CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS CRIMINAL DIVISION People of the State of Illinois, Respondent-Plaintiff, 3 Case No. 09 CR 0059 V. i Honorable Judge Arthur Hill, Anthony McDaniels Presiding Petitioner-Defendant NOTICE OF FILING AND PROOF OF SERVICE To: Celeste Stack Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce 2650 S. California Avenue Chicago, IL 60607 Please take notice that on April 10, 2017 at 10:00 am, I will appear before the Honorable Judge Hill and present the PETITION FOR RELIEF PURSUANT TO 725 ILCS 5/122-1, a copy of which is hereby served on you. Respectfully Submited, 5% I r; I ?ounsel AnthiWcDaniels Joshua Tepfer THE EXONERATION PROJECT at the University of Chicago Law School 311 N. Aberdeen St., 3rd ?oor Chicago, IL 60607 (312) 789-4955 iosh@exonerationproiect.org ID: 44407 CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS CRIMINAL DIVISION People of the State of Illinois, Respondent-Plaintiff, Case No. 09 CR 00059 V. 3 Honorable Judge Arthur Hill, Anthony McDaniels Presiding Petitioner-Defendant i PETITIONFOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF PURSUANT TO 725 ILCS 5/122-1 Joshua Tepfcr THE EXONERATION PROJECT at the University of Chicago Law School 311 N. Aberdeen St, 3rd ?oor Chicago, IL 60607 (312) 789?4955 iosh@exonerationproiect.org ID: 44407 Counsel for Petitioner-Defendant Anthony McDaniels II. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..1 FACTUAL BACKGROUND ..3 A. Arrest of Anthony McDaniels ..3 i. McDaniels? Version of Arrest ..4 ii. Police Version of the Arrest ..5 B. Prosecution and Trial ..6 i. Trial: Incident and Arrest ..7 ii. Trial: Recoverv of Gun and Car ..8 Trial: Arguments and Verdict ..10 C. Appellate Proceedings ..11 NEW EVIDENCE IN THIS PETITION ..11 A. Background ..12 B. Federal Investigations of Watts? Tactical Team ..13 C. Sworn Testimony and Statements of Chicago Police Officers Shannon Spalding, Daniel Echeverria, Juan Rivera, Mickey Spaargaren, and Pete Koconis ..17 D. Proceedings on Federal Charges against Watts and Mohammed ..22 E. Known Individuals Framed by Watts and His Cohorts, Including Sandra Cartwright, Ben Baker (three times), Clarissa Glenn, and Lionel White .. 25 i. Sandra Cartwright ..26 ii. Ben Baker and Clarissa Glenn ..27 Lionel White ..38 iv. Other Individuals that Allege Misconduct ..40 IV. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF ..43 CLAIM I: ACTUAL INNOCENCE ..44 CLAIM II: DUE PROCESS NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE ..48 CLAIM DUE PROCESS BRADY V. AJARYLAND ..48 CLAIM IV: INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF TRIAL COUNSEL ..59 CLAIM V: INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF APPELLATE COUNSEL ..51 CLAIM VI: CUMULATIVE ERROR ..51 CONCLUSION ..52 CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS CRIMINAL DIVISION People of the State of Illinois, Respondent-Plaintiff, 3 Case No. 09 CR 00059 i Honorable Judge Arthur Hill, Anthony McDaniels Presiding Petitioner-Defendant i PETITION FOR POST-CONVICTION RELIEF PURSUANT TO 725 ILCS 5/122-1 Anthony McDaniels, by and through his attorneys at The Exoneration Project, respectfully requests that this Court enter an order vacating his conviction. In support of this request, Petitioner states as follows: I. INTRODUCTION 1. Over the last 14 months, four different Cook County convictions have been overturned on the basis that disgraced former Chicago Police Sgt. Ronald Watts-?and core members of his tactical team?falsi?ed charges and framed them. See People v. Baker, 05 CR 8982 (conviction overturned in January 2016 and certi?ed innocent in February 2016); People v. Ben Baker Clarissa Glenn, 06 CR 810 (two convictions overturned and ?ndings of factual innocence in March 2016); People v. Lionel White, No. 06 CR 12092 (conviction overturned and subsequent certi?cation of innocence in Fall 2016). These rogue Chicago police of?cers victimized these individuals in furtherance of their own decade-long criminal enterprise. (Ex. NN, PP, The exhibits in support of this petition are voluminous, and all but the attached are available in the court ?les of People v. Ben Baker, No. 05 CR 8982, People v. Ben Baker Clarissa Glenn, No. 06 CR 810, People v. Lionel White, 06 CR 12092, and/or In re Kalven Appointment of a 1 2. In the wake of the recent uncovering of the scope of this scandal, on February 27, 2017, the Cook County State?s Attorney publicly announced that its Conviction Integrity Unit would be re-investigating any cases of still-incarcerated individuals whose convictions rested on the word of these corrupt officers. See Phil Rogers, State?s Attorney to Take Fresh Look at Cases Involving Alleged Crooked Cops, NBCS, Feb. 27, 20172 (describing a State?s Attorney representative as saying the investigation initially will be centered on incarcerated individuals); Rummana Hussain, State?s attorney to exam Ronald Watts casesfor police misconduct, Ch. Sun? Times, Feb 27, 20173 (quoting State?s Attorney spokeswoman Tandra Simonton as saying the ?Conviction Integrity Unit is reviewing any cases of incarcerated individuals where Watts was substantively involved?). 3. Anthony McDaniels is one such innocent individual. He is currently incarcerated, serving his ninth year of a 12-year sentence for a hotly-disputed gun-related conviction that both this Court and the First District Appellate Court explained rested on the testimony and credibility of the testifying officers. Ex. at 1T 19-20; R. E13 132, FF 7.4 Special Master, 2016 MR 00034. Undersigned counsel from The Exoneration Project represents or represented each of the Petitioners in those matters. The exhibit letter(s) corresponds to the exhibits as noted in Baker, Glenn, White, and Kalven court ?les, and a full Exhibit List is attached to this Petition. For any new exhibits in support of this Petition, hard copies are attached hereto and are continuously marked, beginning after the last lettered exhibit. Additionally, an electronic copy of all the exhibits cited within this petition is included on a disk attached to this filing. Counsel can provide additional hard copies as requested by the Court. 2 See 1 48923 23 .html 3 . . . . See ice? niisconduct/ 4 Citations to Report of Proceedings are identified as R. and citations to the Common Law Record are marked as C. m. 4. We now know that the three testifying of?cers at McDaniels? trial were all core members of Sgt. Watts? corrupt tactical team. Moreover, each of these three of?cers either committed perjury and/or falsi?ed police reports leading to the wrongful convictions of Ben Baker (twice), Clarissa Glenn, and Lionel White. See supra 11 1 Indeed, one of the testifying of?cers, Kallatt Mohammed, was Sgt. Watts? federal co?defendant several years ago, getting caught on wiretap and pleading guilty (like Sgt. Watts) to shaking down a federal informant for drug money. 5. In light of the recently discovered overwhelming evidence that the testifying of?cers in this matter were routinely framing innocent individuals, Anthony McDaniels? conviction can no longer stand. Like Baker, Glenn, and White, McDaniels, too, must have his conviction overturned and be immediately released from state custody. II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND A. Arrest of Anthony McDaniels 6. The police and Anthony McDaniels tell wildly divergent stories regarding McDaniels? November 21, 2008 arrest. Petitioner?s counsel notes, however, that he has not actually had the opportunity to review the entirety of the record. Beginning in early March, counsel has ordered the record from the Clerk?s of?ce no fewer than three different times. Each time, the Clerk?s of?ce has alerted counsel that the wrong record or ?le was ordered. On March 20, 2017, Chief Judge LeRoy Martin, Jr. entered an order allowing counsel to take out the record for five days. Ex. That same day, counsel gave a copy of the Order to the Clerk?s of?ce, who again promised to produce the record. As of the date of the ?ling, the Clerk still has not produced the record, telling counsel to re-order it yet again. Given the clerk?s inability to produce the record, counsel eventually just ordered the transcript of the one-day, February 24, 2011 bench trial from the court reporter, paying for rush delivery. A copy of that transcript is attached as EX. Where other portions of the record are cited, counsel is relying on the citations as recorded in the briefs by direct appeal counsel from the Of?ce of the State Appellate Defender. Counsel reserves the right to supplement or amend his petition. See 725 ILCS 5/ 122-5; 11. S. Ct. R. 651(c). i. McDaniels? version of arrest 7. At trial, McDaniels? exercised his right not to testify. His version is documented in the sworn Af?davit attached to this petition. (Ex. 8. On November 21, 2008, McDaniels exited 5613 S. Prairie Avenue, alone. As he approached his 1999 Ford Taurus, Of?cers Kallatt Mohammed and Douglas Nichols approached him. Id at 2-3. 9. McDaniels knew Of?cers Mohammed and Nichols as members of Sgt. Ronald Watts? tactical team. Over the previous few years, Mohammad, Nichols, and Watts had all stopped McDaniels and taken money from himthis day, Mohammad and Nichols immediately placed McDaniels up against his own car and took his keys. Mohammad then asked him, ?What you got, man??~?~which McDaniels interpreted as Mohammad ordering McDaniels to give him any drugs or money in his possession. McDaniels responded by saying he had nothing, telling them ?I?m tired of you guys fucking with me.? Id. at 4-5. 11. Mohammed then searched McDaniels and took the $638 he had in his possession. After doing so, the of?cers searched McDaniels? car, and Nichols then claimed to produce a gun from underneath the seat. Nichols claimed that the gun belonged to McDaniels. Id. at 1111 7-9. 12. McDaniels protested, telling the of?cers that gun was not his. Mohammed told him that ?we can make this go away if you give us something.? McDaniels simply told them ain?t got nothing to give you.? The officers then placed McDaniels under arrest and took him to the police station, where McDaniels exercised his right to remain silent and made no statements. Id. at 1111 9-11. 13. Of?cer Manual Leano was not present during McDaniels? arrest. Id. at 11 12. ii. Police Version of the Arrest 14. The police?s version of the arrest is documented in a series of police reports and their later testimony at trial. Petitioner received the police reports through a recent Freedom of Information Act request. (Ex. 15. Of?cer Leano is listed as the ?rst arresting and reporting of?cer on these reports. Nichols is listed as the second arresting of?cers, and Mohammed, Elsworth Smith, Jr., and Brian Bolton are amongst the other assisting arresting of?cers. Id. at 3. Each of these of?cers worked under the supervision of Sgt. Ronald Watts for many years. Moreover, each of these of?cers was listed on police reports and/or testi?ed in the cases of Ben Baker, Clarissa Glenn, and Lionel White. Over the last year, Cook County courts and the Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce have determined that Baker, Glenn, and White?s allegations that they were framed and drugs were planted on them by these of?cers were proven by a preponderance of the evidence. This means, in no uncertain terms, that the police reports and testimony stating otherwise in the Baker, Baker/Glenn, and White cases were fabricated. (Ex. PP, 16. According to the report drafted by Of?cer Leano in this case, Leano and Of?cer Nichols were on narcotic surveillance when they observed McDaniels holding his waistband while running from 5613 S. Prairie and yelling ?go go go.? McDaniels then jumped into the passenger side of a gold Ford Taurus. The Taurus then went westbound on 56th Street, where it failed to stop at a stop Sign at S. King Drive. The of?cers activated their siren, but the Taurus continued southbound for a block and turned west into an alley, where McDaniels supposedly jumped out of the moving car. (Ex. at 3). 17. According to his police reports, Of?cer Leano then exited his vehicle. Leano alleged that he saw McDaniels still holding his waistband. As Leano pursued him on foot, Leano allegedly saw a butt of a gun protruding from McDaniels? waistband. McDaniels then fell, and a ?blue steel handgun eject[ed] from his waistband area which fell to the sidewalk.? Leano supposedly recovered the handgun, as Of?cer Nichols apprehended McDaniels. After his arrest, the of?cers report that McDaniels told them at the station that he bought the gun on the street for protection and wanted to get the gun out of his car. There are no indications in any of the reports as to what happened to the driver of the Taurus or if there were any other passengers. Id. 18. Multiple police and inventory reports describe the recovered gun as a Glock, Model #19, blue steel, with a four-inch barrel, one ten round magazine, with seven live rounds and one in the chamber. (Ex. at 2-7, 11-12). Not a single report documents the recovered gun?s serial number. Indeed, one of the reports speci?cally notes that an ASA felony review attorney approved a charge of ?deface ?rearm ID Markings,? pursuant to 720 ILCS on November 21, 2008, or the exact same day as the arrest. 1d. at 13. 19. The police reports also note that Beat No. 264Aw?which includes Of?cers Mohammed and Smith, McDaniels Ford Taurus in an alley at 5720 S. King Drive. The reports indicate that the car was ?relocated to the 002 District,? although multiple impound sheets indicate the vehicle was ?towed to 10300 S. Doty RdProsecution and Trial 20. Of?cer Leano prepared and signed three different sworn complaints in support of probable cause to bring gun?related charges against McDaniels?all three of these complaints indicated that the weapon supposedly seized during the arrest of McDaniels had a defaced or altered serial number. (C. 13, 21, 22). 21. The State charged McDaniels in a six count indictment. Count Six charged McDaniels with defacing a ?rearm. When the gun introduced into evidence and identi?ed by Of?cers Leano and Nichols as the one they recovered from McDaniels had its serial number intact, however, that charge was directed out by the court. (C. 36; R. EB 45, 88, 100). i. Trial: Incident and Arrest 22. At the bench trial, Of?cers Leano and Nichols testi?ed similarly to the police reports described above. See supra 15-19. There was a stipulation to McDaniels? prior crimes in relation to the armed habitual offender charge. (R. EB 96). 23. Contrary to the police report, however, both of?cers testi?ed that the Ford Taurus in which McDaniels was a passenger ?ed east, not west. (R. EE 9, 40-43). They also testi?ed that there was a male driver of the car and a female passenger in the car. (R. EB 36, 92). 24. Leano further testi?ed that when the supposed foot chase with McDaniels commenced, Leano was ??ve feet at the most? away from him. (R. BE 16). Despite this close proximity, when McDaniels supposedly fell and the ?gun ejected from his waistband,? Leano did not apprehend McDaniels prior to recovering the ?rearm. Rather, McDaniels got up and ran away again, and Leano supposedly radioed to his partner Nichols. (R. EB 18-19). 25. Nichols testi?ed that after McDaniels and Leano jumped out of their respective cars, Nichols continued driving. Nichols then spotted McDaniels near 58th and King Drive; Nichols ?jumped the curb in my vehicle and detained the defendant.? (R. EE 67-68). 26. Leano and Nichols further testi?ed that after they Mirandized McDaniels at the station, McDaniels made the following brief oral statement: bought the gun on the street for protection and I just wanted car.? (R. EB 29, 75-76). The alleged statement is confusing at best, as both of?cers testi?ed that McDaniels was allegedly holding his hip or waistband (where they purportedly said the gun ?ej ected?) at the outset as McDaniels exited and ran from 5613 S. Prairie to his car. (R. EB 35, 64). ii. Trial: Recovery the gun, both Leano and Nichols identi?ed St. Ex. 10 as the gun they allegedly recovered from McDaniels. (R. EE 25-26, 57). The of?cers said the gun was basically in the same condition as when they recovered it except it had ?dust and the purple stuff? on it. (R. EB 26, 73). According to the appellate court opinion, unbeknownst to the of?cers or the prosecutors, the ATP had taken the gun for ?ngerprint testing, which apparently accounted for the dust and purple powder. (Ex. at 11 3). According to a Chicago police report, the ATP submitted a ?ngerprint report on February 10, 2011 (or more than two years after the gun was recovered), in which it found no suitable ?ngerprints.5 (Ex. at 11). 28. Neither Leano nor Nichols placed any identi?cation marks on the recovered gun nor on the recovered bullets. (R. EB 45, 61). Of?cer Leano testi?ed that identi?cation marks were not needed because the gun could be uniquely identi?ed by its serial number. (R. EB 45). Again, however, no police or inventory report identi?ed the serial number of the recovered gun. Rather, Of?cer Leano signed three sworn complaints that the serial number was defaced; the felony review prosecutor approved charges against McDaniels for defacing the ?rearm (on the basis of Leano?s sworn statement); and the State proceeded to trial on the charge that McDaniels defaced the ?rearm. (C. 13, 21, 22, 36). 5 Federal investigators had been investigating Sgt. Watts and his crew for many years, including during this time period. (Ex. O-P). The record does not re?ect why the federal government?? more than two years after McDaniels arrest on state charges?decided to test the recovered gun for ?ngerprints. One logical explanation is that it was part of its federal investigation into Watts and his of?cers. This investigation, of course, led to convictions and prison sentences for both Watts and Mohammed. (EX. 29. Defense counsel never impeached Of?cer Leano with his sworn complaints or the police reports (which did not include the gun?s serial number). Nor did defense counsel otherwise point these facts out.6 30. As to the car, according to Leano and Nichols, the Ford Taurus was located minutes after McDaniels? arrest less than a block away, at an alley at 5720 South King Drive. Of?cer Kallatt Mohammed later drove it to the police station at 51St and Wentworth. (R. BE 24, 73, 75). Apparently, no one was in the car, and there was no testimony at all about any efforts to locate or apprehend the supposed male driver and female passenger of the vehicle. 31. Of?cer Kallatt Mohammed himself later testi?ed that that he was called to the alley at 5720 S. King Drive. When he and his partner Elsworth Smith arrived, McDaniels was already in custody. According to Mohammed, he then drove the gold Ford Taurus to 5101 South Wentworth. (R. EE 121-23). There was no testimony or evidence that the car was still running when recovered, whether the key was in the ignition, or any other indication as to how Mohammed actually drove or started a seemingly abandoned car. 32. Mohammed further admitted that despite it being proper ?procedure? to write a report when taking custody of a vehicle to account for any property within the vehicle, Mohammed did not do so. (R. BB 124). 33. Antonio Riles testi?ed for the defense. On November 21, 2008, Riles was working at and Towing, and his responsibilities included towing vehicles for police. On that 6 In an informal conversation with a representative of the Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce (CCSAO), counsel was informed that the gun introduced into evidence at trial had its serial number located in three different places. The CCSAO informed counsel that in one of those three places, the serial number appeared to be defaced, but the other two places the number was intact. The clerk?s of?ce will not allow counsel to view the impounded evidence without a court order, which counsel will seek. The written record does not re?ect this. Counsel also notes that the circuit court directed out the charge of defacing a firearm. EX. at 14. day, he towed the gold Ford Taurus in question from 5613 S. Prairie Avenue directly to the police pound at 103rd and Doty. He neither towed the car to nor from the police station at 51St and Wentworth. And he never went to an alley at 5720 S. King Drive; rather Riles went to and towed the car directly from 5613 S. Prairie. (R. 13104-11). Trial: Arguments and Verdict 34. During argument at both the motion for directed ?nding, at the close of the case, and at the motion for the new trial, defense counsel argued that the testifying of?cers were not credible and that they failed to lay the proper foundation for the introduction of the gun. (R. EE 97-99, 127; Ex. at 11 11). Defense counsel called the two additional people supposedly in the Ford Taurus ??ctitious.? (R. BB 127) Counsel further argued?consistent with McDaniels? post-conviction Af?davit attached to this petition (EX. McDaniels was apprehended right when he walked out of the house, and right where Riles (the tow truck driver) said he recovered the car: ?That?s where this all takes place,? argued defense counsel. (R. EE 127-28). 35. The circuit court found the of?cers?and their purported ability to determine that Ex. 10 was the gun they recovered?credible. (ExFebruary 24, 2011, McDaniels was found guilty on the charge of being an armed habitual offender, and the remaining four counts merged. (C. 32-36, R. BB 132). A few weeks later, on March 23, 2011, the court sentenced him to twelve years in prison1). His motion to reconsider his sentence was denied on March 29, 2011, and he filed a notice of appeal the same day. (C. 209, 216). 10 C. Appellate Proceedings 37. McDaniels directly appealed the conviction. In his appeal, he argued, inter alia, that the trial court erred in admitting the gun into evidence, as the State failed to lay proper foundation for its introduction. Petitioner argued that the powder on the gun and the fact that its serial number was intact demonstrated that the gun was not the same one allegedly recovered by the testifying of?cers. EX. at 2, 12-14. 38. On November 1, 2013, the appellate court af?rmed, noting that it could not substitute its own judgment in place of the credibility ?ndings of the trial judgethe serial number on the gun, the appellate court speci?cally noted that trial counsel failed to impeach Of?cer Leano with his sworn and signed complaints that the serial numbers had been defaced. Id. at 11 14. Appellate counsel never raised trial counsel?s ineffectiveness. 39. McDaniels? petition for leave to appeal was denied on January 29, 2014. 40. This is McDaniels? ?rst post-conviction petition. He remains in custody. NEW EVIDENCE IN THIS PETITION 41. The gravamen of the new evidence in this petition is the same as what was presented in the cases of People v. Ben Baker, No. 05 CR 8982, People v. Ben Baker Clarissa Glenn, No. 06 CR 810, and People v. Lionel White, No. 06 CR 12092. In petitions ?led in each of these cases, Petitioners presented a four-inch stack of mostly law enforcement investigative documents supporting their allegations that Watts and members of his crew?including all three testifying of?cers in this case?were engaged in what one whistleblowing police officer called a more-than-decade-long ?criminal enterprise.? That criminal enterprise included robbery, extortion, shakedowns, theft of guns and narcotics, and direct involvement in the drug trade. (EX. at Dep p. 11-12, 27?28). 11 42. The documented evidence showed these rogue of?cers?in furtherance of this criminal enterprise?routinely planted contraband on and fabricated false charges against those who would not ?cooperate.? (Ex. A-M, O, P, R-X). All of these documents are incorporated with this ?ling and included on the attached disk. (Ex. A-NN, 43. In light of this new evidence, Glenn, White, and Baker (twice) had their convictions vacated and were subsequently found factually innocent of the fabricated charges brought against them. (EX. NN, PP, ZZ, 44. After or contemporaneous with these judicial ?ndings, journalist and government watchdog Jamie Kalven brought a Petition to Appoint a Special Master, seeking the court?s intervention in identifying other individuals who were framed as part of these rogue of?cers? criminal scheme. (EX. After the Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce indicated its Conviction Integrity Unit would assist in this endeavor-Hat least in regards to individuals who remain incarcerated?Petitioner Kalven voluntarily withdrew his petition with leave to reinstate. (EX. 45. The evidence supporting the innocence of Baker, Glenn, and White?and now, of course, Petitioner McDaniels?is summarized in the paragraphs that follow. See infra 46-145. A. Background 46. In 2012, Sergeant Ronald Watts and Of?cer Kallatt Mohammedw?a junior Second District of?cer working under Watts? direction in the same Wells housing complex?were recorded and then federally charged with stealing money from and paying off a drug courier. That drug courier, however, was actually a federal government informant. Both Sergeant Watts and Of?cer Mohammed pled guilty. Of?cer Mohammed, of course, was one of the three of?cers to testify against McDaniels. 12 47. The federal investigation that led to Watts and Mohammed?s guilty pleas was sprawling, and multifaceted. It began at least eight years prior to the arrests of Watts and Mohammed. At times, it involved the Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce (CCSAO) and other federal investigative agencies, like the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). Most signi?cantly, the federal investigation included the work of the Chicago Police Department Internal Affairs Division (IAD), and speci?cally, two undercover whistleblowing of?cers: Shannon Spalding and Daniel Echeverria. 48. The results of the investigations, as documented in law enforcement reports, sworn statements from law enforcement of?cers, and testimony and statements from citizens, is detailed below. Signi?cantly, in addition to Watts and Mohammed, there is overwhelming evidence that roughly ten members of Watts? crew were involved in the day-to-day corruption. The two other testifying officers against McDaniels?Leano and Nichols?have been consistently implicated as core members of Watts? corrupt team.7 B. Federal Investigations of Watts? Tactical Team 49. Although highly redacted, documents obtained from an ongoing federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in Ben Baker v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, Case No. 1:14 CV 09416, highlight the scope of the investigation into Watts, Mohammed and others. A September 24, 2004 report, documenting an interview three days prior with an individual whose name is redacted, notes that ?Watts gets IBW [Ida B. Wells] drug dealers to pay him to ?work? (sell drugs) in the housing project. If the payments are made to WATTS, he will in turn allow the drug dealers to continue to sell drugs.? The same report described Of?cer 7 For convenience, in the sections that follow, Petitioner highlights Nichols and Leano?s names when they are implicated in the investigation or other?often now-acknowledged? allegations of misconduct. 13 Mohammed as a co-conspirator in this scheme, and noted that receives weekly payments form drug dealers . . . typically in the amount of $5,000.? (Ex. 0). 50. An FBI report dated September 27, 2004 provided further details. It noted that the Watts-targeted investigation involved CPD-IAD as well, and had already ?resulted in the successful recovery of ?rearms.? The report documented statements from an individual who said Watts ?solicited bribe payments from him? in exchange for allowing ?his drug trafficking activity in the Ida B. Wells housing project.? (EX. 0). Highly redacted October 15, 2004, January 20, 2006, and February 10, 2006 FBI reports received as part of the federal FOIA litigation continue along these lines: All indicate that Watts was involved in systematic extortion, bribery, and drug traf?cking. The federal investigation ceased, however, when the FBI learned that the Cook County State?s Attorney was considering ?parallel State prosecution.? (Ex. 0). 51. During this same time period, other federal agencies were receiving information related to Watts?s criminal activity. Agents from (ATF) of the Department of Justice?in conjunction with officers with the federal Department of Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) and several Chicago Police Department of?cers?were conducting an investigation into criminal activity of the Gangster Disciples at the Ida B. Wells Housing Projects.8 As part of this investigation, these officials interviewed Wilbert Moore (?Big Shorty?) on April 7, 2005, or eight months before he was killed. (Ex. 8 Jamie Kalven?s piece entitled Code of Silence, published on The Intercept, con?rms that the federal Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) had been investigating Watts. Kalven reports an interaction whistleblowing Officers Spalding and Echeverria had with a DEA Agent in or around 2010. An undercover agent saw Spalding and Echeverria interacting with a source identi?ed as ?Monk.? The DEA Agent asked them about it, noting they ?we?re trying to get a wire up on him.? During the meeting, when Watts? name came up, ?the DEA agent was outraged to learn he was still on the force and had been promoted to sergeant.? The DEA Agent responded: ?Watts is still around, as corrupt as he is? We were looking into him 10 years ago. I can?t believe your fucking department. I can?t believe they didn?t do anything about it.? (Ex. at Part II). 14 52. In a detailed nine-page report that included sixty?two numbered paragraphs, Moore detailed extensive criminal activity in and around the Wells Housing Project. Beginning in paragraph 53, Moore described Watts? tactical team?s role in the criminal activity. Moore explained that he had personally paid Sergeant Watts $7,000 and that his associate, ?Shock,? had seemingly paid Watts much more. Moore further reported that Watts? associate, Of?cer Al Jones, ?also took the payments from ?Shock.?? The report also refers to ?Kenny? (believed to be Of?cer Kenneth Young) and Of?cer Mohammed as other corrupt of?cers working with or for Watts. (Ex. 53. In the next paragraph, the ATF report documents that on one occasion, Moore and ?Shock? paid Watts $10,000 and two ri?es. These payments were to avoid arrest. A later paragraph alleges that Watts stole forty ?bags of weed? from someone and then sold the weed to ?Shock.? The report further details Moore?s suspicions that Watts has a gambling problem, that a man named William Gaddy was also paying off Watts, and that Watts ?shot at? Gaddy after Gaddy informed Watts he was not going to pay him off. (Ex. 54. The previously?suspended FBI investigation into Watts? tactical team was rejuvenated in early 2007, when Of?cers Echeverria and Spalding contacted the FBI. Although again highly redacted, a January 18, 2007 FBI report appears to document conversations the FBI had with Spalding and Echeverria. The report calls Sergeant Ronald Watts ?a corrupt Police Officer? and states ?that Watts, along with other members of his team, routinely used their positions as Police Of?cers to extort individuals at Ida B. Wells.? (Ex. P) (italics added). According to the redacted source, ?it was common for Watts to keep narcotics on his person while on duty? and he ?maintained possession of narcotics so that Watts could use the narcotics as leverage to extort people.? (Ex. P). IS 55. i The limited and highly redacted number of reports that undersigned counsel has received thus far from the ongoing federal FOIA litigation makes clear that this rejuvenated re- investigation of the Watts tactical team continued for years. An October 26, 2007 FBI report described the targets of the investigation as ?Ronald Watts, Kallatt Mohammed and others yet unknown,? and stated that they ?are accused of engaging in the systematic extortion of money from drug dealers in the Ida B. Wells Housing Project in exchange for police protection.? A report three months later, dated January 21, 2008, described ?bribe payments . . . made to Mohammed on a biweekly basis in exchange for Mohammed and Watts? protection.? A highly redacted February 7, 2008 report requested the use of a Title wiretap and noted the U.S. Attorney?s Of?ce concurred with the recommendation. (Ex. P). 56. A June 9, 2008 FBI report notes that Sergeant Watts ?has been responsible for patrolling and investigating illegal activity within the Ida B. Wells Housing Complex . . . for approximately ten (10) years.? It noted that Watts ?supervises nine (9) to ten (10) officers at any given time, including Kallatt Mohammed.? The same report explained ?Watts regularly extorted payments from drug dealers in exchange for allowing the drug trade to continue at the Wells complex.? (Ex. P). 57. A November 19, 2010 FBI report calls Watts the ?main target? of the investigation. This report, as well as a later one dated February 18, 2011, states, without quali?cation, that ?Watts has engaged in the systemic extortion of drug dealers in the Second District.? These two reports go on to say that Watts is accused of committing a host of other crimes, including theft, the possession and distribution of drugs for money, ?planting? drugs on subjects, and paying informants with drugs.? (Ex. P) (italics added). Federal agents concluded that Watts? above-described criminal activities had been ongoing ?over the last ten years.? The 16 redacted report states that other Chicago Police Of?cers were ?directly involved in the extortion of drug dealer?s funds,? and it lists Kallatt Mohammed. The names of the other of?cers listed directly before Kallatt Mohammed are redacted. (Ex. P). 58. Finally, in a highly-redacted November 30, 2011 letter from ?Special Agent in Charge? Robert D. Grant sent directly to US. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, the FBI explains, background? that its investigation ?involves allegation[s] of systemic corruption within the Chicago Police Department Second District.? (Ex. P). 59. This sprawling, multi-faceted, seven-year investigation that involved multiple federal and local law enforcement agencies into ?systemic? and ?systematic? corruption of Watts? tactical team?and which appeared to successfully utilize multiple wiretaps?culminated in a one count information charging Watts and Mohammed with theft of $5,200 of government funds. (Ex. C). Watts and Mohammed were arrested on February 12, 2012 for this offense. 60. The Af?davit of Special Agent Craig Henderson in support of probable cause explained that, utilizing a Cooperating Witness identified only as Watts and Mohammed were caught on wiretap stealing money from the informant they believed to be a drug traf?cker. However, even in the complaint supporting the single count information, Agent Henderson detailed his use of CSS and how Watts would systematically steal money from drug dealers. (Ex. D). C. Sworn Testimony and Statements of Chicago Police Of?cers Shannon Spalding, Daniel Echeverria, Juan Rivera, Mickey Spaargaren, and Pete Koconis 61. On November 1, 2012, Of?cers Spalding and Echeverria filed a federal whistleblowing lawsuit alleging that they had suffered retaliation ordered by supervisory personnel within the Chicago Police Department for exposing the criminal conduct of Watts and his tactical team. The amended complaint makes clear that Spalding and Echeverria were 17 working with the FBI from 2007-2012 as part of the undercover investigation of Watts, Mohammed, and others at the 2"d District, and that they uncovered ?evidence of illegal activity being committed by various Chicago Police Officers.? (Ex. R). On May 31, 2016, weeks after Mayor Emmanual was ordered to testify about his statements acknowledging a Chicago police code of silence and the day the trial was set to commence, the lawsuit settled for $2 Million. See Jason Meisner, Emanuel averts witness stand as City settles suit by whistleblower cops, Chi. Trib., May 31, 2016. 62. Prior to the settlement, Of?cers Spalding, Echeverria, and Juan Rivera?who headed the Chicago Police Department?s Internal Affairs Division during this time period?~ among others, were all deposed under oath. Although the focus of the depositions were the Plaintiff allegations of retaliation for violating the Chicago Police Department?s Code of Silencemand not the whistleblowing of?cers? investigation into the Watts-led criminal enterprise?there is substantial sworn, police testimony that corroborates the systemic and widespread nature of the Watts-led corruption. 63. For example, in Of?cer Spalding?s November 2014 deposition, she notes that perhaps as far as ten years prior to 2007, an FBI Agent named Ken Samuels reached out to her about ?illegal activity? involving ?multiple of?cers, including Sergeant Watts.? (EX. at Dep. p.23). At that time, Of?cer Spalding had no information. Later, however, Of?cer Spalding transferred to a different unit and allegations from arrestees ?continuously surfaced on the same sworn personnel. It never deviated from the personnel.? (Id. at Dep. p. 29). Of?cer Spalding later explained these arrestees would say that these personnel were essentially ?out there running a dope line.? The arrestees consistently named Watts and his ?crew, which was referring to his tact team.? (Id. at Dep. p. 30). Of?cer Spalding explained that she reported this information to 18 authorities, explaining, at one time, that she told them, ?that continuously the same names continuously popped up by people from different areas, whether it was Englewood or [Ida B. Wells] or the South Side, all consistently naming Ronald Watts and members of his team committing the same crimes of robbing the drug dealers, false arrests, stealing the money, extortion.? (Id. at Dep. p. 43, 53-54) (italics added). 64. Later, after the arrests of Watts and Mohammed but during the time that Of?cer Spalding alleges she was being retaliated against by the Chicago Police Department (id. at Dep p. 312-23), Spalding complained directly to her police superiors: You?ve got criminals like the rest of Ronald Watts? team still out there not under arrest for the crimes they?ve committed, and you have this completely false made-up allegation that you?re going to detain me for. (Id. at Dep. p. 323). Throughout her deposition, Of?cer Spalding detailed other examples of other of?cers voicing complaints about Watts and his tactical team engaging in illegal conduct. (Id. at Dep. p. 368,371) 65. In an interview with Of?cer Spalding on NBC with Phil Rogers,9 Of?cer Spalding was asked, and stated, as follows: Rogers: And the corruption in the unit was much larger than Watts and Mohammed? Spalding: Correct. Rogers: And those of?cers are still on the force. Spalding: Correct. 9 Phil Rogers, Oj?cers Allege Widespread Corruption Inside Chicago Police Department, NBCS, Feb. 11, 2015, available at (Video :50 1:01). 19 In the written article accompanying the video, Phil Rogers reported that Spalding and Echeverria said ?the investigation was stopped before it snared at least half a dozen more of?cers.? 66. In an earlier report, quoting unnamed ?sources close to the investigation,? Rogers reported ?that the allegations about the unit date back more than 10 years, and that while two of?cers, Kallatt Mohammed and Ronald Watts have now been charged, other of?cers are under investigation. The same article quoted comments on the Second City Cop web page that said ?Watts and his team from housing, which included Mohammed, were dirty over 10 years ago. I?m surprised it took this long for them to get taken down. And I?m really surprised that more of his team didn?t get caught up in this indictment.? Another, unnamed police of?cer wrote: ?No secret in housing that Watts? team was dirty?? 67. When asked, Of?cer Echeverria testi?ed similarly in his deposition. He said that as of August 2008, the FBI was well aware of what Watts, Mohammed ?and others? had been doing for ?[d]amr1 near a decade.? (Ex. at Dep. pp. 11, 27-28). Officer Echeverria called it ?a criminal enterprise? that included ?extorting money from drug dealers, stealing narcotics 10 Phil Rogers, More O?icers Under Investigation in Drug Probe: Sources, NBCS, at money-139329598html (italics added). The same page as those comments on the blog included another comment by an unnamed police of?cer who said Watts solicited him to commit criminal acts: The karma bus rolled into the 002nd District and so now ex Commander GL and retired Lt KM do you believe me KM [Kallatt Mohammed] and RW [Ronald Watts] are under arrest for the very thing I told you they asked me to do with them 4 ago. . .but my punishment for telling was removal from tact and sent to a beat car. . .well for that Commander GL I THANK YOU FROM THE BOOTOM OF MY HEART. . .BTW. . .1?ve never been AFRAID to do my job. . .I?ve never had the desire to go to (Ex. W). 20 themselves, selling narcotics to rival gangs or rival buildings. . . . Basically facilitating the narcotics trade.? (Id. at Dep. p. 11-12). When asked What illegal activity he uncovered, he responded: ?What didn?t I uncover, is more like the question.? (Id. at Dep. p. 11). Of?cer Echeverria described what arrestees told him (Id. at Dep. pp. 14-15), and described Sergeant Watts as ?dangerous. He?s a gangster.? (Id. at Dep. p. at 160). 68. In support of Of?cers Spalding and Echeverria?s lawsuit, Chicago Police Of?cer Mickey Spaargaren prepared a sworn af?davit. Under oath, Of?cer Spaargaren swore that, while working on the Public Housing South team supervised by Ronald Watts, he witnessed Sgt. Watts, Of?cer Mohammed, and other members of Watts?s crew fail to log or inventory large amounts of narcotics and drug money seized during drug busts. This occurred no fewer than ?ve times. Of?cer Spaargaren eventually confronted Sgt. Watts about the missing inventory; in response, Sgt. Watts both threatened to falsify a case against him and made veiled threats to his safety. Of?cer Spaargaren later informed Lieutenant James Spratt about the missing inventory; Lt. Spratt, in turn, accused Of?cer Spaargaren of misconduct, and threatened that both his career and life would be in jeopardy if Of?cer Spaargaren reported Sgt. Watts? conduct to Internal Affairs. (EX. V). 69. During the deposition of Chicago lntemal Affairs Lieutenant Juan Rivera, Lieutenant Rivera confirmed that as far back as 2004, Sergeant Watts was being investigated by internal Affairs. (Ex. at Dep. p. 20). Lieutenant Rivera further con?rmed that there were other of?cers involved in the illegal activity beyond Watts and Mohammed, calling it "a team of of?cers." (Ex. at Dep. p. at 28). Lieutenant Rivera demurred on all questions related to the names of other of?cers (besides Watts and Mohammed) involved in the internal criminal investigation. Lieutenant Rivera was asked about three speci?c of?cers: Alvin Jones, Robert 21 Gonzalez, and Brian Bolton. (EX. at Dep. p. 142). Bolton is listed as an assisting arresting of?cer in McDaniels? case. (EX. 70. Later, in support of the post-conviction case of Ben Baker, yet another Chicago Police Of?cer came forward. Thirty?eight year veteran Chicago Police Of?cer, Pete Koconis, retired from CPD in 2009. During his career as a CPD of?cer, Koconis spent 18 consecutive years in the Internal Affairs Division (IAD), leaving that division in 2004 or 2005. Although not assigned to the case during his time at IAD, Officer Koconis learned that the FBIm?and other CPD of?cers in IAD?were investigating Sergeant Watts and members of his tactical team. Because Of?cer Koconis had been at IAD for so long, he was, at times, informally consulted on the investigation. (Ex. MM). 71. According to Of?cer Koconis? sworn af?davit, he was aware the investigation targeted multiple members of Watts? team who were involved in criminal activity. This investigation was still ongoing, and had been for many years, by the time Of?cer Koconis left IAD in 2004 or 2005. Of?cer Koconis swore that Of?cers Brian Bolton, Robert Gonzalez, Alvin Jones, and Douglas Nichols were of?cers ?working in consort with Sergeant Watts and were being investigated? in the FBI-led investigation. (Ex. MM). Nichols, in addition to the federally convicted Mohammed, testi?ed against McDaniels. D. Proceedings on Federal Charges against Watts and Mohammed 72. The federal criminal proceedings against both Watts and Mohammed ended in guilty pleas. (EX. F, J). 73. Mohammed pled guilty ?rst, on August 17, 2012. His sentencing hearing occurred on October 26, 2012. (Exs. J, K). During that sentencing hearing, the U.S. Attorney argued that Mohammed?s conduct was ?repeated and ongoing,? and noted that there were 22 ?multiple [uncharged] occasions? where he participated ?in picking up essentially protection payments from drug dealers, some of which were from sources who were working with the Government, unbeknownst to him.? (Ex. K, at 9). The government noted crimes committed by Mohammed in 2007, 2008, as well as the charged offense in 2011. (Id. at 11). 74. For his part, Mohammed argued that ?Watts was strong-willed, a strong supervisor that if you said no to him, you got certain punishments. He was an individual that people did not say no to without certain kinds of consequences.? Mohammed argued that while he took some money on some occasions, Watts ?was getting many thousands of dollars at a crack.? (Id. at 12). Mohammed?s counsel essentially claimed Mohammed had little choice but to engage in criminal conduct: ?Watts controlled his unit with a very, very strong will and strong fist. He ordered Kallatt Mohammed to do this, and we have phone calls that speci?cally say, you know: You go ahead and pick up this bag.? (Id. at 13-14). 75. Judge Sharon Nelson called the nature and circumstances of the offense ?outrageous.? She commented that she could understand ?one slip?up? but noted that Mohammed continued and did it ?several times.? (Id. 17-18). The court sentenced Mohammed to 18 months in prison. (Id. at 20). 76. Watts pled guilty on July 19, 2013, the Government filed a Sentencing Memorandum on October 2, 2013, and a sentencing hearing was conducted on October 9, 2013. (Ex. E, F, H). In its written memorandum, the Government noted that Watts? criminal acts continued years? and that he engaged in ?years of crime.? (Ex. H, at 1, 8). Watts ?used his badge and his position as a sergeant with the Chicago Police Department to shield his own criminal activity from law enforcement scrutiny. He recruited another CPD of?cer into his 23 crimes, stealing drug money and extorting protection payments from the drug dealers who terrorized the community that, he, the defendant, had sworn to protect.? (Ex. H, at 1). 77. Looking merely at a ?ve-month period from December 2007 May 2008, the Government noted that Watts and Mohammed routinely ?extort[ed] protection payments from drug dealers in exchange for agreeing not to arrest them.? According to the memorandum, Mohammed admitted, over this ?ve?month period, he, alone, was responsible for picking up between $20,000 and $25,000 in protection payments for Watts. (Id. at 2). The Government detailed many other uncharged criminal acts of Watts, including four payments totaling $3,700 to one government informant, and two payments totaling $1,000 to a second informant. Both informants claimed these payments were just the tip of the iceberg and just part of ?day-to-day workings? of Watts? involvement in the drug trade at Ida B. Wells. 78. Signi?cantly, the Government?s sentencing memorandum makes clear that Watts? criminal conduct included falsifying charges against individuals who would not work with him in his criminal scheme. The Government described one of their con?dential source?s (CS) interactions with Defendant Watts as follows: The CS declined to give information to the defendant [Watts] because he did not trust him, but the defendant persisted in trying to get CS to work with him. At times, the defendant threatened to plant drugs on the CS and then arrest him for them. At one point, the defendant and other of?cers falsely arrest the CS on drug charges. The CS understood that as a homeless, unemployed alcoholic, he had no chance of successfully ?ghting against a corrupt cop who appeared to operate within the con?nes of the justice system. As a result, the CS pleaded guilty and received a sentence of two years imprisonment. (Id. at 3) (italics added). 79. At the sentencing hearing itself, the Government repeated these claims, noting Watts? ongoing criminal conduct started in ?at least 2007.? (EX. F, at 10). And, again, the Government reiterated the story of Watts framing and causing the wrongful conviction of its 24 informant. The Government also presented evidence of other speci?c criminal conduct of Watts in which Mohammed was not involved, speci?cally one in March 2010 where Watts stole $11,650 of Government money from an informant. (Id. at 20?21). 80. The court ultimately sentenced Watts to 22 months in prison. E. Known Individuals Framed by Watts and His Cohorts, Including Sandra Cartwright, Ben Baker (three times), Clarissa Glenn, and Lionel White 81. During the federal criminal proceedings in Watts and Mohammed?s case, the US. Attorney?s Of?ce took the clear position that their con?dential source?~Mr. Hopkins?was framed, convicted, and sentenced to two years in prison for a crime fabricated by Sgt. Watts. The investigative documents?and sworn testimony of Chicago Police Of?cers?suggests this practice of falsifying charges was routine. Indeed, Chicago Police Officer Spaargaren speci?cally swore that Sgt. Watts threatened to falsify charges against him if Spaargaren exposed Watts? criminal conduct. 82. Of?cer Spalding, the whistleblowing police of?cer who investigated the Watts tactical team?s criminal conduct for years, was recently interviewed by Juan Gonzalez and Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! Of?cer Spalding described the Watts tactical team?s criminal activity and her investigation in this way: My partner Danny and I started investigating allegations that kept surfacing. There was a sergeant, Ronald Watts, and members of his TAC team, who worked directly underneath him, that were imposing what they called on the street a ?Watts tax.? Basically, he was extortng the drug dealers. He was receiving money from drug dealers that ran different drug lines within the Ida B. Wells housing projects and the surrounding area. And in exchange for that money, they were guaranteed protection from prosecution and arrest. In addition to that, the allegations were that this crew of rogue of?cers, under the command of Ronald Watts, were also planting narcotics on innocent individuals and falsi?n'ng police reports, falsely arresting them, putting them in prison for false allegations. There?s also the allegations of, you know, physical violence, of being beaten, if they didn?t want to comply and pay this tax, as well as warrantless seizures, kicking in doors and going through people?s apartments, stealing everything that 25 wasn?t nailed down. And the allegations kept being repeated over and over again from every individual that we would do intelligence debrie?ngs with, along with our con?dential informants. Chicago Cops Who Broke ?Code ofSilence to Report Police Drug Gang Face Deadly Retaliation, Democracy Now!, October 21, 2016 (italics added). 83. The Cook County criminal courts, moreover, provide additional, speci?c, examples of individuals who were victimized by Watts and his tactical team. These judicially- acknowledged examples of citizens being framed by corrupt police of?cers include examples involving the three testifying of?cers against McDaniels: Leann, Nichols, and Mohammed. i. Sandra Cartwright 84. On November 3, 2007, Sandra Cartwright was in her apartment in a Chicago Housing Authority building when Sgt. Watts banged on her door, demanded that she open it, and told her he would arrest her if she didn?t. Cartwright ?ed out the back of her apartment. She ?ed because for some time prior to this incident, Of?cer Alvin Jones, ?along with other Chicago police of?cers from the 2nd District,? had been threatening and harassing her for information about drug sales in the building. Indeed, in one instance, an of?cer from the 2?d District had falsely arrested her, and Cartwright had filed complaints against these 2nd District of?cers. (Ex. Y). 85. After she ?ed from her apartment on November 3, 2007, Of?cer Lamonica Lewis (who is listed as an assisting arresting of?cer in McDaniels? case (Ex. at caught Cartwright and brought her back to the apartment. When there, Of?cers Jones, Lewis, and Douglas Nichols planted drugs in her apartment and arrested Cartwright for a Class felony. After almost a year-and-a?half in prison, Cartwright was acquitted at a jury trial where she represented herself. (Exs. Y-Z). 26 86. In the federal court ?le of Cartwright?s case where she sued Of?cers Watts, Jones, Nichols, and Lewis?Caeright v. City of Chicago, No. are portions of deposition transcripts, including one of an individual named Mister Lucky Tyrone Pearson. In the midst of that deposition, after saying he planned to testify in Cartwright?s favor at her trial, Pearson asks: ?Ain?t nothing going to happen to me, is it?? After some back and forth, Pearson clari?es that he is ?just talking about as far as them trying to put something on me again just for giving them my testimony. That?s what I?m talking about.? (Ex. (italics added). ii. Ben Baker and Clarissa Glenn 87. The most well-known and familiar example of Watts and his crew falsifying charges against innocent individuals in furtherance of their criminal enterprise are the cases of Ben Baker and Clarissa Glenn. It is now widely-acknowledged that from June 2004 December 2005, Watts and his crew framed either Baker, Glenn, or both in what became three different fabricated Cook County cases: No. 04 CR 1900, No. 05 CR 8982, and No. 06 CR 810. 88. From June 2004 June 2006, Ben Baker and Clarissa Glenn were living with their three children in Apartment 206 of the Ida B. Wells Housing Complex. They had lived in that apartment together since 1997 and married in 2006. (Exs1). 89. Case No. 04 CR 1900: In June 2004, Sergeant Watts approached Baker and told him that he planned to attribute drugs supposedly found in a mailbox at the housing complex to Baker. If Baker gave Watts a $1,000 bribe, however, Watts would ensure that Baker would ?beat the case.? At the time, Baker had not been arrested or charged with any case relating to drugs found in a mailbox. Baker refused Watts? solicitation of the bribe. (Ex. A at U43-49). 90. One month later, Sergeant Watts and three other of?cers stormed Baker?s home and arrested him. They found no drugs, but nevertheless arrested Baker for drugs allegedly found 27 in a mailbox. (Id. at U43-49). Known members of Sgt. Watts? corrupt team, including Of?cers Jones and Young, are listed on those police reports. (Ex. 91. As a result of that false arrest, Baker spent four-and-a?half months in Cook County Jail in Case No. 04 CR 1900. In November 2004, however, Judge Toomin granted Baker?s motion to suppress the evidence. The State subsequently dismissed the case, and Baker was released from county jail. (Ex. Ex. SS at 19-22). 92. Just one week later, Baker encountered Of?cer Alvin onesm?who was often seen with Watts (Ex. A, at U101)?just outside the Wells housing complex. When Baker complained to Jones that ?was some BS y?all put that case on me,? Of?cer Jones replied: ?[T]hat is part of the game you win some you lose some, you won this one because [Of?cer] Kenny [Young]. . . fucked up on his testimony.? Of?cer Jones then promised that the ?next time we get you it will stick. . . . Kenny ain?t going to be able to fuck up the testimony.? (Id. at U49-54). 93. Case No. 05 CR 8982: On March 23, 2005, Of?cer Jones kept his promise. On that day, Baker was walking down the stairway of the Wells housing complex when Of?cer Douglas Nichols detained him and two others on the third ?oor. Baker was not in possession of any contraband. Remembering Of?cer Jones? promise and knowing that Of?cer Nichols was part of Watts and ones?s crew, Baker attempted to ?ee from Of?cer Nichols. Baker ran to the ?rst ?oor where he was detained by Of?cer Manual Leanowwho was the ?rst arresting and testifying of?cer in the case against McDaniels. Of?cer Leano searched Baker, but found nothing illegal. Baker was nevertheless arrested on site. Minutes later, Sergeant Watts and Of?cer Jones arrived, and Of?cer Jones said to Baker: told you we were going to get you.? (Id. at U30, 56?64). 28 94. Of?cers Nichols and Leano are listed as the arresting of?cers in this case against Baker, whereas Sgt. Watts is listed as the supervisor. Of?cers Jones, Bolton, Gonzalez, and Smith are also listed as assisting arresting of?cers in this case against Baker. (EX. Smith is referenced in the case against McDaniels as Mohammed?s partner in supposedly recovering the gold Ford Taurus. (R. EE 121-23). 95. Based on this March 23, 2005 arrest, Baker was subsequently charged and prosecuted in Case No. 05 CR 8982 with possession with intent to deliver 15.3 grams of heroin and 13.9 grams of cocaine. 96. During the pendency of the Class drug charges in Case No. 05 CR 8982, Baker was on bond. At pre-trial hearings related to Baker?s bond, at Cook County Assistant State?s Attorney named David Navarro?who was not the prosecutor actually assigned to the case?? would sometimes appear and state that he had no objection to an I-bond for Baker. (Ex. QQ, at 11 see also Ex. A at L3-4 (a December 8, 2005 court date in which ASA Navarro appeared, Where he indicates he has no objection to an l-bond despite multiple, pending non-probationable felony charges against Petitioner Baker, including in Case No. 05 CR 8982, and Case No. 05 CR 25580); see also Id. at N3 (parties agree at a December 14, 2005 court date that ASA Navarro had no objection to an I-bond, even though, by that time, an additional fabricated Class felony charge under Case No. 06 CR 810 was now pending). 97. ASA Navarro was assigned to the public corruption unit in the State?s Attorney?s Of?ce. He became involved in Baker?s case because he was aWare of Baker?s allegations against Watts and his tactical team. Indeed, over the time period when Sergeant Watts ?rst solicited Baker for a bribe and framed Baker (June/July 2004, through the pendency of his charges in Case No. 05 CR 8982), Baker and Glenn took several steps in an attempt to expose the police 29 misconduct. They contacted the Of?ce of Professional Standards (OPS) and met with city and county law enforcement of?cers who were purportedly investigating allegations made by Baker (and others) against Watts and his tactical team. Baker and Glenn also met with and spoke speci?cally with ASA Navarro about their allegations. (Ex. QQ, at ii 10); see also Ex. 00, at 6 (Judge Toomin stating that he was aware that ASA Navarro was investigating these allegations); see also Ex. A at S4 (same). 98. While Baker was on bond, Sergeant Watts and other members of his team learned about Baker and Glenn?s attempt to expose their criminal conduct. 99. Case No. 06 CR 810: In retaliation for Baker and Glenn?s attempts to expose the criminal conduct of the police, Sergeant Watts and members of his tactical team framed Baker (a third time) and Clarissa Glenn on December 11, 2005, leading to charges in Case No. 06 CR 810. 100. On December 11, 2005, while on bond awaiting trial for Case No. 05 CR 8982, Baker was driving with his wife?Clarissa Glenn. As they were pulling up to a lot in or near the Wells Housing Complex, a blue and white police car appeared. Baker and Glenn believed that the police car was attempting to go around them, so Baker stopped his car. When he did, another car pulled up behind them and stopped. Sergeant Watts exited the driver?s side of that car, and Of?cer Alvin Jones exited the passenger side. (Exs6). See Ex. UU, Chicago Police Department Member?s Bill of Rights, General Order 93-3, Effective January 13, 1993 (in effect in 2005), Addendum No. at (noting a presumption against anonymous disciplinary complaints and noting that ?prior to the interrogation of a Department member under investigation, the member will be informed in writing of the nature of the complaint and the names of all complainants?); see also Agreement Between the City of Chicago Department of Police and the Fraternal Order of Police Chicago Lodge No. 7, Article 6.1E (Bill of Rights), available at Contract .pdf (noting that ?[i]mmediately prior to the interrogation of an Of?cer under investigation [for a disciplinary violation], he or she shall be informed in writing of the nature of the complaint and the names of all complainants?). 30 101. Sergeant Watts and Of?cer Jones ordered Baker and Glenn out of the car. They complied, and the police of?cers then searched the car. Baker and Glenn had nothing illegal in the car. Glenn then observed Sergeant Watts pull a plastic bag that appeared to contain narcotics out of his right sleeve. Sergeant Watts then falsely claimed he found the narcotics on the driver?s door of the car. Both Baker and Glenn were arrested and taken to the 513? Street police station. (Exs. QQ, at 13-14; R, at 11 7-8). 102. At the station, Baker and Glenn were placed near a desk where Of?cer Kallatt Mohammed was sitting. Baker and Glenn were familiar with Of?cer Mohammed, who often patrolled the Wells housing complex as part of Watts?s tactical team. When Of?cer Mohammed saw Baker and Glenn, he asked them what they were doing there. Baker informed him what Sergeant Watts and Of?cer Jones had done to them. Of?cer Mohammed merely shook his head and said something to the effect of, ?that?s too bad.? (Exs9). 103. Shortly thereafter, Sergeant Watts and Of?cer Jones arrived back to where Baker and Glenn were sitting. Sergeant Watts then told Of?cer Mohammed to write up a report about the arrest. Of?cers Jones, Robert Gonzalez and other members of Watts?s team were instructing Of?cer Mohammed what to put in the report. Baker and Glenn protested, speci?cally noting that Of?cer Mohammed wasn?t even present during the arrest. Sergeant Watts brushed them off. (Exs10). 104. The police version of the arrest is documented in a three-page arrest report of Ben Baker and a two-page Vice Case Report. The arrest report lists Of?cers Jones and Mohammed as the arresting of?cers. The vice report similarly mentions Of?cer Jones and Mohammed, while adding that Sergeant Watts, Of?cer [Elsworth] Smith, Of?cer Gonzalez, and Of?cer Leano were witnesses. Save for Mohammed and Smith, all of these of?cers were involved in framing Baker 31 and sending him to prison for almost a decade in Case No. 05 CR 8982. And Leano and Mohammed, of course, testi?ed against McDaniels herein. (Ex. TT). 105. The December 11, 2005 arrest led to Class criminal drug charges against Glenn and Baker under Case No. 06 CR 810. They both were released on bond. (Exs11). 106. As to Baker, the State elected on Case No. 05 CR 8982 ?rst. No substantive proceedings were held for either Baker or Glenn on Case No. 06 CR 810 prior to Baker?s bench trial in Case No. 05 CR 8982 in May 2006. Attorney Matt Mahoney represented both Baker and Glenn as it related to all of these cases. 107. At the bench trial in May 2006 in Case No. 05 CR 8982, Baker testi?ed to the facts as indicated in paragraphs 88?93. He explained in detail that he was innocent and being framed by Sergeant Watts and his crew all because he refused Sergeant Watts? bribe solicitation in 2004. 108. Sergeant Watts, Of?cer Jones, and Of?cer Nichols all testi?ed and denied the truth of Baker?s testimony and the allegations he was being framed. Rather, the of?cers falsely testi?ed that this was merely an onsite drug arrest, and Baker attempted to ?ee but was caught. Of?cer Leann (who Baker testi?ed was the of?cer who detained him), however, did not testify. Instead, Of?cer Gonzalez falsely testi?ed that he was the one who detained Baker on the ?rst ?oor, not Of?cer Leann. (Ex. A at Supp. T. A6-18). 109. On June 9, 2006, noting that Baker?s testimony was ?not corroborated,? Judge Toornin found Baker guilty. Baker?s bond was revoked, and he was taken immediately into custody. (Ex. A at W7). 32 110. During his allocution at his sentencing hearing in Case No. CR 8982, Baker noted that the same of?cers continued to frame him time and time again simply because he refused to pay them off. He ended his allocution with a simple plea to Judge Toomin: not let them do to my wife [Clarissa Glenn] what they are doing to me.? (Id. at X11). 111. Baker was originally sentenced to 18 years in prison. After noting Baker?s allegations of misconduct against the police of?cersmand stating that there had been some corroboration, there might have been a different story,??on July 28, 2006, Judge Toornin reduced Baker?s sentence to 14 years. (Id. at Y8). 112. After Baker?s wrongful conviction and sentence in Case No. 05 CR 8982, his ?primary motivation was to ensure Clarissa was not imprisoned and our children would have their mother to raise them.? (Ex. QQ at 11 22). 113. For her part, since her arrest in December 2005, Glenn?Who had never been previously charged with any crime (EX. R, at 1] 17)?had been committed to ?ghting the charges in Case No. 06 CR 810 because both she and her husband were innocent and being framed. However, after Glenn watched Baker get wrongfully convicted, her husband ?was adamant that, for the sake of the kids,? they both could not be incarcerated. And Glenn was informed that she was facing a four-year prison sentence at minimum if she was convicted of at least one of the charged offenses at trial. Glenn and Baker also knew that in Case No. 06 CR 810, the same of?cers would testify in front of the same judge who, based on these of?cers? fabricated testimony, convicted Baker in Case No. 05 CR 8982, and ultimately sentenced Baker to 14 years imprisonment. (EXS13-14). 114. When the State?s Attorney?s Of?ce offered to reduce Glenn?s charges and recommend one year probation for her and a four-year sentence for Baker in exchange for guilty 33 pleas by both, Baker persuaded his wife that they should take the deal. (Ex1111 15). 115. Baker explained that, after being framed and sentenced to 14 years, he ?would have taken any amount of time on this second drug charge with an assurance that Clarissa would not be imprisoned.? He pled guilty only ?to protect my wife and our children from the risk of my wife?s imprisonment and upon the agreement that she would only be sentenced to 1 year probation.? (EX. QQ at 23, 27). 116. For her part, Glenn stated that she ?only pled guilty at Ben?s urging and upon the agreement that [she] would be sentenced to 1 year probation. [Petitioners?] children could not have both parents in prison.? (EX. RR at ii 18). 117. During the plea hearing, Judge Toomin stated several times that if Baker and Glenn?s allegations about Sergeant Watts and his crew were ever proven true, he would immediately vacate the convictions. [L]et?s just assume that your suspicions, your conjecture has some merit here and that at some point down the line Sergeant Watts and his team are shown to be bad cops and if they have done all the things you have said they did, don?t you think that if Mr. Baker suffered a conviction in this case and in the other case where 1 have found them to be credible don ?t you think that I would vacate those convictions. I mean I have to and I certainly would. (Ex. 00, at 7) (italics added). Let me say this to both of you. I know through your lawyer what your position has been with regard to these police of?cers. I?m keenly aware of that. 1 know how you feel. I know what your defenses were earlier, Mr. Baker. There has not been suf?cient showing [to] me that these are renegade police officer[s]. That they are bad police that they are outlaws. If something should happen in the future where has happened before as you may have read about in the paper in the last few weeks police a?cers do get charged with doing things that are wrong, breaking the law. If that should happen here in this case I would have no hesitation to vacate all of the guilty ?ndings, judgments, sentences including the 14 years that you ?re doing now. . . . If something should later develop, then I think your lawyer has told you 34 my position and I would vacate these ?ndings and I would toss out these convictions[.] (Ex. 00, at 29-30) (italics added). 118. At one point, Attorney Mahoney requested, in lieu of a straight guilty plea. that Baker and Glenn enter Alford ?2 pleas ?to protect [their] possible post conviction rights if there does come a time when Sergeant Watts is held to account for what he is alleged to have done.? (EX. 00 at 9). 119. Judge Toomin stated that ?we don?t use [Alford] pleas,? but reiterated the convictions should be immediately vacated if Baker and Glenn?s allegations about the police are proven true: I can?t conceive of a situation where if things should develop down the line where it turned out that your suspicions are correct and that this guy [Sergeant Ronald Watts] is tagged at some point that there is a judge in the building I can ?t conceive the state would object to vacating pleas and even convictions. It just would not be right to allow convictions if they were based upon outlaw police. (Ex. 00 at 9-10) (italics added). 120. Baker and Glenn?s guilty pleas were entered on September 18, 2006. (Ex. 00). 121. On December 15, 2015, Baker filed a pleading entitled Supplemental Pleading 0 Motion for Leave to File First Successive Amended Petitionfor Post Conviction Relief in Case No. 05 CR 8982. This pleading was supported by two volumes of exhibits that were approximately four inches thick, including many of the same exhibits used in support of this pleading. 122. Baker?s pleading??led through undersigned counsel and which supplemented pending post-conviction matters for the case in which Baker was serving a 14-year prison *2 See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 us. 25 (1970) (allowing a defendant to plead guilty while simultaneously maintaining his innocence of the charged crime). 35 sentence?was the ?rst ?led court document to put the full, comprehensive scope of Watts and his tactical team?s decade-long reign of corruption squarely in front of the Court and the Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce. 123. On January 14, 2016, less than one?month after the full scope of Watts? corruption was exposed, the Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce moved to dismiss all charges against Baker in Case No. 05 CR 8982. Baker was exonerated and released from prison after serving almost a decade of imprisonment for a crime fabricated by Watts and his tactical team, including Of?cer Nichols. (Ex. NN). 124. That same day, then Cook County State?s Attorney Criminal Prosecutions Chief Fabio Valentini told NBCS: ?The conviction?s tainted. Now it?s a fact that (Watts) is a dirty police of?cer?? In a press release, then Cook County State?s Attorney Anita Alvarez noted that the conviction ?can no longer stand,? in light of Watts and Of?cer Kallatt Mohammed?s federal criminal convictions.l4 The decision by the Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce, of course, was an acknowledgement that Baker?s May 2006 testimony about being framed by Watts and his crew was true. It was also con?rmation that when Watts, Jones, Gonzalez, and Nichols testi?ed to the contrary, they committed perjury in furtherance of the Watts tactical team?s criminal enterprise. 13 Phil Rogers, Chicago Mart Who Claimed He Was Set Up By Corrupt Cops Released From Prison, NBCS, Jan. 14, 2016, available at 721 .html Press Release, Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce, State?s Attorney Dismisses Charges In Drug Case Involving Convicted Police Of?cer Following Conviction Integrity Review (Jan. 14, 2016), available at onvictedOf?cerDrugCase 36 125. Just over one month later, on February 22, 2016 and without objection or intervention from the State, Chief Judge Martin granted Ben Baker a certi?cate of innocence based upon the identical evidence. Chief Judge Martin stated that this was the ?rst Certi?cate of Innocence he ever allowed. (EX. There is no way to interpret this judicial ?nding other than to conclude that this Court found that Baker proved by a preponderance of the evidence that (1) Watts and his tactical team fabricated a crime against Baker; and (2) Of?cers Watts, Jones, Nichols, and Gonzalez committed perjury when they testi?ed at Baker?s trial to the contrary. 126. On March 17, 2016, Baker and Glenn sought to vacate their convictions and guilty pleas in Case No. 06 CR 810. Baker and Glenn relied upon the identical evidence they put forth in the December 2015 ?ling in Case No. 05 CR 8982, as well as the statements from Judge Toomin that he could not imagine ?a judge in this building? denying this type of relief were these of?cers ?tagged? or proven corrupt at a later date. 127. And indeed, just six days later, on March 23, 2016?and again, without objection from the State?Chief Judge Martin vacated Baker and Glenn?s guilty pleas and convictions. The State immediately dropped all charges, exonerating Glenn and Baker (a second time). (EX. ZZ). On April 5, 2016, again, based on the identical evidence, Baker was awarded his second certi?cate of innocence. Chief Judge Martin also found Glenn factually innocent.15 (Ex. 128. Once again, based on these ?ndings, there can be no other conclusion other than Chief Judge Martin again found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that (1) Sgt. Watts and his tactical tearn fabricated Class drug cases against Baker and Glenn, and (2) Of?cers Jones, 15 Glenn was denied a certi?cate of innocence solely on the ground that she was not sentenced to a term of imprisonment because, in this Court?s view, probation does not encompass imprisonment. This purely legal issue is pending in the appellate court. 37 Mohammed, Elsworth Smith, Robert Gonzalez, Manual Leano, and Watts conspired to fabricate and falsify police reports that led to Class drug charges against Baker and Glenn. Lionel White 129. The fourth conviction overturned on the basis of the identical allegations outlined above is that of Lionel White in Case No. 06 CR 12092. In or around March 2006, Sgt. Watts, Of?cer Alvin Jones, and Kallatt Mohammed came to White?s door and threatened that if he didn?t open it, they would tear it down. Upon entering, the of?cers continued their threats, demanding narcotics. Finding none during their illegal search, they threatened to frame White at a later date. (Ex. at 11 6; at 1T 4). 130. One month later, on April 24, 2006, Watts, Jones, and their crew returned to White?s home, where they beat and framed him, ultimately planting evidence and falsifying drug charges against him. (EX. at ii 12). Amongst the of?cers listed on the police reports that day include Nichols, Leann, Mohammed, Gonzalez, and Smith?all of whom either testi?ed against McDaniels or are listed as assisting arresting of?cers. Sgt. Watts is listed as the supervising of?cer on the police reports. (EX. 131. At his second court date, White pled guilty, but only after he told the court during the hearing that he was innocent and was only entering the plea to avoid a mandatory life sentence if convicted: I wasn?t [unintelligible]. The of?cers that did this to me, I was in my house. This is wrong and I?m scared to take my chances. When they was in my house beating me, I went to the Window to holler out for help and the police came over and showed the time they say I did this. They was in my house beating me and I went to the hospital, your Honor. This is wrong. I am pleading guilty because I am scared. That?s the honest to God truth, your Honor. I lost my momma, my daddy, my grandma, my auntie. I lost most of my family during all this time I have done. I don?t have no problem if I done it, I will do the time. But I am scared. That?s why I am taking the time, your Honor. 38 Police came to my ?ancee house and the time 1 came in two places at one time, your Honor, people beat me and put me in the hospital. (Ex. at 10). 132. White was hospitalized as a result of his beating. He also complained to the Of?ce of Professional Standards (OPS), where he gave a sworn statement that he was framed and beaten by Of?cer Jones and Sgt. Watts. During the course of the OPS investigation, White viewed a lineup of of?cers and identi?ed Of?cer Jones as his assailant. Also included within that lineup, however, were Of?cer Leano, Mohammed, and Smith. Of?cers Nichols and Bolton, moreover, are listed as ?additional witness[es]? in the OPS investigation. (Ex. 133. On December 14, 2016, shortly after the parties received the OPS complaint corroborating White?s allegations in his petition, the State indicated it had no objection to White?s petition for relief. Chief Judge Martin vacated Petitioner?s conviction and guilty plea, and the State agreed it would not seek to retry Petitioner. (Ex. Three weeks later, on January 5, 2017, Chief Judge Martin granted White a certi?cate of innocence. (EX. 134. Based on these ?ndings, once again, there can be no other conclusion other than Chief Judge Martin found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that (1) Sgt. Watts and his tactical team fabricated Class drug cases against White, and (2) Of?cers Jones, Mohammed, Elsworth Smith, Robert Gonzalez, Brian Bolton, Manual Leano, and Douglas Nichols I conspired with Sgt. Watts to fabricate and falsify police reports that led to Class drug charges against White. 39 iv. Other Individuals that Allege Misconduct Leroy McCambry 135. Leroy McCambry ?led a federal civil rights suit against, inter alia, Sergeant Watts and his tactical team of?cers??Douglas Nichols and Manual Leano. (Ex. AA). McCambry alleged that on October 21, 2009, Of?cer Melvin Bailey "ran down McCambry with his motor vehicle," breaking McCambry?s hip and causing extreme physical pain. (Id. at 9, 1 1). McCambry then alleged that Of?cers Nichols and Leano arrived, but they ignored McCambry's pleas for medical care and claims that Bailey hit him with his car. (Id. at 11). After being ?dragged? by Of?cers Nichols and Leano to the 2nd District, McCambry told Sergeant Watts what happened and that he needed to go to the hospital. "Watts informed McCambry that if McCambry went to the hospital, the police of?cers would put a gun case on him and put cases on him." (Id. at 13-14). McCambry then alleged that ?Nichols falsi?ed his police report omitting the fact that McCambry was struck by the police car.? (Id. at 17). Nichols also falsely testi?ed in front of the grand jury that during Of?cer Bailey?s pursuit, McCambry ?fell between a fence and Bailey?s car.? (Id. at 18). Two Informants Wrongfully Convicted as Reported by Journalist Jamie Kalverz 136. In October 2016, journalist and government watchdog Jamie Kalven published a piece documenting the decade-long corruption of the Sgt. Watts?led crew. Part II of Kalven?s piece, entitled Operation Brass Tax: Corrupt Chicago Police Were Taxing Drag Dealers and Targeting Their Rivals, documents Spalding and Echeverria?s use of two informants, both of whom relayed to the whistleblowing of?cers their own stories of Watts framing them. (Ex. 40 137. The first informant is referred to as ?Chewbacca;? he is the same informant framed by Watts repeatedly referenced by the US. Attorney?s Office during the sentencing proceedings in the federal criminal case against Watts. See infra 11 78. Kalven, however, reports additional details. He notes that when Spalding and Echeverria started working for the FBI in 2007, they went looking for informant they had worked with, on other matters, for many years. When they found him, ?Chewbacca? informed the undercover officers that he had been in prison because ?Watts had put a case on him.? ?Chewbacca? reported this occurred after Watts ?pressed him for information about where some drugs were stashed.? When ?Chewbacca? did not provide the information, Watts retaliated against him by putting a case on him. ?Knowing he wouldn?t be believed over Watts, he pleaded guilty,? and got a two-year prison sentence. (EX. 138. When Spalding and Echeverria approached ?Chewbacca,? he had just gotten out of prison for the crime in which Watts framed them. The undercover officers asked him about Watts, and, according to Spalding and Echeverria, ?Chewbacca started talking and it was a long time before he stopped. He was an avalanche of information, con?rming the scope of the protection racket Watts was running.? (EX. 139. ?Chewbacca? reported that he had seen Watts pay off drug dealers ?hundreds of times. . . . The boys call him Thirsty Bird. You have to pay taxes to sell dope.? (Ex. 140. ?Chewbacca? told the whistleblowing of?cers that he had seen Watts take drugs off one person and put them on another many occasions over the years.? (EX. 141. One such person was another informant, unnamed in Kalven?s article. This individual was a drug dealer from the Harold Ickes Homes on South State Street from whom Watts had routinely taken protection payments through the years. However, on one occasion, 41 Watts was unsatis?ed with the amount of the bribe, and in retaliation, ?Watts put someone else?s package on him and arrested him.? Once again, this resulted in two years of prison (from 2007- 2009) for this unnamed informant. (Ex. 142. Kalven goes on to report that because of these experiences, ?Chewbacca? and this unnamed individual agreed to work as informants for Spalding, Echeverria, and the FBI investigation. This included a March 31, 2010 ?sting? caught on wiretapm?that involved Watts, Mohammed, and Of?cer Alvin Jones, another member of the Watts tactical team. (Ex. Bernard Brown 143. An August 14, 2009 FBI report, authored by Special Agent Patrick Smith, documents an interview with Bernard Brown where Of?cers Spalding and Echeverria were also present. (Ex. X, at 1). Brown narrated his personal knowledge about Watts? ?criminal activity [of] extorting and robbing drug dealers as well as selling drugs.? Brown named many, many individuals in this report, both by name and nickname, who both ?directly or indirectly, provided BROWN with information about Brown explained that Sergeant Watts? ?drug line? began ?around 2000.? The FBI report noted that Openly talked about his criminal activity in the TAC room at the police station,? and the report talked about ?Watts and his team.? (1d. at 2) (italics added). The Report also included a photo lineup of nine CPD of?cers. Brown was able to recognize a few of them. (Id. at 2-15). Upon information and belief, some, if not all of the testifying of?cers against McDaniels are included in this photo lineup. Other Citizen Complaints 144. As a result of litigation in the case of Kalven v. City of Chicago, 2014 IL App 121846, and related cases, citizen complaints lodged against Chicago Police Of?cers have recently become public. As a result, Petitioner?s counsel has been able to obtain a listing of 42 complaints ?led against individual of?cers, including the testifying of?cers in the case against McDaniels. This includes 21 complaints against Mohammed, 20 against Nichols, and 16 against Leano. (Ex. See also EX. DD-HH, (listing compiled complaint registers for Nichols, Leano, Mohammed, Smith, Watts, and other members of Watts? corrupt crew, while showing that the of?cers were often co-accused with each other). 145. Although efforts to obtain details of these complaints through the Freedom of Information Act remain ongoing, at this time counsel has received some minimal information through a FOIA request of the Independent Police Review Authority that outline some complaints against Nichols and Leano. (Ex. Although complainant names are redacted, the complaints allege, inter alia, that Of?cers Nichols, Leano, Mohammed, Smith, Jr., and Jones stole $916, beat, attempted to coerce a false admission, and demanded money from the complainant; Of?cers Nichols, Jones, and Watts participated beat, threatened to plant drugs, and stole $340 from a different complainant; Of?cer Leano intentionally drove over a complainant with an and Of?cers Nichols and Leano placed an unknown object into the complainant?s rectum. IV. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF 146. This is Petitioner?s ?rst post?conviction petition. Although the petition is technically untimely, the delay in ?ling is not due to McDaniels? culpable negligence, so all claims Should go forward. See also People v. Boclaz'r, 202 Ill. 2d 89, 104 (2002) (the issue of timeliness is not ripe until the second-stage of the post-conviction process). 147. Culpable negligence is akin to recklessness. Id. at 106. As noted, Petitioner?s claims are based on the widespread practice of the testifying officers framing innocent individuals and lying about it. This information overwhelmingly has been discovered over the 43 last year, including the fact that Cook County courts have acknowledged these allegations in the Baker, Baker/ Glenn, and White cases. See supra 41?145. To the extent the information was available previously or prior to McDaniels? trial, it was unconstitutionally hidden from him and his counsel. Therefore, McDaniels was not reckless in failing to bring it earlier. 148. The actual innocence claim, moreover, is not subject to the time provisions of the Act, so that claim independently goes forward. See 725 ILCS 5/ CLAIM I: ACTUAL INNOCENCE 149. McDaniels re-alleges every paragraph of this petition and expressly incorporates them as if they were fully set forth herein. 150. Illinois law makes clear that newly discovered information about the pattern and practice of police of?cers engaging in similar type of misconduct as alleged by a Petitioner? Defendant is cognizable as an actual innocence claim. People v. Tyler, 2015 IL App 123470, 194, 200-02. The evidence must be new, material, noncurnnlative, and so conclusive it would probably change the result on retrial. Id. at 1i I96. 151. The evidence in this petition establishes that for over a decade, and beginning well before November 2008 (the day of McDaniels? arrest), the Sergeant in charge of a District Two tactical team?Ronald Watts?coordinated a criminal enterprise under the color of police authority that involved planting evidence, making false arrests, and extorting and bribing individuals. The tactical team officers working in consort with Watts include his federal co- defendant Kallatt Mohammed, Douglas Nichols, and Manual Leano-mor the three testifying of?cers against McDaniels. 152. Taking the well-pled facts as true, McDaniels will put forth, at the minimum, the following evidence and testimony: 44 Filed court documents in the federal cases against Sergeant Watts and Mohammad. See supra 72?80. . Testimony from the multiple Special Agents who conducted the FBIs investigation, including Special Agent Craig Henderson who swore out the federal af?davit in support of the complaint, and Special Agent Ken Samuels, who led the federal investigation from 2004-2006. See supra 49-60. Testimony from current Chicago police officers Shannon Spalding and Daniel Echeverria who worked undercover and who stated, in sworn depositions, that there are other ?criminals like the rest of Ronald Watts? team still out there? and that Watts was running ?a criminal enterprise.? See supra 61?67. . Testimony from Of?cer Michael Spaargaren, who also went to the FBI to expose Watts? criminal enterprise. See supra it 68. Testimony from retired Internal Affairs Division Chicago Police Officer Pete Koconis that the FBI and CPD were investigating Sergeant Watts and his Division Two team, including the testifying of?cers in this case, for years before 2004. See supra ii 70. Other testimony from Internal Affairs Chicago Police Of?cers involved in the ?joint investigation? with the FBI and the US. Attorney?s Of?ce, including, but not limited to, Lt. Juan Rivera. See supra 11 69. . Testimony from the investigators or attorneys from the Cook County State?s Attorney?s Of?ce, including David Navarro, who investigated Sergeant Watts and the Second District Tactical Team. See supra 96-97. . Testimony from other known and identi?ed victims of Watts and his ?crew,? including Sandra Cartwright, Ben Baker, Clarissa Glenn, Lionel White, Leroy McCambry, and ?Chewbacca? (Mr. Hopkins). See supra 84-142. Testimony or statements from other known citizens identi?ed in law enforcement reports, including, but not limited to, Wilbert Moore and Bernard Brown. See supra 111] 51-53, 143. Testimony from any other victims and witnesses learned through (1) the ongoing litigation with the FBI over their redactions in the Baker FOIA suit; and (2) reasonable discovery requests allowed by this Court?or other ongoing investigation?that reveals the names and identity of the ?arrestees? relied on by Of?cers Spalding and Echeverria that caused them to report to the FBI, or the 45 names and identities of the complainants in the CRs ?led against the corrupt of?cers in this case. ?6 See supra 144-145. 153. The evidence summarized in the preceding paragraph is all new, material, noncumulative, and conclusive. See People v. Coleman, 2013 IL 113307, ii 96. It is new because much it stems from the federal investigation and guilty plea of Sergeant Watts and Of?cer Mohammed, and none of the investigative materials were available until after that case concluded. Of?cer Spalding and Echeverria?s whistleblower lawsuit from was not ?led until 2012, and the sworn deposition testimony relied upon from that case was not done until late 2014. And the Complaint Registry data was not publicly available until the March 2014 decision in Kalven v. City of Chicago, 2014 IL App 121846, and the web site that compiled the data was just launched in November 2015. See Invisible Institute, Public Reactions to the Citizens Police Data Project17 (noting that the project and web site launched on Nov. 10, 2015). 16 The fact that not a single relevant complaint resulted in discipline is, of course, no reason to discount them, as the bodies tasked with investigating the complaints have come under extreme recent criticism. See e. Todd Lighty, Stacy St. Clair Steve Mills, Chicago ?s?awed system for investigating police shootings, Ch. Trib., Dec. 5, 2015; Timothy Williams, Chicago Rarely Penalizes O?icersfor Complaints, Data Shows, NY. Times, Nov. 18, 2015. For example, in an unrelated case, Chicago Police Of?cer Jerome Finnigan pled guilty to, amongst other things, ?routinely and regularly perforrn[ing] unlawful arrests and searches for the purposes of conducting criminal investigations,? and stealing ?as much as $450,000 from an individual and other circumstances where they took large quantities of money from individuals.? (Ex. II at 10- 11). In his own allocution, Mr. Finnigan called himself a ?corrupt police of?cer.? (Ex. JJ at 14). Yet of the 68 citizen complaints lodged against Mr. Finnigan in his corrupt career as a police of?cer, not a single one was sustained. (EX. II). The same could be said of the admitted corrupt police of?cer in this case?Sergeant Ronald Watts. Of his many complaints, the only two that were sustained were the one that led to his actual criminal indictment and one lodged against him by a different police of?cer for a physical ?ght. (Ex. DD). Watts? co-defendant and admitted corrupt of?cer?Kallatt Mohammed?has roughly 21 citizen complaints, none of which were sustained. (EX. HH, In short, given records of the departments investigating police misconduct, each of the individual complaints alleging misconduct by Sergeant Watts, his tactical team, and the other of?cers testifying in this case, must be adjudged on their own by this Court. :7 46 154. All of this evidence is also material, noncumulative, and conclusive. As the trial court and the appellate court acknowledged, the conviction rested entirely on the credibility of the testifying of?cers. To put it mildly, the new evidence in this petition casts signi?cant doubt on that credibility. 155. The new evidence, moreover, taken with Petitioner McDaniels? sworn af?davit in this matter, is particularly compelling. McDaniels explains that despite testimony to the contrary, Of?cer Leano was never even at the scene of his arrest. Only Mohammed and Nichols were present. (Ex. Inrportantly, this mirrors the allegations of Ben Baker in Case No. 05 CR 8982, where Of?cer Robert Gonzalez falsely testi?ed in that case, essentially in place of Of?cer Leano, who was actually present for the false arrest. See supra 11 108. In the same Baker case, moreover, Of?cer Nichols and others falsi?ed an oral confession from Baker, just as McDaniels alleges herein. Of course, Baker?s allegations have now been judicially-acknowledged as true. 156. Ultimately, even before all of the new information about the testifying of?cers in this case came to light, the conviction in this case was dubious. The written record never adequately explained how the gun introduced into evidence with a serial number intact could be the same gun that was inventoried into evidence as having a defaced serial number. If the gun allegedly recovered from McDaniels had a serial number, why was that serial number never placed on any of the police documents inventorying the evidence? 157. At the same, it was never adequately explained why an independent third-party witness?a tow-truck driven?would testify in direct contradiction to Of?cer Mohammed as to the location of the vehicle. Nor was it ever explained how or why Of?cer Mohammed could even drive an abandoned car without the keys. 47 158. The explanation to all of this is now obvious: Of?cers Mohammed, Nichols, and Leano lied and framed McDaniels for a crime he did not commit?all in furtherance of What we now know were these of?cers? own criminal enterprise. McDaniels?like Baker, Glenn, and White before him?should therefore have his conviction vacated. CLAIM II: DUE PROCESS NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE 159. McDaniels re-alleges every paragraph of this petition and expressly incorporates them as if they were fully set forth herein. 160. Illinois appellate courts have repeatedly held that a petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on due process grounds if he sets forth substantial new evidence of police misconduct consistent with allegations previously made. People v. Patterson, 192 Ill. 2d 93, 145 (2000), People v. King, 192 Ill. 2d 189, 198?99 (2000); People v. Cannon, 293 Ill. App. 3d 634 (1St Dist. 1997); People v. Mitchell, 2012 IL App 100907 (lst Dist. 2014); People v. Nicholas, 2013 IL App 10320211 44; People v. Whirl, 2015 IL App 111483; People v. Tyler, 2015 IL App 123470. 161. The evidence included within this petition easily establishes Of?cers Mohamed, Nichols, and Leano pattern of framing innocent individuals, committing perjury, and falsifying evidence and police reports. This pattern establishes McDaniel?s right to relief on due process grounds. CLAIM DUE PROCESS BRADY V. MARYLAND 162. McDaniels re-alleges every paragraph of this petition and expressly incorporates them as if they were fully set forth herein. 163. A petitioner establishes a Brady v. Maryland violation by showing that (1) undisclosed evidence by the State is favorable to the accused because it is either exculpatory or 48 impeaching; (2) the evidence was suppressed by the State either willfully or inadvertently; and (3) the accused was prejudiced because the evidence is material to guilt. People v. Beamcm, 229 Ill. 2d 56, 74 (2008). A Brady error is never harmless. Id. A Brady violation occurs even if only the police know about the exculpatory information, not the prosecution itself. People v. Mitchell, 2012 IL App 100907, 1111 71-72 (explaining that under Kyles v. Whitley, 514 US. 419 (1995), knowledge by any agents of the State, such as police of?cers, is imputed to the prosecutor). 164. Prior to Anthony McDaniels November 2008 bench trial, CPD Internal Affairs was engaged in a ?joint investigation? with the FBI into the Second District tactical team headed by Sergeant Watts. During that investigation, as documented in a September 27, 2004 report, an informant provided details that ?resulted in the successful recovery of ?rearms.? The informant also detailed that he had been ?solicited by Watts in the past for bribe payments,? and that receives weekly payments from drug dealers . . . typically in the amount of $5,000.? A report three days later said Watts sent members of his eight of?cer tactical team to collect the bribes ?with instructions? to tell the drug dealers that ?they needed to pay WATTS if they wanted to continue to sell drugs.? See supra ii 50. 165. Reports generated in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008?all prior to McDaniels? November 2008 bench trial?further show the CPD, FBI, ATF, and CCSAO had knowledge about the Watts-led criminal enterprise, which of course included these testifying of?ces. Indeed, one report notes explicitly that the CCSAO ?had been investigating the Chicago Police Department Sergeant Ronald Watts.? The detailed report relating to informant Wilbert Moore?s statement?who speci?cally named Of?cer Mohammed?occurred in 2005. The report of Bernard Brown?s statement describing, in detail, the criminal activity of Watts and his 49 team was in 2009?or well before McDaniels? trial. And the depositions of Spalding, Echeverria, and Rivera?as well as the Af?davits of Spaargaren and Koconis~?con?rm the involvement well before McDaniels? trial. See supra 49?71. 166. This crucial information was all Brady material: It was impeaching to the testifying officers and withheld from McDaniels. The damage wrought by failing to disclose this material is exacerbated by the fact that the entire case rested on the credibility of these of?cers. Needless to say, all of the undisclosed evidence proves these of?cers were not credible. 167. Furthermore, had this information not been withheld from Petitioner, McDaniels may have exercised his right to testify. Had he done so, he would have testi?ed consistent with his Af?davit, which alleges that he was falsely arrested and framed. (Ex. Had the trier- of-fact heard his testimony and been faced with all of the allegations that these of?cer did the same thing to many other individuals, McDaniels would not have been convicted. CLAIM IV: INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE 0F TRIAL COUNSEL 168. McDaniels re-alleges every paragraph of this petition and expressly incorporates them as if they were fully set forth herein. 169. To the extent this Court ?nds that any of the evidence in this pleading could have been discovered by counsel through investigation, McDaniels maintains that this is de?cient performance that cannot be attributed to trial strategy, and McDaniels was prejudiced as a result. 170. McDaniels also alleges that it was de?cient performance and prejudicial for counsel not to impeach Of?cer Leano with his signed and sworn complaints stating that the recovered ?rearm he attributed to McDaniels had a defaced serial number, if the gun introduced into evidence as recovered from McDaniels had its serial number intact. The same is true for 50 counsel?s failure to impeach counsel with Leano?s police reports inventorying the gun?reports that do not include the serial number. CLAIM V: INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE 0F APPELLATE COUNSEL 171. McDaniels re?alleges every paragraph of this petition and expressly incorporates them as if they were fully set forth herein. 172. To the extent that any of the claims asserted in this pleading are deemed waived for failure to present them on direct appeal, Baker received constitutionally de?cient assistance of appellate counsel. In particular, it was constitutional error for direct appellate counsel not to have raised trial counsel?s ineffectiveness. See Ex. at ?l l4 (appellate court noting that defense counsel ?did not attempt to impeach [Leano] at the time with the contents of the complaints he signed?). Had appellate counsel raised the issue of trial counsel?s ineffectiveness based on the grounds noted above, see supra 168-170, McDaniels would have been granted relief. CLAIM VI: CUMULATIVE ERROR 173. Baker re?alleges every paragraph of this petition and expressly incorporates them as if they were fully set forth herein. 51 V. CONCLUSION WHEREFORE, Petitioner Anthony McDaniels, by and through his attorneys, moves this Court to consider the prejudicial impact of each of the above-stated deprivations of his constitutional rights independently, or in combination with one another. Accordingly, Petitioner respectfully requests the following: (1) An evidentiary hearing in which proof may be presented concerning the allegations contained in this petition; (2) His conviction vacated followed by a grant of a new trial; or (3) Reversal of his conviction. Respectfully Submitted, orney for Anthony M?driiels Joshua Tepfer THE EXONERATION PROJECT at the University of Chicago Law School 311 N. Aberdeen St., 3rd ?oor Chicago, IL 60607 (312) 789?4955 joshtt?exonerationproiectorg ID: 44407 Counsel for Petitioner-Defendant Anthony McDaniels 52 CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY ILLINOIS CRIMINAL DIVISION People of the State of Illinois, Respondent?Plaintiff, 3 Case No. 09 CR 0059 i Honorable Judge Arthur Hill, Anthony McDaniels Presiding Petitioner-Defendant 3 VERIFICATION 1, Joshua Tepfer, depose and state as follows: 1. I am the Attorney for Petitioner in the above-captioned action; 2. have consulted with Petitioner, and drafted and read the foregoing Petition for Post? Conviction Relief (?Petition?); 3. The factual contents of the Petition are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Groom SEAL manqu EK Notary Pubtic - State of Illinois My Commission Expires Jun 4. 2019 is i if??