I didn't see it earlier but they do have a separate “press room” link for more official business.

That is what I would also like to know. I'm tempted to believe it is a newly elected official being overly aggressive to prove herself to someone. Check out what the Cook County states attorney office website has for “news and events”. It's a little curious what they choose to focus on here.

The prosecutors (or persecutors?) are out on a limb now IMHO. For as corrupt as things can get in Cook County, $40-100 in two alleged bribes don't amount to much. Prosecutors are out hunting for mice when an elephant is sitting in their office. Especially since the mice appear to be scrupulous about following the rules.

I've been trying to follow this story in the Chicago Tribune and it does drill into some details that answer a number of questions for me. Such as “why are witnesses being given money by the hired investigator for the students?”
~~~~~~~~
One witness, Tony Drakes, said the Northwestern investigator gave a cab driver $60 to drive him a short distance and told the driver to give Drakes $40 in change. Drakes said he used the money to buy crack cocaine.

Northwestern student Evan Benn, who is named in the state's subpoena, said it was him, not the investigator, who gave the cab driver the money, along with instructions that none of it was to be given to Drakes.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-us-wr…
~~~~~~~
An earlier Trib article said that the cab driver gave the change to Drakes because he was afraid it was drug money.

The suburban Chicago street down which he ran, on Sept. 15, 1978, took him near the spot where security guard Donald Lundahl had earlier been shot to death. Police, still on the scene investigating, arrested McKinney, 18, who said he was running from gang bangers. With no physical evidence linking him to the crime, they ended up letting him go.

But they did not forget him. Eventually, police turned up two men who said they had witnessed the crime, one of whom said that from 50 yards away, he saw McKinney, who had no history of violent crime, point a shotgun and say, “Your money or your life.” Detectives re-arrested McKinney. After a long session in the interrogation room, he signed a confession.

At trial he recanted, saying he had been coerced. At the time of the killing, he said, he was home watching the Ali-Spinks fight. His father corroborated this, not that it helped. McKinney was convicted and sentenced to life.

We are indebted to the Medill Innocence Project, which gives journalism students at Northwestern University real world experience in investigative reporting, for the preceding account. And also for the following findings, based on a three-year investigation begun in 2003:

• McKinney was indeed running from gang bangers that night. Students found two of them who admitted chasing him, angry that he had damaged their car.

• The “eyewitnesses” say police beat them into falsely fingering McKinney. Both had originally told police they were home watching the Ali-Spinks fight until the ninth round, which would have made it impossible for them to witness the murder.

• The crime scene is a busy street. It is not possible to hear anything said or shouted there from 50 yards away.

• The now-retired police officer who led the investigation had a jacket full of brutality complaints and once faced federal charges for allegedly beating a suspect.

• A convicted killer, Anthony Drake, told students he was “present” at the murder — and that McKinney was not.

Students finished their investigation in 2006. McKinney, now 49, still languishes behind bars, his conviction under judicial review.

Meanwhile, not content with having two crimes (i.e., the apparently still-unsolved murder of Donald Lundahl and the railroading of Anthony McKinney) on her hands, the prosecutor is busy committing a third. She's trying to kill the messenger.

Attorney's tactics against Medill's Innocence Project hint at intimidation

I didn't see it earlier but they do have a separate “press room” link for more official business.

That is what I would also like to know. I'm tempted to believe it is a newly elected official being overly aggressive to prove herself to someone. Check out what the Cook County states attorney office website has for “news and events”. It's a little curious what they choose to focus on here.

The prosecutors (or persecutors?) are out on a limb now IMHO. For as corrupt as things can get in Cook County, $40-100 in two alleged bribes don't amount to much. Prosecutors are out hunting for mice when an elephant is sitting in their office. Especially since the mice appear to be scrupulous about following the rules.

I've been trying to follow this story in the Chicago Tribune and it does drill into some details that answer a number of questions for me. Such as “why are witnesses being given money by the hired investigator for the students?”
~~~~~~~~
One witness, Tony Drakes, said the Northwestern investigator gave a cab driver $60 to drive him a short distance and told the driver to give Drakes $40 in change. Drakes said he used the money to buy crack cocaine.

Northwestern student Evan Benn, who is named in the state's subpoena, said it was him, not the investigator, who gave the cab driver the money, along with instructions that none of it was to be given to Drakes.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-ap-us-wr…
~~~~~~~
An earlier Trib article said that the cab driver gave the change to Drakes because he was afraid it was drug money.