Four Lake County area men, several of whom may have only been peripheral participants in a drug transaction, now face homicide charges.
The men face up to 30 years in prison each after authorities accused them of providing heroin laced with fentanyl to a Sugar Grove woman who was found dead in her home from an apparent overdose. Shortly after her body was found, investigators focused on the men as possible drug suppliers in the area. According to phone records, the victim called one of the men, and authorities claim the two set up a drug sale somewhere in the St. Charles area. Along with the four men, police seized a powder substance that field-tested positive for heroin, several bags of suspected heroin, cash, and prescription pill bottles.
Kane County Sheriff’s spokesman Lt. Patrick Gengler said that many victims are first-time users of the incredibly dangerous substance, so “they really don’t know what they are using.”
The Link Between Drugs and Crime
During post-arrest news conferences, many police departments are quick to link street drugs with serious crimes. Fortunately, when a case reaches a courtroom, the prosecutor must produce more than hype and speculation to overcome the presumption of innocence and secure a conviction.
That presumption is not to be glossed over. In criminal court, the scales of justice do not begin evenly balanced. Instead, they are weighted in favor of the defendant, because the jury must assume that the defendant is wrongfully accused. It is not enough for the prosecutor to present enough evidence to balance the scales. Instead, because of the high standard of proof, the prosecutor must produce so much evidence of such a compelling nature that it reverses the balance, and the jury must find the defendant guilty as a matter of law.
Another rather unique feature of American criminal law is that there is no such thing as “guilt by association,” and this element often comes to bear in drug crimes prosecutions. For example, in possession cases, it is not enough for the prosecutor to prove that the defendant was in a car or house where there happened to be drugs close by. Instead, the state must prove that the defendant:
- Knew that the substance was the illegal drug charged in the indictment (as opposed to knowing that there was “something illegal” in the glovebox), and
- Had actual or constructive control over the drug.
In other words, a kilo of cocaine could be directly underneath the defendant’s chair, but if the defendant does not know there is anything under the chair, does not know that the substance is cocaine, or does not have the key to the storage locker, the defendant is not guilty of possession.
Overdose deaths are always tragic, but this tragedy does not necessarily give rise to legal culpability. According to the drug-induced homicide law, the prosecutor must prove that:
- The defendant “unlawfully deliver[ed] a controlled substance to another,” and
- The person who received the drugs subsequently died after ingesting that particular controlled substance.
So, in addition to proving that the defendant either actually sold the drugs to the overdose victim or was part of a conspiracy to sell the drugs to that person (as opposed to a conspiracy to sell drugs to anyone on the street), the prosecutor must also prove that the victim died because of that individual sale, and not because of another transaction.
Reach Out to Aggressive Attorneys
If you or a loved one is caught in an anti-drug police dragnet, contact Glasgow & Olsson for a confidential consultation with an experienced criminal law attorney in Schaumburg.
(image courtesy of eric molina from New York City, United States)