Will County cops, Secret Service targeted Manhattan couple with ‘frivolous’ forfeiture: lawsuit

A Manhattan couple charged with pandemic relief fraud as well as other offenses filed a federal lawsuit claiming that Will County authorities and the U.S. Secret Service are targeting them and others with “frivolous” civil forfeiture cases to line their pockets.

The lawsuit was filed Thursday by attorneys representing Jeff Regnier, 47, and Greta Keranen, 51. Regnier and Keranen were charged in Will County with Paycheck Protection Program fraud, money laundering, theft and other offenses.

Regnier is the owner of Kee Firearms and Training in New Lenox. He also ran unsuccessfully in the 2022 Republican primary for Illinois’ 1st Congressional District.

The couple’s lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois by attorneys with Ettinger and Associates in Palos Heights.

The defendants in the case include the Will County Sheriff’s Office, U.S. Secret Service Agent Cayla Coleman and “unknown John and Jane Doe” agents for the sheriff’s office and Secret Service.

Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow’s office was not named as a defendant because Regnier and Keranen “do not presently have any facts” that his office “engaged in any acts” that are not “judicial in nature” that would reduce their immunity from absolute to qualified, according to the lawsuit.

But Regnier and Keranen “reserve the right to amend the complaint should they become aware of any such facts,” according to the lawsuit.

The Herald-News has not yet received a response from Glasgow’s office. The Will County Sheriff’s Office declined to comment.

U.S. Secret Service spokesman Joe Biesk said, “As a matter of practice, the U.S. Secret Service does not comment on pending litigation.”

The lawsuit alleged that Coleman drafted a “knowingly false affidavit” Feb. 24 that led to the search and seizure of four vehicles and Fidelity Investment accounts valued at $5.5 million.

On May 26, a complaint seeking forfeiture of those items was later filed by Dant Foulk, an assistant state’s attorney for Glasgow. A judge has not yet made a ruling in that complaint.

According to the federal lawsuit, the forfeiture complaint had allegations with “materially false,” misleading or overreaching statements.

According to the lawsuit, Glasgow’s office worked in conjunction with the Secret Service and the Will County Sheriff’s Office to bring “knowingly frivolous civil forfeiture claims targeting citizens of Will County to line the pockets of the Will County state’s attorney and other Illinois government agencies.”

The lawsuit claimed those authorities have “created a de facto policy to overzealously pursue forfeiture opportunities” regardless of their legality in “violation of the constitutional rights of the individuals whose assets they seek to forfeit.”

The “ongoing nature, quantity and egregious quality” of the alleged constitutional violations “indicates the existence of either a widespread conspiracy, understanding or policy” that results in “overzealous and unconstitutional prosecution of forfeiture cases,” according to the lawsuit.

These violations are ”still ongoing, pervasive and rampant,” according to the lawsuit.

Last year, Joliet attorney Frank Andreano filed a counter claim in a forfeiture case that alleged Will County prosecutors are profiting from seized property belonging to people who’ve committed no crimes.

The case involved prosecutors seeking the forfeiture of an 84-year-old woman’s 2014 Mazda SUV that was seized by police after the woman’s daughter was operating the vehicle with a revoked driver’s license, according to court filings.

Andreano claimed that Illinois civil asset forfeiture law is unconstitutional because the proceeds from those cases are directly paid to police departments and state’s attorney’s offices rather than to the general fund of Illinois.

Glasgow’s former spokeswoman, Carole Cheney, said Andreano was challenging the “constitutionality of settled, well-established forfeiture laws.”

Cheney said Glasgow’s office has used forfeiture money in compliance with these laws for law enforcement and public education “in the prevention and detection of drug and alcohol abuse” through donations to numerous nonprofit organizations and law enforcement agencies.