure final outcome of this, but what a PR nightmare for Oak Brook…

    http://www.abisoft.org/opinions/2009/1_05-cv-02335_20090730.pdf

    There’s more online…

    https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2007-07-13-0707121276-story.html

    Even if you win some of these cases, how much money do taxpayers spend to defend in these cases?

    And more bad PR here…

    https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2007-03-29-0703280806-story.html

    https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8b0b4fe3-1eb8-4dc7-90ae-449fdfc47218

    OMG!!!

    https://www.courthousenews.com/drew-petersons-sonsues-police-force/?amp=1

    http://www.abisoft.org/opinions/2009/1_05-cv-02335_20090730.pdf

    Now they apparently have a town manager who’s a former cop (eye roll).

    Haven’t taken time to check final outcomes of all these cases after the back and forth, but how does own town get into that much legal wrangling? And does their PD maybe need some independent oversight?

    That is a reform IL really needs. Independent oversight of even suburban departments.

    IMHO

$