The Cook County state’s attorney’s office plans to appeal an Illinois Appellate Court decision that set aside a murder conviction because of “pervasive misconduct” by a prosecutor.
The Appellate Court cited the closing argument of Assistant State’s Atty. Laura Morask as the reason for ordering a new trial for Roy Fluker, who was convicted of a street gang murder in 1995.
“We are going to appeal the decision,” Patti Simone, a spokeswoman for State’s Atty. Richard Devine, said Monday. She said the office would not comment on whether Morask would be disciplined because “it is a personnel matter.”
The Appellate Court said Morask “turned the jury’s attention away from the issues in an effort to turn the case into a referendum on attitudes toward gangs.”
Morask’s comments came in the prosecution’s rebuttal argument–the last argument made by lawyers for either side before the jury is given instructions and begins deliberations.
Fluker was on trial for the Nov. 15, 1995, murder of Charinda Willford and the attempted murder of Tasha Stinson, which police detectives said was the result of a drive-by shooting by street gang members.
In her closing argument, Morask told jurors the “only issue” for their determination was “who do you want to control our criminal justice system..Do you want the judge and you jurors to control our criminal justice system or do you want Roy Fluker to control the criminal justice system?”
Even when Cook County Circuit Judge James Schreier sustained defense objections to Morask’s argument, she continued, according to the appellate opinion.
“Do you run it or do they run it?” Morask argued. “You may as well give him a robe and a gavel and make him a judge.”
Although Schreier sustained another defense objection, Morask then said, “Well, you know that the (gang) will control the city as well as all the other gangs if you allow them to make a mockery of the justice system.”
The Appellate Court said Morask “not only failed to throw light on the issues in the case, she actively distracted the jurors from the issues,” and took Schreier to task for overruling some of the defense’s “prompt, appropriate objections.”
