Judge rejects Esqueda attorney’s motions challenging case

A Kendall County judge dismissed several motions from Joliet police Sgt. Javier Esqueda’s attorney that challenged the indictment, trial venue and prosecution of his client.

As a result of Thursday’s hearing, Esqueda’s case will remain in Kendall County and will likely proceed to a jury trial.

“I think we got a good indication today we will be going jury. That’s a fact,” Esqueda’s attorney Jeff Tomczak said after the hearing. “It’s going to be a sporty trial. I think Mr. Esqueda deserves the highest of defense, the most aggressive defense possible. His heart was pure through his whole thing.”

Esqueda was indicted on charges alleging that “while not on duty” on June 10, he used a laptop in his squad car to access the department’s WatchGuard system and view “a video file which was locked” while he was “in a motor vehicle which passed through Kendall County.”

Esqueda has been accused of unlawfully accessing a video that showed Eric Lurry, 37, riding to the Joliet Police Department after he was arrested at what police said was the scene of a drug deal in January 2020.

The Will County State’s Attorney’s Office determined the Joliet police committed no criminal wrongdoing in connection with Lurry’s arrest. The Will County Coroner’s Office ruled Lurry’s death an accidental drug overdose.

Joliet police reports showed investigators interviewed a witness who claimed Esqueda indicated he would use the Lurry video “as his ‘Trump Card’ if he was given discipline” over internal investigations into his conduct.

Tomczak argued before Judge Robert Pilmer to move Esqueda’s case out of Kendall because it had an “enormous” connection to Will County and no connection to Kendall.

At the hearing, Joliet police Lt. Joe Egizio said investigators used cell tower information to determine that Esqueda’s squad car was at his Plainfield residence in Kendall at the time of the alleged offense.

Tomczak asked Egizio if investigators talked to neighbors or requested Ring videos to determine if Esqueda’s car was at his residence. Egizio said no and that a “neighborhood canvass was not completed.”

“You don’t know where the squad was at the time that you alleged this downloading occurred, is that correct? You don’t know if it was in Kendall County or Will County? You can’t say that under oath, can you?” Tomczak asked.

“Under oath? No,” Egizio said.

Tomczak told Pilmer he couldn’t assume Esqueda was home at the time of the incident.

“That’s a fact that’s not in evidence, whether he was properly using the squad car or not, that doesn’t put him home at that time. And that cell tower is a 50-50 shot,” Tomczak said.

Assistant State’s Attorney Mark Shlifka said there was no evidence at the hearing to show the alleged offense was committed in either Will or Kendall and a prosecutor can choose either one.

“It’s clear based on what you heard, venue’s proper in either Will or Kendall and statute gives the executive branch the choice which county to prosecute it in,” Shlifka said.

Pilmer denied Tomczak’s motion claiming improper venue. He said he believed “there’s been a sufficient showing that there is some connection to Kendall County.”

Pilmer also denied Tomczak’s motion to dismiss the case for alleged misconduct in grand jury proceedings.

Tomczak had accused Shlifka of intentionally never telling the grand jury the underlying offense he asked them to indict Esqueda on was computer tampering. He argued the indictment was “dirty” and the grand jurors were “deceived very skillfully.”

Shlifka responded that the statute citation for computer tampering is contained within the indictment and “it’s very easy to look up.” He said Tomczak was “attacking me and the grand jury proceedings.”

He said the issue at hand was whether there was sufficient evidence before a grand jury to find probable cause to believe that a crime had been committed.

“There was no prosecutorial misconduct, notwithstanding the allegations to the contrary,” Shlifka said.

Pilmer further denied Tomczak’s motions for a bill of particulars that requested an explanation of every aspect of the indictment and to dismiss the case for failure to state an offense.

Esqueda’s next court date was scheduled for July 28.