Prosecutor outlines conspiracy case against Van Dyke’s fellow officers
With less than a month to go before three Chicago police officers go to trial on charges of an alleged conspiracy to cover up for Jason Van Dyke, lawyers for the trio attacked the case leveled against them by Special Prosecutor Patricia Brown Holmes.
During a four-hour hearing Tuesday at the Leighton Criminal Court Building, lawyers for Officer Thomas Gaffney, former Officer Joseph Walsh and ex-Detective David March argued that Judge Domenica Stephenson should dismiss charges of conspiracy, obstruction of justice and official misconduct stemming from alleged false police reports the three filed during the investigation of Van Dyke’s 2014 shooting of Laquan McDonald.
The at-times combative hearing likely provided a preview of the trial, set to begin Nov. 26 in front of Stephenson. Brown Holmes’ team laid out the case against the officers, painting an alleged collaboration to cover for Van Dyke that implicates numerous other officers who have not been charged.
March’s lawyer, former prosecutor James McKay, argued that Brown Holmes’ team misled the grand jury that handed up the indictment, saying the wide-ranging allegations contained in an evidence brief filed by the prosecutor do not prove a criminal conspiracy.
“This whole indictment is a sham, based not on evidence, but on politics,” McKay said.
Stephenson said she would rule on the motion to dismiss — it would be rare for a judge to dismiss a criminal case just weeks before trial — at a hearing set for Monday. A jury found Van Dyke guilty this month of seconddegree murder and 16 counts of aggravated battery.
Brown Holmes — who was appointed after a group of prominent civil rights attorneys and activists lobbied for a special prosecutor to investigate the CPD probe of the McDonald shooting that absolved Van Dyke of wrongdoing — filed charges against March, Walsh and Gaffney in 2017 after a yearlong investigation.
The charges hinge on statements Walsh and Gaffney made in reports that were compiled by March, a homicide detective who led the CPD investigation of the shooting.
Gaffney and Walsh filed reports that the department mandates after an officer has been assaulted, and another required when an officer uses deadly force. Neither officer fired a shot nor laid hands on McDonald.
The reports indicated that McDonald had assaulted Van Dyke, Walsh and Gaffney, though lawyers for the three officers charged in the conspiracy argued that this was a feature of the software the officers used to file the reports.
Assistant Special Prosecutor Ron Safer said other officers called as witnesses will testify that March took down false information backing up Van Dyke’s story that McDonald was threatening him with a knife before the officer opened fire.
Also included in the evidence, according to Safer, are emails sent by March’s superiors early in the investigation suggesting the department should be “applauding” Van Dyke’s actions, not second-guessing them. Among those superiors was a supervisor who later worked with a legal defense fund for law enforcement officers and the Fraternal Order of Police to help Van Dyke with legal representation, Safer said.