Cook chief judge: Need to review pretrial system in wake of CTA attack

CHICAGO - With just days left before his successor takes the post at the top of Cook County's court system, and as the CTA train fire attack continues to generate national outrage, outgoing Cook County Chief Judge Timothy Evans has taken the rare step of conceding that the county may need to reevaluate the electronic monitoring system that allowed the career criminal to be free to roam at the time he attacked and severely burned a young woman.

On Nov. 25, Evans' office released a statement concerning the "incident" and the potential need to review and make changes to Cook County's electronic home monitoring "procedures."

"We are reviewing all actions taken in this case to ensure procedures were followed and to identify opportunities for improvement," Evans' office said in the release.

The statement comes as national response continues to build against Evans and others in the Cook County judiciary over the assault on a CTA Blue Line train that left a young woman severely burned.

Lawrence Reed, 50, of Chicago faces federal terrorism-related charges over accusations he attacked the 26-year-old woman, recently identified as Brittany Magee, on Nov. 19 in a brutal and unprovoked assault.

According to prosecutors, Reed, who is black, and Magee, who is white, did not know each other.

Reed allegedly attacked the woman from behind, pouring gasoline over her from a bottle. He then pursued her through the train and ignited the gasoline, lighting her on fire.

Magee reportedly has suffered severe burns over more than half of her body. She was only saved from further injury because bystanders on a train platform provided aid when she stumbled out of the train, still on fire, and then called for help.

No one on the train came to her aid.

In reports published since, most prominently and extensively by crime news publication CWB Chicago, court transcripts reveal Cook County judges had the chance to jail Reed months earlier on charges stemming from a separate assault incident, in which Reed allegedly attacked a social worker who was attempting to help him in a psychiatric ward at a suburban hospital.

According to reports published by CWB, Cook County prosecutors had asked Judge Teresa Molina-Gonzalez to jail Reed, citing Reed's extensive criminal background, including at least 72 prior arrests and at least 15 felony convictions.

According to official court transcripts cited by CWB, Judge Molina-Gonzalez reportedly told prosecutors: "I can’t keep everybody in jail because the State’s Attorney wants me to..."

Instead, the judge released Reed into the county's electronic monitoring program, operated by the Cook County Chief Judge's office.

Later, a different judge, Ralph Meczyk, further modified Reed's electronic monitoring order, giving him still more leniency to be outside of his home.

Those particular decisions have drawn scrutiny and criticism, which has only intensified as further reporting from CWB revealed those tasked with monitoring Reed's movements allegedly were aware that he was violating the terms of the orders, yet no actions were taken to correct the situation and ensure Reed was complying with the orders, allowing him to be on the train at 9 p.m. on Nov. 19, when he allegedly attacked Magee.

Fury over the attack on Magee and the facts of the case have intensified as reports about the attack have spread nationally and globally.

And that fury appears to have jarred even the coalition of Illinois Democrats who have steadfastly defended Illinois' controversial criminal justice reform laws, collectively and commonly known as the SAFE-T Act, that many have blamed for allowing Reed to be free at the time of the attack.

Cook County State's Attorney Eileen O'Neill Burke, for instance, issued a rare statement implying her office should bear no fault for the attack on Magee. The statement reinforces the reporting that Judge Molina-Gonzalez declined to jail Reed, over prosecutors' strong objections.

And even Gov. JB Pritzker - who has staunchly defended the reforms for years - has publicly indicated the SAFE-T Act may be in need of "tweaks" in the wake of the attack.

Evans' statement - released nearly a week after the attack - appears to come in response to the furor surrounding the attack.

The statement comes as a rare concession from Evans that there may be problems with the system established under the SAFE-T Act.

That legislative SAFE-T Act package was enacted in 2022 by Pritzker and his fellow Democrats, as left-wing lawmakers seized on anti-police sentiment stirred up by Black Lives Matter protests and riots of 2020 to push through sprawling reforms of virtually every aspect of Illinois' criminal justice system.

The Pre-Trial Fairness Act, prohibiting cash bail, was passed as a follow-up revision of the larger so-called SAFE-T Act criminal justice reform law.

While the law was passed in 2022, it did not take full effect until September 2023, after the Democrat-dominated Illinois Supreme Court rejected a challenge to the law from many of Illinois' county state's attorneys, who had argued the state's Democratic governing supermajority violated the state constitution by rewriting the state's criminal justice laws without amending the state constitution first.

The cornerstone of the so-called Pre-Trial Fairness Act was a provision abolishing the state's traditional cash bail system for criminal defendants, which all but entitles criminal defendants to release from custody unless prosecutors can persuade judges they are a threat to public safety or a flight risk who otherwise wouldn't show up for trial.

For years, Evans has been among the loudest and most prominent supporters of the reform measures, regularly touting its supposed effectiveness at both strengthening civil rights for those accused of crimes and allegedly reducing crime.

Evans, for instance, has repeatedly pushed back against statements and data produced by others involved in the criminal justice system, including the former Cook County Circuit Court clerk, who have claimed provisions under the so-called Pretrial Fairness Act that eliminated cash bail has resulted in more and more criminal defendants skipping court dates and effectively thumbing their nose at the courts.

County sheriffs elsewhere have said the new system has resulted inversely in more people being jailed in recent months for failure to appear in court.

Evans, however, has asserted such claims were overblown and based on a faulty understanding of the rules and processes established under the system that replaced the traditional cash bail regime.

In the statement, the chief judge's office did not outright defend the decisions reached by the judges involved in Reed's case.

Rather, the chief judge's office indicated decisions on electronic monitoring and pretrial detention are made under the guidance of the Pretrial Fairness Act, which they said sets the "threshold for denying pretrial release ... intentionally high."

"The State must prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that no condition or combination of conditions can reasonably ensure a defendant’s appearance in court or protect the public," the chief judge's office wrote. "Allegations alone are not enough; the law requires evidence of a specific, unmanageable risk that cannot be addressed through available supervision or court-ordered conditions."

The chief judge also conceded the limitations of the electronic monitoring system, saying "it is designed to support accountability and provide location and compliance data. It is not a substitute for law enforcement and does not give pretrial officers arrest authority."

Those limitations have been exposed through the years since electronic monitoring became the preferred choice for Cook County courts handling accused criminals pretrial. According to data tracked and reported by CWB Chicago, hundreds of violent crimes, including murder, have been committed by people already in Cook County's electronic monitoring system.

Those limits and the county court's preference for the jail alternative system led to public conflict between Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart and Evans over how and whether to continue the program.

In 2022, for instance, Dart bluntly stated the electronic monitoring program "is not a program for people charged with violent offenses," noting even his sheriff's department lacked the ability to quickly respond to violations.

Rather than end the program, the county instead shifted the program to the oversight of the Cook County Chief Judge's office.

In the statement, Evans' office said that was based on a desire to shift "from a law-enforcement-operated home-detention model to a compliance-based model overseen by the Adult Probation Department."

In the statement, the chief judge's office confirmed the electronic monitoring program lacks the ability to respond directly or immediately to violations of electronic monitoring.

Rather, the chief judge's office said "major violations" of electronic monitoring orders "are reported to the prosecutor and the court within 72 hours," while "lower level" violations "are addressed at the next court date."

"Pretrial officers may involve law enforcement only when a clear, articulable threat to public safety is present, such as cutting off a device or entering a prohibited area," the chief judge's office said.

According to the statement, there are an average of 8,500 electronic monitoring alerts received by the chief judge's electronic monitoring program every week.

In the statement, the chief judge's office noted it will "work closely with our justice-system partners to assess current procedures and determine whether additional safeguards or policy adjustments are warranted."

While declining to discuss the scope of potential changes, the chief judge noted his office has "under consideration" the possibility of "reinstating the practice of reporting escalated EM alerts to the State’s Attorney’s Office.

"That process was previously paused, following concerns raised by the State’s Attorney’s Office regarding the volume of alerts. In the interest of public safety, we believe it is necessary to re-evaluate this process."

The actual work of such review, however, will not be carried out by Evans, directly. Rather, it will be under the supervision of incoming Chief Judge Charles Beach, who defeated Evans in an election in which only Cook County judges could vote.

In public comments, Beach has indicated a continued support for the SAFE-T Act reforms, calling it a "better and fairer system."

Evans has served as Cook County's chief judge since 2001.