Cook County State’s Attorney Orders Blanket Objections to Electronic Monitoring

Introduction to the Directive

Cook County States Attorney Eileen O’Neill Burke has ordered prosecutors to object to all judge’s orders for electronic monitoring if the prosecutors were trying to hold the person while awaiting trial, according to a memo from Burke’s office obtained by the Sun-Times.

Background and Reasoning

In the memo, Burke cited 57 escape charges that have been leveled against defendants since Dec. 2 and accused the Chief Judge’s Office of not being adequately prepared to handle the responsibilities of managing electronic monitoring, which previously was under the purview of the Sheriff’s Office.
“I am now directing you to object on the record whenever you have sought detention and the judge has chosen to place the defendant on electronic monitoring/home confinement,” Burke wrote. “At this time, OCJ has not ensured that they have sufficient properly trained staff to monitor individuals ordered to electronic monitoring instead of detention. … I believe this is a threat to public safety.”

Office of the Chief Judge Response

The Office of the Chief Judge of Cook County didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Policy Directives

The memo is in line with previous directives from Burke, breaking with the policies of her predecessor, Kim Foxx.
Burke’s first policy directive — issued on her first day on the job, Dec. 2 — called for prosecutors to seek detention for “every detainable felony offense where an offender used or possessed a firearm equipped with an extended magazine, drum magazine, automatic switch, or used a ghost gun or defaced firearm.”

Specific Guidance

The now months-old directive also added guidance to seek detention for “any domestic violence-related, stalking or sex offense where the offender used or possessed a weapon” as well as “any detainable felony offense that is committed on public transportation.”

SAFE-T Act Implications

Under the SAFE-T Act, which abolished cash bail in Illinois, judges determine whether or not to jail a person before trial if prosecutors request it. Defendants are unlikely to be jailed on weapons possession charges unless they face other aggravating felony charges.

Conclusion

The directive by Cook County State’s Attorney Eileen O’Neill Burke to object to electronic monitoring in cases seeking detention reflects a significant shift in policy, emphasizing public safety concerns and the perceived inadequacies in the management of electronic monitoring by the Chief Judge’s Office. This move aligns with Burke’s broader approach to prosecution, focusing on stricter conditions for defendants awaiting trial, particularly in cases involving firearms and certain violent crimes.

FAQs

• Q: What has Cook County State’s Attorney Eileen O’Neill Burke ordered regarding electronic monitoring?
  A: Burke has ordered prosecutors to object to all judge’s orders for electronic monitoring if the prosecutors were seeking detention.
• Q: Why has Burke given this directive?
  A: The directive is based on concerns about public safety, citing 57 escape charges and the perceived lack of preparedness by the Chief Judge’s Office to manage electronic monitoring.
• Q: How does this directive align with previous policies?
  A: This directive breaks with the policies of Burke’s predecessor, Kim Foxx, and is in line with Burke’s first policy directive issued on her first day, which emphasized seeking detention in certain felony cases.
• Q: What is the SAFE-T Act, and how does it relate to this directive?
  A: The SAFE-T Act abolished cash bail in Illinois, leaving judges to decide pre-trial detention based on prosecutors’ requests. The directive reflects an approach to ensure stricter conditions for defendants, particularly in cases involving firearms and violent crimes.