On November 6, 2024, police responding to a 911 call found a father conducting chest compressions on his two-year-old child. Soon after, the child died. At this moment, we should be reflecting on how a case like this could happen while working to ensure that the parents’ surviving six-year-old child is supported. Instead, Illinois House Republicans are shamefully taking the opportunity to once again complain about the Pretrial Fairness Act. It is clear that they will react this way to every tragedy – always trying to blame this policy rather than actually working to build up communities and address the root causes of harm and violence.

Every aspect of this case is tragic: evidence suggests that the parents were struggling with substance use and the home was in deplorable conditions with drugs scattered throughout. Now, the parents are dealing with the loss of their child and their own potential culpability in that terrible event. No one involved will be the same. 

Soon after the death of their daughter, police arrested the parents on felony charges, which included child endangerment. After evaluating their criminal records and likelihood of appearing at future court dates, the judge released them pretrial. Their older child was also removed from the home and is in DCFS care. The judge imposed strict release conditions, including home confinement and substance use treatment. For six months, the parents have been fully compliant with those conditions.

Now, based on the autopsy report, prosecutors have increased the felony charges to murder, alleging that the child ingested drugs and that the parents did not call 911 fast enough to save her life. Those allegations will play out at trial. In the meantime, the parents have complied with their pretrial conditions, including participating in treatment and showing up to court. There is no other new evidence suggesting that they are a flight risk or are currently a danger to the community, which are the relevant questions that determine pretrial release. 

It is a deeply human impulse to want to punish people we believe have caused grievous and unnecessary harm, especially in a case that involves the death of a child. And that is, in part, what a sentence is for: a sentence that is given by a judge once a case is tried and after a person is found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, the question is safety and flight risk, and no new evidence suggests that the parents are a threat to either.

We hope opponents of a fair, risk-based pretrial system will stop using these tragedies to push their political agenda. It does not make our communities safer and only serves to distract from the needs of this hurting family and their surviving child.