Degorski tape decision in judges' hands

Was Brown's Chicken murder suspect James Degorski still aware he had the right to remain silent after taking a nap while in police custody the day after he was arrested?

A panel of three appellate judges honed in on that point Thursday as they listened to oral arguments on whether a partial videotaped confession by Degorski is admissible in court.

A standing-room-only crowd, which included Cook County State's Attorney Dick Devine, packed the small appellate courtroom in Chicago to witness the debate over a potentially key piece of evidence in the case against Degorski.

Degorski is accused of seven counts of capital murder in the 1993 slaying inside a Palatine restaurant.

In October, Cook County Judge Vincent Gaughan ruled the video could not be played in court because Degorski's Miranda rights were violated, though he also ruled that the suspect's statements had been made voluntarily.

Both sides agree Degorski had been read his rights at least twice, and reminded of them twice more, over the two-day period in 2002.

But the 4½-minute videotaped statement began at 4:15 p.m., the day after Degorski was arrested, and Degorski had last been reminded of his rights at 4 a.m. that morning, shortly before taking a nap.

Case law says Miranda rights must be re-read if the warnings have "grown stale."

Assistant Public Defender Mark Levitt argued that the circumstances surrounding that day -- Degorski's lack of sleep, the way he was treated, the attitude of the police, his dislike of videotape -- all contributed to the judge's decision to throw out the entire videotape.

The tape begins with then-Assistant State's Attorney Michael McHale asking Degorski if he's been advised of his constitutional rights.

Degorski replies, "Yes."

McHale then reminds Degorski that he confessed to planning a robbery at the Brown's Chicken in Palatine; that he had shot two people in a cooler and co-defendant Juan Luna had shot and killed the other five and stabbed a woman; and that money was stolen and later split.

"Is that correct?" McHale says.

"Right," Degorski replies.

McHale then reads Degorski his rights and asks if he wants to make a statement.

"Not really," Degorski replies.

"OK, earlier you told us what happened, right?" McHale says.

"Correct," Degorski says.

"Do you wish to talk to us at this time and tell us everything you said before?" McHale says.

"I would much rather just say it in court," Degorski says.

Degorski adds, "It'd be much easier just to say it one time, or say it in court rather. I've already said it. It's not like I have anything to hide or whatever."

The three-judge panel will issue a written opinion on the issue, which must be resolved before the long-running case can go to trial.

Co-defendant Luna was convicted of the murders and is serving a life sentence. His 45-minute videotaped account of the killing spree -- given the same day as Degorski's videotaped statement -- played a significant role in his conviction.