Lake Co. judge denies effort to muzzle sheriff

A Waukegan attorney has accused Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran of "spouting off" to the press with unethical statements about his client and others, and asked a judge to stop it.

But Associate Judge George Bridges on Tuesday rejected the request to restrict Curran's future statements and to have his past statements taken down from the Internet. He warned all parties in the James Lewis murder case to play by the rules.

The rules highlighted in the motion by defense attorney Christopher Lombardo are sections of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct barring prosecutors and police from making statements that "pose a serious and imminent threat to the fairness" of a trial.

Contacted after the hearing, Curran said he did not believe any statements he made violate rules he is governed by as a police official or an attorney. He said he has voluntarily removed his past press releases from the sheriff's office Web site.

Lewis, 42, is accused of the Valentine's Day stabbing death of John Herres, 19, of Riverwoods, in what police say was a fight over marijuana in Lewis' Ingleside home.

Lombardo cited a press release from Curran's office issued Feb. 15 that contained the following statement from Curran:

"James Lewis has shown a complete lack of respect for the sanctity of human life as he was able to murder a young and vibrant 19-year-old man over a small amount of marijuana," Curran said. "I can only wonder how James Lewis arrived at such an evil and pitiful world view."

Lombardo said it violated IRPC bans on comments on the guilt or innocence of a defendant and on a defendant's character, and could compromise Lewis' right to a fair trial.

He cited four cases dating to June 2008 in which he said Curran made inflammatory comments to the media.

"The statements regarding my client are just a small snapshot of the many times he has made these types of comments," Lombardo said. "He cannot be allowed to compromise the case by spouting off to the press."

Curran said he believed his comments were in line with information already on the public record through statements made by prosecutors during bond hearings in high-profile cases.

"Nothing I have said about any criminal case has been outside the boundaries of the Supreme Court rules I am bound to as an attorney and sheriff," Curran said. "Obviously, the judge did not see anything wrong with them."

Bridges said he would go no further than to remind all parties in the case about IRPC rules, and he would hear motions regarding any future comments only after they were made.

He also declined Lombardo's request to order Curran to take down past press releases from the Internet, saying to do so might put him in a position of requiring newspapers to remove past articles from their Web sites.

Curran said the press releases should no longer be a concern, because he has removed them from the sheriff's site.

"I am convinced it would be fine if we left the press releases on our Web site, but I ordered them taken down last week when I was informed of the (Lombardo's) motion," Curran said. "I am not interesting in prejudicing any one's criminal case."

While acting as a defense attorney for serial rapist Christopher Hanson in 2006, Curran filed a similar motion calling for an order for then-sheriff Gary Del Re to stop making comments about that case.

Circuit Judge Fred Foreman issued a ruling similar to Bridges', although Curran said Tuesday there was a crucial difference between the two motions.

"In 2006, I was the target of the comments, not my client, and it was being done for political purposes," said Curran, who at the time was running against Del Re for sheriff.

The IRPC rules have been a flashpoint of controversy since they were issued by the Supreme Court in 2000.

But according to a spokesman for the state Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, which investigates complaints of violations of the rules and is empowered to issue sanctions up to disbarment, little has come of the controversy.

James Grogan, ARDC spokesman, said the agency has investigated some complaints, but no attorney in the state has been punished for violating the rules in the 10 years they have been in force.

"In most cases, it is best left up to the judge," Grogan said. "The judges are the referees best suited to stand in between the parties and bring everyone into compliance."