Law protects police, judges, prosecutors from being taped

The last of three parts.

Tuesday, January 19, 2000

Kane County Chronicle (IL)

By BRENDA SCHORY

GENEVA – A new law took effect Jan. 1 that expands the state's eavesdropping law to specifically protect law-enforcement and judicial officials from taping and increases its punishment.

House Bill 526 makes it a class 1 felony to eavesdrop "an oral conversation or electronic communication between any law enforcement office, state's attorney, assistant state's attorney, the Attorney General, assistant attorney general, or a judge, while in the performance of his or her official duties," if not authorized by law or court order.

The old law was a class 4 felony, punishable by one to three years in prison, or one year mandatory supervised release and a fine not to exceed $10,000. A class 1 felony is punishable by four to 15 years in prison, two years' mandatory supervised release and up to $10,000 in fines.

State Rep. John Fritchy, D-Evergreen Park, one of the bill's several sponsors, said the Cook County State's Attorney's Office requested the change "to help insulate lawmakers and law officials in carrying on or performing official duties. If somebody is eavesdropping on a conversation between two police officers, that could inhibit their performance of duties in pursuing criminal activities."

Gang members and drug dealers clone numbers for police and prosecutors' cell phones, pagers and fax machines, and phone lines, putting all their lives at risk, he said.

"Eavesdropping in any event is illegal. It is not OK to eavesdrop on a private citizen," Fritchey said. "But there is discretion by state's attorneys when not to bring charges."

Chicago attorney Robert Loeb, chairman of the State Bar Criminal Justice Committee, said the committee opposed the law because a class 4 felony is too severe.

While Loeb helped draft the 1994 amendment requiring all parties to consent to being taped, he said the new law goes too far.

"The state bar opposed it too," he added.

"The new law is ludicrous," said Hindi's lawyer Rick Halprin. "What if I tape a judge asking me for a bribe? Is that part of his official duties?"

BGA Chief Investigator Michael Lyons, who is also a journalism professor at Loyola University, said many breakthroughs in Illinois have come through taping police in their official capacities.

"We had a traffic stop and the police made some sort of allusion to wanting money," Lyons said. The tape was running, on the seat in plain view. Of course, the police appealed and the court held they had no expectation or privacy."

Lyons said though Hindi's recorder was hidden in this case, the incident also occurred during a carnival when no expectation of privacy should apply.

***********************************

Halprin and several other sources say Hind is being punished because he isn't liked and his views are not popular.

Halprin said charges were reinstated against Hindi because St. Charles Police pressured the state's attorney.

St. Charles Police Chief Don Shaw disagreed, saying Hindi was charged "because it's against the law. It's listed in Illinois statues as being against the law. Linda Tripp and her tape recording another's conversation unbeknownst to them, has a certain unsavory and diabolical purpose."

Liking or not liking Hindi is not an issue, Shaw said.

"Mr. Hindi has a right to his opinion, and every time he has made a complaint, we have followed through with a report and contacted the State's Attorney's Office with his complaints of animal abuse," Shaw said.

"The bottom line is, it's against the law. The Legislature, in its good judgment, made it a felony, not a misdemeanor, Shaw said.

Police don't pick and choose who gets the law applied to them.

"It's not good police work," Shaw said. "We present to the state's attorney. Whether it's Steve Hindi or Linda Tripp, it (eavesdropping) is not permitted under the law."

Ed Yohnka, director of communications for the American Civil Liberties Union, called what Hidi did a "technical violation of the eavesdropping statute," noting they are rarely prosecuted.

"This is the embarrassment factor – the police were upset with what he was doing and he's clearly being singled out for punishment because of his previous activities," Yohnka said. "It's showing bad discretion on the part of the prosecutors."

"I can't believe a prosecutor would bring an action like this," Lyons added.

The Kane County prosecutor is, in my opinion, literally pandering to the police in this particular case, (because) they had their sensibilities offended…they have their noses out of joint," Lyons said.

"Kane County has much better things to do than for its police and state's attorney to pursue, and not have to harass people who carry tape recorders at carnivals. I can't think this (action) will survive," Lyons said.

"The only thing I can tell you," countered Kane County State's Attorney David Ackemann, "is I have no personal animus against any person involved in this. We do not do everything a police department asks us to do, blindly."

***********************************

Hindi routinely uses audio and visual recordings to document animal mistreatment.

"We want everything to be out in the public," Hindi said. "The only thing it (his tape of police) would have done was to make the record accurate. That's the beauty of audio and video. I say, police ought to welcome being taped. There is no room for fudging on either side."

"The issue is when it's hidden, not out in the open. Mr. Hindi has his (recorder) concealed," Shaw said. "The other problem is, tapes can be altered."

Fritchey said he would be open to suggestions about amending the new law.

"Some of the best bills come from residents in the district, not lobbyists," Fritchey said. "It is my duty to make laws and fix them once they're made…to make a good bill better."

Hindi vowed to do just that. "It will have to be challenged," he said. "We'll fight this one tooth and nail."