Motive irrelevant in ex-Joliet cop’s misconduct case, Kendall County judge rules

A Kendall County judge ruled prosecutors’ evidence of a retired Joliet police sergeant’s alleged “bad acts” are irrelevant to his official misconduct case, unless he testifies about his motive at his trial.

On Tuesday, Judge Jody Gleason granted a defense motion to block prosecutors’ evidence of motive in their case against Javier Esqueda, who’s charged with unlawfully accessing a Joliet police squad vehicle video depicting the 2020 arrest of Eric Lurry, 37, of Joliet.

Lurry died from a fatal drug overdose following his arrest in a drug investigation. The video stirred protests and a lawsuit when it showed Joliet Police Sgt. Doug May slapping Lurry in the face, saying “Wake up [expletive]!” and pinching Lurry’s nose shut as other officers pulled bags of drugs out of his mouth.

Gleason’s decision Tuesday may spell a short trial for Esqueda that focuses on the bare facts of the case. Gleason has not yet ruled a motion from Esqueda’s attorney, Jeff Tomczak, that requests the suppression of all evidence based on Joliet police officials allegedly violating Esqueda’s whistleblower rights.

No trial date has yet been set for Esqueda’s case, which has another status hearing Sept. 24. Tomczak’s motion to suppress evidence is tentatively set for Oct. 17.

At Tuesday’s hearing, Tomczak, objected to jurors hearing prosecutors’ evidence of his client’s alleged motive for accessing and disseminating the Lurry video because he argued it was irrelevant to the official misconduct charges.

Tomczak said the case comes down to whether Esqueda accessed the video and whether he exceeded his authority in doing so. Tomczak contends Esqueda, as a field training supervisor, was allowed under departmental policy to access the video.

Tomczak said any evidence of motive is irrelevant and would “poison” the trial.

“It would really screw the jury up as far as what their considerations are,” Tomczak said.

Kendall County State’s Attorney Eric Weis said he wanted to introduce evidence of Esqueda’s alleged motive to show that him accessing and leaking the video was “not a mistake or accident.”

The “bad acts” that Weis sought to bring up at trial concerned two internal affairs investigations of Esqueda. Prosecutors contend Esqueda wanted to use the Lurry video as his “trump card” if he was disciplined or even fired following those investigations.

“We allege he was basically doing this to cover for himself,” Weis said.

At one point, Weis argued Esqueda, whom he said disseminated the Lurry video to the media, had “other options” if he was worried about “corruption” at the police department.

“He could have called the FBI,” Weis said.

In Gleason’s ruling, she said Esqueda’s case is about whether prosecutors can prove he accessed the video and whether he was authorized to do so. She said the case is not about Esqueda’s motive, which prosecutors are not required to prove.

Gleason said prosecutors can ask Esqueda about those internal investigations if he takes the witness stand and tries to explain his actions at trial.

Gleason denied Tomczak’s motion to cross-examine retired Joliet Police Chief Al Roechner, former Deputy Chief Marc Reid and Detective Jeff German about an inspector general report on an alleged conspiracy against former Joliet Mayor Bob O’Dekirk.

Gleason said Roechner and the two others “don’t have anything to do with this defendant and what he’s charged with.”