Chicago Lawyer Keys Soon To Be Deployed Marine's Car

[pegwinn]

For openers, my comment about the Marine charging the Lawyer with a Hate Crime was intended as tounge in cheek humor.

It's not a hate crime because to be a hate crime, the victim has to be a member of a suspect class... I am not a lawyer. In laymans terms please.....
the guy deserves some jail time, though. they should preserve the marine's testimony on video tape or let him testify by telephone from whereever he's deployed.

But I don't believe for a second that the DA's office said it would be difficult to collect a judgment from the guy "because he's a lawyer". You grab his bank account after getting a judgment against him. But that would be after a civil suit or an order for restitution. Guy's actual damages are, arguably, $100 though, which is why the D.A. can't be bothered. Heh. You haven't had a scratch repaired by a body shop around here huh?

Society needs to send a message that hate is unacceptable.

With respect, society needs to enforce the base law without adding to it. A murder victim is still dead no matter the emotion of hate being added or not.

That's recruiters... different issue. And if they went near my kid, I'd have something not very nice to say about it, too.

Heh. Wish I'd met you when I was on active duty. Would have been fun. Recruiters are doing a difficult job. Lil Johnny is protected from them by you until his/her 18th birthday.

But this isn't such an aberration. From Vietnam forward, military personnel have been the victims of assaults (spitting and threats), violent acts, screaming protestors at colleges, pushing, shoving, etc. There are some pretty outrageous acts captured on film for the movie "PC U" by "anarchists" against the Army. And there are restrictions against discriminating against military personnel by employers.

But their absence from the protected class category reveals the ridiculousness of "hate crimes." They are for the most part set up to favor minorities and hurt whites. There's barely a fig leaf of pretension that they're there to protect everyone or even a broad spectrum of people.

Here, it looks like the lawyer tried to whip it back against the soldier by accusing HIM of a hate crime, i.e., that he was accosted because he was Jewish. This lawyer knows full well the power of that accusation and that the soldier could be subject to a court martial.

Good post. But it wasn't a Soldier, he is a Marine. The difference is slight to civilians but huge to those in uniform. Additionally the services are held to a higher standard than the folks they serve. Fortunately a court martial is/was unlikely since the standard of proof wasn't met.

I dislike hate crime legislation because I dislike criminalizing thought, which is essentially what happens with a hate crime. We're going to increase the penalty because you hated the race of the person you assaulted, or what have you. Being a racist is not a crime, nor should it be no matter how abhorrent I find the philosophy. If someone is assaulted, the fact that the criminal is a racist doesn't increase the culpability of that person. The assault is the crime and the punishment should be based on that.

Also, I think hate crimes perpetuate the idea of differences among groups rather than bringing people together. How do you tell people they're all equal, but then say by the way if you're black or gay and someone assaults you for that reason, it is somehow worse than if they just assaulted you randomly.

I don't care for it.

Excellent.

 

[William Joyce]

That's why they have trials, though. How do you know the lawyer is lying? (No jokes, seriously) and how can you assume the military guy is telling the truth.

I don't, but in our society, if you're white/military/straight/Christian/Republican/etc., you're guilty until forgotten (see the Duke players). If you're minority, you're innocent even after being proven guilty (see their accuser). That's just how it is. I don't like it. It's unfair.

 

[jillian]

I don't, but in our society, if you're white/military/straight/Christian/Republican/etc., you're guilty until forgotten (see the Duke players). If you're minority, you're innocent even after being proven guilty (see their accuser). That's just how it is. I don't like it. It's unfair.

That's silly. I think *most* people forget that those charged are innocent til proven guilty. There's a bloodlust for stuff that makes people just lap it all up.

As for the Duke kids. The prosecutor took a fall for that one and rightfully so. And, I think, to most of us, that case never smelled right. Won't be the first case of prosecutorial misconduct. Won't be the last.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

He is guilty because 2 people CAUGHT him in the act and he admitted he did it by offering to pay the deductable and by pretending he was a victim of oppression.

There is such a thing as COMMON SENSE.

And remind me how we are Innocent even when not found guilty by a Jury of our Peers? Remind me how O.J. is innocent and how every one abides by the decision of a court and a jury.

Remembering innocent till proven guilty does not also entail disconnecting our brain from our body. Sometimes trials are just formalities.

 

[Annie]

Some updates from the original link:

Update 12-31-07 1000 CST: The hearing is today. After about four hundred emails offering help, I've taken down the email address for now. If I haven't sent you a reply, I apologize and hopefully will send one soon.

I will post updates as they occur. There are several options and we'll see what happens in court first before Mike decides on the next move.

And, BTW, a sincere thanks to all the Chicago Police Officers for their advice and offers.

Let me be clear. I do not want anyone to harass the lawyer, threaten him, damage his property or propose any other illegal suggestion. We can win this one clean and fair - one way or another...

Update 12-31-07 2000 CST: A Blackfive reader sends this update about the hearing today...

Attn: Black Five

I am writing to produce an update of the results of Sgt McNulty's case against Jay R Grodner. I was present in support of Mike and thought you may be interested in an update for this story.

Sgt McNulty was called forward by the State's Attorney in order to discuss the case. I am not sure what transpired behind the closed doors, however, I overheard the State's Attorney expressing her intent to prosecute this guy to the fullest extent. It seems as if BlackFive is the sole catalyst to this story getting out and I am sure Sgt McNulty has probably heard the effect of yours and other blogs from the results of today's proceedings to include several Marines and civilians who showed up in his support.

Jay R Grodner was called before court and in his absence, the Judge issued a warrant for his arrest effective immediately. Sgt McNulty was departing the court when Grodner rolled in to the courtroom more pathetic than anyone I had ever seen. The Judge had questioned him on his tardiness and he explained that traffic had been busy and he 'made a wrong turn'. The Judge chastised him for his tardiness, pathetic excuses, and that he was lucky the warrant had not been executed prior to his arrival.

It seems the blogosphere has put the ball in Sgt McNulty's court. Furthermore, it is also apparent that the State's Attorney's Office has decided to take this matter on a much more serious level. A new and very aggressive State's Attorney seems to have a genuine interest in pursuing this case to the extent that it warrants.​

A lot of good people deserve our thanks today. Thousands responded with emails and phone calls and some even went to support Mike at the hearing. Thank you. I've said it before and I'll say it again - Blackfive and military blogs have the best readers on the planet - we really are a true community.

 

[jillian]

For openers, my comment about the Marine charging the Lawyer with a Hate Crime was intended as tounge in cheek humor.



With respect, society needs to enforce the base law without adding to it. A murder victim is still dead no matter the emotion of hate being added or not.

Heh. Wish I'd met you when I was on active duty. Would have been fun. Recruiters are doing a difficult job. Lil Johnny is protected from them by you until his/her 18th birthday.

A suspect class just means that the designation is based on race, religion or sexual orientation... something that requires a bit of extra scrutiny. As was pointed out, it's mostly relevant to constitutional review of legislation, but they have pretty much used suspect classes as the people protected by hate-crime legislation.

The $100 is because that's what the victim's deductible was.

And yes, I've had scratches fixed on cars... lol...

I'd have been polite to you until you tried to recruit my son.

And if you think the apron string is cut at 18, you clearly have never had a jewish mother.... it's the gift that keeps on giving.

 

[Annie]

A suspect class just means that the designation is based on race, religion or sexual orientation... something that requires a bit of extra scrutiny. As was pointed out, it's mostly relevant to constitutional review of legislation, but they have pretty much used suspect classes as the people protected by hate-crime legislation.

The $100 is because that's what the victim's deductible was.

And yes, I've had scratches fixed on cars... lol...

I'd have been polite to you until you tried to recruit my son.

And if you think the apron string is cut at 18, you clearly have never had a jewish mother.... it's the gift that keeps on giving.

Jillian, it looks like the good Sgt is going to be cared for now by the system. Lots of locals read B5 and wrote to State's Atty, IL Bar Assoc, etc.

Still, his or your take on $100 being reasonable, since it paid his deductible, put the onus on the victim-via insurance rates-and off the suspect. In actuality I'd say that the suspect could see if HIS UMBRELLA Insurance would cover an act of vandalism perpetrated by the insured.

 

[pegwinn]

I'd have been polite to you until you tried to recruit my son.

And if you think the apron string is cut at 18, you clearly have never had a jewish mother.... it's the gift that keeps on giving.

I wasn't a recruiter. I spent approximately 19 of 22 years leading Marines who were mostly 18-22 y/o. In some cases (ask any of the vets on the board) it was almost like being a parent of a very stubborn child.

The recruiter is no more dangerous than say...... a lawyer. It's his job to present options and put them in a favorable light. Everything he says, just like any contract, is subject to documentation and verification. My third kid is being courted by a recruiter now. The recruiter is free to speak to her so long as I am privy to the conversation due to her age. The recruiter, and anyone who knows me, understands that if he screws her over his body will never be found. How's that for out Jewishing the Jewish mom?

 

[Annie]

Chicago Tribune columnist has picked it up:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-kass_03jan03,0,1836149.column

...

"There wasn't a scratch on his car," Sullivan said.

But there is one now.

It is a big scratch, a particularly long scratch in that black paint, a scratch stretching from the rear driver's side around the back, across the trunk, then up to the passenger's side.

If you have a car, and parked it on the street, surely you've thought about what an angry key could do to it.

According to the Cook County state's attorney's office, it wasn't an accident, but a deliberate key job, not done by some kid or street thug, but by a Chicago lawyer who apparently can't stand the military.

Private attorney Jay R. Grodner, 55, of Chicago has been charged with a class A misdemeanor -- criminal damage to property -- punishable by up to one year in jail and up to a $2,500 fine, said Andy Conklin, spokesman for the state's attorney's office.

Late Wednesday, I reached Sgt. McNulty, who declined to comment for the paper but confirmed the facts in the police report.

And I wanted to get Grodner's side of it because he's been accused but not convicted of anything. So we called all the Grodner numbers we could find -- home and business -- including those on the police report and others in the suburbs and Chicago. Many were disconnected, and his cell phone voice mail was full.

I'd like to ask him two questions:

Why?

And, are you proud?
...

And now Jonah Goldberg:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NDQwZDYyNTAxMmYwZThlYWJhOTFkZjJlMmJmMDM3NjQ=

Thursday, January 03, 2008

Marine vs. Lawyer [Jonah Goldberg]

The Chicago Tribune's John Kass has a useful update and summary (Reg. Req'd) of the incident. My favorite part is where the lawyer tried to accuse the Marine of anti-Semitism.

According to the police report I read, other investigative accounts and interviews, Grodner was upset to have been accused of purposely scratching the car. So upset, that he accused his accusers of being anti-Semitic.

The Chicago police officer responding to the call didn't take the accusation seriously, according to the report, because he couldn't justify it. And Sgt. McNulty's brother and Sullivan say it is outrageous and nonsensical.

"The officer wasn't going to hear this kind of talk. He put the kibosh on the whole thing," Sullivan said. "So [Grodner] became apologetic."

According to the police report, "The offender denied scratching the victim's vehicle, but did admit to rubbing past it."

Rubbing past it? I guess it all depends on what the definition of "rubbing" is.​

Because you know, it's just a vicious anti-Semitic stereotype that Jews key cars. No wonder Grodner was offended to be accused even though he was caught red-handed.

In the annals of asininity Grodner is a true standout.

01/03 10:01 AM

 

[Shogun]

I have to agree with Steerpike regarding his criticism of the classification of criminal behaviour as "hate crimes". Strangely, this is where I gree with the likes of Niel Boortz. This lawyer was still caught in the act of criminal behaviour despite his hateful motivation. I don't agree that we should be in the business of deciding who gets special protection under "hate crime" laws when ALL criminal behaviour is illegal despite motivation. I'd have to ask when, exactly, it became the governments role to send any message out about Hate anyway. I don't recall voting in an anti-hate mandate. I don't recall that anything of the sort is in the Constitution. Hate is a human emotion that we ALL experience even if some of us enjoy a protected status under hate crime laws.


Prosecute the Lawyer and, if convicted, disbar him.

 

[pegwinn]

I have to agree with Steerpike regarding his criticism of the classification of criminal behaviour as "hate crimes". Strangely, this is where I gree with the likes of Niel Boortz. This lawyer was still caught in the act of criminal behaviour despite his hateful motivation. I don't agree that we should be in the business of deciding who gets special protection under "hate crime" laws when ALL criminal behaviour is illegal despite motivation. I'd have to ask when, exactly, it became the governments role to send any message out about Hate anyway. I don't recall voting in an anti-hate mandate. I don't recall that anything of the sort is in the Constitution. Hate is a human emotion that we ALL experience even if some of us enjoy a protected status under hate crime laws.


Prosecute the Lawyer and, if convicted, disbar him.

Agreed. Except, he should be given the choice of a year in jail or a year picking up trash and painting rocks at Camp Lejeune.

 

[William Joyce]

A colleague proposes punishment for the false reporting of hate crimes. Here, the lawyer would be charged with that, too.

 

[pegwinn]

A colleague proposes punishment for the false reporting of hate crimes. Here, the lawyer would be charged with that, too.

Works for me. At what point in the process does the Marine get to kick this guys ass without worrying about assault charges?

 

[Annie]

Update. There's some justice, the judge was a marine. Of course, the jerk is still a jerk which is obvious at the end:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...,0,1923633.story?page=1&coll=chi_tab01_layout

Man who keyed car gets day in court; so do Marines


January 20, 2008

...Grodner pleaded guilty in a Chicago courtroom packed with former Marines. Some had Marine pins on their coats, or baseball jackets with the Marine insignia. They didn't yellor call him names. They came to support Marine Sgt. Michael McNulty, whose car Grodner defaced in December, but who couldn't attend because he's preparing for his second tour in Iraq.

Grodner was late to court for the second time in the case. Grodner called Assistant State's Attorney Patrick Kelly, (Marine Corps/Vietnam 1969-1972), informing Kelly that he would be late to court.

"He wanted to avoid the media," Kelly said Friday. "So he's coming a half hour late."

"I don't run my courtroom that way!" responded Judge William O'Malley, ordering Grodner be arrested and held on $20,000 bail when he arrived. Finally, Grodner strolled in. A short man, wide, wearing a black fedora, dark glasses, a divorce lawyer dressed like some tough guy in the movies.

Grodner told me he'd describe himself as a "radical liberal" who's ready to leave Chicago now with all this negative publicity and move to the south of France and do some traveling.

Judge O'Malley has also traveled, but in his youth. He was a police officer on the West Side during the riots before law school. And before that, he performed another public service. Judge O'Malley served in the U.S. Marine Corps from 1961-1964...

..."DID YOU KNOWINGLY CAUSE DAMAGE TO THIS CAR?" O'Malley asked.

Grodner bowed his head, meekly, and responded in an equally meek voice:

"Yes," he said.

After the admission, came the details and Grodner was lucky, getting off with a misdemeanor and no jail time, and not a felony even though he caused $2,400 in damage to Sgt. McNulty's car.

So Grodner received a $600 fine, which will go to a Marine charity, 30 hours of community service and a year of court supervision. If he doesn't pay up in a month, the judge promised to put him in jail for a year.

Judge O'Malley had something to say. He looked out into his courtroom, at all those men who'd come to support a Marine they didn't know.

"You caused damage to this young Marine sergeant's car because you were offended by his Marine Corps license plates," said Judge O'Malley.

Grodner stood there, hands behind his back. He grasped the fingers of his left hand with his right, and held it there, so they wouldn't wiggle.

"You're probably also wondering why there was a whole crowd of people here, Mr. Grodner," said Judge O'Malley.

"I don't want to wonder," said Grodner, continuing in his new meek voice, not in his tough divorce lawyer voice, but the gentle, inside voice he'd just learned.

"That's because there is a little principle that the Marine Corps has had since 1775," the judge continued. "When they fought and lost their lives so that people like you could enjoy the freedom of this country. It is a little proverb that we follow:

"No Marine is left behind.

"So Sgt. McNulty couldn't be here. But other Marines showed up in his stead. Take him away," said the judge and former Marine....

.."Yes, I'd say, 'I'm sorry if I scratched your car.' It escalated. That's when he wanted me locked up and thrown away," said Grodner, always the victim.

Grodner tells me he plans to leave for the French Riviera and get some sun.

Sgt. McNulty will get some sun, too. In Iraq.

 

[Annie]

Here's the transcipt, made me smile:

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2008/01/anti-military-l.html#more

 

[mattskramer]

Here's the transcipt, made me smile:

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2008/01/anti-military-l.html#more

Thanks for the information. It looks like some justice is being served. Grodner – what a low character and low class piece of work.

((Shakes his head in disbelief/disgust))

On about line 16 of page 5, Grodner is asked a straight question. Grodner doesn’t seem to give a straight answer until we reach line 4 of page 6. --- and he is an attorney! Incredible

 

[watermark]

Unreal. Something will probably get done here, his website is now down and business phones disconnected, I guess it won't just be 'the kid not getting off easy...'

The comments are pretty good.

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/12/anti-military-l.html

Well thank God we can deny them blacks the vote in one case... minor property crimes. Otherwise we'd be overrun with mongrels.

 

[watermark]

Perhaps the military should be a 'protected class'? Just a thought.

Needless to say, if said lawyer was found guilty, the only motive was the military license, that was a vanity plate. Seems to be a violation of the service member's freedom of speech. I know that if I went around keying cars that had a countdown til GW was out of office or some other bumper sticker I disagreed with, I would expect I was going to pay damages and probably more.

Why should the victim's insurance company pick up the tab for vandalism? The $100 was the deductible, the damages were estimated at $2400. Seems though that the statute of limitations has exceptions for those serving in the military. I'm not going to be surprised to find this on talk radio this morning and in the papers tomorrow, (meaning New Year's).

Keying someones car because you don't like their opinion isn't a violation of their free speech. It's a violation of their right to property. Only the government can violate free speech.

 

[AllieBaba]

It could probably be classified as a hate crime if he did, on the grounds that the guy is an attorney.

What a jerk.