May 05--In a surprise move, Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez's office said Thursday it was withdrawing from prosecuting Chicago police Officer Jason Van Dyke on charges of killing Laquan McDonald, clearing the way for a special prosecutor to be appointed.
Prosecutors said that Alvarez saw no valid conflict of interest on the part of her or her office but still opted to recuse herself from a case that has created a firestorm and played a part in her re-election defeat in March. She asked that a special prosecutor be appointed.
In seeking the special prosecutor, a coalition of Alvarez critics, attorneys and community groups had alleged that the state's attorney's close relationship with the Chicago police union created a conflict of interest that discouraged her from pursuing officers suspected of wrongdoing.
State's attorney candidate Kim Foxx, who defeated Alvarez in the Democratic primary and is the heir apparent to succeed her after the general election in November, applauded the move by Alvarez, saying in a statement that "this is clearly the appropriate decision in this case."
In her own statement issued after court, Alvarez said the interests of justice after she lost the election would best be served by having an independent prosecutor appointed.
"While it has not been an easy decision, I believe that it is the right one because it will help to avoid unnecessary legal delays and provide continuity in the handling of this very important and complicated case," the statement said. "It would also ensure that one designated prosecutor will handle this case as it proceeds to trial.
"While there is no legal conflict of interest that would prevent the state's attorney's office from continuing the prosecution of this case, I believe that the results of the recent election and the impending transition of this office make this the best and most responsible decision.
"More than anything else, our role as prosecutors is to seek justice and do all that we can to promote confidence in our criminal justice system. It is my greatest hope that the citizens of Chicago who have been shocked and polarized by this crime and this tragedy will understand and welcome this decision and respectfully support the efforts of all elements of the criminal justice system as the prosecution of Jason Van Dyke moves forward."
Locke Bowman, an attorney who represented a coalition seeking a special prosecutor, told reporters that he was surprised but gratified by Alvarez's decision, saying it was in the best interests "of justice and fairness for this community."
Judge Vincent Gaughan, who is presiding over the Van Dyke case, must still approve of Alvarez's recusal. In court Thursday, Assistant State's Attorney Alan Spellberg said the law requires the judge to first reach out to the attorney general's office and the Illinois Office of the State's Attorney Appellate Prosecutor to see if they have prosecutors available to take on the case.
Bowman told reporters he hopes, though, that neither agency would handle the prosecution because he said both historically have been closely aligned with Cook County prosecutors in their reluctance to prosecute police officers.
In court, Bowman asked the judge for the opportunity to suggest a slate of possible lawyers to be appointed as special prosecutor.
The judge said he would hear such proposals June 2.
"The decision about how to proceed forward after the recusal is just as important as Alvarez's decision to recuse," Bowman told reporters. "This prosecution needs to be handled superbly, it needs to be handled with fairness, it needs to be handled with a view not just to doing justice with respect to Mr. Van Dyke but also with respect to other officers who were involved in the cover-up."
Bowman said he was not yet prepared to name any candidates but said the judge should appoint "a person of stature, great integrity and fierce prosecutorial zeal."
G. Flint Taylor, another attorney involved in seeking a special prosecutor, said the lawyer "needs to be from, and responsive to, the community."
A coalition of some 25 community groups, prominent attorneys, a member of McDonald's family and some of Alvarez's biggest critics had filed the petition seeking a special prosecutor. In addition to the alleged conflict of interest with the police union, they also alleged that Alvarez's office had botched a number of prosecutions in addition to that of Van Dyke.
At the time that the petition was filed in February, Alvarez denied any conflict of interest and called the timing of the motion "more than a little coincidental" since it was filed weeks before the Democratic primary for state's attorney.
The motion, filed by lawyers from Northwestern University, the University of Chicago and the People's Law Office, also asks that a special prosecutor be appointed to investigate Chicago police officers who filed reports that contradict the now-viral dashboard camera video showing Van Dyke shooting McDonald 16 times as the 17-year-old walked away from officers with a knife in his hand.
The Rev. Jesse Jackson also filed for a special prosecutor to be appointed to handle Van Dyke's prosecution. That filing alleges Alvarez had a conflict of interest and that the public's trust in her office was at a low point, but it did not call for a special prosecutor to investigate the other officers.
Also Thursday, Gaughan said he has privately worked out a plan to ensure Van Dyke's safety as he enters and exits the Leighton Criminal Court Building for court appearances on the first-degree murder charges.
Gaughan said he held an unannounced meeting last week with prosecutors, Van Dyke's lawyer and sheriff's officials at which the group hammered out an unspecified "security plan."
"It's unconscionable that we would compel an individual to appear at a court date without ensuring his security," Gaughan said. "Mob rule will not happen in this courtroom."
Van Dyke's lawyer, Daniel Herbert, had raised concerns for the officer's safety in a case that has caused a firestorm, even proposing at first that Van Dyke be allowed to skip routine court appearances.
But in his latest filing, Herbert suggested that sheriff's deputies guard the officer as he enters and exits the county's main courthouse. Prosecutors had first raised the possibility.
Herbert asked a judge in March to waive Van Dyke's presence at routine court appearances, citing concerns about his safety because of public protests outside the courthouse over the high-profile case. Van Dyke, who has been suspended without pay, is free on $1.5 million bond while awaiting trial.
Prosecutors have said the judge should not allow Van Dyke to skip court, arguing that to do so would create a perception of preferential treatment and create a "slippery slope" for other defendants in highly publicized cases. But in their court filing last month, prosecutors suggested Gaughan could order sheriff's deputies to protect Van Dyke when protesters are present or allow him earlier access to the courthouse than the general public.
The dashcam video of Van Dyke shooting McDonald 16 times has caused a crisis for the city and Police Department, leading to calls for major reforms amid a U.S. Justice Department investigation of police practices.
Since he was charged in November in the on-duty killing just hours before the court-ordered release of the video, Van Dyke has had to maneuver through rowdy protests outside the courthouse during several early court appearances.
No protesters were on hand outside the courthouse Thursday.
sschmadeke@tribpub.com
