CHICAGO -- Years after her 11-year-old daughter was sexually assaulted, Denise Rotheimer wants to sue the Lake County prosecutors who sent the offender to jail, saying they defamed her child by telling the judge that the girl "had issues."
In Cook County, Maria Ramirez believes prosecutors violated her rights by refusing to let her file a complaint after she was threatened by relatives of a juvenile charged with her son's 2006 murder.
Both women found that -- after floundering through a complex criminal justice system that critics say is weighted toward ensuring the rights of the accused -- their rights as crime victims were unenforceable.
Victims of violent crimes "are not the people you want to further victimize or betray," said Rotheimer, who along with her daughter, Jasmine Jimenez, now 21, has filed a federal lawsuit against the Lake County's state's attorney and the state of Illinois.
"I am saying, let's have a right to be able to hold accountable a person who violates or denies you your rights to justice, prosecutor or not," Rotheimer said.
The Illinois Constitution already provides 10 rights for crime victims, including that they be treated with respect, given advance notice of court hearings and be allowed to attend trials and present victim-impact statements.
But if those rights are violated, there's no mechanism for a crime victim to appeal to a higher court, said Cindy Hora, who heads the Illinois Attorney General's crime victim services division. And Illinois is the only state whose constitution specifically prohibits victims from seeking legal remedy through an appeal, Hora said.
Now Illinois advocacy groups have joined a national push to amend state constitutions and give teeth to statutes already on the books. Few agree with Rotheimer's goal, to make prosecutors personally liable for violating crime victims' rights. But most share a desire to allow victims a voice during the criminal process.
The Illinois Coalition for Enforceable Victims Rights has proposed its version of a constitutional amendment approved by California voters in 2008, called Marsy's Law.
For years, the criminal justice system worked at making the process fair for the accused, advocates say. Now crime victims want more control within the process.
But in Illinois, allowing victims a bigger role in court has been controversial.
"In some ways, crime victims are the odd man out in the criminal justice system," said Paul Cassell, a former federal judge now teaching at the University of Utah's law college.
"Defendants don't want victims involved in the criminal process because they are afraid the victim will seek harsh justice. The prosecutors don't like to be second-guessed by victims and are used to running the show in a criminal case."
In Lake County, the state's attorney's office distributes brochures to crime victims outlining their rights and assigns advocates to guide victims through the process. But some argue that because the advocates work for the prosecutor, they have an inherent conflict of interest.
Glenn Gosh, of Lake Villa, believes Lake County prosecutors mishandled his case as the victim of a near-fatal stabbing by allowing the court case to extend over 2 1/2 years. The defendant -- his ex-girlfriend -- pleaded guilty to aggravated battery in October and received a felony conditional release with no jail time.
"When I am told that this is 'normal' for the system, there should be some serious changes to the system," Gosh said.
His ex-girlfriend, Sherri Marenkovich, confessed to the stabbing during a 911 call prosecutors said. Still, she maintains that Gosh instigated the attack, and her lawyer, Jed Stone, blamed Gosh during her sentencing, Gosh said. He denies the allegations.
Gosh could have hired his own lawyer for a civil case, but, under state law, the state would not be required to include that lawyer in the criminal prosecution. He was assigned a victims advocate but was not happy with her advice.
"The victim needs someplace to go besides the prosecutor's office," Gosh said.
Lake County Assistant State's Attorney Pat Fix said that the prosecutor handling Gosh's case took notes that showed that he heard Gosh's concerns at least 40 times over two years. A domestic abuse advocate also logged dozens of calls from him, she said.
But Fix, chief of the felony trial division, agreed that the case dragged on too long. She said the judge had allowed the defense attorney to continue the case "some 20-odd times."
"I think the majority of the victims who have had the opportunity to work with our state's attorney's office would say there has been an extraordinary passion and compassion in handling these cases," Fix said.
In another Lake County case, Rotheimer alleges that prosecutors never informed her of her rights as the mother of a minor who was sexually assaulted. In 2003, she learned from the attorney representing the defendant that the state was prepared to accept a guilty plea with the minimum sentence of six years.
Rotheimer asked the bailiff to inform the judge that she objected to the sentence. Once before the judge, she disclosed facts that she said the prosecution left out. The state's attorney argued before the judge, saying Rotheimer's daughter "had issues," according to her lawsuit.
The judge threw out the state's plea deal as a result and sentenced the defendant to 7 1/2 years, her lawsuit states.
Rotheimer today believes the only way to protect crime victims is to remove laws that, in nearly every state, grant prosecutors immunity from legal liability while doing their job.
Rotheimer claims in her lawsuit that this immunity violates the due process protections of the U.S. Constitution's 14th Amendment.
In California, Marsy's Law increased victims' rights and added measures to enforce them. The law does not allow for a conviction to be overturned. But if a victim argues successfully that they were denied their rights, such as the right to attend a pretrial hearing, an appellate court can order the court to hold the hearing again, experts said.
The so-called do-over is "pretty rare because once the law says that the remedy can happen, most people are very, very careful," said Meg Garvin, executive director of the Oregon-based National Crime Victim Law Institute. "Most people try hard to avoid that, for judicial economy."
Arizona voters were among the first in the nation to adopt a constitutional amendment protecting crime victims' rights in 1990 after the measure failed twice in the legislature, said Dan Levey of the Arizona Attorney General's office.
Today, the judge reads the crime victims' rights out loud every morning in court. A state-level victims' rights enforcement officer gets involved if complaints cannot be satisfied locally.
Visit the Chicago Tribune at www.chicagotribune.com
Distributed by MCT Information Services