I. Home II. Summary of Case III. Brady Smith      a. Evidence and Allegations      b. Profile      c. Audiotape Transcript IV. John Piland's Handling of Case      a. The Plea Bargain      b. The Conflict of Interest      c. The Probation Violations      d. The Untried Cases V. The Civil Cases VI. Conclusions      a. Effects on our Community      b. What You Can Do Who I Am Credits Discussion Forum

The Cases Not Yet Brought Forward There are still at least two boys who have brought charges against Smith (as civil cases), but which Piland has not brought forward on criminal charges.  They are both aggravated criminal sexual abuse charges. There is disagreement among various people who know about these cases as to how strong they are, and I won't go into details in the event that they are eventually brought forward, although at this point, it looks like it would need to be a different State's Attorney if that is going to happen.  Mr. Piland believes that any case that comes forward about abuse that happened before the plea bargain would be a weak case, and he would be unlikely to prosecute.  And, in fact, he is not prosecuting them. Only one of the cases was public when I spoke with Mr. Piland.  When I asked about that specific case, he said that the benefits don't outweigh the costs.  If this is so, then I truly do not understand our criminal justice system.   Here's why: The victim in this case was willing to testify in court.  Obviously, he was not thrilled or excited about it, but he was willing to do it for the chance of seeing some justice done. The benefits of winning the case are obvious - a child sexual offender is off the streets for another few years.  Piland said that the jail time would be minimal (after all, Smith was sentenced to 4 years for the probation violation, but will be out after a year and a half).  I don't understand this reasoning - by that logic, why bring charges against anyone for any case?  Sexual offenders have a very high rate of recidivism.  If he is off the streets for another 2 years, and this prevents a few kids from being groomed, it is absolutely worth it.  And, now that there are two cases, one would think that the sentencing would be a lot stricter, given his previous conviction. The costs of losing the case would be merely the time spent on the case.  It isn't like losing this trial would have the consequences of the first case, where a loss would mean no felony conviction at all, and he would still have his job at the school. One of the reasons cited for the case being weak is the credibility of the witness.  This is always the case for sexual abuse victims - it is their word against the offenders. However, the case would be a lot stronger if you could introduce evidence from other victims - the solicitation audiotape,  the boy whose case was dismissed, the man who came forward about abuse from 25 years ago, etc. And now, of course, there are two cases that are pending, that could be tried together, making it even stronger than just a single case. Because I am not in the criminal justice system, I asked Piland about this, since it seemed to me that it would make a very strong case with all the other evidence and testimony available.  Mr. Piland said that he can't introduce other testimony as evidence, because the law stipulates that just because someone has committed the same crime previously, you can't provide that as evidence that he committed the crime he is currently charged with ("undo prejudice" is the legal term). This makes sense in general, but I did a little more research just to make sure.  It turns out that there is a statute (725 ILCS 5/115-7.3) in Illinois that specifically allows the introduction of evidence from "the commission of another offense" if the offenses are criminal sexual assault, which is what this case is.  Or, in other words, other sexual offenses of the same kind could be considered evidence in this case too.  Plus, I am told that this happens all the time for cases like this, and that it is up to the judge (not the prosecutor), to decide which piece of evidence can be admitted. Again, I'm not involved in legal matters, so I could be wrong on how strong these cases are.   However, I think Mr. Piland's credibility on the issue is suspect when he misleads me about admissibility of evidence. I truly don't understand what we as a community have to lose in this case.  If the plaintiff was not willing to testify, I would totally understand.  If the prosecution attempts to introduce evidence from other cases, but the judge doesn't allow it, that might make it too weak to go forward.  And, if the case went to trial and lost, it would be very depressing.  But it would at least show that our State's Attorney's office does actually want to keep sexual offenders off the street, and that sexual offenses against African American kids do matter in this community.