You are reading a rare, detailed account of everyday life in Stateville Prison.

Click to read Paul's blog quoted on:
To contact Paul, please email:
or write him at the address shown in the right column. He will get your message personally.

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Blagojevich Verdict -- August 18, 2010

Yesterday afternoon the jury finally had a verdict in the trial of the former governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich. Out of 24 counts, the jury was only able to come to a unanimous verdict on the last, and least serious, charge: lying to federal law enforcement. This conviction was probationable and only carried a maximum of 5 years in prison. Many people were surprised by the verdict including myself. Even after it became known the jury was deadlocked on certain counts, the legal community and public at large assumed Blagojevich would be convicted of more than just lying to federal police.

Two weeks ago I began a pool to see who could guess how long the Blagojevich jury would be in deliberations. Because of the notorious tapes of the former governor talking on the telephone trying to profit from his office, I thought the jury would come back with a verdict the first Friday. Juries typically do not like continuing deliberations over the weekend. My jury in fact, came back with a guilty verdict on a Friday. Others thought deliberations would continue into the second week due to all the counts and jury instructions. They chose various days from Monday through the following Friday. Listening to the Roe Conn news radio program on WLS, the latest guess was Friday the 13th of August, and it seemed she picked this date more out of superstition than any logical basis. She and the inmate several cells down from me, however, were the closest. I do not know what the news radio woman on the Roe Conn Show won, but the Stateville inmate won a six pack of soda pop.

The day after I made my prediction, I knew I was wrong. The jury sent a note to the judge asking for all the trial testimony. This was incredibly unusual. No jury asks for all the transcripts. The request signified to me the jury was going to go over the prosecutor's case meticulously. The judge rejected the jury's request, but told them if they wanted specific testimony, it would be ordered. Transcripts are not typed out verbatim by trial stenographers, but in a very abbreviated short hand that is not decipherable by people who do not know the coded language. Prisoners on appeal have to pay thousands of dollars for trial transcripts if they had a long trial, and do not claim an inability to hire a private lawyer. Some inmates have a Public Defender appointed to them on appeal before they hire counsel to save on legal expenses. The court in the Blagojevich trial did not deny the jury transcripts because of financial reasons, however. The judge probably made his decision based on the time required to produce the transcripts but also to encourage the jury to be more focused and rely on their notes and memory.

There was not much sympathy for Rod Blagojevich at Stateville. There was a certain tendency for prisoners to wish the same misery that we experience on the man who controlled the Illinois Department of Corrections. The governor does not make court rulings, nor does he prosecute the men behind bars. And although he can be influential in laws that are passed, he does not make legislation. However, the governor does have enormous control over our lives through the director and other administrators he appoints to control the prisons in Illinois. During Blagojevich's reign, life in prison did not improve, but conversely became worse.

When the Democratic governor before Rod Blagojevich was prosecuted there was some sympathy by prisoners, particularly those who were formerly on death row. George Ryan, before leaving office, commuted all the death sentences to natural life. He also commuted a handful of prisoners on death row to a term of years, and granted a few pardons. George Ryan made an impression on me due to his public recognition that the Illinois' justice system was broken. Many people have been convicted who are innocent. Over 10 prisoners who had death sentences were found to be innocent during George Ryan's tenure. One man came hours to being executed before the court granted his lawyer a stay of execution. Although I admired George Ryan for bringing attention to a flawed justice system, he did nothing to improve it, and I felt no sympathy for his conviction for corruption or for the amount of time he was sentenced to serve.

The answer to a broken justice system was not commuting the sentences of all death row inmates, despite how this may make the liberal left and capital punishment opponents happy. The answer was to correct the errors in the system and review cases on an individual basis. An investigation into the causes for wrongful convictions should have occurred, and then the governor should have immediately pushed for reform. Those prisoners with questionable convictions should have been given new trials or greatly reduced sentences if the courts or attorney general would not agree. What does natural life without the possibility of parole matter to a person who is innocent? Although many on death row are happy to have had their sentences commuted, I believe natural life is a protracted death sentence. It is an existence of infinite torture. If those who call for the abolition of the death penalty truly wanted to lessen suffering, they would advocate for more executions instead of life in prison.

Although George Ryan had a commission review the cases of those on death row, no one with a life sentence or term of years was granted any scrutiny. Between George Ryan and Rod Blagojevich, four of my requests for clemency were denied. I have reason to believe the Prisoner Review Board has made positive recommendations in the past, but neither governor would give me the time of day. I had a federal congressman speak to George Ryan on my behalf, and I had someone personally hand Rod Blagojevich my petition along with letters of support. Blagojevich probably threw my petition in the garbage when he boarded his private jet to Springfield. He failed to review thousands of petitions, and ultimately, I doubt he personally looked at a single one. Possibly, I could have got Rod Blagojevich's attention if I had known everything was for sale. Afterall, my freedom is "fucking golden" and I would pay just about anything to have it back.

In Chicago, corruption is taken for granted by many of the people who live there. It is not surprising that two of Illinois' governors have been prosecuted. I am sure many other governors and politicians engage in patronage, quid pro quos, and other deal making. What is vulgar about Blagojevich's schemes to enrich himself, his wife, or his friends is the indiscreet and crude manner he went about it. To talk on the telephone about selling Barack Obama's senate seat was certainly blatant folly, especially considering he was fully aware of the federal government investigating his office. I sense an arrogance that he thought he was above the law and a king without anyone to answer to. And Blagojevich was a bad monarch, as testimony at his trial revealed he was only in his office performing his duties a few hours a week. Almost all the work and responsibilities of the governor's office was delegated to subordinates.

The massive $14 billion state deficit, not including pension liabilities which tally over $100 billion, was largely inherited by Governor Quinn from the Blagojevich administration. Blagojevich refused to make the necessary cuts to government spending, and did not even try getting agreement with the Democratic or Republican legislature. I tend to believe former Governor Blagojevich did not care about the state's financing, only his own. I will give him credit for remaining true to his word and not raising taxes, however, I do not know if this speaks to his integrity or principles. He seemed to want to be popular by giving out foolish subsidies like the "Seniors Ride for Free Program," and not making any cost-cutting decisions. At one point, Blagojevich, or most likely his staff, sought to reduce IDOC spending by closing the state's most costly and run down prison: Stateville. However, when the legislature attempted to pass a bill that would allow serving governors to be evicted, he changed his mind to get the support of the guard's powerful union and several legislators. It was a bad bill, but the former governor refused to make the necessary cuts to state spending. His predecessor, it must be said, however, also failed to make those politically tough decisions as well. Hopefully, his political opponent is willing to use the hatchet to remedy Illinois' financial catastrophe.

Although I was not sympathetic to Rod Blagojevich, I could understand, or possibly empathize with him and his wife's wait during the jury deliberations. Waiting on a verdict for a criminal defendant is very stressful. Any any moment, the jury could reach a verdict. There is nothing you can do to reason or argue with jurors at this point. It is completely out of your hands once your attorney gives his final argument. In my case, the jury was out for several days. For those days, my life literally was in their hands. Rod Blagojevich did not face a death sentence, however, if convicted on all counts, he could have spent most of his remaining years in prison, albeit a nice minimum-security prison in the federal system. Nontheless, I am sure this weighed heavily on his and his wife's thoughts for those two weeks. Although Blagojevich gave a spirited speech afterwards to reporters, I noted Patty Blagojevich appeared drained, and I knew the ex-governor must also be despite his continued optimistic rhetoric.

Fortunately for Rod Blagojevich, he was given bail and could wait out most of the deliberations in his nice home. I was bussed back and forth from the maximum-security section of Cook County Jail. Early in the morning before the sun was up, I had to walk the tunnels underneath the county jail and wait in dirty, loud cages with hundreds of other detainees until we were handcuffed and smashed into sardine can-like buses. At the courthouse, I waited hours and hours usually alone in a barren cell. On occasion, my lawyer or family would visit with me.

Despite the recorded tape conversations of Blagojevich and a number of witnesses that told of his attempts to profit from his position as governor, Sam Adams, Jr., put on an aggressive defense and argued passionately inside and outside the courtroom his client's innocence. At least Rod could think that, for better or for worse, his lawyers did all they could to keep him out of the clinker. Contrarily, my lawyer did not contest the prosecution's theory of accountability, and even told my jury that the interrogating officer's testimony was true. My attorneys had numerous witnesses and evidence at their disposal, even such that put my car 50 miles away from the murder scene to prove the cop was a liar, but chose not to use it. I knew going into deliberations that I was doomed. Even when my co-defendant was acquitted, I knew I was going to be convicted. After a few days passed, I hoped for a hung jury. I wish I had one juror who would obstinately refuse to render a guilty verdict. My lead attorney had bought me an ugly tie to wear, and I continued to wear it every day of my deliberations. Superstitiously I thought if I kept the same clothes on that the deliberations would go on indefinitely and remain at a deadlock. At least with a hung jury, I could fire my lawyers and hire new ones who would actually present a defense. Unlike the Blagojevich jury, however, no one held out for me.

After the judge announced a mistrial on 23 counts, the defense team and former governor came out with very self-confident statements. I heard about how the prosecution with the full power and resources of the federal government could not prove their case. Sam Adams, Jr. told the media how millions of dollars were used to prosecute an innocent man. Blagojevich also spoke to the press and gave them a spirited "I am not a crook" speech. As he told the public time and time again, he had done nothing wrong and this verdict, or lack thereof, proves it. Indeed, at the time, it seemed the defense was victorious. Out of 24 charges, the prosecutor was only able to obtain one unanimous guilty verdict, and this was on the least serious charge in the indictment. If I was Rod Blagojevich, I would be jubilant as well. However, I would not be so smug until I knew how the jury deadlocked. In my case, I am almost certain I would win a retrial. In Blagojevich's case, I would be highly skeptical if a jury was only a vote away from guilty verdicts.

While his jury was deliberating, I had a discussion with my neighbor about hung juries. It is one of many I have had with him. My neighbor portrays himself as a "know it all," although he knows very little. And despite his ignorance, he will vehemently argue a point if you let him. Yesterday, he told me that if the jury had deadlocked with a minority voting guilty, Blagojevich would have to be acquitted. This is false, and even if eleven of the twelve voted for acquittal, Blagojevich still would have a hung jury. A verdict must be unanimous or a mistrial is declared. As I told him before, he is a "real man of genius." He knows I was disingenuous in my words and I say this often when there is no point discussing a subject with him. "The real man of genius" quote comes from a silly beer commercial that mocks a man's intelligence.

Today I learned on news talk radio that the jury was deadlocked, not 11 to 1, in Blagojevich's favor, but against him. Only one juror held out and if it was not for this one woman, the ex-governor would have probably been found guilty on all 24 charges. On the WLS Roe Conn Show they joked that this older woman was one of the few to benefit from Blagojevich's "free ride for seniors." The news that there was only one hold-out certainly had to deflate the hot air balloons of the defense, and vice versa, caused the prosecutor to feel more confident. Blagojevich will be retried, and most likely he will be found guilty on all counts.

Sam Adams, Jr., and later Rod Blagojevich, would try to put pressure on the government by speaking about the expense to reprosecute him. They claimed the prosecutor would spend $30 million in a second trial, and inferred this was a waste of taxpayers' dollars, especially at a time of needed fiscal restraint. Other legal experts were interviewed by news programs and were of the opinion this figure was greatly exaggerated. Furthermore, they stated it was an irrelevant figure because federal prosecutors get paid a flat rate and this money would be spent regardless. If Blagojevich was not being reprosecuted, another case would be. Thus the defense then attacked the federal prosecutor for not going after other criminals. Sam Adams, Jr. told the news media babies were being killed on the streets of Chicago and yet the federal government was going after his client whose only crime was talking too much.

After my trial, my father attempted to find out how much the county spent on my conviction through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The government refused to give him a figure and stated that although the amount could be ascertained by calculating all the bills, it was not a figure tallied by Cook County accountants. Almost all information collected by government offices can be procured through FOIA. However, the statute cannot be used to gain information that is not readily available or requires processing. Despite this, sources speculated more money was spent prosecuting me than the serial killer John Wayne Gacy.

Legal analysts of news programs I watched stated that Rod Blagojevich's defense would most likely cost more than his reprosecution. It was estimated Sam Adams Sr. and Jr. were paid over $10 million dollars. The ex-governor has claimed to have no more money to finance his defense. However, even if this is true, I tend to believe a law firm will volunteer to represent him pro bono. Law firms gain tax write-offs for doing legal work for free. They also gain free publicity. I tend to believe the Adams' will not represent Rod Blagojevich again because not only will they not be paid, but the first trial will always be seen as a victory in prospective clients' minds. A second trial will be a losing proposition. Odds of rolling snake eyes again are minute. Though, Sam Adams Jr. did say he loved Rob Blagojevich.

I visited with my father while the deliberations were in their second week. My father has thought from the beginning the prosecutor's case was weak and the jury would not easily come to a decision. He has even gone so far to say he would not convict the ex-governor if he was on the jury. I inquired why, and he replied, as some others have to the news media, that Blagojevich spoke about committing a number of crimes, but ultimately he did not do them. The lone juror who refused to tender a guilty verdict also, apparently, did so based on this reasoning. The law is clear that many crimes, like the 23 counts Blagojevich was charged with, do not have to be completed. The are inchoate offenses. However, there is certainly a problem in the conscience of many Americans about being convicted of crimes only contemplated, but not committed. And I believe this is rightfully so.

America is supposed to be a land of freedom. But how free are we when we can be sent to prison for merely thinking about committing a crime? Just because a man or woman may consider, or talk about committing a crime, does not necessarily mean they will do so. Our freedom is substantially put at risk when laws are made to give power to the thought police. Who among us has never considered committing a crime? Who among us has never uttered a threat or desire to commit a crime? Who has never reconsidered an action after that contemplation? If society creates thought crimes, we may all be in prison.

I am reminded of a movie starring the actor Tom Cruise where psychics predicted crimes that were going to occur. Before the crime(s) actually occurred, police would arrest the potential offender. This person was given no trial, and was immediately put in prison. The rate of crime plummeted to virtually nothing. The police and public were under the illusion of a perfect, utopian society until one day the oracles predicted one of their own thought police would commit a murder. Tom Cruise, instead of turning himself in, ran. Ultimately he never killed anyone, and it was found the psychics were not infallible. Many people had gone to prison that would never have committed a crime.

The movie Minority Report was science fiction, but even in the real world, many police, prosecutors, judges and juries think they can see into the hearts of men and read their future. It leaves me to ponder the suppression of freedom and justice inchoate laws create. I also ponder how many men are in U.S. prisons, victims of wannabe psychics.


  1. Ok. Nice to have some convicted murderer telling the rest of us how we should fix the system. He's one is guilty. Everyone is innocent and just being railroaded by the powers that be just for the hell of it. Murder, rape, robbery...dont happen...its all made up.

    1. One day the cellhouse capt calls me to translate as one inmate went crazy and refused to speak English. He was from my home country and I was the only guard from that hellhole corner of the globe...So I go, i see the inmate and ask him if he would like a tranfer to a prison back home. His eyes opened up and became freindly so I told him it can't hapen to assholes and I left :) Capt screams at me to get my butt back there hahahahaha. Here's the deal: someone owed him money and after threats and stuff invited him over to "collect." He got there but the bastard was not home, only his wife who started scratching him, and herself, hair flying everywhere...clothes torn (hers) a big mess for 6 minutes then...police shows up. The bitch called the cops as soon as he rang the bell and he got charged with...rape! Rape! He went to colect some money not to rape but ended up as a rapist! Yeap, stuff is made-up...(I made a deal with the capt and the inmate: we let him buy cigarrettes right away even though he was not eligible for commissary yet and in exchange he cooperates by shutting the hell up and stop yelling in foreign languages, which might scare the roaches :) They shipped him to a medium-security and I can't remember his last name so I don't know if he ever went back into the system. So my friend, "convicted" doesn't mean you really did that. You did something, sure, but sometimes what you get convicted of is what you did, times 500.

    2. Hey, anonymous from 10/31/2010: I just read your comment and must throw in my 2 cents--YOU'RE NUTS. Where have you been to miss over 200 exonerations of men, some of whom were on death row? Why do you think there are so many Innocence Projects at law schools all over the country?

      I agree that the majority of prisoners ARE guilty, but there are plenty who really are innocent. As the comment above explains, sometimes people are set up or framed. There are many crooked cops who don't care about lying or framing an innocent man, especially if its someone they don't like. And with prosecutors getting promotions and raises after convictions, some of them are willing to bend the rules and even lie just to get a conviction.

    3. Joliet CC. What country are you from?

  2. Whoever posted the above comment needs to become a better reader! I did not read any such things in the Blagojevich post above! Where did Paul write that "everyone was innocent"? or that "murder, rape and robbery don't happen"? You are a poor reader, or projecting your own ideas onto someone else!

    I fully understand Paul's viewpoint, but personally, I think Blagojevich is GUILTY of all counts against him! And I believe Blagojevich should have been sentenced to the same length of time in prison as ex-Gov. George Ryan! Both men cheated the citizens of Illinois.

  3. Paul Modrowski was convicted of murder under Illinois' accountability law -- a law which is bizarre and probably unconstitutional. There was no evidence and no notion that Paul killed Dean Fawcett.

    When you call Paul a "convicted murdered," it becomes pretty obvious who you are -- since there is really only one person in the world that calls Paul this -- and that is James McKay, the prosecutor who framed Paul so he could get a conviction.

    is it so important to maintain the lie? Is it so important to continue to torment an innocent man and destroy his entire life so that one prosecutor and one police officer can continue on being cozy?

    Dean Fawcett was a criminal type who wrote bad checks and who was dating Nadine Lenarczyk, who was allegedly a prostitute and a drug addict and the girlfriend of a Mafia person. There are many people who might have wanted to kill Dean Fawcett, but Paul M was not one of them.

    Paul Modrowski had no reason to write bad checks -- he had plenty of his own money. He was just staying with the Faracis for a short period of time because he had an argument with his father -- and being 18, did not know anyone his own age with their own apartment. He considers his brief stay with them to be the biggest mistake of his life.

  4. What are you talking about? Are you delusional? My name is Robert K. and I live in the suburbs of Chicago. I stumbled across the site and looked into the case out of curiosity. I noticed that one thing is missing from these pages. One ounce or remorse or personal responsibility on the part of the man in prison who is the focus of this blog. I am not involved with the case. I am a casual observer. I noticed that you removed the portions of the appeal case that I posted here. They spelled out facts that dont paint the prisoner in such a glowing light. Why remove them? They are part of the public record of the case. Why not allow people to see the facts as spelled out in court? What are you afraid of? It looks like the prisoner was hanging with bad people who ended up killing someone. We all do stupid things when we are young...but very few of us end up involved in something like this. Dont sugarcoat what happened. He was intimately involved with these people when this thing went down. That is the TRUTH. It's too bad for him...but its even worse for the kid who was killed and decpaitated....dont you think? Why not say a little something about the facts of the case instead of blathering on for pages about how crappy life is in Stateville. Of course it is. Its supposed to be. My point is....he is not in prison because of some magical tragedy...he is there because he was being a creep when he was 18 years old....and the other people around him were being creeps too...and one of the killed someone and cut off his head and dumped him by the railroad tracks. Those are the facts.
    Do you have the courage to leave this post up?

  5. To Robert (above comment):
    Paul has already said a zillion times that meeting Bob Faraci and being his friend was "the biggest mistake in my life." What more do you want to hear from him? This blog is NOT about the murder he knew nothing about. This blog is called "On the Inside" because it is about Paul's experiences inside prison!

  6. TO ROBERT K -- NOW I understand where you are coming from. The fact is that the things in the appeal are NOT true and were not ever part of the trial testimony or evidence. Part of understanding the appeal is understanding how criminal law procedure works.

    How can this be so that what is in the appeal is stuff that never even was said at trial, for which no evidence is present? Paul's lawyer on appeal was a severe alcoholic, which was not known to Paul or his family at the time. The lawyer "forgot" to attach affidavits to the appeal. When affidavits are left off, the court MUST, by law, take what the state presents as fact. The things the state presented were not part of the trial -- they came from earlier hearings, and some parts appear to be simply made up. AT TRIAL, the same people said they never saw Dean Fawcett in Paul's car, but that he was in Robert Faraci's car. What was said at the trial was very very different from the things you can read in the appeal.

    It may be hard to understand how all this happened. Back in 1993, when this case happened, Illinois did not have the same rules it now has for death-penalty eligible cases. At trial, Paul had a lawyer who has never been on the list of lawyers qualified to handle death penalty eligible cases. His lawyer was probably very qualified for civil cases, but not for a serious criminal case.

    Also, the procedure that was allowed in his trial was very different from what would happen today. His trial was very blatantly unfair. For example, the judge allowed newspapers to be present in the courthouse during the trial -- newspapers that had a headline saying Paul was the prime suspect in the Brown's Chicken killings. Paul's lawyer asked for a mistrial, but the judge did not grant it.

    There were other extreme irregularities during the trial. All told, it was an unfair scapegoating of an innocent man. If you want to know more, just email, and you will probably have a chance to see all the documents, have things explained to you, etc. The family is eager for others to know what actually happened.

    Then when Paul went to appeal, the family hired a lawyer who was recommended -- but who was a severe alcoholic and made a lot of mistakes. That fact came out after the lawyer died years later. Lawyers are required to be "competent," but both of these lawyers were probably not "competent" to be handling the case.

    Then, to make matters worse, Paul' had one more shot at justice, so his family hired a lawyer to do a writ of habeas corpus. This lawyer was also recommended. This lawyer had a mental breakdown while handling the case. What he turned in was a half-done, jumbled mess, and he filed it ONE day late. One day late means the court dismisses it and you lose your chance.

    Some lawyers from a justice foundation took this issue all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, trying to get the court to say that keeping an innocent man in prison based on one day late is wrong. The Court said one day late is one day late. They made no exception for the fact that the lawyer was having serious personal problems that prevented him from being able to complete the task. The Court went so far as to say that a defendant should supervise his attorney and should file the papers separately on his own. Of course, this is ridiculous and impossible for a prisoner to do.

  7. Robert K. says....I appreciate you taking the time and adressing my post. And for having the courage to leave my post up. That says something about you. I must admit that I find the prisoner to be intelligent and compelling. I also admit that the circumstances surrounding the case (mainly that the supposed killer is found innocent but the guy that let him use his car is put in jail for life)at the very least bizzare....and at the most...terribly unjust. I wish him well...and hope he can find a way out of prison. He's been in prison a long time and surely has paid for his mistake.

    Perhaps some sort of post telling how he feels about what happened to the victim and how he understands the pain of the family would be helpful? This blog reveals him to be thoughtful and intelligent...surely he must have some thoughts on the matter.

  8. TO ROBERT KAY: As I understand it, Paul did not know Dean Fawcett, other than slightly as an acquaintance of the older married couple (the Faracis) that Paul was staying with for a short time. Paul was not Dean's friend and not his enemy -- Paul barely knew Dean.

    About the only thing Paul or the Modrowski family knew about Dean was that he came into their home one time with a group of friends, and managed to steal checks from a desk drawer. Dean wrote some of those checks -- and the Modrowskis raised a big fuss with their bank about it.

    If you note -- Dean's murder involved Dean writing bad checks.

    Some of the people to whom Dean had written bad checks might have wanted to kill him -- apparently, Dean wrote a rather large bad check for some jewelry to a mafia-related person, just days before he was murdered.

    The weekend before Dean died, he was also sleeping at a hotel with a woman who was the girlfriend of a mafia man. The woman was known to be a prostitute and drug addict. It is unknown if the police ever looked into any of these people as possibly being related to his killing.

    The only thing that is absolutely certain is that Paul had nothing whatsoever to do with Dean Fawcett's death and did not even know that Dean was dead until months later, when Paul was arrested in the crime. Paul thought that Dean had gone to California to escape being arrested for writing bad checks -- because that is what Dean had announced he was going to do. Instead, before Dean could flee, someone killed him.

    Paul Modrowski never wrote any bad checks and never had any involvement in such things. Paul came from a very solid middle-class family and had plenty of money for whatever he needed.

    Paul did not know Dean's family, since he barely knew Dean.

    Paul did mention in one of his blog posts that when he found out t hat Dean was dead, rather that being in hiding out in California, Paul was very sad. But keep in mind, Paul only found this out as he was being arrested for Dean's murder! Paul's life then went into a spin -- he was in Cook County Jail for months awaiting trial, then having a terrible trial, and then being in horrible prisons. It might be a bit much to expect Paul to dwell too much on the sadness of "losing" someone he never really knew and had nothing to do with, and who was not the kind of person that Paul would ever be friends with.

  9. Someone above wrote that Paul M. has been in prison a long time and has paid for his mistake. What mistake? He is innocent.

  10. Well come on now. It was brought out in the trial that the prisoner was involved with the check writing scheme...and benefited from it. The evidence points to a rather seedy bunch of kids doing stupid things. Just because Modrowski was from a "middle class home" and had "plenty of money" does not mean that he wasnt involved in this stuff. Several witnesses and his own statements say the exact opposite. And the idea that "Paul didnt even know where Dean was" and all the rest....strains credibility. Modrowski moved to Florida immedialtely after the time of the murder and rented an apartment with the murder's (according to Modrowski) wife. He used a fake name (Himmler---nice for such a sweet middle class boy) and then lived with the creepy couple for months. You expect people to believe that whereabouts of Fawcett or his disapperace was not a topic of converstaion?

    Look. You think the law is wrong and he is being treated unfairly....thats fine. But you lose all credibility when you try and paint the kid as some angel who was helping old ladies accross the street when this happened. He was there....he was hainging with these people....he fled the state with them after it happened....and his car might have been used.

    You should really consider dropping the "he's an angel with autisim" defense. It wont fly.

  11. No. You are getting your misinformation NOT from trial sources, but from sources that were used in the appeal by the state-- which went basically unchallenged. You CANNOT read the appeal document and know what happened at the trial, because MOST of what the State introduced in the appeal did not occur in the trial. Some of it was said earlier, but was recanted or disproven before trial.

    All the people you are talking about were arrested and beaten, had their rights violated, and were coerced into saying things they later recanted.

    Paul's name was put on the Florida lease, not by him, but by Robert Faraci's wife. She did use a fake name, but it was not the name the state said she used -- the State's Attorney made that up to get a shudder from the jury.

    Paul Modrowski was NOT involved in writing bad checks, and there is no evidence that he was.

    Just before Dean Fawcett died, Dean Fawcett WAS on a spree of writing bad checks. Dean DID buy Christmas gifts with bad checks. Dean did buy a pair of sunglasses and gave it to Paul, because Paul was staying with the Faracis.

    Paul is autistic. He is very intelligent, but he has autism, a communications disorder. Whatever things the Faracis and Dean Fawcett had going on, Paul was not privy to it and probably did not read all the social cues that might warn him that they were up to no good. However, he was NOT in on their wrongdoing.

    However, KEEP IN MIND that Robert Faraci came across as very like friendly and likable. His jury of twelve "normal" people thought so.

    Yes, Paul DID believe when Dean said he was going to California. Dean was then gone, and Paul assumed that Dean had gone to California. Paul's belief in this was bolstered when a while later, a phone call came, and the person answering the phone told Paul that it was Dean calling from California.

    At the trial, there was a good amount of evidence presented that could only have been faked-up. For example, there were tools presented, such as an old saw, that were supposedly found in the woods and that were supposedly involved in the beheading and dismemberment. These tools contained no blood or tissue fragments and no DNA. Also, the tools were not found when the woods were thoroughly searched at the time the bodies were found , but instead, suddenly appeared months later after Paul and Faraci were arrested.

    Also, keep in mind, Paul's car was thoroughly searched by the FBI, and not a trace of blood or any other evidence was found in it. There were no witnesses claiming they saw Paul at the site or saw his car at the site.

    In fact, there were two witnesses that know they saw Paul at a family party that day. Those witnesses were NOT called by Paul's lawyer because the state had not proven its case and had in fact not presented any evidence of any crime. At that point, the State's Attorney "created" a crime by lying to the jury about what would meet the far-flung requirements for a conviction under the Illinois Accountability law.

    The State's Attorney, James McKay, has been censured by the higher courts for his antics and inappropriate, prejudicial behavior in other cases. The Modrowski case is probably McKay's worse to date, and yet, it has not been unravelled and he has not yet been censured by the Courts for what he did to Paul Modrowski. That day is likely to come. When it does come, Paul M. will be let out of prison and will most likely get the multi-million dollar settlement that comes with false convictions. We here at Blog-ville are all awaiting this day.

  12. No one ever said Paul was "an angel"! The point made here is that Paul IS INNOCENT, and was wrongfully convicted.

    You can make all kinds of innuendo in the comments section, but you must admit that a grave injustice has occurred here. A natural life sentence for allegedly lending a car?

  13. I don't belive Paul is innocent, nor guilty. I am still making up my mind but to agree that life without parole is fair for a bad kid who hanged around other bad characters ...come on. Since when are we to receive ife without parole if one of our bad friends commits murder? Then, if one of our friends gets a job, we all should get paid as well for him working? The system is about everyone paying for his mistakes and life with no parole is too much for Paul's mistakes. As for his blog...we should be is saving some from going to again, what's the argument here? As for Paul "complaining"...he raises general complains about the way things are run not about him personally...The 1st post by "anonymous" is writen by a bad character individual. I too want all bad guys to have their balls fed to them but Paul doesn't fit the profile and his crime doesn't fit the punishment.

  14. Did the stolen checks belong to Paul's Parents/family ?

    1. The bad checks cashed by Fawcett and the Faracis in December 1992 were provided by a bank to Dean Fawcett when he opened a checking account.

      Dean and Bob were no strangers to writing back checks. Both of them had previous arrests for theft, cashing bad checks, and worse.

      Within a year of Faraci's acquittal for the murder of Fawcett, he was back in jail and then prison for another scam involving checks and/or credit card theft. I read he was in prison for about 2 years that time.

    2. To Anonymous of 12/9/12: Over a year before Fawcett's murder, he stole blank checks from my mother. He came to my home with Brian Palasz and while there asked to use the bathroom. While he was gone, he went into the study without my knowledge and took some checks. I did not hear about the theft until my mother told me and he was arrested trying to buy a used car with one of them.

      Fawcett apologized but said she'd be reimbursed by the bank. She was, but only after a lawsuit was filed. Fawcett had stolen checks before and said banks never gave their customers any problems. Years later I learned he did the same thing to his own mother and many others.

  15. well if you have a guilty opinion of paul or atleast contrary to him being released dont bother posting the editors wont approve... that in itself is shady

  16. just an update on this post Rod Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years in prison convicted of 17 of the counts by a different jury

  17. Blago jailbird!

  18. Rocan?
    Do you mean Roe Conn?

    1. Yes, I meant Roe Conn who speaks on WLS talk radio. Those who typed this post must have made a typo. It should be fixed for future readers. Thank you for pointing out the error.


If you choose Name / URL, you can write any name and you don't need a URL. Or you can choose Anonymous. Paul loves getting your Comments. They are all mailed to him.