Updated: Woman sentenced to prison in fatal DUI crash

URBANA — In spite of impassioned pleas from the victim's family and scores of supporters for the defendant, a Champaign County judge Friday sentenced a Philo woman to prison for causing the death of her cousin in a drunken driving incident last fall.

At the conclusion of an emotionally charged 90-minute hearing held in a courtroom packed with about 60 spectators, Judge Richard Klaus sentenced Katheryn "Katie" Daly, 24, to 3 1/2 years in prison for the reckless homicide of Annie Daly, 19, also of Philo.

"The loss to society is the same whether Annie was killed by a family member or a total stranger. This is absolutely a deterrable crime and it must be deterred. It is the duty of the court to see that it is deterred. If anything positive can come from this crime, let it be this. Let this be the clarion message: If you make the choice to drink and drive and you kill someone, regardless of your station in life, you will face the consequences of your actions in this court," said Klaus, who estimated he's sentenced 15 to 20 people in cases involving death or great bodily harm in his nine years on the bench.

Annie Daly died on Oct. 6, a few hours after the all-terrain Gator that Katie Daly was driving on the family farm in rural Philo tipped over, dumping Annie Daly out, causing her fatal internal injuries.

Katie Daly admitted she had been drinking alcohol prior to the accident. Her blood alcohol level was 0.13 percent, more than the 0.08 percent required for an Illinois motorist to be presumed intoxicated.

Klaus refused a request by defense attorney Mark Lipton of Champaign to recommend Daly for the Department of Corrections' boot camp program — a recommendation that State's Attorney Julia Rietz was willing to endorse.

Daly is eligible for day-for-day good time, meaning she could be released from prison in 21 months. Klaus could have sentenced her to up to 5 years.

Sobbing family members and friends spilled into the hallway outside Klaus' courtroom following the hearing, hugging Sue and Bowie Daly, the parents of Annie Daly, and comforting Julia and Pat Daly, the parents of the incarcerated daughter.

Father Bo Schmitt, pastor at St. Thomas Catholic Church in Philo, led the stunned crowd in a brief prayer.

Both Rietz and Lipton made moving arguments for probation for Daly, described by the nine people who testified in her behalf and many others who submitted letters as loving, kind, compassionate and smart.

Among those testifying Friday were Carle orthopedic surgeon Dr. Robert Bane; his physician assistant, Casey Shroyer; Parkland College nursing instructor Carmen Zych; two of Daly's fellow Carle nurses; one of Daly's former patients at Carle; family friend John Khachaturian; and Daly's counselor, Gina Johnson.

Julia Daly testified that her family is very close to Sue and Bowie Daly's family. She said all of them started Friday at St. Thomas Church, where the Mass intention was offered for both families.

"Then, after that, we went to the cemetery to visit Annie. Katie was with us," she said.

Julia Daly said her daughter's imprisonment would be "devastating" to her brother-in-law and his wife, who said they considered their niece to be another daughter.

"It would be doubly hard for them to lose another child," Julia Daly said, wiping back tears.

Several witnesses referred to the tight bond between the two families, who also live near each other.

On the day of Annie's death, several family members had been at a bonfire for a family birthday celebration on the family property. Katie and Annie Daly were in the front seat of the Gator and three others were in the back, headed for home about 3 a.m.. None of them wore a seat belt as Katie Daly skidded on wet gravel turning from County Road 1700 E on to 600 N. The Gator tipped over and Annie Daly fell out. Katie Daly performed CPR on her, reviving her until she could be taken by ambulance to Carle. She died there almost four hours later.

Reading a statement to Klaus, Leo Daly, the brother of Annie Daly, said his cousin Katie is more like a sister to him and his sisters.

"We have never once blamed Katie for this accident nor will we ever be mad at her. Taking Katie away from us, her family, and her son would be heartbreaking. We have lost one sibling and couldn't stand to lose another," he said, speaking on behalf of Devin and Janna Daly, who sat near him as he read.

His parents, Sue and Bowie Daly, followed him with a statement that Sue Daly read, begging Klaus to show mercy to their niece.

"Annie shared her love for family unconditionally. We know that Annie was given a wonderful loving and forgiving spirit for a reason. She would never want an accident to tear apart her family," Sue Daly said as her husband sat next to her, their arms touching. "We need to have Katie here to help us heal. She will live with this accident for the rest of her life and the guilt she carries is punishment enough."

Klaus made little eye contact with the Dalys or the attorneys as the hearing progressed.

After arguments for probation by Rietz and Lipton in which they noted Daly's spotless record and contributions to the community through her work as a nurse and a volunteer, Klaus gave Daly her chance to be heard.

In a broken voice, Daly, the mother of a 20-month-old son, told the judge family is the most important thing in her life.

"I would never intentionally hurt anyone, especially Annie Sue. If I could, I would take her place in a heartbeat because I am permanently heart-broken," she said.

Daly, who has already attended a victim impact panel, done public service, and undergone counseling, said she hoped, as part of a community-based sentence, to educate high school students that alcohol and driving in any kind of vehicle are not acceptable in any circumstance.

In March, Lipton and Rietz had tried to present Klaus with a negotiated plea to reckless homicide for a sentence of probation but Klaus rejected the deal.

The attorneys came back later in March with the plea to the same charge, agreeing to let Klaus impose the sentence. They hoped that once the judge heard the evidence in mitigation and read the letters of support for Daly, that he would consider probation.

Sections (2):News, Local

Comments

News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.

Login or register to post comments

sweet caroline wrote on May 16, 2014 at 6:05 pm

I don't know anyone in the family at all, but I've followed this tragic case from the beginning.  I'm saddened and actually shocked at the prison sentence, but Judge Klaus is right when he says this was NOT an accident.  Katie did not accidentally drive drunk.  I fear for what she will have to endure in prison.  She has done everything exactly as instructed since the accident.  I had hoped that with intense court supervision and a long probation she'd be able to continue her public service work and using her own horrible example as a means to deter others from drinking and driving.  Instead, her incarceration will make HER the example.  One family has lost 2 beloved daughters. 

trysomethingnew wrote on May 16, 2014 at 7:05 pm

I'm glad that the Judge showed that he wouldn't show favoritism in making his decision in sentencing. I'm a little shocked that the sentence was still less than they have given other DUI cases in the same county. However I am disgusted that once again Julia Reitz has shown favoritism to another white defendant. Welcome to Champaign County. 

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 17, 2014 at 7:05 am

Lose the hate.  If it takes leaving Champaign County to do so, do it. 

K.D. wrote on May 16, 2014 at 7:05 pm

If Klaus were interested in deterring drinking and driving, perhaps he would have served us better when he had an opportunity to sentence a sworn police officer to something other than court supervision for driving drunk the wrong way down the interstate.  Today, while protecting society, he didn't give the vicitim's family the courtesy of looking them in eye when they spoke.  I sincerely doubt justice was accomplished today.   

alabaster jones 71 wrote on May 17, 2014 at 12:05 am
Profile Picture

Maybe it's just me, but I believe that once you decide to get into or onto a vehicle that you know to be driven by someone who is impaired, that you are responsible for what happens to you, or at least much more so than the driver.  Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

If it were up to me, she and others like her would be prosecuted for the act of driving drunk, but not for the choices made by their passengers.  (Also, the judge would have the backbone and the basic human decency to make eye contact with the people he is pontificating about in court.)

But, of course, that wouldn't make as much $$$ for the court and prison systems, and we can't have that!  They give too much money to the right people to make sure that things stay the way they are.

This case isn't half as ridiculous as the Dana Hasselbring verdict though.  That was an absolute travesty.....worthy of a good laugh, if it weren't so tragic.

ericbussell wrote on May 17, 2014 at 8:05 am

Thoughts and prayers to the entire Daly family and the many impacted by this horrible accident.  

Local Yocal wrote on May 17, 2014 at 10:05 am
Profile Picture

Having watched the same set of circumstances where African-American families go through the torture of watching a loved one swept away to the prisons for far, far less serious crimes than Daly here, it is hoped this 'ol hammer of the criminal justice system faces more and continued scrutiny.

Rietz conforms to her usual standards of leniency for the professional, (and white) class, but no doubt Judge Klaus is beginning to realize the double standards of justice are beginning to get embarassing, which the judge did once perpetuate with the first Detective Lisa Staples DUI case on the highway. (Staples, months later, re-offended by tampering with her ankle bracelet, and drove again drunk and crashed into two teenagers sending the kids to the hospital.)

Klaus couldn't hold an eye gaze because no one can when they are talking out their neck. A prison sentence deters future crimes, Judge? 

Champaign County's law enforcers are very proud of its tough sentencing on DUI, but do show us then, Judge Klaus, a spread sheet of the last ten years worth of DUI prosecutions. If prison sentences are doing what you claim they do, we should see the number of DUI prosecutions on the decline, right?    

rsp wrote on May 17, 2014 at 11:05 am

Here's a comparison for you. Klaus made a referance to a dui case where a firefighter was injured and he sentenced the man to 6 years. In that case the guy was on probation for felony possession at the time of the dui. In his list of cases he reviewed how many were first timers? And any judge who doesn't have the courage of his convictions to make eye contact shouldn't be on the bench.

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 17, 2014 at 9:05 pm

Local; more race ranting regarding "white"?  Justice is only what the defendent can afford.  Only the well-off, and connected of all races get the justice that they can afford.  Of course; it is simpler just to make it racial than economic when ranting against inequal justice.

Stay in C-U, Local.  The county is full of poor "white" residents who have experienced judicial inequity; and they would find your simple logic repulsive. 

Voice of Reazon wrote on May 17, 2014 at 10:05 am

Each case has its own facts. In this case, Katheryn Daly differs from lots of DUI defendants, in that (a) she does not seem to present much of a danger to society, and (b) she has already suffered, and will continue to suffer, regardless of what the judge thinks he has to do. 

In my view, Ms. Daly should not have received this kind of sentence.  And any judge who can't look at the defendant while sentencing her to years in prison should not be on the bench.  

Hopefully this is a wake-up call to Judge Difanis, who needs to re-assign Klaus to hearing jay-walking violations. 

We have a voice as citizens; if and when Judge Klaus seeks to be retained, voters should remember this sentence and vote NO.  Justice lies, to a great extent, in the eye of the beholder, and Klaus certainly failed here, to my eye.

P.S.  N-G:  Your "captcha" validation technology is VERY hard to use (scrawled, script words are pretty much illegible; there are better tools out there for this). 

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 17, 2014 at 9:05 pm

Good comment.  Judge Klaus should NOT be retained.  This will come up during the next time Klaus seeks retention.  Each case is different.  If they are not; why bother with character witnesses, victim's families, and attorneys?  Just have judge Klaus send an e-mail verdict?

K.D. wrote on May 17, 2014 at 10:05 pm

Judge Klaus is an associate judge.  He is appointed by the Circuit Judges, not elected. 

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 18, 2014 at 12:05 pm

Thank you for the information.  "Appointed" judges based on what criteria?  How do the Circuit Judges decide who is fit to be an Associate Judge?  Do they hold secret meetings to decide, exchange favors, or accept money? 

trysomethingnew wrote on May 19, 2014 at 11:05 am

She killed someone. What do you mean she didn't hurt anyone!!!! She committed a homicide regardless of voluntary or involuntary.  Kinda glad this didn't go to a jury in this county. 

Gimme wrote on May 17, 2014 at 11:05 am

Only societal blackmail affected this decision. Using this young mother as a basis for deterrence, or equality in sentencing, is bowing to the mindless logic that she must pay the same price that others paid before her, without considering an ounce of any of the vast and positive testimony of her network. An educated and self reliant citizen who positively contributes to society in every sense of god, country, community and family and poses no risk of repeat is worthy of mercy. The Judge is spineless for ignoring relevant testimony. Justice is not served today and a remorseful citizen has been needlessly removed from the community.

trysomethingnew wrote on May 19, 2014 at 11:05 am

She didn't positively commit to society, she CHOSE to drink and drive and she killed someone.  What makes her so much better to save? Hypocrisy. There is no justice for all, only justice for some. Very disturbing. 

Trojan wrote on May 17, 2014 at 5:05 pm

It seems that Champaign court has plenty of judges who are impartial and decide the cases based on their own "interpretation of law". The other one who comes to mind is judge Ford.

 

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 17, 2014 at 9:05 pm

If you can; look up or ask around about judge Ford's connection to Klaus, and D.U.I.s.

Bennett 87 wrote on May 18, 2014 at 8:05 am

I hope that imposing this sentence made Judge Klaus feel big, important, and powerful. I don't know what else it was supposed to have accomplished. 

fedupwithit wrote on May 18, 2014 at 9:05 am

Thank You Judge Klaus. It is somewhat refreshing to experience a Court with the backbone to do what is not popular. To everyone whining about a three and a half year prison sentence..... This is your deterrent dont drink and drive, if you do and someone is hurt or killed then "regardless of your staion in life you will suffer the consequences". Again Thank you judge Klaus this is absolutley the message that needs to be sent to the community.

Julia Rietz You should be ashamed.

Affluence alone does not absolve you of culpability

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 18, 2014 at 12:05 pm

The young woman sentenced, and her family are not affluent.   Why bother with character witnesses, forgiving victim family members, and community support?  Just let the affluent judge give everyone his prescribed sentence.  No good comes from Klaus' decision.  It does allow the righteous to spout condemnation until it is their turn, or their family member's turn on the docket. 

Justice is only based on how much money one can pay for it in America.

trysomethingnew wrote on May 19, 2014 at 11:05 am

You seem like someone who speaks a lot about nothing. Do you even know what is like to grow up not white??!!!! I mean your so delusional in your postings. You have no idea how the real world works. I'm assuming you have the complexion for the protection. 

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 19, 2014 at 2:05 pm

The "real world" as opposed to what other world? 

Yes, I am a Euro-American.  Yes, I grew up poor.  Yes, I have seen the problems caused by economic disparity.  To disregard the diversity of others is racism as you have shown in your racial comments.  Race does not trump poverty.  Your ignoring the lack of money being available for justice in the courts.  You are demonstrating racism as much as any red neck would. 

trysomethingnew wrote on May 19, 2014 at 11:05 am

Finally someone else who sees this for what it is. I agree with everything you said. 

trysomethingnew wrote on May 19, 2014 at 11:05 am

Born and raised right here in CU. Should I lose the hate or should this community stop the racism?  Why do I have to leave to live somewhere that I am treated the exact same way no matter the color of my skin?

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 19, 2014 at 2:05 pm

Your hate does not help end racism.  It only perpetuates it.

casegirl wrote on May 19, 2014 at 12:05 pm

Hope the Judges standards do not change anytime soon.

Mr Dreamy wrote on May 19, 2014 at 1:05 pm

The fallacy all of you operate by is that everyone should be treated the same. While it shouldn't matter the race, religion, gender, or affluence of the defendant, each and every person, each and every defendant is different. Some are bitter, some are unapologetic, some are evil, while some are decent, some are remorseful, some are devastated by their feelings of guilt. 

To cookie cutter all defendants, to make examples out of every one, to harshly treat every defendant just because he/she is a defendant is not justice. I am certain that any other RN who is thinking about being at a family picnic, having a few beers, hopping on a Gator, sliding on some gravel, dumping the Gator and killing her best friend/cousin is deterred. Nobody else. Not the guy who gets loaded at the tavern (as usual) and who just knows he can make it home without killing someone on Mattis Ave. Not the guy coming home after drinking pitchers of beer celebrating his softball team's win that night. 

Deterrence as a concept works but in the real world it is illusory. Do you refrain from stealing because you'll get caught and punished, or because it's the wrong thing to do? Is the education of morality instilled in you your guidance, or is it potential criminal prosecution? Are you a thief who is just afraid of getting caught? Or are you someone who maybe was distracted at the self checkout line and accidentally forget to ring up the can of tuna while checking out $200 worth of groceries? What deters you?

And who are you to call for retribution punishment? Aren't the wishes of the victims family more well situated than you are? THEY speak for the victim, you don't. 

Some should be punished harshly. They just didn't get it that what they did was so wrong, or are repeat offenders. But not all belong in prison. Shame on you.

 

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 19, 2014 at 2:05 pm

Thank you, Mr. Dreamy.  We do not always agree; but your comment is right on this article.

auntjo wrote on May 19, 2014 at 6:05 pm

My sympathies to the Daly family for their loss.  Unfortunately, the law should be meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of identity, money, power, or weakness, with blind justice and impartiality.  As mentioned in an earlier remark there was a man sentenced to 6 years in prison for aggravated DUI and injuring a Fireman.  However, the information did not add that his alcohol level (0.092) was less than Ms. Daly’s (0.13), he did not kill anyone it also did mention probation, but failed to mention all the facts.  He also lives with the fact that he has caused unintentional injury to someone.  He is also a kind loving and giving person, yes a person with feelings, dreams, and a family much like Ms. Daly.  He, has full-time employment of 8 years, is married has a family is expecting a child in 14 weeks and has a life and loving family who is hurting and misses and loves him.. Therefore, this begs the question, what if this young man had been a woman, would the decision have been different or if he had hit a homeless person instead of a firefighter.  Would the States Attorney’s office have offered a probation plea instead of the original 10-year plea?  Alternatively, if he had hit a relative and killed them instead of injuring them would he have gotten a lesser sentence?  I believe that the States Attorney’s office has gone astray from justiceI commend Judge Klaus for applying the sentence, but I do not understand how you can get 3 ½ years for killing someone and 6 years for injuring someone.  It would appear that we are all quick to judge yet are quick to cite the Christian roots of others, yet we do not look to others  sent to prison for ACCIDENTS  that have occurred with the same glasses.  Therefore, when you are all having dinner at that restaurant, a party, or that happy hour and have that second or third glass of wine and drive home, peak out and pull your vehicle out and something hits your vehicle, let’s hope that the States Attorney’s office takes a liking to you and you may come out alright.

 

Tryingtoberespectful wrote on May 20, 2014 at 8:05 pm

 This is in response to auntjo's earlier post. It was mentioned that not all of the "facts" of Mr.Paquin's case were allowed to come out. It is obivious that you have close ties to the family to know such details so let's look at some facts that have not been mentioned. First and foremost Garrett was NOT sentenced by Judge Klaus. He took a plea deal. He got to chose to take the "deal" or have it go to trial where then the judge could have set his sentence. Mr. Ballew did not get to chose his"fate" on the night of  Sept. 25. Garrett got to decide that for him. While Mr.Paqin celebrated Thanksgiving, Christmas, News Years, got his wife pregnant and lived a healthy life you cannot begin to comprehend what Mr. Ballew was striving to regain. There was not much to celebrate except the fact he was still breathing.  While clearly the Daly girl has fully accepted her responsible part in her tragic story and done many things while awaiting trial to prove it, the family of Mr.Ballew has not heard a word of any regret on the part of Garrett. My heart actually has felt sorry and sad for him as a mother of sons, but your post referencing Mr. Ballew as "something" that hit Garrett's truck is hurtful. It wasn't a bug or a rock. It was another human being. Someone who is also loving and kind. Someone who also has a wife, children, and grandchildren. A man who his family loves and misses who he used to be too, but has to watch struggle everyday to do the simplest of things. Clearly no one wins when a person decides to drink and drive and hurt innocent people. Everyone suffers so then we must ask ourselves why does it continue?  We can all speculate why that is and we would all have a different opinion I'm sure. Finally I do pray that this accident changes Garretts life so that when he is released he will have no desire to use drugs or drink and drive. While he did not "kill" anyone his actions certainly forever altered someone elses life. While Garrett has to also live with that everday it is Not the same.  You also suggest that things have not been fair in Mr. Paqin's case.....the victim does not necessarily feel for all his suffering that it was "fair" for there to even be an offer of.a plea especially since there.was a prior drug felony that was not at all an old charge. There should have been a trial and a sentence from the.judge. But the victim did Not have a say so in that. Garrett had rights according to the law and he used them. So do.you really want a.courtroom where everything is cut and dried and the same for everyone no matter what?  Think about all that would mean and what that might have meant for.Garrett too.  He could have gotten many more years than he did.         You are correct when reminding people to.think before they drink and drive but not because it is  Champaign County but because innocent lives are at stake. 

C-U Townie wrote on May 19, 2014 at 9:05 pm

When you allow for an individual's circumstances to come into play regarding punishment it's a very slippery slope. 

Upstanding citizen or not she made a bad decision. The idea of discouraging others from doing the same is that there is no circumstance that will get you a "get out of jail free card." The idea is that regardless of who you are you will be punished if you break the law. When you send the message that somehow a circumstance in your life should trump not only your illegal behavior but the outcome of that behavior is a very poor argument. 

That argument was used in the case of the 16 year old boy who killed 4 people and his attorney blamed it on Affluenza. He was someone with no record. He wasn't a repeat offender. He had family that spoke up for him and argued that he was a good kid. 

Fair is when everyone, regardless of their circumstances, is judged the same. The judicial system was created based on that concept. Latitude has been extended to each presiding judge and jury and at their discretion they can dole out punishment as they see fit. I agree more with states that set mandatory terms for crimes.. Mandatory terms that are not swayed by offender, offender's life, or what others say. 

Consider if this had been your loved one who had been killed. While the family of the loved one is the same as the offender's that should not take away from the choices made that led to the outcome. Victims' families should be afforded justice as the victim should be/is. 

The best message the judicial system can send is of firm consequences. "You will be punished if you break the law. No roll of the dice. You'll be punished." It's when individuals think they will be the lucky few who will not get caught, will not have a severe outcome, and will not be punished harshly who don't toe the line and throw caution to the wind. 

Local Yocal wrote on May 20, 2014 at 1:05 pm
Profile Picture

"Victims' families should be afforded justice as the victim should be/is."

What say you when, as in this case, the victim's family wanted mercy and a community-based sentence?

K.D. wrote on May 20, 2014 at 9:05 am

Didn't the person who hit the fireman have a prior felony?  

cbcb wrote on May 20, 2014 at 11:05 am

Yes the person did have a prior felony. While looking up Dalys record, she has had no prior tickets/convictions at all. I  pray for the Daly families. I have no idea how hard these past months have been. Yes, law was broken. But to me, everyone had a choice to get on that atv that night. Freak accidents happen and this is what it was. 

Local Yocal wrote on May 20, 2014 at 1:05 pm
Profile Picture

Good to see a robust debate on what goes on over at the courthouse. If you don't think race matters to law enforcers, go to the courthouse and see it for yourself. Often, the critics of this system are called "the racists," but don't confuse the intended ideals of the system with what actually happens. It's law enforcement who gives race and income the importance, not the critics.

And while all hold Judge Klaus responsible for sending this young lady to prison, it's your State's Attorney who really controls the ball. If the State's Attorney didn't want the girl to go to prison, she could have dropped the charges or filed lessor charges that don't require a prison sentence.

Just like Rietz did in '05 with the Jennifer Starks case, where Jennifer's conduct of texting while driving could have easily been given to a jury to decide if texting while driving ignored a substantial risk, (the standard for a reckless homicide) that killed bicyclist, Matt Wilhelm. Instead, Rietz only prosecuted Starks (who was rumored to have been in a relationship with a Sheriff's deputy at the time) with improper lane usage. Just like when Rietz didn't prosecute whatsoever developer Steve Harrington for stealing over $150,000 from the Sonic Drive-In; just like nobody even arrested or prosecuted Urbana Police Officer Kurt Hjort for raping a convenience store clerk; just like charging Sgt. Myers, a correctional officer who tortured four inmates at the county jail with a taser, with only a misdemeanor disorderly conduct initially (public pressure made Rietz think twice about that decision)....and on and on the favors go.

Consider this: Over 8,400 police reports are filed each year with the State's Attorney's office. But only about 4000 cases are actually prosecuted. The other 4,400? The state's attorney files them in a category called Miscellaneuous Reports, never to be seen again.

The state's attorney controls what the judge gets to decide on.

It was Rietz' insistence that there must be a guilty plea to a felony that allowed Klaus to send Daly to prison. It's certain Mr. Lipton attempted to talk Rietz down to a lessor charge.

But then,....it would be the state's attorney who everyone is mad at in this DUI case if it was pointed out that such leniency (dropping the charges or filing lessor charges) is another sign of the two-tiered, unequal application of the law practiced over at this particular courthouse.

Mr. Dreamy's analysis of deterrence should be pasted to every Judge's gavel for that lame excuse is not true (50% recidivism in Champaign County) and only sounds good during the theatre production that is a court hearing in Champaign County. 

We could cut DUI down by 50% if it were studied objectively, and we designed a better way to deter people from getting behind the wheel impaired. Instead, we let the criminal justice practitioners pick who is "evil" and who is "good" in this archaic Roman Collesium of "justice." Rev. Dr. Evelyn Underwood, a trained lawyer herself and frequent witness to the goings-on at the courthouse, bristles at what she describes as, "They think they can play God."

Oh, one more clarification, Attorney Mark Lipton is a private attorney who is quite expensive for usually, (and this is an edict handed down by the state's attorney to her assistant state's attorneys) the private bar is always to be given "professional courtesies" in the state's recommendations for sentences. Daly didn't go to prison for lack of resources. The presence of Lipton, (and his diligence at securing all the favorable character evidence) had Julia mouthing, "probation."

In consolation to the Daly family and church, constant contact with the relative, (letters, visits, and phone calls) will alert D.O.C. officials that nothing better happen to Kathryn during her stay. (It's mideval that the State allows drugs, gangs, rape, and murder to be part and parcel of a prison sentence.)

The months should go by fast, boring, but faster than you think.

Hopefully, Kathryn might lend her voice to prison reform when she gets out.      

alabaster jones 71 wrote on May 21, 2014 at 1:05 am
Profile Picture

Amen, amen, amen, and then amen again.  Well said.

cbcb wrote on May 21, 2014 at 6:05 am

I'm having a hard time looking up the old articles, but forgive me if I'm wrong. Didn't Rietz actually reduce the charges? I thought her prison sentence could have been up to 14/16 years. Maybe I'm wrong to, but I just thought Rietz actually did what she could without dropping the charges. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Sorry I'm just going of my memory. Thanks

Urbana215 wrote on May 22, 2014 at 12:05 pm

The aggravated DUI was dropped, she was charged with Reckless Homicide which DOES NOT have an manadotory prison sentence.  It does have a probation sentence.

Sid Saltfork wrote on May 23, 2014 at 7:05 am

Thank you, Urbana215.  It would seem that the controversy comes down to those who believe in manadotory sentencing versus those who believe in individual, and rehabilitative sentencing.  Based on some of the comments, race plays a part in the matter also. 

The judge's personal view of justice was the decider evidently.  Thanks again for explaining that a probation sentence could have been imposed.

Urbana215 wrote on May 23, 2014 at 9:05 am

I made some other comments but apparently they were not liberal enough for Urbana.

auntjo wrote on May 21, 2014 at 9:05 pm

In the avoidance of a fencing match I have knowledge of Garrett, I am his Aunt.  Therefore, I am aware of his feelings,yes he has them.  He does feel remorse and lives with the affect that he has had on Mr Ballew's life every second and every minute since that night.  As I am sure you as a friend or relative have felt sadness for Mr. Ballew as well. If your understanding is that Garrett does not understand the levity of his actions or accepts responsibility, I assure you he feels the full weight and responsibility deeply and painfully.  He has been jailed, worn the appropriate monitoring equipment, admitted his actions, called 911 from the scene, stayed with Mr. Ballew while awaiting EMS, spoke with the police at the scene, as well as followed all provisions dictated by the law and did not try to not step up and face the consequences of his actions.  I in no way implied that he was treated unfairly, I am only implying that justice is to meted out by our judicial system according to rules of law.  Furthermore, it was not my intention to be hurtful to the friends and family of Mr. Ballew, his life is changed,I am unsure that one could feel  there is no apology, sentence, or a request for forgiveness that will compensate for the loss of his former way of life.    This forum should continue to remain on the subject of truth in sentencing and the legitamacy  of the sentencing of DUI and consequences thereof.