A

STATE OF ILLINOIS
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
COUNTY OF WINNEBAGO
OmODNOUUW-PCON

THE PEOPLE OF THE

VWW
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
PTaintiff,

VGFSUS Case No. 14-CF-922

STATUS
RICHARD E. WANKE,

VV
Defendant.

REPORT OF PROCEEDINGS at the hearing of the

above-entitled cause before the HonorabIe Rosemary

CoIIins, Judge of said Court, heard on March 20, 2015.

APPEARANCES:
F. JAMES BRUN,
Assistant Deputy State‘s Attorney,
Appeared on behaIf of the pIaintiff.

ERIN HANNIGAN and

DERRICK SCHMIDT,
Assistant PuinC Defenders,
Appeared with and on behaIf of the defendant.

Ann M. McNeer, CSR

License No. 084—001922
 A
THE COURT: A11 right. This is Peop1e

versus Richard Wanke, two thous- or 14—CF-922.

ocoooxloacnaoom

I have received mu1tip1e packets of subpoenaed

materia1. I wi11 have you identify —— can you hear?

THE DEFENDANT WANKE: No.

THE COURT: Do you have it turned on?

THE DEFENDANT WANKE: It's not working.

THE COURT: Is it turned on now?

THE DEFENDANT NANKE: I can hear the

microphone moving but I can't hear you ta1king.

THE COURT: Because I'm not saying anything.

A11 right. Can you hear me now?

THE DEFENDANT WANKE: I'm sorry, your Honor.

No, I can't.

THE COURT: Can you hear me now?

THE DEFENDANT WANKE: Yes.

THE COURT: A11 right. I have received
mu1tip1e packets of subpoenaed reports on Mr. Wanke, so

I‘11 go through them for the record.

I have it turned on.

BAILIFF JAMIE BUTTON: I don't know if they

messed with this or something --

THE COURT: I know.

BAILIFF JAMIE BUTTON: -- whi1e I was gone.

 Something happened.
_\

THE COURT: Yeah. I know. It's not

OLDCD‘JQUI-me

working.

BAILIFF JAMIE BUTTON: A11 the buttons were

sti11 the same, right?

THE COURT: Yeah.

BAILIFF JAMIE BUTTON: The speaker ones?

THE COURT: Yes. They're 311 the same. And

they're a11 high, so —- but it does seem 1ike it's not

working.
BAILIFF JAMIE BUTTON: I know.
THE COURT: Okay. The first one appears to
be a response to a subpoena issued by the Peop1e of the

State of I11inois asking for a11 videos, photographs,

911 records and recordings to the Rockford Po1ice

Department. The Court did not view the videos and the
photographs, but I'm turning them over to the State.

There's two packets there.

There's another packet, again subpoenaed by the

State, from the Rockford City Lega1 Department that's

asking for ENS reports. They wi11 be turned over to

the State.

Another packet issued by the State to the

Rockford City Po1ice Department asking for information,
 OLDOONJO'SU‘l-PCAJN-l
inc1uding a11 1eads that may have imp1icated other

suspects in this case. The Court did review a11 the

remaining documents just brief1y to make sure they were

in fact on this case. I did not read them for

reco11ection purposes, but just to review and make sure

they were in fact this particu1ar case. Nothing's been

redacted from any of these enve1opes and they're a11

going to be turned over.

The next packet is to the Rockford City Lega1

Department, ENS reports. It says, in particu1ar, a11

NMNMN—LA-‘A—LA-LAA—L

notes and reports generated by Greg Lindmark, which

th—‘OCOCDNQUT-P-OJNA

he's emp10yed by the Rockford Po1ice Department.

The City of Rockford Po1ice Department is the

next package, issued by the State, subpoena for a11 ENS

reports, and that'11 be turned over.

The next fi1e is subpoena by the State to the

City of Rockford Lega1 Department. A11 of Greg C1ark's

fi1es containing the case fi1e, notes and 1etters that

were written to and from Gregory C1ark to Richard Nanke

and vice versa re1ating to the cases that Mr. C1ark

represented the defendant on. That's been turned over

then to the State today, the response to that subpoena

request.

The next packet is a subpoena issued by the State

 OLOOO‘slmU'l-bOJNA indicating that they are asking for, from the Winnebago

County Jai1, reports, a11 comp1aints and responses made

by the defendant from the custody date 4/25/14 to the

present. That'11 be turned over.

And then the 1ast two big packets are the State's
subpoena to the Rockford City Po1ice Department

regarding a11 fi1es or -- or a11 reports. They both

are that. They'11 be turned over to the State.

MR. BRUN: For the record, --

THE COURT: As I said, nothing has been

NNNNNAAAAAAAAAA

redacted from any of these fi1es.

-P(JOI\J—‘CD(.OOI>‘~IG‘JO1-h(.v~JI\D—x

MR. BRUN: For the record, James Brun on

beha1f of the Peop1e, your Honor.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

MR. BRUN: Uh-huh.

THE COURT: Okay. So where do we stand on

this?
MR. SCHMIDT: A coup1e things, your Honor.

First, your Honor gave us permission for Mr.

Nanke to review the grand jury transcripts and have

them returned today. I have them in my custody.
I've -- I've 1ooked through them. There's been no --
there‘s nothing missing, nothing written upon and they

are compTete.
 OCOOO‘JOUU'l-DOJN—i Today was for the State to answer our motions,

and I be1ieve the State has issued subpoenas regarding

those answers. I've received some materia1 today.

However, I‘11 obvious1y have to see what the subpoenaed

materia1 is to see if that is responsive to our

motions.

MR. BRUN: For the record, the State wou1d

be fi1ing instanter a Sixth Supp1ementa1 Answer to

Discovery 1isting a number of reports and actua11y six

CDs, and that does address the defense Motion to

NNNMNAAAAAAAAA.‘

Preserve Potentia1 Evidence.

.P-CDN—‘OCDOONO'JU'l-hODNA

A1so, the State wou1d be fi1ing a Seventh

Supp1ementa1 Answer re1ating to the Defendant‘s Second

Supp1ementa1 Motion For Discovery, asking for po1ice

report 07163681, and in speaking with counse1 before

court, there are additiona1 identification materiaTs

that are 1isted in that report that I wi11 be obtaining

and a1so tendering to counse1.

And in additiona1 matters, in re1ation to the

Defendant's First Supp1ementa1 Motion For Discovery

asking for the whereabouts of Attorney Greg C1ark's

fi1es concerning the defendant, any case fi1es, notes

and 1etters written to and from Greg C1ark to Richard

Nanke, I did speak with Bart Henbest yesterday

 OCDCO‘sICDUT-hOOM-A
afternoon and he was ab1e to confirm there are three
fi1e cabinets of fi1es that Mr. C1ark worked on, that

on1y three accordion fi1es, however, re1ated to Richard

Nanke. Therefore, your Honor, it is my request at the

next -- we wi11 the next court date have a subpoena

sent out for those fi1es to be returned to the Court

for in camera inspection.

And fina11y, one of the additiona1 requests of

counse1 1ast week does re1ate to the grievances that

Mr. Nanke has made to the jai1 in a kiosk at the county
MNMNN—LJAAAJA—k-L-L

jai1. I do have the origina1 Order November 24, 2014

me-AocoooxlmmeN—L

authorizing the jaiT to furnish those copies to

Attorney Schmidt. ObviOUSTy we have a subpoena

present, but aTSo just for the Court's know1edge, I'11

forward this Order back to the jai1 so they know this

is a ongoing ob1igation and not just upon subpoenas.

THE COURT: Thank you, counse1.

A11 right. So what are the parties requesting

then?
MR. SCHMIDT: Besides that, discovery is

ongoing. I wi11 take a 100k at the new discovery, go

over discovery with Mr. Nanke.

I have ta1ked to him a 1itt1e, as he had fi1ed

request for days accrued on speedy tria1 demand. I‘ve

 discussed where I think we are on that.

I wou1d 1ike to review obvious1y the subpoenas

OOODNOUO‘l-bwk)

that are coming back and that were received this

morning.

I don't want to set this out too 1ong.

THE COURT: How about Apri1 15th?

MR. SCHMIDT: That wou1d be perfect.

THE COURT: Okay. I can give you morning or

afternoon.
MR. SCHMIDT: I'm avai1ab1e a11 morning.

11 THE COURT: Okay. 9:00 o'c1ock?

12 MR. BRUN: May I have one moment, p1ease,

13 your Honor?

14 THE COURT: Uh-huh.

15 MR. BRUN: 9:00 o'c1ock is fine, your Honor.

16 THE COURT: Okay. 9:00 o'c1ock on Apri1

17 15th. On defendant's motion, time t011ed. You can use

18 that for a return date then for the subpoenas too.

19 MR. BRUN: A11 right. Thank you.

20 THE COURT: A11 right. Thank you.

21 (Nhereupon Richard E. Nanke

22 was remanded to the custody

23 of the Winnebago County

24 Sheriff.)
 (Nhich were a11 the
_\.

proceedings of record heard

wm

in the above-entit1ed matter

OJN—‘Otom‘xlmm-hmM-‘OLDCDNODCh-b

on this date.)
NMNMAAAAAAAAAA
N
4;
 A
STATE OF ILLINOIS
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
COUNTY OF NINNEBAGO
ocooo-qmcnhmm

C E R T I F I C A T E
I, Ann McNee1y, CSR, Officia1 Court Reporter,

Seventeenth Judicia1 Circuit, State of I11inois, do

hereby certify that I reported in stenograph the

testimony given at the hearing of the said cause, and

that the foregoing transcript is a true and correct

transcription of my stenographic notes so taken as

aforesaid, and contains a11 the testimony given at the

hearing of the said cause to the best of my abi1ity.

I further certify that I am not connected by

b1ood or marriage to any of the parties in this action,

nor am I a re1ative or emp10yee or attorney or counse1

of any of the parties, nor am I a re1ative or emp10yee

of such attorney or counse1, or financia11y interested

in said action, or interested direct1y or indirect1y in

the matter in controversy.

IN WITNESS NHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand on

May 31, 2017. / K\\‘\\
@AAZWf/J?
Ann M. McNee1y

1O