By Steven Dahlman

22-Aug-23 – One of the things we like most about our readers is that there is almost a zero percent chance you have within easy reach a machete.

Even for us jaded downtown residents who have seen it all, the story of police responding to a domestic disturbance at a large residential community in downtown Chicago and arresting a young man who had in his possession a machete got our attention.

A machete.

Any time I search for our story, the keyword I use is “machete.” If I told you he also had a gun, would that even matter? No. I had you at “machete.”

But there was a gun, a 9mm Smith & Wesson that, according to police, one party in the dispute waved at the other. The gun was not loaded, but only the person holding the gun knew that.

It happened on December 17, 2021, at Chicago’s iconic Marina City, home to about 1,400 residents. During a loud, late-night argument between Jacob Nicotra, a 25-year-old Elmhurst University student, and his 24-year-old girlfriend, Nicotra allegedly went into the bedroom, took the gun from a dresser drawer, and, according to the police report, was “waving it erratically and violently.”

Fearing Nicotra would use the gun against her, the woman, said the report, took control of a bag that contained the machete and three boxes of ammunition. She pleaded with Nicotra to put down the weapon, and when he did, she took the machete from the bag to keep him at a distance. She stayed in the bedroom with the machete while Nicotra went to call the police.

Yes, it was Nicotra (left) who called police, saying someone had a knife on him, but when police officers arrived at 2:43 a.m., they soon determined that Nicotra was the aggressor. Nicotra was charged with assault with a deadly weapon, a charge that was later dismissed. More on that later.

The woman told police, according to the police report, there had been at least three previous violent incidents involving Nicotra, including one incident in which she was battered.

While Nicotra was in custody, he complained of chest pains and shortness of breath, and an ambulance transported him to Northwestern Memorial Hospital. The woman told police it was just a ploy he had learned while taking a concealed carry class, to complain of chest pains to delay arrest and obtain legal counsel.

Three days later, during a court appearance before Circuit Judge Megan Goldish at the Domestic Violence Courthouse, the assault charge against Nicotra was dismissed.

A strain on emergency services already pushed to their limits

The story we published on January 8, 2022, stuck to the facts detailed in the police report. Loop North News has no issues – none at all – with naming people charged with violent crimes, particularly if the name is provided by the Chicago Police Department and the incident was witnessed, or at least heard, by a large number of people. Undoubtedly, these people were frightened and deserve to know every detail of the incident.

Furthermore, the incident required the response of the Chicago Police Department and services of Cook County Circuit Court, which we pay for as taxpayers and, at least briefly, it tied up public resources needed by people in dire circumstances.

But we want to be truthful and fair. So when the victim in this incident contacted me after our story was first published, of course I wanted to tell her side of the story.

She said what she told police “was not accurately reflected in the police report.” She denied telling police that Nicotra waved a gun at her, or that he had battered her previously. She said Nicotra did not assault her physically or threaten her verbally during the December 17, 2021, incident, though in the past, she says police have been called to the Marina City apartment due to verbal altercations.

She called the incident “a domestic argument that got out of hand but should never have led to an arrest.”

Nicotra moved out of state, she said. The gun used in the incident was confiscated and destroyed, according to court records.

After that, we received a couple of polite inquiries about whether Jacob’s name could be removed from the story. Each time, we explained that the information came from the Chicago Police Department, which we considered accurate and lawfully obtained. We do mention in the story that charges were dropped.

There are exceptions, of course, such as minors and victims of crime, but generally, we do not leave out details to spare the feelings of someone at the epicenter of a violent incident.

Most importantly, we can’t promise to remove the name of every person mentioned in a news story who later gets the charges against them dropped, and so do we do this only for certain people? We get to decide who must live with the consequences of their actions and who gets spared because they asked us in just the right way?

The matter was dropped for a while and then on July 31, 2023, we received this gem of an email from Skokie attorney Colleen LeFevour, J.D.. Managing Attorney at the Law Offices of Matthew Fakhoury, LLC.

“This email is to inform you that we are requesting removal of the article ‘Gun and Machete Part of Domestic Incident at Marina City,’ that was published by Loop North on January 8, 2022,” began the email from LeFevour (right).

“Jacob Nicotra, who is named in the story, has retained our law firm to represent him on this matter. We are requesting the removal of this content on the basis that Jacob Nicotra’s criminal record was expunged on May 3, 2022, and he has had no subsequent arrests. Pursuant to 20 ILCS 2630/5.2 (a) (1) (E), ‘Expunge’ means to physically destroy the records or return them to the petitioner and to obliterate the petitioner’s name from any official index or public record, or both...,” therefore, we request the removal of this article from public record.

You read that right. Removal of this article from “public record.” Not just documents and information created by the government but, it would appear, articles published by news outlets. She seemed to be saying there is a court order to remove Jacob’s name from news articles.

I’ve been writing about legal matters for decades, and most lawyers, I have found – please do not giggle – are ethical. But if you interact with enough of them, you start to recognize the subtle difference between “bluff and bluster” and non-meritorious claims and contentions.

I filed a complaint with the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, arguing Ms. LeFevour, J.D., was in violation of Rule 3.1 of the American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct, which states as follows:

A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law.

In other words, I felt the conflating of news articles with the “public record” had no basis in law. It was intended, in my opinion, to confuse and intimidate.

Ms. LeFevour’s email went on...

“In order to come to a beneficial outcome, we would also be willing to have Jacob’s name and involvement redacted from the article completely. Another acceptable solution is to have the article edited in such way that will make our client’s identity anonymous. We are open to discussing possible remedies further.”

She was kind enough to attach the Order to Expunge, which is available to anyone charged with a crime – even a violent crime – and then that charge is later dismissed. Whether you were wrongfully accused due to mistaken identity or the victim says it was all a misunderstanding.

Expungement, I will note, does not mean that the incident did not occur.

There was a second email from her, and another response from me, none of which were any more productive than the first round of emails.

I’ve filed Rule 3.1 complaints before and have never been successful, so I was not shocked when the ARDC wrote back to say they had “completed our inquiries and have determined to proceed no further with this investigation.”

According to Roona Shah, Senior Counsel for the ARDC Intake Division, “after considering all relevant factors, we have determined not to pursue formal disciplinary charges against this attorney at this time.”

My heart did soar just a little to read in Ms. Shah’s response that she had read Ms. LeFevour’s email and “we have also reminded her regarding certain rules that we thought may be appropriate including what you cited.”

Domestic incidents impact neighbors, too, and taxpayers

I’d say, “stop me if you’ve heard this before,” but anyone who has lived in a large residential community in a big city has stopped me already. Many of us have lived near a young couple that argued so often and so viciously that you braced yourself for the sound of a gunshot at any moment. The police are called, it quiets down for a while, and then, not long after, the police are called again.

Does the couple separate? Get counseling? No. Instead, we hear variations of “what I told police was not accurately reflected in the police report,” as if we’re expected to believe it’s normal that they were involved in an incident that generated a police report.

There’s probably nothing we can do about it, of course, except if you’re a news outlet, you can at least document an incident, when it’s particularly bad, and try to keep people informed, some of whom might just be able to help.

The First Amendment does not give news outlets carte blanche to print just anything. Please don’t giggle a second time but there are ethics for journalists and I believe we all try our best to abide. But one thing is for certain.

In any matter in which we must decide between serving our readers and anyone else, we will always side with our readers.

Every time.