Illinois high court upholds ruling against coerced confessions

  Comments (...)
Text Size: AaAaAaAaAa

CHICAGO (MCT) — The Illinois Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a confession obtained through torture can never be considered harmless error, upholding a lower court’s decision in a brutal rape case that said when police use physical coercion to force someone to confess, the incriminating statement must always be thrown out.

The decision, which had been anticipated for months in the legal community, came in the case of Stanley Wrice, who was convicted in 1983 of rape but had long alleged he had been tortured by officers working for disgraced former Chicago police Cmdr. Jon Burge.

The court’s 6-0 ruling, which means Wrice will get a hearing to determine if his confession was a product of torture, represented another milestone in the long-running scandal surrounding Burge and his crew of officers, who have repeatedly been accused of abusing African-American suspects in the 1970s and 1980s at their South Side police station. Among their alleged methods: beatings, electric shock and Russian roulette.

Defense attorneys had feared that any break in the court’s tough stance, established a quarter-century ago in a police killing case, would close off avenues of appeals for those who allege they were tortured during Burge’s tenure. Prosecutors had hoped the court would issue a ruling allowing them to use tainted confessions when other evidence against a suspect is overwhelming.

The decision, written by Justice Mary Jane Theis, strongly supported the defense and dismissed claims from prosecutors that it might lead to frivolous claims by defendants.

“We believe that this type of coercion by the state ... constitutes an egregious violation of an underlying principle of our criminal justice system ...,” Theis wrote for the state’s high court, adding that the ruling in the 1987 case establishing such a principle “still has some vitality.”

“The opinion is crystal clear,” said Heidi Lambros, an attorney with the Office of the Appellate Defender who represents Wrice. “There was torture at Area Two, and they’re not going to tolerate it. If I’m a Burge torture claimant, I’m going to use this opinion and see if I can get my hearing.”

Locke Bowman, director of the MacArthur Justice Center at Northwestern University and the author of a friend-of-the-court brief, said the ruling affects Wrice and perhaps 15 other inmates who claim they were tortured by Burge or his officers and are seeking court hearings.

Previous Page|1|||

Comments

Total Comments
0

View/Add Comments

There have been no comments made about this story.

Reader Poll

Do you support Morris' decision to allow video gambling in city establishments?

Yes. It's an opportunity to raise needed funds.
No. This sort of activity should be kept out of the community.
I'm undecided on this issue.