The Waukegan Police Department finds itself on the back end of another lawsuit, this one filed by family members of Adelina Weber, who was stabbed to death by her husband. The family and their high-priced Chicago lawyers contend police ignored an order of protection and should have arrested Clarence Weber and whisk the woman to a safe haven.
But what came out in Clarence Weber's bond hearing in Lake County Circuit Court on Thursday paints a different picture. According to prosecutors, Adelina agreed to meet her husband --- who had the order of protection against him, which she sought --- after she ended her shift at the Walker Brothers pancake house in Lincolnshire on July 5.
What would cause a woman apparently afraid of her husband to meet him near a motel across Milwaukee Avenue from the pancake house? It was a fatal move as her husband stabbed her to death after arguing over their impending divorce.
The Hound may be wrong on this, but her actions seem to take the sails out of the suit filed by the family. How can the police be at fault? Nobody forced her to meet her husband, whom she obviously knew was violent.
Certainly, police aren't responsible to be with her round-the-clock when there are safe places to go for protection. Or are they? And, she was killed not in Waukegan, but Lincolnshire. The speed in which this suit was filed also bothers The Hound.
A life has been taken but The Hound thinks the finger is being pointed in the wrong direction. As in other instances, it's all too easy to blame the cops for a bad decision. After all, they have the deep pockets.
"What would cause a woman apparently afraid of her husband to meet him near a motel across Milwaukee Avenue from the pancake house?"
Abused women often follow this pattern (trying to trust just one more time, falling prey to the abusive spouse's power of persuasion, etc). It's an emotional and psychological problem; however, an order of protection is intended to protect the victim from her assailant, not from herself.
Had the accused been arrested in May, would he have been locked up? Given his documented violent tendencies and criminal history, he should have been, but I don't know what the law allows. He could very well have been arrested, charged with violating the order of protection, given a court date and been released on bond, in which case the arrest would not have prevented the murder.
The Hound isn't wrong on this.
THE HOUND SAYS: Good points
I think that there is no case here whatsoever. First of all, the lady was killed in Lincolnshire. Secondly, if she agreed to meet him and break a protective order, the WPD could do nothing to protect her. It's unfortunate she was murdered but it wasn't the fault of the WPD.
THE HOUND SAYS: Which was The Hound's point.
I guess the part of this tragic story that gets to me is how fast the victim's family filed suit after her death. What do you bet some ambulance chasing, oxygen thieving and opportunistic lawyer saw the chance to prey on the grieving, seeing a chance to make a quick buck?
America's lawsuit mentality is only a problem surpassed by domestic violence. We have warnings to remind us the coffee may be hot and cause burns and stickers on our lawnmowers reminding us not to put our hands and feet under them when they are running but nothing preventing people under protective restraining orders into voiding that protection by meeeting the attackers and abusers by their own volition.
THE HOUND SAYS: Well, Mike, the Clifford law offices of Chicago normally aren't known as ambulance chasers, but that speed of filing was just less than the speed of Kerry Wood's fastball. Ask those running for public office this fall if they support tort reform. If they're not lawyers, they usually do.
I agree with the hound. The police are not to blame, but her husband. He is the criminal and not her or the police. He is the one who violated his order of protection, supposedly. How do we know she planned to meet him? Was this said only to cover tracks? We don't know the full story. The point is that theirs is a life that was lost and your comments and posts are insensitive to this woman and her family. How dare you all! Someone commented that the woman made the decision to meet her husband and it's her on fault that she is now dead. Even if she did agree to meet him, it's still not her fault. I hope none of you all work for the office where orders of protections are filed. Some comments seem to reflect what I've heard about these offices being insensitve to the needs of the victims, mainly the police and the prosecuting office or DA. It's really sad. We don't know if this poor woman was treated poorly by the police or any other agency who was supposed to help her. I've heard of situations like this before. Maybe her husband was the only person she could talk to when she needed someone, if she did in fact plan to meet him. We don't know. The criminal could've been stalking her. Her family lost a person they loved and cared about and your comments and posts are offensive and insensitive. No, I am not a family member, but I also don't believe everything I read.
THE HOUND SAYS: Well, Mark certainly has covered a lot of ground. Of course her husband is to blame, he allegedly killed her. Yet, the family blames the police. They haven't named the state's attorney's office in their suit. Her husband was the only one she could talk to? How about the family members which are now quick to sue? How about all the taxpayer-paid social agencies available? Posts to The Hound being insensitive? Surely, you jest.