The 76-year-old boyfriend of a 32-year-old woman charged with setting up a sex date with a 15-year-old boy believes he can spring his young lover from jail now that a judge lowered her bond.
"I'm working on it now to get that," veteran weekly newspaperman John Gabriel said of the $10,000 he needs to bail lady friend Margarita Hernandez out of jail.
Judge Richard Schoenstedt reduced Hernandez's bond from $250,000 to $100,000 Wednesday. She only needs to post 10 percent of that for her release from the Will County jail.
"Margarita has very substantial savings," said Gabriel, who like his live-in girlfriend is a precinct committeeman for the Troy Township Democrats.
While Hernandez might have money stashed away, Gabriel said he can't get at it. And he claims to have no cash himself, choosing to get by with just the "clothes on (his) back" to discourage people from suing him.
Until he figures a way to access Hernandez's savings, she will remain in jail, where she was taken following her arrest Thursday on charges she had sex with the teen.
Joliet Police Chief Mike Trafton Hernandez and the boy planned the tryst at her home on Joliet's far west side. But Gabriel claims his girlfriend was framed by enemies he made over the years while working for Joliet-area weekly newspapers.
"Whoever did this needs to be exposed," Gabriel said.
Trafton also said FBI agents raided the home where Gabriel and Hernandez live as part of an investigation into the possible production of child pornography.
FBI spokeswoman Joan Hyde said she cannot comment on—or even confirm the existence of—an investigation conducted by her agency unless it results in criminal charges.
In court Tuesday, Hernandez's attorney, Steve Landis, argued that she is not a flight risk, that she has three sisters, two brothers and a mother living in Cicero, and that she has strong ties to the community.
Landis also pointed out Hernandez's connection to the Troy Township Democrats, said she is on the board of the Will County Historical Society and that she is an I&M Canal Tour Guide.
Not only that, but Hernandez volunteers for an organization that provides horseback rides to handicapped children, Landis said, and has won awards at her job with Southwest Airlines for performance and perfect attendance.
Landis went on to knock the case against Hernandez, saying prosecutors won't be able to prove it, and asked Schoenstedt to put the bond at $500.
As a condition of lowering the bond, Judge Schoenstedt forbade Hernandez from contacting anyone under 18 or doing any volunteer work out of concern that she might run into a boy or girl, possibly on a horse or the along the I&M Canal.
Schoenstedt did permit Hernandez to return to work for Southwest if she gets out of jail.
"This situation is very sad to me personally." Yeah without this to talk about your life would be even more dull. I wish you'd quite biting your tongue and start on your fingers. People like you are why innocent people can and do end up in jail.
Angry you can be angry all you want, nobody told her to go sleep with little kids!
The one who is alleged guilty and can never have her life back or the ones who were allegedly victimized who possibly had their childhood back? One victim may receive partial justice. One may receive partial vindication. Justice all you seek is revenge for something that doesn't involve you. The only "winner" in this case will be you and the lawyers. They will receive money for their role and you will receive some cheap satisfaction in playing God. Glad you feel comfortable in that role.
If I was John or Margarita I would seriously consider a slander suit based on the accusations that you have made, but that they have yet to be charged with. You lost this argument when you gave that holier than thou speech about, "I can't talk about this because of the ongoing investigation," and then refused to shut up, which shows that you care more about your two minutes of fame than about "justice." Just think how you'll feel if your opinions taint the jury pool and they walk because of you. Now that would make me Angry. PS. I know a lot more than you think.
You and one other on here are quick to think that anyone who disagrees with you must be John or Margarita. This may be hard for you to believe but some people actually believe in letting the police and FBI make the accusations and back them up with - this may be a rough term for you - facts. As for people who hide behind lawyers. One of the funny things about this country is that under our laws - people have a right to representation, a fair trial, an untaited jury pool and having their side of the story told. People who accuse and don't want to hear anything but their side are also handy to have - ask the residents of Salem, Mass. By the way I don't see you using your real name so in a sense aren't you also hiding? However in the light of all fairness. I am more than willing to bet you and Justice $500 cash that I am not John, nor Margarita, nor am I related to them. I just happen to be someone who was initially intrigued how someone's politics had anything to do with a sex abuse charge. If you want to drop some cash let me know and I can contact Joseph Hosey and he can tell you.
On one of the other articles Justice you said and this is your words not mine. "Justice 3:23 pm on Tuesday, October 9, 2012 Wow, you don't even know the story and right away rush to judge! " Now you didn't make that comment to me. However, isn't that what you and some other here have done? Your comments to me have been nothing but a rush to judgment and I do take offense to many of them. As I have said from the beginning. I am not advocating for or against this woman. What I am against is the outright innuendo, and false statements you have made. I am against your attempts to label anyone who disagrees with you as being guilty of not caring about children. In a civilized world both sides have a right (some would say a God given right) to tell their story. What you are advocating is mob judgment, the rule of the bully and it is what are laws are supposed to prevent. The original article used the word "allegedly." That means they are not sure. If they were sure the FBI/police would not have reduced bail. So what gives you the right to be judge, jury and executioner? Did you see her commit the act you are accusing her of? You said she was a prostitute - did you accept money from her for sex? You and others have tied her to this man - who also has not yet been accused. You've dragged her family and workplace into it. Did they make you their spokesperson? What gives you the right?
You and I have very differing opinions on what is a fact. To me a fact is something I've seen with my own eyes or is repeatable. Neither you or anyone else has seen this woman commit this act. People are jailed, investigated and slandered all of the time. Once the damage is done there is no way of undoing the damage. You and others speak of justice. Do you understand why "lady justice" wears a blindfold? It is to represent impartiality, objectivity and fairness. Courtrooms are a place where facts are shown and "justice" not vengeance is handed out. Somehow, most people seem to believe that vengeance is justice it is not. Justice is supposed to be the balancing of facts and sentencing is the time where the victims and their advocates have a chance to explain why a particular act is so heinous. When we use rhetoric to convict someone in the press or in the court of public opinion the victims do not receive justice, they receive mob gratification. They incite a public indeceny that makes a mockery of the term justice. I ask you to look objectively at some of the cases (not this one) where someone has been accusted and then found innocent. Does that person ever recover and does the victim have satisfaction? Do you know how many teachers have been accused of crimes because of a bad grade - (cont)
As I have said from my first post. If this woman who has been accused, but not convicted is guilty, both society and the legal system will see that she is punished. In many ways because of the publicity on this it no longer matters if she is innocent. Her friends will always wonder, the ones who haven't already abandoned her. Her employers, because some here have made that public, will no longer be allowed for fear of litigation, to trust her and everyone who has known her will forever wonder. As one person reported she has never been charged with a crime before. However, from this point on will it matter. She has been tried and convicted in five news articles and from this point on, innocent or guilty, she will remain a criminal. Why do we have a legal system when we have a mob to seek...justice. At least the people on here should be honest about what they want...Vengeance. Didn't a certain person say, "Vengeance is mine?" Are you competing with him?
!!!!!
At first, I simply thought you were interested in publicity. but thou protest too much. Now, I truly wonder. 1. Either you know her and John so well because you are a spurned ex-lover (of one or both) 2. You were a "friend" who did nothing to prevent this and now feel guilty about your role. Maybe you even work with her since you know so much about her workplace. Since you know so much it really makes me curious why you didn't say something in the, to use your words, "years" that this has been going on. Perhaps, if it is true, you really do have a load of guilt for your inaction. You're right I do need to stop commenting. You don't listen, can't read and feel guilty enough without my help. Sleep well thinking about what you could have done before this victim was victimized. Hindsight is 20/20. I hope the parent of this child reads your many, many messages about how you knew this and failed to say anything when it could have done some good. If I was the victim's parent I would seriously consider litigation against you.
Actually, I don't. Like I said to "Justice" the only way to be 100% sure is for you to have physically been there. Perhaps the police really don't have all the "facts" that you could help them provide. As for me thinking I know so much...Remember, I haven't said this person is guilty, nor have I said this person is innocent. My initial entry into this was wondering what a person's political party had to do with a sex offense. All I know is that there are a lot of people, who are tried and convicted in the press and then are later proven innocent. What I've read here pertains to "Facts not in evidence." I see charges against a man who wasn't charged, a woman who is blamed for prostitution, that wasn't charged and a lot of people seeking vengence who are giving the impression they saw what happened and the only way for that to be possible was to be there - unless you have a video that you're not sharing with the police? Like I said to "justice" maybe you are emotionally invested in this for a reason. They say that to truly hate someone you must love them first. If you truly know this much I hope for your sake that the parents don't feel that you should have said something that would have prevented it. Since this is now so far from the point I entered the conversation I will now butt out. Eventually the facts will come out - in court.
Justice and Picked don't like talking about specifics. They prefer innuendo. After all if they named names someone might suspect they knew before hand and could have prevented this incident. That might subject them to....dare I say it...."justice." Everytime I've asked them a direct question I've got more of the same dribble. I'm actually beginning to wonder if they are teenage girlfriends of the "victim" who are jealous. Wouldn't that be really ironic?