Have times changed to shift support away from R. Kelly’s alleged penchant for being too close to young girls?

I’m eager to see how the whole saga related to R&B singer R. Kelly plays out – will his celebrity status continue to make people think he’s somehow above the law and shouldn’t be punished?

Or has his time finally run out? Will he wind up facing legal consequences as a result of the criminal indictments he was hit with Friday – as a result of allegations that Kelly (who is 52) has a thing for girls aged roughly 16.

THE CHARGES OF aggravated criminal sexual assault for which he was hit were for incidents involving four females – three of whom were 16 or younger. His initial appearance in Cook County Circuit Court for a bond hearing is set for Saturday.

Now the reason I’m not yet convinced that anything significant will become of all this is because this isn’t even the first time Kelly has faced criminal charges related to his conduct with young girls.

It was back in 2008 when prosecutors pushed for charges, and he wound up going on trial for claims that his use of video cameras to record his activities amounted to child pornography.

He was acquitted for all those charges, and there were people back then who were more than willing to believe speculation that Kelly was being persecuted. Similar to the 2005 trial of “King of Pop” Michael Jackson – who was found not guilty of criminal charges claiming he had a “thing” for young boys.

THERE WERE PEOPLE more than willing to see their prosecution as petty acts by petty prosecutors who couldn’t handle the thought of a black person being successful.

It was true that during Kelly’s last criminal trial, the case ultimately fell apart when the girls who supposedly were molested were unwilling to confirm that anything improper was done to them.

So what will happen as this case works its way through the legal process?

There are some who think that activists with a focus on abuse against women will manage to prevail. We’ll see his behavior as so tacky that we’ll eagerly hope he gets found guilty of each count against him – with prison terms piled up consecutively.

THERE ARE THOSE who already are speculating on a 70-year prison term for R. Kelly – with just the slightest touch of disgust that probation is also an option.

Not that I’m counting on such an outcome occurring yet. Let’s not forget the recently-completed criminal trial of former Chicago cop Jason Van Dyke. Remember the people who speculated on a pileup of sentences that could result it a 90-year-plus prison sentence?

And just what was it that Van Dyke ultimately got as punishment for the incident involving a 17-year-old being shot to death? A judge who figured out a way to give him a prison sentence that – when time off for good behavior is factored in – will come to just over three years served in prison somewhere.

There are those who think Van Dyke should suffer more. Will there be a outburst of anger from people eager to see Kelly suffer?

IT MOST DEFINITELY won’t be the same people. I suspect the kind of people anxious to see Van Dyke suffer will be the ones most likely to think that Kelly is somehow being persecuted.

It’s ultimately going to be a matter of how many people still have sympathetic memories of watching “Space Jam,” whose theme song “I Believe I Can Fly” was performed by Kelly. To the point where they can’t believe anybody connected through the film to basketball star Michael Jordan and Bugs Bunny himself could do anything immoral.

The fact is that some people do have the ability to overlook fact, thinking of them as the sordid details that distract from truth – or at least truth as they want to view it.

We’ll have to wait and see just how much we’re willing to take a serious look at what has occurred here.

  -30-

Just what constitutes Justice?

VAN DYKE: What will be left of life?

I can already hear the rants from people who fear that justice (or is that Justice! with a capital “J”) won’t be served in coming weeks.

The would-be defendants whom some are eager to see prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law (if not beyond the extend, with the mythical “book” being thrown at them) are none other than Alderman Edward M. Burke and former police officer Jason Van Dyke.

BURKE: Does he still have a political life?

VAN DYKE, OF course, is the white police officer who was found guilty last year of criminal offenses in the 2014 shooting death of a teenager who happens to be black.

While Burke is the long-time alderman named in a criminal complaint suggesting that he went too far in terms of shaking down a business that wants to remodel a Gage Park neighborhood Burger King franchise.

The very franchise, in fact, where Laquan McDonald, the black teenager, was shot nearby on that night in ’14 when he didn’t stop fast enough to satisfy Van Dyke’s concerns.

It seems that federal prosecutors would like to strengthen their criminal case against Burke by getting a grand jury to indict him on some sort of charge – perhaps something far more significant than he currently faces.

WHICH IS WHY attorneys were in court this week. In theory, prosecutors had until Friday – the next scheduled court date – before they would have to put up or shut up, so to say. Instead, an extension was granted. May 3 is now the significant date.

A fact that will anger those people so eager for a Burke criminal conviction that they dream of it being the factor that knocks him out of the running for the Feb. 26 municipal elections.

Legal notoriety? Or is all publicity good?

Even if the 14^th Ward aldermanic race stretches to an April 2 run-off (which is very likely), it means the elections will be over before we know exactly what will become of Burke on the criminal justice front. He could easily wind up being re-elected before actual charges are known.

It will complicate the desires of those who just want Ed Burke out of office – and really don’t care much about the specific details. It sort of makes it easier for Burke to focus on campaigning for re-election if actual criminal charges are theoretical.

AS FOR FRIDAY in court, it now means nothing for Burke. But for those eager to see criminal justice action that day, the focus will be solely on Van Dyke.

For he’s the one found guilty of second degree murder and multiple counts of aggravated battery with a firearm. Theoretically, he could get multiple sentences for each charge that could have a minimum of 96 years in prison.

A sentence that would appease those people eager to see a cop go to prison for what they will forevermore see as a racially-motivated slaying. But prosecutors admitted this week there is a way to interpret the sentencing guidelines so that Van Dyke could theoretically get 15 years of actual prison time.

At age 40 now, he’d be 55 upon release. Which would still allow him a chance to have some life left in freedom – even though it will be his aging years, as the rest of what’s left of his youth would be spent in prison somewhere.

IT WILL BE interesting to see how Judge Vincent Gaughan interprets the law in this case. I have no doubt everybody’s going to be outraged – from those who want Van Dyke to get some form of probation up to those who want him to get a lengthy, demoralizing prison term then want him to die at the hands of his fellow inmates.

GAUGHAN: Expected to impose sentence Friday

Which is a sick attitude to have, but it is one that becomes all too common amongst the general public. The very reason why we don’t let public sentiment play too much of a role in criminal cases.

Similar to those who would like to see Ed Burke get hauled off to the pokey, so to speak, as punishment for all the ideologically-motivated acts he committed throughout his 50 years in the City Council.

Public sentiment all too often leads to rash acts that, in and of themselves, are an injustice.

  -30-

Cop-related killings become common? As are the accompanying racial rants!

We have yet to learn what kind of prison sentence will be imposed against the Chicago police officer who fired those 16 shots into a teenaged boy who may have been acting erratically enough to make the officer fear for his life.

The incident in suburban Robbins occurred … 

There also is the upcoming trials of three more police officers whom prosecutors say tried to spin the initial investigation so as to make it a clear-cut case of self-defense by law enforcement.

AND NOW, WE have the incident in suburban Robbins where a police officer responding to a call of shots fired at a tavern wound up killing the security guard who was on duty and was trying to subdue the man who had provoked the whole incident.

It’s becoming far too common that we’re having to question the motivations of our law enforcement officers – who theoretically are there to protect the public, but are behaving in ways that arouse racially-motivated suspicions.

As though the only “crime” that was committed in Robbins was that a tavern willing to stay open until 4 a.m. serving intoxicating beverages would have so little sense as to hire an African-American male to provide security.

Some activist types anxious to turn the “ROBBINS, Ill.” dateline into a focal point for their efforts are openly saying that white cop from nearby suburban Midlothian who was assisting would have been more understanding of the situation if it had been a white security guard trying to break up the incident.

THE SAD THING is that there may well be some truth to that line of logic. Although I also don’t doubt there will be other people who won’t want to have to listen to such arguments.

Heck, when the Washington Post earlier this week got into covering the incident that took place Sunday at Manny’s Blue Room lounge and led their story with the fact that a “white” cop killed a “black” security guard, there were ample examples of people who responded by accusing the post of irresponsibly bringing up race.

In this “Age of Trump” in which we now live, there may well be some people who don’t want to hear these types of stories. While others are going to demand they be told!

… on the heels of a trial over a police shooting in Chicago

Now in the interest of disclosure, I should point out I do some work for Tribune Publishing, and in fact was a reporter-type person on call Sunday morning when the incident broke out.

I WAS AT the tavern and at the police station in Robbins, and the conclusion I quickly came to was that the local police weren’t really sure what happened. There was confusion about who shot whom, or how many were shot or what provoked the incident in the first place. It took time before Cook County sheriff’s police (for the incident itself) and Illinois State Police (for the cop shooting a security guard portion) brought out details that made apparent just how absurd this incident was – and I have read follow-up news accounts written by others with great interest.

Even now, there are conflicting stories about how clearly the security guard was identified, and could it be possible for a police officer to seriously confuse him for just another guy with a gun at a scene that had seriously lapsed out of control.

There also are people who want to think the Illinois State Police are rushing their investigation so as to try to absolve the cop of criminal liability.

Which may be an after-effect over the officers who soon will be on trial for allegedly trying to reduce the chance that Jason Van Dyke would ever have to see the inside of a courtroom for the 2014 shooting death of a teenager.

ARE WE GOING to get the same kind of “conspiracy” suspicions against the state police? Is that attitude going to impede the ability of police to seriously get to the bottom of what happened?

Which municipality will find its police tainted next?

That would actually be the casualty for society as a whole if our investigators can’t be trusted to figure out what happened, and if the ideological suspicions of individuals were somehow allowed to predominate in determining how our judicial system will respond.

I’m sure on the date that Van Dyke is sentenced for his second-degree murder conviction, along with all those criminal accounts for each shot fired, we’re going to hear people screeching and screaming on all sides for how unfair the verdict will be.

Just as I’m sure there also are people who will be demanding that the as-of-yet unidentified Midlothian cop should someday become Van Dyke’s cellmate, and others who will be grossly offended if such a moment ever comes close to becoming reality.

  -30-

Reynolds ‘done w/ America?’ I thought Chicago was “done” w/ Mel long ago

One-time member of Congress from Chicago Mel Reynolds, the man who more than two decades ago made the phrases “peach panties” and “did I win the Lotto?” words worth snickering at, has added a new one to the lexicon of ridiculous things spoken by political people.

REYNOLDS: From Congress to incarceration

Reynolds, who back in 1995 was found guilty of having sex with an underage girl, was sentenced to prison this week on charges he went four years without filing income tax returns.

HIS REACTION TO getting a six-month prison term?

“I’m done with America,” he said, even though he admitted his sentence was far less than the just-over two years of prison time prosecutors sought, and that it is assured he’ll be free before year’s end.

Reynolds says that after he serves his time and is released, he plans to leave this country and live the rest of his life in an African nation. Possibly South Africa, where it turns out one of his daughters has resided for several years.

Reynolds, in talking with reporter-type people following his sentencing at the Dirksen Building federal courthouse, made it clear he thinks he’s the one being victimized – just another black man being constantly hounded by law enforcement and being sent off to prison just because he’s tried to make something of his life aside from menial labor.

NOW I DON’T doubt that there are elements of our society that do seek to keep black people from accomplishing much; or making any success they do achieve as difficult to do so as possible.

There may even be some who are taking a perverse pleasure at the thought that Reynolds – who served two terms in the House of Representatives from Chicago’s far South Side and surrounding suburbs in the early-to-mid-1990s – is now on his third term of incarceration.

But I can’t help but think that most people who heard of Reynolds’ fate on Thursday got their snicker from what they perceive as the man’s awfully-high perception of his self-importance.

Reynolds is “done with America?” I think it’s more accurate to say that America, particularly that segment of the nation that is Chicago, is “done” with Mel. To the point where most of us haven’t thought about him in ages – and may have even been a little shocked to learn the man is still around.

I SUSPECT WE’LL get over the idea of a Mel-less society, particularly since even the people who were supposed to be his strongest supporters were never that thrilled with the man.

Reynolds was a product of the 1992 election cycle that gave us Bill Clinton as president. There also was Gus Savage in Congress, and his oft-outspoken ways that provoked the sensibilities of non-black people (to be honest, he didn’t care what they thought) created a gap for a challenger.

Which was Mel, a Mississippi-born and Chicago-raised man who got a chance to attend Harvard University and also was a Rhodes Scholar.

I remember that many black people were apathetic about Reynolds, largely because of the perception that Mel thought he was better than everybody else. Which created conditions that – when he got into legal troubles – too many were more than willing to laugh at him and enjoy his misery.

AS FAR AS an Africa-residing Reynolds is concerned, my reaction is to wonder which nation would actually accept him. One of Reynolds’ more recent predicaments was an arrest in Zimbabwe – which makes me think that no matter where he goes, he’s going to manage to tick people off and be harassed by the local officials.

Some people just bring out the worst.

Although there may well be one other bit of significance to the Mel Reynolds saga. The man who once had the whole wide world at his grasp will have lost it all and wind up living off of his daughter.

For his sake, he’d better stay on her good side, since he might not have any other friends left.

  -30-

Is anyone really shocked the jail inmates cheered for the cop killer?

I really have a hard time believing that Cook County sheriff’s police officials could be shocked that jail inmates awaiting their day in court on Thursday would cheer for the guy who’s facing criminal charges for the shooting death earlier this week of Chicago Police Cmdr. Paul Bauer.

Defendant? Or anti-hero?

If anything, I’d be shocked to learn they had been respectful of their jailers, or the legal system that I’m sure many of them believe is railroading them into a few years’ residence within the state prison system.

NEWS ACCOUNTS FROM both of the major metro newspapers (Sun-Times, Tribune) indicate the sheriff, who runs the county jail and criminal courts complex, wants to identify the disrespectful inmates.

With their names to be turned over to the assistant state’s attorneys who are prosecuting their pending criminal cases. Their hope is that someday, those disrespectful inmates will have extra time added to their punishments because of their behavior this week.

While several of the inmates awaiting trial in Cook County may wind up finding themselves transferred to county jails elsewhere. They may wind up awaiting trial in some rural county jail where their legal proceedings will be far more complicated to carry out.

But a little bit of inconvenience is being deemed as warranted for acting as though Shomari Legghette were some sort of hero because of the half-dozen gunshots he fired when Bauer tried to catch him Wednesday at the Thompson Center state government building.

THE NEWSPAPERS ARE going along with this tone – the county sheriff provided video taken of a holding cell so we can see, and hear, crude images of the cheering inmates as Legghette is brought past their cell en route to the courtroom – where a judge decided that Legghette should await trial inside the jail without the option of bond.

Now I’m not saying I think these inmates were anything but buffoons in the way they behaved, or that Bauer (who will get the full-ritual police funeral on Saturday) is deserving of disrespect.

It’s just that I wouldn’t expect anything but tacky behavior from jail inmates.

No matter what legal basis there is for saying these men (including Legghette) are innocent until proven guilty, the fact is that many of them are misfits from the standard beliefs of our society.

WHICH IS WHAT led most of them to actions that would bring them under suspicion by police and prosecutors and cause them to have criminal charges pending against them.

Besides, there’s something about incarceration that would break the spirit of just about anybody – surround yourself with enough misfits, and you’ll find yourself starting to take on their ideals.

I remember one time I was inside the Stateville Correctional Center near Joliet (as a reporter-type person). As the group I was with was passing the roundhouses, we could hear the inmates taunting us – letting us know they regarded us as being as much a part of the problem as anybody else.

It was execution duty (back in the days when Illinois still committed homicide in the name of justice), and the inmates let me and others know we would “burn in Hell” as much as anyone else for being a part of the ritual.

I ALSO RECALL crude and vulgar threats shouted specifically at the prison staffers – letting them know how they would be “f---ed up” by the inmates if they ever wound up inside the prison proper.

With that kind of mentality, it wouldn’t shock me in the least to learn that some of the county jail inmates (some of whom are bound to wind up in the Illinois Corrections Department eventually) would think cheers and applause would be worthy of a man charged with the shooting death of a cop.

Could he be Cook County sheriff?

So to learn that aides to Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart are saying the inmate behavior is “disgraceful and despicable, just beyond the pale” has a familiar ring to it.

Something similar to that of Capt. Renault from “Casablanca,” when he uttered his now-memorable line about being “shocked, shocked to learn that gambling is taking place on the premises” of Rick’s Café. Both of them are worthy of an equally insincere sigh.

  -30-

How far some fall -- from the ballpark to the court. Or silly costumes for some

Baseball pitchers and catchers for many ball clubs, including the Chicago White Sox, arrive for spring training camp Wednesday to begin preparations for another season of play, and I’m sure many former ballplayers have fond reminisces about those days in Arizona or Florida.

LOAIZA: Scheduled for court on Wed.

Although reading the news reports of late have me wondering what’s running through the mind of Esteban Loaiza – remember him?

HE’S THE BASEBALL pitcher who had a peak during his 2003-04 stint with the White Sox, when he and Mark Buehrle were the ball club’s most reliable starting pitchers.

He was the starting pitcher for the American League all star team in 2003, when the game was played at the then-named U.S. Cellular Field – the last time the All Star Game was played in Chicago.

Loiaza also wound up finishing that season with a record of 21 wins and 9 losses. The win tally matched the number of victories that Fernando Valenzuela had for the Los Angeles Dodgers in 1986, and gives the two of them the most victories ever in a single season for a Mexican-born ballplayer.

The Tijuana native was on top of the world back in those days when he was with the Sout’ Side ball club – just as Sammy Sosa was once a beloved celeb back in the late 1990s when he was hitting all those home runs for the Chicago Cubs.

SOSA: Silly, but not serious

YET JUST AS Sosa is now a comical figure whose latest antics include that photograph of himself and wife Sonia in their cowboy-like outfits, Loaiza has taken a plunge for the worse.

In fact, Loaiza is now far lower than anything Sosa is ever alleged to have done.

For Loiaza is the former ballplayer who got himself arrested last week and now faces criminal charges related to narcotics. Police in Imperial Beach, Calif., (near San Diego) found large-enough quantities of controlled substances in his rented home that he’s being regarded as some sort of low-level drug dealer.

That’s a label he may never be able to shake – even if he eventually is acquitted of the criminal charges or has them dismissed.

HOYT: Fallen even further

LOAIZA SUPPOSEDLY HAD drugs valued at $500,000 in his possession – although one needs to keep in mind that those dollar figures police toss out with regards to drug busts usually have their own sense of exaggeration.

They’re nowhere near as precise as the baseball stats we have that tell us of Loiaza’s 2.90 earned run average or his American League-leading 207 strikeouts back in that season of 2003 – which is tainted largely because the White Sox wound up collapsing that year in September and finished as a mere second place ball club.

Which means that Loaiza, who currently is being detained in lieu of $200,000 bond, is one whom I’m sure would rather be at a ballpark, rather than in a courtroom and jail cell combo.

It will be interesting to see how White Sox fans will acknowledge Loaiza’s existence as a ballplayer, and if it will turn out to be similar to that of LaMarr Hoyt – the 1983 Cy Young Award winner (best pitcher) whose own life became mucked up with several drug-related arrests. Hoyt is almost an un-person to the fans old enough to remember him.

WILL LOAIZA BECOME something similar?

BARRIOS: The ultimate fate

Although I have to admit that learning of Loaiza’s situation reminded me of another former White Sox pitcher. As in Francisco Barrios, who pitched for some crummy Sox teams of the late 1970s and was released at the end of 1981. Within a year, the one-time Mexican League ballplayer and native of Hermosillo was dead from cocaine use.

I still remember being at Comiskey Park for a ballgame when a “moment of silence” was held for Barrios. A sad end to another former ballplayer.

And will mean that at least a little attention will be paid to a Southern California courtroom where Loiaza has an appearance scheduled for Wednesday, while his former fans will be trying to see what’s happening at the Camelback Ranch training camp the White Sox have in suburban Phoenix to determine if there’s any hope for 2018 and the near future.

  -30-

Feds still tipped off to DACA beneficiary, despite sanctuary policy

Christian Gomez Garcia spent a couple of days in jail this week, awaiting the possibility of deportation from the United States even though he’s one of the individuals under federal policy who supposedly is protected from such a fate.

Gomez is one of the people who registered under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program so that he could live openly in this country even though his mother brought him here at age 6 without getting valid visas for herself or her son.

TECHNICALLY, HE’S AMONG the ranks of the undocumented in this country – an illegal alien in federal bureaucratic-speak that the ideologues like to use because it dehumanizes the individuals they wish to deport.

Technically, his fate is one that isn’t supposed to happen. It was a screw-up by law enforcement, although the Chicago Tribune reported that his DACA protections may have lapsed. Which is why Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials reviewed his case before releasing him from the county jail in Kenosha, Wis., where they house some immigration cases while they’re pending prior to deportation.

But I’m sure Gomez isn’t going to feel all that relieved. He’s going to know that the slightest little slip-up will cause the bureaucrats to throw his life out of whack – and that the ideologue-inclined of our society won’t feel the least bit of sympathy.

Gomez is 29, and he’s supporting his mother, Luz Maria Garcia, who left their native Mexico to get away from instances of domestic abuse. He came to the attention of law enforcement for an incident in December. He drove his car through a stop sign, and was issued a ticket.

HE HAD HIS day in court on Monday, making his appearance at the courthouse in suburban Skokie. All routine; something I’m sure all of us have gone through at some point in life.

But when Gomez tried leaving the Skokie courthouse, the Chicago Sun-Times reported that he found ICE agents waiting for him in the lobby. It seems someone notified federal officials that a person with uncertain immigration status was in court that day, and they should come to pick him up.

Even though the whole point of the DACA program is that those young people with no serious criminal records aren’t supposed to have to fear such hassle from law enforcement. DACA registration gives them the work permits provided they continue progress through the naturalization process toward eventual U.S. citizenship.

What has Latino activist-types all worked up is that this happened in a Cook County government facility. If it turns out to have been a sheriff’s deputy or some other county official who picked up the phone to call the feds, then someone is in violation of Coo County’s own sanctuary policy.

THAT’S THE POLICY that says county officials don’t assist federal immigration officials by providing such information about their jail inmates. It means that appearing in court for a traffic ticket should have been a circumstance in which Gomez felt secure.

Now I’m sure some people are going to argue that the inconvenience to Gomez wasn’t that big a deal. After all, the federal government wound up admitting their error and releasing him on Thursday.

Although it also means that he came to the attention of immigration officials, and this is exactly the kind of bureaucratic screwup that has the ability to come back and bite one on their nalgas. Or their derriere, if you prefer more effete language!

Who’s to say that having drawn this kind of attention will cause federal officials to tune their antennae more intensely to Gomez’ presence, looking for anything they could construe as a screw-up so they can justify their actions of this week?

BESIDES, I ALSO wonder how many of the rest of us would appreciate a screw-up that resulted in having to spend even a single day in a county jail. Particularly since the offense that initiated this whole incident was a blown “stop” sign.

The DACA policy, the one-and-the-same that President Donald Trump would like to see done away with, or at least extort other ideologue benefits in exchange for keeping it, was supposed to eliminate the chance of deportation being the end result for such petty offenses by people who are far from criminals.

Except in the mindset of those ideologues who want to believe that existing in this society without being exactly like their narrow-minded selves is a crime in-and-of itself.

For so long as we allow the immigration debate to be dictated by the idiotic thoughts of the most bigoted of our society, we’re going to continue to have more silly incidents like these clogging up our justice system.

  -30-

How do disabled watch Chicago baseball? Should they switch ballclubs?

It will be interesting to see what becomes of a lawsuit filed recently that says the Chicago Cubs are now in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act – the federal law that governs how accessible buildings must be to people with physical disabilities.

Were wheelchairs at ballpark even contemplated in so-called good ol' days?

In this case, a 20-year-old Cubs fan whose father is a prominent attorney is suing the ball club because he doesn’t like the way renovations of Wrigley Field in recent years have altered the seating made available to people who must use wheelchairs to get around.

THIS PARTICULAR FAN used to like to sit in the space out beyond the right-field fence between the bleachers and the foul pole – on the Sheffield Avenue side of the building, to be exact.

The Cubs used to use that space to allow wheelchair-bound fans to park themselves during ball games and watch from their own seats. The fan says in his lawsuit that he enjoyed being able to sit out in the sunshine (of a day game, presumably) while watching a ballgame.

But with the renovations of recent years, that space has now been filled in with an outdoor bar that’s supposed to add to the ambiance of the ball park – while making it easier for bleacher fanatics to get themselves an over-priced drink (everything associated with ball parks these days is overpriced, so that’s not a slander aimed only at the Cubs).

Wrigley portion focus of lawsuit. Photos by Gregory Tejeda

His lawsuit also points out that the Cubs used to have a space in the grandstand behind home plate where wheelchair-bound fans could park themselves. It actually put them in front of many other fans, which meant the disabled got a particularly-prime location within the Wrigley Field seating.

NOW, THE LAWSUIT contends, wheelchair-bound people must park themselves in a spot several rows further up – and when the bulk of Cubbie fandom chooses to stand and cheer, it becomes impossible for the wheelchair-bound to see anything!

What an outrage!!!!!

How do disabled maneuver the crowds?

Although I couldn’t help but notice many people using the Internet and the Chicago Tribune to comment (anonymously, of course) about the lawsuit in negative ways; trying to claim that this particular wheelchair-bound fan (he’s coped with muscular dystrophy for half his life) is merely upset he can’t get a prime spot in the ballpark.

Doesn’t he realize life ain’t fair? Which is a rather cold-hearted approach to take toward life.

MY OWN REACTION is to wonder just how far this particular lawsuit will go in the courts. Since it seems based on the premise that the Cubs ought to have to undo many of the changes made in the structure in recent years – whose purpose was to add private clubs in the ball park and also some prime seating that could go for top dollar.

Are the Cubs really trying to bolster their financial bottom line by reducing the number of disabled who can enter the ball park?

The Sout' Side's wheelchair view of the playing field

I’d almost suggest those fans dump the Cubs and start attending Chicago White Sox games, where the existing stadium puts disabled people in the lower deck concourse (the space where all the concessions stands are located). People can park their wheelchairs right up against the existing seats.

When I’ve noticed them at ballgames, it’s almost like they’re part of the existing crowd – only they brought their own chairs. Which means I’d hope those fans would get some sort of financial break on ticket prices – although I’m not naïve enough to think that’s so.

BUT THEN AGAIN, I’ve heard Cubs fans dump on the White Sox because the ball club puts those with wheelchairs behind the grandstand seats, rather than amidst them.

Although personally, I’d think that the heavy presence of elevators at Guaranteed Rate Field (unlike the century-old Wrigley Field) would make it much easier to maneuver around.

But as I wrote easier, we’ll see how seriously the courts take this lawsuit. Because I’m sure the Cubs will argue they’re playing ballgames in a century-old building that, if you truly maintained its historic character, was never intended to accommodate wheelchairs.

Frivolous lawsuit? Or discrimination against the disabled? We’ll wait and see.

  -30-

I’m sure Van Dyke feels picked upon by reporter-type he wanted to silence

I felt a touch of relief when I learned Wednesday that a Cook County judge tossed out a subpoena that would have forced a freelance writer to get into the inner workings of how he learned the details that make us think Chicago cop Jason Van Dyke used excessive force in the 2014 shooting death of a 17-year-old.

VAN DYKE: Wants people to quit talking

For it was clear that the only reason for dragging reporter-type Jamie Kalvan into the criminal proceedings involving Van Dyke and the death of Laquan McDonald was to harass.

TO PICK AT a reporter-type for butting into something the police mentality would think was none of his business to look into. And to perhaps get the reporting process tangled up in so much legalese that when a jury someday does have to sift through the evidence presented in a trial, it will be so confused that it can’t decide anything beyond a reasonable doubt and will have to go with “not guilty.”

Meaning that getting sidetracked off on only marginally-related issues has little to nothing to do with getting at “the truth.”

It was good to learn that Judge Vincent Gaughan (who once presided over the trial of R. Kelly) saw things similarly; issuing a written explanation of his ruling to toss the subpoena for Kalvan’s testimony on the grounds it would be a “fishing expedition” to try to produce “information that the timeline of events, discovery documents and testimony suggest simply does not exist.”

Now in my own time as a reporter-type, I’ll admit to never having been called upon to appear in court.

ALTHOUGH I ONCE did have to give a deposition in a lawsuit filed by a woman who had lost her municipal government job. She was suing for damages, claiming city officials went out of their way to single her out for abuse.

I recall that deposition as being one in which I was asked to recall every petty action and insult that might have ever been directed her way in my presence.

Which was difficult because most of the stuff was so petty and minor I had long forgotten about the details. It was the kind of petty trivia I made a point of forgetting so as to avoid clogging my brain with stupid stuff. I have enough significant detail to remember without the trivia overflowing my mental capacity.

Besides, like many other reporter-types, my view is that anything relevant to a story I report actually goes into the copy I write.

JUST AS I’M presuming Kalvan has done the same with his own stories. My own self-interest would say that my stories could be offered up as evidence.

Of course, defense attorney-types want someone they can have answer back to them, and get caught up in double-talk. Then again, prosecutors will do the same; if it benefits their case.

The legal process is most concerned with coming up with a “guilty” verdict – with “not guilty” being the end result if guilt cannot be proven beyond that shadow of reasonable doubt.

This is an ongoing criminal case involving Van Dyke, who’s going to have to show that the 16 shots he fired at McDonald were not excessive and that the teen male truly was a serious threat who had to be “put down,” so to speak.

I DON’T DOUBT Van Dyke will do whatever he feels necessary to prevent his reputation from permanent damage – although it’s most likely that even an acquittal would not clear him in the minds of a certain segment of society.

The ones for whom only a conviction will assuage their anger.

In short, this is a very serious issue with significant life consequences to many people.

Seeing that the case will get bogged down in just a bit less trivia by refusing to turn the case into a legal proceeding about reportorial process may be the first step to thinking the courts may someday get at “the truth” about why Van Dyke acted the way he did toward McDonald.

  -30-

Obama does civic duty, just like the masses who get called upon for jury

I’m sure the ideologues amongst us who want to believe that Barack Obama exists on some sort of alien plane of existence will hate this characterization, but now the former president has something in common with many of us Cook County residents.

Obama went from Oval Office ...

He had to blow a few hours of his day at a courthouse (in his case, the Daley Center downtown) on the off-chance he would actually be needed to serve on a jury.

THE REPORTS I read indicate he showed up at about 10:15 a.m., and was released from duty by the county by mid-day.

He got to watch that video of a youthful Lester Holt talking about the great civic duty one performs when they’re asked to be one of a dozen individuals who decide the guilt or innocence of someone caught up in the court system.

Just like I have done three times in my life. Like Obama, I wound up not being picked – and in two of the cases didn’t even come close to being considered. Almost as if it was a waste of my day.

Except that it will be argued the need for a large pool of individuals is essential to come up with enough acceptable people to have enough juries. In short, it’s not a process that can be run with efficiency in mind. Somebody’s time has to be wasted!

IT SHOULDN’T BE a surprise that Obama wasn’t picked, and not just because I’m sure many attorneys arguing a case in court want the attention focused on the merits of their legal arguments – and not on the fact that one of the jurors is (at the very least) a former law school instructor who probably knows more about legal issues and public policy than they do.

Not that I’ve ever been rejected for jury service because I was too knowledgable. In fact, two of my times I received the call, my stint ended as abruptly as Obama’s service.

I remember being back outside the Criminal Courts building at about 12:15 p.m.. waiting for a bus that would take me to the el platform a few blocks north that rode me back into the heart of the city – then back home for the day.

,,, to jury room of Daley Center

In my case, I was part of a group that was supposed to be considered for a jury in a criminal case – only for the defendant to suddenly decide to accept a plea agreement.

SINCE THERE WAS no trial, there were no need for jurors. Which means the sheriff’s deputies wound up having to sort out the paperwork so we could all be given our checks for just over $17 each to compensate us for our service.

Which pretty much was enough money to cover the cost of my el and bus fares I encountered to get out to the courthouse that one-time Mayor Anton Cermak had constructed in the neighborhood because it was where he came from – he liked the idea of all his supporters being able to get jobs near home.

Of course, I might be more mocking of Obama’s two hours of jury service that resulted in him not being picked if not for another experience I once had at the county courthouse in Maywood.

On that particular day, there were three cases scheduled to come up for trial (all civil), only for all three to be settled out-of-court at the last minute. Meaning, once again, no jurors needed. We all got to go home by about 1 p.m.

WHICH I REMEMBER had all of us relieved. Because no matter how much it is a civic responsibility, no one wants to have to give up several weeks of their lives to sit through a criminal trial – which, based on my experience covering criminal courts cases as a reporter-type person, isn’t unheard of.

So I’ve had my own Obama-like experience with jury service – having to sit in isolated rooms with vending machines providing overpriced sustenance. Although I understand Obama was allowed to sit off by himself in a judge’s private office so he could continue to get some work done.

A touch of nature outside a place that focuses on humanity's ugliness

The version of me that once actually had to submit to interrogation from prosecutors and defense attorneys picking a jury wouldn’t have been as sympathetic. I remember being at the Criminal Courts building until about 8:30 p.m. before I was formally rejected to serve in the case against a man facing attempted murder charges of a Korean grocer he was accused of trying to rob.

In my case, I had just been laid off from a job a couple of days before, and I remember seeing the looks of dismay on the attorneys’ faces when I was able to say I was unemployed. Almost as though they could pull out their rubber stamp of “rejection” and plop it on my forehead. Which sent me packing just moments later.

  -30-

Feds need a warrant to get into public schools; what’s wrong with that idea?

When you think about it, it makes all the sense in the world. Although I can already envision the nativist element of our society ranting and raging about the unjustness of the Chicago Public Schools’ new policy.

I’m referring to the memorandum sent out this week to principals throughout the city school system, informing them that any agents of the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency had better have proper arrest warrants on them if they decide to set foot on any school property.

IF THEY HAVE such warrants indicating they’re looking for a specific individual and also details exactly what it is they suspect that individual of, then no one is going to even remotely think of telling those agents to stop.

But if they think they can come onto school properties on a fishing expedition, of sorts, in hopes of finding evidence of people in violation of federal immigration laws, then it is only proper that such actions ought to be halted. Although it should be noted that officials say that immigration officials haven't actually tried showing up at schools. Not yet!

While I realize some people with a “law and order” mentality think police ought to be given great authority to scour amongst our society, the fact is that we expect law enforcement personnel to show some sort of cause before we allow them to legitimately restrict someone’s freedom.

That is the American Way, even though we now have the Trump mentality developing that thinks a more authoritarian way of doing things is somehow more appropriate.

TO BE SPECIFIC about this new policy, Chicago Public Schools chief education officer Janice Jackson wrote to principals to tell them they should forbid federal immigration officials from setting foot on school property unless they have that warrant.

Which would mean that a federal judge somewhere has given at least a cursory review to the circumstances and decided that there is a legitimate reason to be suspicious.

School officials also are making an effort to gather up more information about their students that would be needed in the event that a parent gets caught up in an immigration situation. The schools want to be informed about who is next in line to be responsible for a child if the parents suddenly “disappear.”

All of this is coming about because of fears that immigration, in this era of Trump, is going to step up its efforts and will be overbearing in its desire to remove people from our society whom some amongst us are determined to believe should never have been here to begin with.

I’VE NOTICED AMONGST my own Facebook friends those who live in neighborhoods with higher-than-average populations of non-Anglo residents warnings that “ICE agents” are out and about, on the lookout for people whom they want to believe are candidates for deportation.

People are feeling the need to be wary. The Obama era of wanting to think that such people have a place in our society and do make worthy contributions is most definitely over.

In fact, I wonder if amongst the Trump-ites, which Obama-era sentiment is a bigger priority to erase – serious immigration reform or health care reform.

It may be amongst the nativist element that foreigners, particularly if they habla en Español, are a bigger threat than having one’s tax dollars help to cover the cost of providing health insurance to all (or as many as possible).

IN LIGHT OF such attitudes spreading through our neighborhoods, it is reassuring that schools officials are showing a little bit of sense. And because they’re asking to see a warrant, it means legitimate law enforcement efforts won’t be thwarted.

Do ideologues hate health care or immigration more?

Just like the concept of “sanctuary cities” does NOT mean that people without valid Visas are capable of hiding out in Chicago, or any other place with that distinction.

It’s about requiring Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to do their own work, which makes sense because they’re the ones trained in the nuances of immigration policy. Local cops have enough to do without being required to add immigration tasks to their work load – even though the new Trump policies seem to want to make just such an addition.

Just as schools officials have enough responsibilities to deal with, without having to monitor their student bodies and try to figure out which ones have parents whose immigration status is questionable!

  -30-