Tossing a brick from an overpass onto a passing car was a senseless act, and the perpetrator should definitely be brought to justice. But charging Rakiem Campbell with first-degree murder was excessive. I’m pleased that Campbell will be punished by being sent to prison for 15 years, and that his charge was reduced to the proper one: vehicular endangerment.

He plead guilty to a couple other crimes in the process, and will also do time for those. The Journal Star reports, “In total, [his sentence is] 22 years, but with credit for time served and day-for-day ‘good-time’ credit, he could be released in slightly more than 10 years, said Kevin Lowe, one of his attorneys.”

I think justice was served as far as the charge and the sentence, but I do question a system that lets criminals out after serving less than half their sentence. Is this just to free up prison space? What is the reason for not requiring a full sentence to be served?

Here’s an interesting story from the Journal Star. State’s Attorney Kevin Lyons talks about Rakiem Campbell, the 15-year-old who threw the brick off the overpass, and the reason he was charged with a more serious crime than the Bradley students who started the house fire on Laura that killed Danny Dahlquist (emphasis mine):

[The college prank] differs, [Lyons] said, from an incident last month where a 15-year-old boy threw a patio block off an interstate overpass, killing a passing motorist. In that case, the prosecutor noted, the boy probably didn’t mean to kill anyone but the fact that he threw a block and meant to hit a car made a big difference.

Did you see that phrase? “The boy probably didn’t mean to kill anyone.” That’s not first-degree murder. That’s involuntary manslaughter. According to 720 ILCS 5/9?3 (emphasis mine):

A person who unintentionally kills an individual without lawful justification commits involuntary manslaughter if his acts whether lawful or unlawful which cause the death are such as are likely to cause death or great bodily harm to some individual, and he performs them recklessly….

If the prosecutor is admitting that “the boy probably didn’t mean to kill anyone,” then shouldn’t he have charged the boy with involuntary manslaughter and let it be adjudicated through the juvenile court system?

What do Danny Dahlquist and Katrina Kelley have in common? They were both the victims of a prank gone wrong.

Four friends of Dahlquist’s (Daniel Cox, David Crady, Ryan Johnson and Nicholas Mentgen) are accused of setting off between one and three roman candles under the door of Dahlquist’s room while he was sleeping. The result, obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense but completely escaping the minds of this group of college students, was that the roman candles set the room — and, ultimately, the house — on fire. Dahlquist apparently tried to get out (he was found near a window), but was overcome and died of smoke inhalation.

Rakiem Campbell “was headed home from a party early July 14 when he and a 12-year-old boy allegedly decided to pick up two concrete patio blocks, walk 150 feet to the Broadway Street bridge over Interstate 74 and wait for a car to pass by,” according to the July 21 Journal Star. Predictably to anyone with an ounce of common sense but completely escaping the mind of this 15-year-old, the patio block crashed through the passenger side of a car’s windshield, hitting Kelley in the chest, causing massive injuries from which she died.

Campbell is being charged by the state’s attorney’s office with first-degree murder. Dahlquist’s friends are being charged with aggravated arson. what can happen if you are contacted by state or federal regulators or investigators or become involved in litigation that involves a cryptocurrency or digital coin? click here https://secdefenseattorney.com/cryptocurrency-defense/.

“The charges state Campbell’s actions caused a ‘strong probability of death or great bodily harm to motorists on Interstate 74’ before specifically mentioning Kelley,” the Journal Star explained back on July 21. Why not the same charge for Dahlquist’s friends, whose actions also caused a “strong probability of death or great bodily harm” to Dahlquist?

[State’s Attorney Kevin] Lyons said he considered first-degree murder charges but opted for the lesser counts, saying he didn’t believe the four men had the intent to cause a catastrophic act.

.The b
So, evidently the state’s attorney believes that four college students (ages ranging from 19 to 22) were too dumb to realize shooting off roman candles in a sleeping man’s room might cause great bodily harm to that man, but a 15-year-old kid (the age of a high-school freshman or sophomore) was smart enough to realize that his throwing a brick off an overpass would kill someone.Confusing medical terms, complicated legal procedures, and an avalanche of paperwork are routine in personal injury cases, but an experienced personal injury lawyer can simplify the headache and resolve your claim so that you can get on with your life this information from a Car Accident Attorney in Chicago

It’s also worth noting that “Lyons says everyone was drinking,” according to 1470 WMBD. That means two of them were drinking illegally, being only 19 and 20 years old. Presumably 15-year-old Campbell was sober.

Is it just me, or does something seem inequitable here? Either Campbell’s charge is too harsh or Dalquist’s friends’ charges are too easy. It seems like the same charge should apply to both crimes. What’s the difference between them? Criminal defense law consists of the legal protections afforded to people who have been accused of committing a crime, check this https://criminaldefenselawyervirginia.com/if you need some help.
What are Felony Drug Charges?
Generally speaking, felony drug charges are more serious drug crimes. Under state and federal criminal laws, felony charges typically result in a sentence in prison for greater than one year, along with serious criminal fines. In contrast, misdemeanor charges will usually result in a sentence in jail (not prison), and lower criminal fines. Thus, Drug Possession charges typically result in more serious criminal penalties. The bankruptcy Lawyers help you, stop harassment visit
website.

The Bloomington Pantagraph ran an interesting AP article today on a tactic used by some cities to fight gang-related crime: civil lawsuits. Sounds crazy, but apparently it has had some success:

Fort Worth and San Francisco are among the latest to file lawsuits against gang members, asking courts for injunctions barring them from hanging out together on street corners, in cars or anywhere else in certain areas.

The injunctions are aimed at disrupting gang activity before it can escalate. They also give police legal reasons to stop and question gang members, who often are found with drugs or weapons, authorities said. In some cases, they don’t allow gang members to even talk to people passing in cars or to carry spray paint. […]

Those who disobey the order face a misdemeanor charge and up to a year in jail. Prosecutors say the possibility of a jail stay — however short — is a strong deterrent, even for gang members who’ve already served hard time for other crimes.

The article goes on to state that this method has so far withstood court challenges.

I decided to ask the Peoria Police Department if they had ever heard of this tactic and if they thought it would work. Chief Settingsgaard is on vacation this week, but Officer Ann Ruggles replied via e-mail and said that of the officers she contacted, only Captain Phil Korem had heard of filing civil lawsuits against gang members. Thus, the Police Department has no comment on the effectiveness of that particular tactic.

However, she added that “Peoria does have a Gang/Narcotics Loitering Ordinance (similar to Chicago), that has helped us in keeping track of the gangs and its membership. Keeping the individuals moving, and in some cases [barred] from certain areas of the city, known for drug sales, does help.”

Since the council will be discussing crime prevention techniques at their August 28 meeting anyway, perhaps this would be a tactic worth investigating.

I’m sure you’ve heard by now. The Journal Star, Pantagraph, and WEEK.com (picture to the right is from WEEK) have all been reporting the latest Peoria homicide. This time the homicide was committed without a gun or knife, but with a cement block. From the Pantagraph:

Apparently, someone threw the brick just after 1 a.m. from the Broadway Street overpass, according to the Illinois State Police. Katrina Kelley, 26, was riding in the passenger seat of a westbound Cadillac driven by Todd Foster when the brick crashed through, hitting her chest.

The State Police and Peoria Police departments are both working on this case. This just goes to show you that those big fences on Peoria’s overpasses are no deterrent to the demented [expletive deleted] who think it’s funny to throw heavy objects onto unsuspecting motorists. My guess is the person was just out for his usual night of random vandalism and his extra-tiny pea-brain never considered the fact that a brick dropped/thrown/whatever from that height could kill somebody.

Please, please, please let the police catch the filthy vermin who did this and bring him to justice.