Like & Share on FB!

Tuesday, January 30, 2007

Troutman: Substance was fiber, not drugs

I found this in the Sun-Times this morning. I remember they talked about finding some drug paraphernalia in Ald. Troutman's home, a holiday card with a $100 in there, and a gun (let me note that Aldermen are considered peace officers and may carry a weapon). The focus are now on the powder (drug paraphernalia) that was found in her home. She claims...


Ald. Arenda Troutman (20th) said today she doesn’t use drugs and is “betting my life” that the white powdery substance found in her home was not narcotics, but a dietary fiber she uses to cleanse her colon.

Troutman charged that federal agents who found the powdery substance during a raid on her South Side home and ward office already know the results were negative and that they’re keeping the information quiet to continue to smear her.

“I can’t understand that you don’t know by now if that was a drug or not,” she said after chairing a City Council Committee hearing. “That’s been over three weeks ago and you mean to tell me with all the technology we have today that they have not let the press know? They’ve let you guys know everything [else] to this point.”

Asked whether she believes the feds are deliberately keeping the information quiet as part of a “character assassination” of her, she said, “That’s what it seems like to me. What does it seem like to you? . . . It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that these people on the spot can tell you if it’s a drug substance.”
I'm with her on the toxicology reports. It would be good for the FBI and the prosecution to just nip this oversight in the bud. This would weaken them to contend that this power is anything but dietary fiber. Or at least continue to dance around without confirming what this substance is.

Still let's get back to Troutman. The statement regarding her gun was assinine...

Troutman confirmed today that the .357-caliber Colt Python revolver seized from her home was given to her by a longtime friend, cable TV host W. L. Lillard.

Lillard had examined Troutman’s South Side home after Chicago Police stopped watching it after a series of break-ins there, she said.

“I’m a single woman. I have three small children. And I was pretty much wanting some measure of safety and security. Once the police left, W. L. Lillard being the security person he is and a friend of mine -- he came and looked through my house [and] he said, ‘You need a gun. This house is too large.’ He left a gun,” Troutman said.

The alderman was asked why she didn’t register the gun, as required by the city’s 1982 handgun freeze.

“I would have registered had he given me the gun. He did not give me the gun. He loaned me the gun. The gun was not mine. The gun was just a token of him saying, ‘I think you need something more than just a dog,’” as security, she said.
I'm not a lawyer and it's obvious that neither is she (well she only has a degree in political science from SIU) but that seems a little weak. "He loaned me the gun?"

Hmmm, is there a lawyer in the house who can clarify this. Is there a distinction between giving someone a gun and loaning someone a gun? And does this distinction prevent you from registering a weapon? I think she can do a little better than that.

2 comments:

Craig Gernhardt said...

I'm not a lawyer either, but you missed the keyword that caught my eye Levois, and I'm suprised you missed it (and everyone else).

The word is... "Token"

Now my question is, does she have to disclaim this token as a 'in-kind' donation on her D-2's?

Or do"tokens' not count?

Anonymous said...

Its all nonsense, in reference to the gun, she is an Alderwoman and has the right to carry which is true. Question, is she required to pass any type of test to safely carry as the police are, or is she and other alderperps beyond this requirement, if so why? Two, gun loan, token, gift, improper weapon transaction, were talking Chicago. What laws don't apply to Alderperps, just citizens and police? Bet that's not on the books. Her attorney said weapon was a gift/loan from a Private I now known as a cableman, still required for transferring weapon you can do it for a buck on paper, can't get around that fact, guns can't just be passed off freely not here in Chicago as loaner's, or can they? Why didn't CPD charge her with an unlawful weapon failure to register? Does she even have an FOID card another requirement and fine, no biggie? Was the gun owned lawfully an properly registered by her giver another unanwsered question, over an over. There were other guns, were they registered and to whom again no mention of required FOID, why? This question on FOID and gun course needs to be addressed, don't you think, if Daley is so staunch on gun control?
The baggie of white powder is also a no biggie and she is using it, trying to set herself up as being harrased by police aka feds all nonsense, its either dope or not, no one cares about her colon. The media runs the topic through her attorneys mouth to build her case, logical defense action. Crime labs run slow this is not an emergencey issue, she gets in the back of the line, again no biggie she can't dictate the FEDs they are not Chg.

Bottom line FEDs case, until they make it known what is really up everything else, including CPD, Chg. will remain at a stand still, that's just how it is. The real issue for the time being is the bribe whether the property was in her ward or not, everything else is small potatoes and a distraction for defending her case. Look at ex-Alderman Jones and operation Silver Shovel, convicted felon and running again for alder seat.
Welcome to Chicago the Windy City, still our motto.
www.honorablestar.blogspot.com

Post a Comment

Comments are now moderated because one random commenter chose to get comment happy. What doesn't get published is up to my discretion. Of course moderating policy is subject to change. Thanks!