As I sat through Wednesday’s hearing, the line from Herman Hermits’ 1965 song, “I’m Henry, the VIII, I am.”
Judge Thomas Meyer was asking,
“Am I to assume the State’s Attorney is ‘unable to attend?’”
That was pretty much the way he left the case at the last hearing a bit over two weeks ago.
No one had an answer beyond the February 14, 2011, letter provided by McHenry County State’s Attorney to Seipler’s attorney Blake Horwitz.
So, what’s a judge to do?
Judge Meyer authorized that the attorney’s question Bianchi under oath as to whether he is available to investigate and prosecute Sheriff Nygren.
“Let’s cut to the chase,” the Judge said at one point.
“My actions are guided by the statute. (That’s) the only issue. In light of the fact I have nothing on that issue, I’ll enter (an order) and continue (the case) and allow you to address this issue.”
Earlier, Judge Meyer said, “If…he (State’s Attorney Bianchi) is able to attend, the rest is irrelevant.”
Elsewhere, “That’s the threshold issue I have to address.”
The Judge wanted to know if the Special Assistant State’s Attorney Bill Caldwell was “implicitly or explicitly conceding the issue.”
Sheriff Nygren’s attorney, Mark Gummerson observed that they had “not conceded anything” concerning the State’s Attorney’s availability.”
After the court hearing, Seipler attorney Blake Horwitz explained that the questions he had to ask Bianchi were “very simple questions,” but he declined to reveal them to reporters.
Nygren was sitting in the back of the courtroom. McHenry County Board Chairman Ken Koehler was in attendance, too. Seipler was not.