Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
A DuPage County judge on Monday banned more than a dozen members of a west suburban gang from hanging out with each other in a landmark Illinois decision that law enforcement officials said gives them a powerful weapon to combat gangs.
But Judge Edward R. Duncan denied a request from West Chicago and DuPage County State's Attorney Joseph Birkett to make the 14 members of the Satan Disciples street gang also pay $529,000 in damages. Duncan said authorities couldn't really show the gang members cost police that much money over five years.
The split ruling came in a first-of-its-kind Illinois lawsuit that Birkett filed in 1999 seeking to shut down the West Chicago gang by imposing civil penalties, including damages for gang-related law enforcement costs.
Duncan granted a permanent injunction sought by prosecutors that prohibits the gang members from associating publicly or possessing firearms and other weapons.
Birkett, who won an Illinois appellate court ruling in 2001 to keep the suit alive, said he was pleased with the ruling even though the judge did not order the Satan Disciples to pay damages.
"It's a significant tool against gangs,'' Birkett said, adding the decision clears the way for police and prosecutors to file similar civil suits against other gangs.
"The bottom line is the judge gave us what we were after,'' Birkett said, vowing that such suits "will be used again -- no question.''
Any gang members found violating the order could be brought before the judge for contempt of court, Birkett said.
None of those named in the suit were present in court when the ruling came down. Several are in prison and others have left the area, West Chicago police say, estimating about six remain in the western suburb.
Court-appointed defense attorney Dan Brown argued that banning the gang members from simply hanging out together publicly was too broad a step to take.
"The right to associate took a hit today,'' Brown said. His client, Arthur Guillen Jr., is now prohibited from associating publicly with a relative, Thomas Guillen, who also was named in the suit.
"What if they just meet in a store? They can't even say hello,'' Brown said.
Birkett, however, said the ban was justified, particularly since gatherings of the gang members frequently led to violence and illegal behavior.
"When you use that right as an excuse to do acts of violence, then we can step in and prevent that,'' Birkett said.
Originally posted by Reilly
I am no fan of gang members but this is a shit ruling. Now the gov't presumes to tell us who we can and cannot talk to. No way this is upheld.
Originally posted by Reilly
This would make it hard to put on a gang-bang.
for taking a pro-active stand.
Originally posted by Reilly
This would make it hard to put on a gang-bang.
Originally posted by Big D
This is just natural behaviour for the hispanic people.
As the hispanic population continues to increase whites will not be unable to control this hispanic behaviour as they are trying to do today.
Originally posted by Big D
This is just natural behaviour for the hispanic people.
As the hispanic population continues to increase whites will not be unable to control this hispanic behaviour as they are trying to do today.
:
Originally posted by Big D
GEE, lets just ignore the fact that by far the majority of violent gangs are hispanics.
And the majority of janitors are named Dave. So what?
Originally posted by nycflasher
Watch out, your going to get another spanking from Sir Evil.Originally posted by Big D
GEE, lets just ignore the fact that by far the majority of violent gangs are hispanics.
And the majority of janitors are named Dave. So what?
Originally posted by NewGuy
http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-gangs20.html
There is more, but according to the last few statements in the following quote, this is CLEARLY unconstitutional.
