Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/9/2005 8:29:11 AM EDT
Shaken alderman: Boost ward offices' security

August 9, 2005

BY FRAN SPIELMAN City Hall Reporter
Chgo Suntimes


Ald. Shirley Coleman (16th) is demanding stepped-up security at aldermanic ward offices after an irate man looking for food walked into her office in the heart of impoverished and crime-ridden Englewood last week and told aldermanic staffers he would "blow" their "brains out."

Coleman's sister, Mildred Matthews, works as the alderman's receptionist at 1249 W. 63rd St. Darlene Coleman, no relation, serves as the alderman's administrative assistant.

They were working alone behind a locked door that seals off a reception area when a man walked in at 10:55 a.m. Friday asking for food. When Darlene Coleman told the man the office had no food and tried to steer him to places where he could get some, the man, who was not armed, started shouting, according to the police report.

"If I had a gun, I'd blow your brains out," Ald. Coleman, who was not in the office at the time, quoted the man as saying. The man then made a vulgar sexual reference to the women and walked out the door. The women reported the incident to Chicago Police, who apprehended the man walking east on 63rd Street.

The 46-year-old suspect, identified as Robert Lowe, was charged with misdemeanor assault. He is scheduled to appear in court on Sept. 5.

Friday's incident was the latest in a series of recent threats made against Ald. Coleman, who acknowledged that she is particularly sensitive to security issues because of her harrowing experience as a victim of domestic violence.

Coleman is the ex-wife of convicted murderer Hernando Williams, who was put to death in 1995 in what was Illinois' first double-execution in 43 years. During her marriage to Williams, Coleman was repeatedly threatened and "beaten up" by him, she said.

"I'm sensitive whenever threats are made against my life," Coleman said. "Having been a victim, you don't take threats lightly."

"In this day and time, it's important to look at elected officials' offices that are open to the public on a full-time basis. Looking at the overall budget for homeland security, a line item could be included for security purposes."

Wants 1 guard per location


With two full-time bodyguards and one relief officer, Finance Committee Chairman Edward M. Burke (14th) is the only City Council member who has Chicago Police officers permanently assigned to protect him.

The protection dates back to Burke's role as a political lightning rod who marshaled opposition to Mayor Harold Washington during the 1980s power struggle known as "Council Wars."

On Monday, Coleman said she is not interested in having a full-time bodyguard. She wants one armed security guard permanently assigned to each of the 50 aldermanic ward offices and, possibly, some money made available for office renovations.

"To have three bodyguards, I think, is a bit much," she said, questioning whether Burke's "life has been threatened like mine" has.

Coleman added, "It's not fair for aldermen to be put in a position of being threatened and not be able to do something about those threats."

Burke could not be reached for comment.

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 8:29:57 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/9/2005 8:31:17 AM EDT by CKMorley]
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Responses can be sent to: letters@suntimes.com

Editors,

Alderman Shirley Coleman's recent demand that all 50 Chicago aldermanic ward offices should have an armed guard on the premises is insulting to ordinary citizens, and in light of special Aldermanic privileges, quite laughable.

Insulting, because The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled time and again that police officers have no obligation to defend individual, ordinary taxpayers, yet Ald. Coleman believes that Chicago politicians are owed special treatment and armed protection at taxpayer's expense. Apparently, Ald. Coleman puts no faith in the 911 system that her constituents are told to rely upon.

Laughable, because under Illinois Law, Chicago aldermen are considered "conservators of the peace", and as such, they have the power to arrest and the power to carry firearms. Chicago Aldermen, for all intents, are cops.

Ald. Coleman has the means to defend herself and her staffers, unlike the ordinary citizens of Illinois, who are prohibited from carrying handguns for self defense. On top of that, Chicago's handgun ban prohibits non-politicians from even owning a pistol. For Ald. Coleman to demand armed guards, on top of her special concealed carry privileges, is a sickening display of elitism.

Lastly, Coleman's statement, "it's not fair for aldermen to be put in a position of being threatened and not be able to do something about those threats" is entirely inaccurate in light of her "conservator of the peace" status. If Ald. Coleman was truly defenseless, I would say "welcome to the real world, your honor".

CKMorley
Park Forest, IL
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 9:13:11 AM EDT
What more would you expect coming out of Chicago?

BTW, that's a very good letter to the editor you got there.

WIZZO
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 10:04:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CKMorley:
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Responses can be sent to: letters@suntimes.com

Editors,

Alderman Shirley Coleman's recent demand that all 50 Chicago aldermanic ward offices should have an armed guard on the premises is insulting to ordinary citizens, and in light of special Aldermanic privileges, quite laughable.

Insulting, because The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled time and again that police officers have no obligation to defend individual, ordinary taxpayers, yet Ald. Coleman believes that Chicago politicians are owed special treatment and armed protection at taxpayer's expense. Apparently, Ald. Coleman puts no faith in the 911 system that her constituents are told to rely upon.

Laughable, because under Illinois Law, Chicago aldermen are considered "conservators of the peace", and as such, they have the power to arrest and the power to carry firearms. Chicago Aldermen, for all intents, are cops.

Ald. Coleman has the means to defend herself and her staffers, unlike the ordinary citizens of Illinois, who are prohibited from carrying handguns for self defense. On top of that, Chicago's handgun ban prohibits non-politicians from even owning a pistol. For Ald. Coleman to demand armed guards, on top of her special concealed carry privileges, is a sickening display of elitism.

Lastly, Coleman's statement, "it's not fair for aldermen to be put in a position of being threatened and not be able to do something about those threats" is entirely inaccurate in light of her "conservator of the peace" status. If Ald. Coleman was truly defenseless, I would say "welcome to the real world, your honor".

CKMorley
Park Forest, IL



GREAT LETTER!!!
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 10:24:13 AM EDT
Fuck him, let the bastard be unarmed just like the rest of the proliteriate that he rules over.

Funny how laws suposedly apply to everyone except those who make them in Chi-town...
Link Posted: 8/9/2005 10:52:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jm03:

Originally Posted By CKMorley:
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Responses can be sent to: letters@suntimes.com

Editors,

Alderman Shirley Coleman's recent demand that all 50 Chicago aldermanic ward offices should have an armed guard on the premises is insulting to ordinary citizens, and in light of special Aldermanic privileges, quite laughable.

Insulting, because The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled time and again that police officers have no obligation to defend individual, ordinary taxpayers, yet Ald. Coleman believes that Chicago politicians are owed special treatment and armed protection at taxpayer's expense. Apparently, Ald. Coleman puts no faith in the 911 system that her constituents are told to rely upon.

Laughable, because under Illinois Law, Chicago aldermen are considered "conservators of the peace", and as such, they have the power to arrest and the power to carry firearms. Chicago Aldermen, for all intents, are cops.

Ald. Coleman has the means to defend herself and her staffers, unlike the ordinary citizens of Illinois, who are prohibited from carrying handguns for self defense. On top of that, Chicago's handgun ban prohibits non-politicians from even owning a pistol. For Ald. Coleman to demand armed guards, on top of her special concealed carry privileges, is a sickening display of elitism.

Lastly, Coleman's statement, "it's not fair for aldermen to be put in a position of being threatened and not be able to do something about those threats" is entirely inaccurate in light of her "conservator of the peace" status. If Ald. Coleman was truly defenseless, I would say "welcome to the real world, your honor".

CKMorley
Park Forest, IL



GREAT LETTER!!!


+1!

Very well written!

Link Posted: 8/9/2005 2:07:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CKMorley:
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Responses can be sent to: letters@suntimes.com

Editors,

Alderman Shirley Coleman's recent demand that all 50 Chicago aldermanic ward offices should have an armed guard on the premises is insulting to ordinary citizens, and in light of special Aldermanic privileges, quite laughable.

Insulting, because The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled time and again that police officers have no obligation to defend individual, ordinary taxpayers, yet Ald. Coleman believes that Chicago politicians are owed special treatment and armed protection at taxpayer's expense. Apparently, Ald. Coleman puts no faith in the 911 system that her constituents are told to rely upon.

Laughable, because under Illinois Law, Chicago aldermen are considered "conservators of the peace", and as such, they have the power to arrest and the power to carry firearms. Chicago Aldermen, for all intents, are cops.

Ald. Coleman has the means to defend herself and her staffers, unlike the ordinary citizens of Illinois, who are prohibited from carrying handguns for self defense. On top of that, Chicago's handgun ban prohibits non-politicians from even owning a pistol. For Ald. Coleman to demand armed guards, on top of her special concealed carry privileges, is a sickening display of elitism.

Lastly, Coleman's statement, "it's not fair for aldermen to be put in a position of being threatened and not be able to do something about those threats" is entirely inaccurate in light of her "conservator of the peace" status. If Ald. Coleman was truly defenseless, I would say "welcome to the real world, your honor".

CKMorley
Park Forest, IL



Good work CK.
Link Posted: 8/10/2005 7:04:16 AM EDT
1 more for CK!!! It would be great to see that printed!
Link Posted: 8/10/2005 8:04:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/10/2005 8:07:31 AM EDT by CKMorley]
They might run it. I've had several in the Times and Trib over the years.

CKMorley

Update: They just called to verify authorship.
Link Posted: 8/10/2005 11:25:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/10/2005 11:28:23 AM EDT by woodbutcher223308]
CK , best news I heard all day.

I will look for the draft I or two that I wrote to the Trib . You did good.

Crap' I wish i could type.
Link Posted: 8/10/2005 11:37:19 AM EDT
CK, Good job.

It's just not right.

Aldermen get to CCW(which is above and beyond city and state law) but the average law-abiding citizen cannot carry a weapon to defend themselves. WTF?
Link Posted: 8/10/2005 3:33:42 PM EDT
So let me get this right, she has the ability to carry a weapon on herself (unlike the lowly serfs beneath her) but she wants hired protection because she doesn't want to carry?

Give me a break!(where's John Stossel on this one)

WIZZO
Link Posted: 8/11/2005 8:25:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By WIZZO_ARAKM14:
So let me get this right, she has the ability to carry a weapon on herself (unlike the lowly serfs beneath her) but she wants hired protection because she doesn't want to carry?

Give me a break!(where's John Stossel on this one)

WIZZO


+1. She(and the other aldermen) are going beyond state law and she should get armed guards?

No.

Top Top