From a press release:
STATEMENT FROM DARIN LAHOOD
Peoria, IL – Darin LaHood, candidate for Peoria County State’s Attorney has issued the following statement in response to Kevin Lyons’ statement yesterday:
“Five children between the ages of 13 and 16 were allegedly raped by a convicted felon out on parole over the course of 13 months leading up to January of this year. Monterius Hinkle was arrested at least three times by law enforcement, and was never charged for any rape by the State’s Attorney Office until the fifth rape. He should have been charged the first time. Instead, Hinkle left five rape victims and their devastated families. Concerned citizens of this community want answers as to why Hinkle was walking the streets of Peoria after four alleged rapes.”
Kevin Lyons has reduced the criminal justice system – particularly in this case – to political expediency; he has made false accusations against me, and he is ultimately responsible that Hinkle was free, on the streets of Peoria to allegedly commit these multiple rapes. I am a candidate for the office of State’s Attorney and yesterday the Peoria Heights police officers endorsed my candidacy by giving me the unanimous support of police organizations throughout the County. Law enforcement has collectively said that Lyons offers them no support as they tirelessly work to keep our streets safe.
I make no apologies for continuing to ascertain how families who have been victimized by unspeakable crimes feel about their treatment in our criminal justice system. I have this responsibility as a candidate for State’s Attorney This is crucial because the safety and security of our community depends it. At the very least, citizens should expect that violent criminals are sent to prison the first time and not allowed to roam the streets and commit further crimes. My commitment to the citizens of Peoria County is to put violent criminals where they belong–behind bars.”
The report on WCBU this morning had sound bites from LaHood saying he never identified himself as “the new prosecutor” on the case, and that he wasn’t there to see the rape victim, but rather the rape victim’s father. He further said that he went to see the victim’s father at the request of police officers familiar with the case.
This really is “wrong headed” campaigning on the part of LaHood. He shouldn’t be inserting himself into this sort of situation. Lyons has done more than enough to hang himself in the coming election. This sort of activity on LaHood’s part comes off as arrogant and sticking his nose in where it shouldn’t be. Someone has been steering him in the wrong direction.
The facts speak for themselves regarding Lyons’ tenure. He’s let a host of folks off that shouldn’t have been. He’s alienated the majority of folks within the county at every level of government and in the public, at one time or another. LaHood should just keep hammering on the facts under life with Lyons. That will get him elected. This sort of mumbo-jumbo Voodoo crap will only keep him from beating Lyons.
and cost the taxpayers of Peoria county thousands of dollars as the rape case is moved to another venue.
Darin LaHood was on the Greg & Dan show this morning for about 10 minutes. In a few hours 1470 should have their site updated with the podcast of the interview. He sure danced around the questions a lot! Stumbled around a few of them, mostly when being grilled about how he learned where the victim lived.
He got the information from a Peoria police officer! That officer should be disciplined, but not fired(let’s not have another Dunnigan fiasco); can we just write this up to politics and get on with our lives?
The question remains… why was he there?
Chasing an ambulance?
Amen to Wacko. While I won’t comment on the right and wrong of the situation, much of it is politics as usual.
I don’t understand the fascination of where he got the information. Obviously it was from a police officer.
Hell, if you were listening to a police scanner that day, you could have maybe found the location of the alleged rape.
Much of what Lyons/LaHood said was hearsay. There is no sworn testimony in any of this. That puts everything, on both sides, into question.
LaHood should have stayed out of this. He is an attorney and should know to not do anything to screw up a case. He is not yet the States Attorney. And to get the information from a police officer is unreal. I wonder about his leadership and if he will always agree with the police officers when he is elected. Lord help us if he does.
Is there a third party candidate? One that is effective AND with scruples?
Is there a third party candidate? One that is effective AND with scruples?