Attorneys Jim Rowe and Cierra Norris are both passionate when it comes to the litigating cases.

Once again, the duo stood their ground Friday during the pretrial conference for Norris’ client, Xandria Harris.

Harris is accused in the murder of Bradley Police Sgt. Marlene Rittmanic and attempted murder of retired Sgt. Tyler Bailey in December 2021.

The officers were shot by Harris’ boyfriend, Darius Sullivan, in a hallway of the Comfort Inn in Bradley.

Ritmanic and Bailey answered a call about a barking dog in a vehicle parked in the hotel’s lot.

Sullivan, who police said shot the two officers, was convicted in September 2024.

Kankakee County Circuit Judge Kathy Bradshaw-Elliott sentenced Sullivan to natural life in prison for the murder of Rittmanic and 80 years, plus natural life, for the attempted murder of Bailey.

On Friday, Bradshaw-Elliott was going over some items before the trial is scheduled to start Feb. 23.

When it got to Norris’ plans to use an affirmative defense, things heated up.

“I’m going to address the big issue of affirmative defense and harassment,” Bradshaw-Elliott said.

An affirmative defense is when the defendant introduces evidence that negates criminal liability or civil liability, even if it is proven that the defendant committed the alleged acts, according to Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute.

The affirmative defense must be found credible to be successful, and the party that raises it has the burden of proof on establishing it.

At the time of the shooting, Harris had two children and was pregnant with another. Sullivan is the father of all three children.

In the court document, Norris said Harris suffers from battered woman syndrome.

A psychologist was hired by Norris to determine whether Harris was under duress at the time of the shooting because of alleged domestic abuse situations between herself and Sullivan.

Norris filed a motion in December 2022 asking the court to allow the use of an affirmative defense.

“My defense is Ms. Harris did not promote or facilitate this act. But if you believe that there’s going to be a few things, running down the hallway, picking up the clip, giving him the keys, going to Indiana,” Norris said.

“If you believe that that is evidence of intent to promote or facilitate this murder, then we bring in the affirmative defenses of battered woman syndrome because the jury … can hear from an expert that help the jury understand the actions in light of Ms. Harris’ domestic violence and abusive battered woman syndrome diagnosis. Would you agree she does have to testify?” Norris asked Bradshaw-Elliott.

“Absolutely. Ms. Harris has to testify. So, Ms. Harris has to testify in order for that to occur,” Bradshaw-Elliott said.

Kankakee County State’s Attorney Jim Rowe argued battered woman syndrome has not been used in a first degree murder case in this way.

“There’s just no precedent in Illinois in which battered woman syndrome is used to justify the killing of a third person,” Rowe said.

“That can’t possibly be a defense. And, what the defendant is charged with here is the first degree murder of someone that never battered her,” he said.

In the end, Bradshaw-Elliott said it will come to wait-and-see during the trial.

“I don’t know how it’s going to unfold. I don’t know what Ms. Harris is going to say. I know the defense has a right to put on a defense and I’m going to follow the law as I see it,” Bradshaw-Elliott said.