Focusing on Lou Bianchi’s Motion to Hold Special Prosecutor Thomas McQueen, et al, in Contempt of Court – Part 2

Joyce Synek and her attorney Ernest DiBenedetto after Special Prosecutor Thomas McQueen's case was dismissed.

Joyce Synek and her attorney Ernest DiBenedetto after Special Prosecutor Thomas McQueen’s case was dismissed.


This is a continuation of what is in McHenry County State’s Attorney Lou Bianchi’s motion for contempt of court against Special Prosecutor Thomas McQueen and Quest investigators Robert Scigalski and Patrick Hanretty before Rockford Judge Thomas McGraw.

The motion also charges that McQueen knew there was a virus on Bianchi assistant Joyce Synek’s computer, but also withheld that information. Ekl argues that the IT Department’s removal of the virus could explain the emails McQueen and Tonigan said were “missing” from Synek’s machine.

So, why involve Synek in the case.

In an August 6, 2010, email, McQueen writes Scigalski they “should bring some pressure by charging Synek in a complain with perjury and arresting her.”

Scigalski failed to provide notes on interviews with McHenry County Treasurer Bill LeFew, Suzanne Lockhart and Demetri Tsilimigras.

Addition examples are provided.

McHenry Co Leaks website masthead

Concerning a motion to remove Judge McGraw, Ekl reveals that information contained in the motion was “leaked” to an internet website, [Exhibit KK.]

The article was entitled, “Bianchi’s Judge Received Payments from IASAAP” [“Illinois Association of State’s Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor.” Exhibit Q. Not the exact title of the article.]

Thomas McQueen.  Photo Credit:  First Electric Newspaper.

Thomas McQueen. Photo Credit: First Electric Newspaper.

Robert Scigalski.  Photo credit:  First Electric Newspaper.

Robert Scigalski. Photo credit: First Electric Newspaper.

“Great leak, Bob,” McQueen emailed Scigalski.

Turning to Quest investigator Hanretty, Ekl points to information withheld from interviews with Sue Serdar, the former Chairman of the Pro-Life Victory PAC, and Phil Weyma, one of its officers.

McQueen had advanced the hypothesis that because the Political Action Committee had made contributions to both Bianchi and another candidate resulted in a quid pro quo between Bianchi and the other candidate, who was also brought into the case.

That possibility was specifically denied by Serdar, but the denial was not provided to the Defense.

In a motion for sanctions held in Rockford, Hanretty first testified that Serdar told him there was no “this for that” arrangement. A few minutes later he reversed his testimony.

Withholding statements made by Jeffrey Bora about how a supposed “nephew” of Bianchi was given special treatment so he could qualify for an upcoming First Offender Program also comes in criticism, as do reports on Bianchi’s supposedly reducing a sentencing recommendation in another case from 5 to 4 years. Preliminary and final reports from Scigalski are “substantially different” on the sentence reduction count, the court filing claims.

Failure to tender 43 pages of notes from Quest investigate Reilly also is cited in the contempt motion. McQueen told Judge McGraw they didn’t exist.

Next Bianchi’s attorney writes, “Robert Scigalski gave false testimony on June 24, 2012 when he testified that he did not know who Mark Gummerson was. McQueen, who knew Scigalski’s testimony was false, failed to inform the Court and correct the record.”

Below Ekl expands: “Through the recently disclosed emails, it is now known on September 2, 2010, McQueen wrote an email to Scigalski, Tonigan and Jerger with a list of things to do in preparation of Bianchi’s indictment on September 10th. McQueen included in that list the instruction ‘NO MORE CONTACT WITH GUMMERSON.’ See email attached as Exhibit HH.”

Further, “On November 12, 2010, Scigalski wrote McQueen an email indicating that Gummerson was contacting witnesses in the investigation and that Gummerson had information about the pending investigation. Scigalski also told McQueen that he knew Gummerson was a friend of the Sheriff [Keith Nygren] and that ‘[i]f Gummerson is a friend of our position in this investigation when we all meet with him and tell him how he is ruining our chances.’ See email attached as Exhibit II.”

The brief also says that “McQueen failed to disclose witness statements made by Tom Carroll and Scigalski falsely testified under oath regarding Tom Carroll’s statements.”

Chapter and verse is offered as evidence in numerous exhibits.


Focusing on Lou Bianchi’s Motion to Hold Special Prosecutor Thomas McQueen, et al, in Contempt of Court – Part 2 — 10 Comments

  1. I’ve never had the opportunity to meet David Bachmann, but am deeply grateful for his courage and for Cal’l blog.

    Were it not for such people, these travesties would be archived along with many many years of corruption in McHenry County.

    As Mr. Bachmann suggests, this corruption goes deep, and goes WAY back.

  2. Don’t forget Judge Gordon Graham in all of this.

    He is responsible for overseeing all of this. Gordon Graham is a total political hack, failed lawyer, and incompetent judge who does what he’s told.

    He KNEW all this was political and corrupt, but HE gave the OK. He could have stopped this from the very beginning.

  3. Kudos for David Bachmann. Too bad we don’t look at the McHenry County Board Chairman for corruption going all the way back from Buss to and including Hill.

  4. Proof is in the pudding, as they say. Looks like Dave B. has done the job.
    Good “pudding”. Bravo!!

  5. We experienced corruption first hand 1994 when we were made an offer to pay off a judge in exchange for custody. TRUE.

  6. I get all the need for self congratulation, but why not at least post them on a story you have something to do with?

    Bachmann involved with the Bianchi prosecution case, really?

  7. OH we knew it was just a matter of time before “But Seriously’s” head would surface… I had Cal remove my comments so that those such as But’ Seriously” hiding, won’t know what hits them when all those lights give you your morning wake up call one day in the near future..

    Yea, I’d say I have some evidence of a timeline tied to this lynching…as always, I provide the proof.

    Perhaps you “B.S.” had forgotten about his previous post of Cals… I wonder who gave Tom Cynor the heads up on this one? Read it nice and slow you coward. I’m sure Mr. Ekl has the names by now!

  8. David, please try to keep up. I was consistently against the private for profit prosecution of Bianchi as I have been the for profit 3rd party investigations and “prosecutions” of others in the county. But you taking a victory lap for Ekl’s work is hilarious in its self absorption.

    At least I can claim consistency in wanting accusations from both sides in this local political feud to be handled in a consistent manner. A lot of us are getting very tired of the two camps using the courts and taxpayer money from carrying out their personal vendetta’s.

    Those of you who want these private for profit investigations pointed at your political opponents while condemning them when they get pointed back at your side are the very root of the problem for taxpayers of our county. Pure hypocrisy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *