The meat of the matter:
Pepmeyer denies allegations
by
Mike Kroll
The
Zephyr, Galesburg, Illinois
The
living room of StateÕs Attorney John PepmeyerÕs Galesburg home is becoming a
familiar location as I have spent two long Sunday afternoons interviewing him
as he sat on that floral pattern couch with his wife Laura at his side. On this
second occasion I witnessed Pepmeyer read for the first time the specific
charges being leveled against him by three women who have worked for him in the
Knox County StateÕs AttorneyÕs office since he replaced former StateÕs Attorney
(now Circuit Judge) Paul Mangieri in January.
The
first specific charges leveled against Pepmeyer are contained in a complaint
filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by Galesburg
attorney Barry Barash representing Jennifer Brown, Teresa Cummings and
Constance Griffith. The women allege a blatant pattern of sexual harassment by
Pepmeyer coupled with at least one specific incident of professional
misconduct.
Since
the courthouse saga has begun, Pepmeyer has consistently and vehemently denied
all such charges and says that he has never engaged in the actions or
conversations alleged by his accusers. He also notes that they are but three of
the women he deals with on a continuing basis in the Courthouse apparently
without similar incidents. He believes that his accusers are transferring their
own motives on to him. ÒIt is they who seek to divert the focus to outrageous
and fictional charges against me. This was neither a shock nor unexpected.
These same allegations of sexual harassment were initially made to cause me to
resign and when I refused, now they are seeking damages.Ó
Pepmeyer
is surprised that Griffith has joined in this action with Brown and Cummings. ÒI
have understood from the beginning that Jennifer [Brown] and Teresa [Cummings]
were behind the sexual harassment allegations but I had no idea that Connie
[Griffith] was also part of it. Connie has always said, ÔI just want to do my
job,Õ and it never occurred to me that she felt this way or that she would see
the other women as her allies.Ó
The
irony is that GriffithÕs complaint contains the potentially most damning charge
against Pepmeyer and there is nothing sexual about it. She says that on Friday,
January 12 (the day Pepmeyer was sworn in as StateÕs Attorney at about 4:30pm)
he approached her about a case concerning a defendant Pepmeyer had been
defending against a charge of predatory criminal sexual assault before turning
the case over to his brother and former law partner Tom Pepmeyer.
GriffithÕs
complaint reads: ÒHe asked me to type an amended information on a sex case...
He wanted me to type it to reduce it to a battery (misdemeanor) which would be
an offense which would not require registering as a sex offender. I knew the
felony attorney Mike Kraycinovich had just recently spoken to the victim and
the victimÕs family and that they wanted the ...matter to go to trial. They
emphatically were opposed to a plea agreement. Mr PepmeyerÕs request (made just
hours before he was sworn in as StateÕs Attorney) made me feel uneasy, so I
mentioned it to the felony attorney. He was as uneasy as I was and was
immediately on the phone to Paul Mangieri who was at home for lunch.
[Kraycinovich] told Paul what John asked me to do and Paul said that I was not
to do anything about [PepmeyerÕs] request and that he would speak to me about
it in the office when he returned. When Paul returned ...he was very upset
because this family deserved justice and that was what they were going to get.
[Mangieri] would not sign an amended information and said that he would tell
John in no uncertain terms that this case would go to trial.Ó
Pepmeyer
acknowledges that since his appointment two days earlier by the Knox County
Board he had been in the process of divesting himself of all pending cases
including the one in question. Like this one, most were turned over to his
brother, Tom. But he is adamant that he never considered making any such
request as described by Griffith.
ÒThere
were several cases that require resolution. On all of these cases and the
specific one mentioned in the complaint, I have made motions for the State
Appellate Prosecutor to be appointed as Special Prosecutor, the Court granted
my motions. These matters have been completely turned over to that office for
handling and they have exclusive responsibility for this case. Most
importantly, the Court files clearly reflect that since January 12, nothing has
occurred in these cases. As to the case mentioned it is still pending, and
further comment would be improper at this time.Ó
According
to courthouse records the two original charges were filed in October 2005 and
amended on October 27, 2006 at the same time that three additional counts were
filed. Predatory criminal sexual assault of a child is a Class X felony in
Illinois and the defendant could be facing life in prison. Had Pepmeyer
contemplated such an action it is unclear how he could have accomplished it.
Even if Mangieri were open to a plea agreement of some kind he was likewise
relieving himself of the pending cases before being sworn in as circuit judge
immediately before PepmeyerÕs own swearing in ceremony. A hearing would have to
have been scheduled before a judge with the accused present and all this
completed in just two or three hours.
ÒWhat
is of prime importance for the public to know, is that regardless of sexual
harassment charges, union grievances, personal smears and civil lawsuits, these
Ôcounter-actionsÕ taken by certain staff members of my new office, have
occurred only after I commenced my attempts to shake up and change certain
routines within the office, organize the mess and turmoil regarding felony
files in the office, and most importantly, only after I had begun my inquiries
and investigations, and had discovered highly-questionable practices and what I
believe amounts to criminal wrong-doing in both the SheriffÕs Office and the
StateÕs AttorneyÕs Offices.Ó
As
documented by the time frame laid out in the EEOC complaint, Brown and CummingsÕ
decision to pursue grievances against Pepmeyer followed his asking questions
related to the investigation of sexual contact between a prisoner and
corrections officer in the Knox County Jail, the huge number of DUI cases that
were being dismissed or lost when the StateÕs AttorneyÕs office failed to
respond within the 160 days speedy trial mandate and the now infamous letter
from Henry County StateÕs Attorney Tim Patton regarding the ATM bandit case and
the extradition of Timothy Lucas from Utah.
ÒIt
is my belief that the personal smears directed towards me were and remain, a
clear and blatant attempt to stop me from uncovering wrong-doing and criminal
activity — nothing more, nothing less,Ó says Pepmeyer. ÒEven after these
attempts to silence me and to thwart further probing and investigation into
these criminal matters, it appears that almost on a daily basis, revelations of
further highly-suspect activities and possible criminal wrong-doing continue to
surface.Ó
ÒWell
before the accusations, I had discussed with my staff the need to take a much
more aggressive attitude towards prosecuting DUIÕs and felonies. The need for
more trials instead of plea-bargaining or outright dismissals and securing
convictions on felony cases as opposed to reducing them to misdemeanors. Of
prime importance — perhaps the most important action which took place
before these allegations against me were made was my issuance of a memo to all
staff attorneys that no more DUIÕs and no more felonies were to be dismissed
without clearance from me as StateÕs Attorney. One staff memberÕs response was
to wave this memo wildly in a public courtroom while uttering the ÒFÓ word.
AnotherÕs was to berate me for not trusting the judgment of my assistants and
for not having faith in their judgment and discretion in handling cases
assigned to them.Ó
Pepmeyer
says that when he arrived there was no system in place to track documents being
brought into the office or who or how they were handled once a file was created
in the StateÕs AttorneyÕs office. ÒPeople in law enforcement regularly
complained of having to bring documents back a second or third time because
they could not be located within the office,Ó noted Pepmeyer.
Pepmeyer
describes a workplace where staff infighting was a daily occurrence and where
there was a constant effort by some to advance their own position or salary at
the expense of a coworker. ÒThe staff members who have made allegations against
me, are the precise people I was either attempting to request dramatic changes
from, or investigating for either negligent or criminal wrong-doing. They were
people I had previously criticized or who had sought dramatic pay raises from
me and had been denied. These are the same people who had requested of me daily
to fire certain of their fellow co-workers within the office, and were
constantly jockeying for a new position and more money.Ó
ÒWell
before the accusations made against me, another secretary within the office had
cleaned off the desk of the office manager who was off work due to an injury.
During the deskÕs Ôcleaning processÕ numerous files, police reports, crime lab
reports, Petitions to Revoke Probation that were never filed, unfinished
forfeitures from the police and sheriffÕs office, and a letter containing
restitution check to a victim from my former law firm dated November, 2005 were
among the items found. There were repeated requests and expectations from my
staff that I would fire her when she returned. The other secretaries within the
office delighted in this action to the extent that they invited a multitude of
employees from other offices within the Courthouse to view the secretaryÕs
desk. Upon her return to work, when I did not fire her, two of the women now
accusing me of sexual harassment called me weak for not doing so and told me
she needs to go.Ó
While
the three woman in the StateÕs AttorneyÕs office who have worked for Pepmeyer
only since mid-January paint a picture of a man who was obsessed with sex it is
intriguing that no other women have come forward to assert similar charges
against the embattled attorney. There would appear to be lots of candidates.
Former secretaries and assistants in his legal practice or staff at either of
the two bars Pepmeyer co-owned with his brother until being named StateÕs
Attorney. The charges of sexual harassment against Pepmeyer have received
substantial press coverage and are the talk of this community yet not one other
woman has stepped forward to say she too was victimized by John Pepmeyer.
Quite
the contrary has occurred. Jill Hennenfent has been employed by Pepmeyer &
Pepmeyer since October 1989 and continues today as a secretary to JohnÕs
brother, Tom. ÒHaving worked with John Pepmeyer for more than 17 years I feel
that I can provide a unique perspective as to his behavior and interactions
with people. During my employment we have dealt with literally hundreds of
clients, both male and female, and I have never witnessed any unwarranted
behavior from John Pepmeyer. Further, there have been several female
secretaries employed during my tenure, none of whom have ever complained of
either being sexually harassed or mistreated by John Pepmeyer.Ó
ÒI
find it very odd that in the first 60 days of John being StateÕs Attorney that
he is being accused of creating a Ôhostile work environmentÕ and being accused
of sexual harassment,Ó continued Hennenfent. She went on to say how amazing it
was following the volume of complaints alleged by Teresa Cummings Òthat her
work environment angers, upsets and frightens herÓ that this woman would bring
her young daughter to work with her for a entire day. ÒIf this workplace is so
horrible why would she subject her daughter to this environment? I am of the
opinion that these allegations are untrue and that none of these things that
John is being accused of ever happened.Ó
Since
the week following the March 17th article in the Peoria Journal-Star that
ignited this entire scandal when three assistant stateÕs attorneys and some of
the office staff initially ceased coming to work, Pepmeyer has brought new
people into the Knox County StateÕs AttorneyÕs office to help keep things running.
This has included Nicki Gulick, who formerly worked as John PepmeyerÕs legal
secretary from March 1999 through June 2006. ÒEven though I was a young female
in my early 20Õs never once did I ever feel awkward around [Pepmeyer], even
when we were alone. NEVER EVER did I feel that I was threatened in any way,
sexually, verbally or physically. I think the allegations made against John are
completely ridiculous and I could never picture him saying any of the comments
that he has been accused of. I believe that after over seven years of working
with someone five days a week I would have a pretty good idea of what could
come out of his mouth.Ó
Gulick
has worked in the Knox County StateÕs AttorneyÕs office since March 26 on a
temporary basis after Pepmeyer asked for her help. During her career as a legal
secretary, Gulick has worked in another StateÕs AttorneyÕs office and is
therefore familiar with the operations of such an office. ÒI have to say that
this is the most unorganized StateÕs AttorneyÕs office I have ever seen!Ó Since
working in the Knox County office she says, ÒI have never seen Mr. Pepmeyer
treat anyone with disrespect or make them feel uncomfortable in any way. I
certainly have never witnessed any harassment of any kind by Mr. Pepmeyer. If
anything, itÕs the secretaries in the office creating the unpleasant
environment. Since I have been here John, only speaks to the secretaries when
others are present to protect himself from further allegations.Ó
Louis
Glossip was also brought into the Knox County StateÕs AttorneyÕs office on a
temporary basis in mid-March by Pepmeyer. Glossip has worked for the Pepmeyer
brothers for the past six years in the restaurant and bar businesses. ÒI have
never been treated with anything less than courtesy and respect by John
Pepmeyer. In fact, I feel that I have been treated as part of the Ôfamily.Õ In
my experience Johns has always treated everyone he encounters with the same
respect that he affords me. I have never seen John mistreat anyone in my
presence. Since the allegations against John first came out I have often
wondered why a 55-year-old man who has been an attorney for 30 years and has a
clean record would get begin acting so inappropriately immediately after
getting appointed to a high profile public office. And why is it that the
remainder of the office staff have not witnessed any of this questionable
behavior?Ó
4/19/07