Please enjoy this editorial from the Chicago Tribune. Bottom line, the Chicago City Lawyers lie repeatedly to the Judges. I always thought everyone presents their case in a honest manner, respecting the laws as written. Someone at Chicago’s Law Department must have ordered the Chicago Lawyers to lie, which leads me to believe the culture of corruption, scare tactics, and retaliation, is alive and well in the Mara Georges Office. I would quit working for the City of Chicago, as a lawyer, if a supervisor ever asked me to lie in-front of a judge. The law requires this activity to be reported, it never has happened. Many of City of Chicago’s lawyers are not the top college graduates. Many quit Mara Georges rein after a short stay. I think the newspapers would best serve Chicago if they looked into the Law Department, as closely as the Building Department. See the Editioral below. On the same page, the Tribune wants the Olympics so bad, they are seem ready to “look the other way”, to land the Olympics. Patrick McDonough
]]>(Dis)trusting City Hall
October 5, 2007
Every federal judge in Chicago is learning that it’s folly to trust the Pinocchio-nosed lawyers from the City of Chicago.
The Tribune disclosed Wednesday that the city’s top lawyer, Corporation Counsel Mara Georges, appears to have broken a promise she made to federal judges this summer in a dispute that involves police officers accused of using excessive force.
But the question of whether to trust what city lawyers say didn’t start with this tawdry episode over allegedly abusive cops.
That history started years ago with a different matter in a different courtroom. The question there was whether City Hall was abiding by the Shakman decrees that prohibit most political hirings and promotions. Year after year, city lawyers assured U.S. District Judge Wayne Andersen that clout didn’t drive personnel decisions.
Last year’s trial of Robert Sorich, Mayor Richard Daley’s former patronage chief, exposed that serial dishonesty to Andersen. Trial testimony showed how Daley’s underlings rigged hirings and promotions to reward loyal political workers for Chicago’s Democratic machine. Even before the trial, Andersen said he was disappointed in himself for “having taken at face value” the city lawyers’ claims that City Hall was complying with the Shakman decrees.
Andersen still must decide whether to let City Hall monitor its own compliance with fair-hiring standards. As he decides whether to believe one more word that the city’s lawyers tell him, Andersen can empathize with U.S. District Judge Joan Lefkow and the judges of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Long story short: City Hall is fighting to block release of documents detailing which Chicago police officers have been frequently accused of using excessive force. Lefkow ordered the documents released, but they remain out of public purview while the city appeals her order to the 7th Circuit.
Corporation Counsel Georges’ office assured the various federal judges that she would share the confidential documents with any member of the City Council who requested them. But when Ald. Toni Preckwinkle (4th) made such a request, Georges responded that she couldn’t share the documents with Preckwinkle. Why not? Because they’re the subject of the appeal before the 7th Circuit. Yes, the same 7th Circuit that was assured aldermen could get the documents. Go figure.
Instead, the city has given aldermen copies of the documents — but with the officers’ names blacked out. We’re not aware of any suggestion from Georges that when she said she’d share the documents with aldermen, she meant she’d share only redacted documents.
Lefkow wrote in July that Chicago aldermen have a legitimate interest in obtaining the disputed information. We agree. But that isn’t the only issue here: When attorneys make pledges to federal judges, those attorneys are duty bound to tell the whole truth.
Unless, apparently, the attorneys represent Chicago’s City Hall.
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune