Chicago Justice Podcast

Send us Fan Mail

Crime is falling in cities across America—so why does the public conversation sound like the opposite? Crime analyst Jeff Asher, co-founder of AH Datalytics and host of The Jeff-alytics Podcast, joins us to unpack how crime data is being misused, misread, and weaponized.

Social media, misinformation, and rising partisanship have turned crime statistics into political ammunition. When leaders deny data that challenges their views and exploit single violent incidents for political gain, we lose the ability to understand what actually drives crime—and to fund solutions that work.

In this episode:

• Can UCR and NIBRS data be compared year over year?

• Should we trust police department crime data?

• Why real estate “safety” rankings mislead

• How local media gets crime data wrong

• How politicians exploit crime data

• What worries Jeff most about how America uses crime data

Support CJP: https://chicagojustice.org/donate/

Get Involved: https://chicagojustice.org/become-part-of-the-cjp-nation/

Send us Fan Mail

A stop for a missed turn signal and a dim license plate light should have been routine. Instead, it ended in an arrest on charges that don't hold up, and then in a fight over records that officials won't release.

This week, Emmy Award-winning KPRC 2 journalist Jaewon Jung joins us to break down a traffic stop earlier this year in Montgomery County, Texas, and what happened after the video became public.

Jung requested the deputy's personnel file and the sheriff's office's traffic stop policies. The department refused to release the personnel file, citing pending litigation, and the Texas Attorney General's office backed that decision. The policies were released, but they were completely blacked out. Both of Jung's appeals are still pending.

In this episode, we discuss:

• The pretext for the stop and the tactics the deputy used
• How far the deputy strayed from the state's traffic stop guidelines
• The body camera moment when the deputy says, "This is just how I do my traffic stops"
• The denial of the personnel file request and the completely redacted policies
• Why cover-ups do even more damage to community trust than the original incident

When officers ignore approved tactics, nobody is safer. When officials protect those officers instead of the public, the damage to community trust spreads much further.

Send us Fan Mail

Under Louisiana law, people who were wrongfully convicted and served years, even decades, in state prison are entitled to compensation through the Louisiana Innocence Compensation Fund. It's a simple principle: when the state gets it wrong, the state owes something to the people it wronged.

But in practice, that compensation has been anything but guaranteed. In this episode, we're joined by investigative journalist Richard Webster of Verite News, a member of the ProPublica Local Reporting Network, to break down how Governor Jeff Landry and Attorney General Liz Murrill have fought compensation claims again and again, sometimes even in cases involving DNA evidence or where judges have personally apologized to defendants while overturning their convictions.

We dig into how the compensation process actually works, why plea deals often let prosecutors avoid public accountability rather than pursue justice, and reports that Murrill threatened to use the power of her office against an exoneree simply for publicly maintaining his innocence.

In this episode:

• How the Louisiana Innocence Compensation Fund is supposed to work
• Cases involving DNA evidence and judicial apologies where the state still fought compensation
• Why plea deals can shield prosecutors and police rather than serve justice
• Reports of retaliation against an exoneree for speaking publicly about his innocence
• What accountability looks like when the state won't admit it got it wrong

Guest: Richard Webster, Investigative Reporter at Verite News and a member of the ProPublica Local Reporting Network

Send us Fan Mail

Police shootings make headlines. Police officers sexually abusing children and adults rarely do. This week we sit down with Rachel LaPointe, a social worker turned independent investigator, who tracks gendered police violence across the country: officers caught paying minors for sex, school resource officers abusing students on duty, and departments that quietly rehire known offenders after six-figure settlements.

We dig into why prosecutors almost never hold these officers accountable, and why the media routinely softens coverage, describing abuse of a minor as an officer who "had sex with a student," as if a child can consent. Rachel explains the institutional complicity behind these cases, including a school district police force that hired an officer whose former department had already paid $1.5 million to settle a sexual misconduct claim.

A difficult but necessary conversation about power, silence, and what real accountability would require.

Follow Rachel's ongoing investigations:
TikTok: @rachel_mle
Instagram: @rachelmlap
Substack: genderedpoliceabuse.substack.com

Send us Fan Mail

DC Councilmember Zachary Parker (Ward 5) joins us to unpack one of the most misunderstood issues in local politics today: youth gatherings and the media and political rhetoric that surround them. We ask a question many officials avoid: should cities respond with more policing and curfews, or invest in the root causes driving young people to gather in the first place?

Councilmember Parker makes the case for the latter. He walks us through his work partnering with DC's Department of Parks and Recreation to build community-based alternatives that have already reached thousands of youth across the District, alongside a real slowdown in large, unplanned gatherings. We also dig into DC's juvenile curfew laws, why the social science says they don't work, and what happened when Parker invited young people themselves to a roundtable to explain, in their own words, why curfews might actually be backfiring.

A candid conversation about policy, politics, and what it actually takes to solve a problem instead of just reacting to it.

Send us Fan Mail

This week on the Chicago Justice Podcast, we sit down with Injustice Watch Senior Reporter Dan Hinkel to examine the changing role of the Cook County State's Attorney's Office Conviction Integrity Unit (CIU) under State's Attorney Eileen O'Neill Burke.

Cook County has recorded more exonerations than any county in the United States, a reflection of decades of police misconduct, coerced confessions, official corruption, and other systemic failures that have led to approximately 440 wrongful convictions being overturned. Yet despite that history, the CIU's approach to reviewing innocence claims appears to be shifting.

Hinkel discusses how O'Neill Burke has signaled that convictions should only be overturned when there is definitive evidence proving innocence, such as DNA evidence. Critics argue that standard ignores the reality that DNA evidence is rarely available in the types of cases that typically reach conviction review units and could significantly limit future exonerations.

We also explore the philosophy behind Conviction Integrity Units, whether prosecutors can objectively review convictions obtained by their own offices, the role of outside experts in innocence investigations, Kim Foxx's record on exonerations, and O'Neill Burke's history handling wrongful conviction cases.

If Cook County's Conviction Integrity Unit is changing course, what does that mean for people seeking to prove their innocence?

Listen as Dan Hinkel helps unpack one of the most important criminal justice debates facing Cook County today.

Guest: Dan Hinkel, Senior Reporter, Injustice Watch

Topics Covered:

• Cook County's history of wrongful convictions and exonerations
• The Conviction Integrity Unit under Eileen O'Neill Burke
• Whether DNA should be required to overturn convictions
• Conflicts of interest within conviction review units
• Kim Foxx's record on exonerations
• Certificates of Innocence
• The future of innocence claims in Cook County

🎧 Subscribe to the Chicago Justice Podcast for in-depth conversations on criminal justice, policing, courts, government accountability, and public policy.

Send us Fan Mail

New reporting from The Trace has shed light on an important question in the gun violence prevention space: Why are firearms sold by certain retailers showing up in criminal investigations at disproportionately high rates?

In this week’s episode, we take a deep dive into data connecting California-based firearm retailer Turner’s Outdoorsman to a higher-than-expected number of guns later recovered as crime guns. According to reporting by The Trace, firearms sold by the retailer have consistently appeared in crime gun traces at rates that exceed expectations, raising questions about firearm diversion and gun trafficking patterns.

We also examine the concept of “time-to-crime,” a metric developed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) that measures the time between a firearm’s initial retail sale and its recovery by law enforcement. A short time-to-crime can be an important indicator for investigators seeking to identify potential straw purchasing schemes and other forms of firearm trafficking.

Joining us is Arron Mendelson, Data Journalist at The Trace, who walks us through the reporting, explains how crime gun tracing data is analyzed, and discusses what these findings may reveal about the movement of firearms from legal sales into criminal activity. We also explore the limitations of the data, the broader role of gun retailers in preventing firearm diversion, and what policymakers, researchers, and advocates can learn from these trends.

Whether you’re interested in gun violence prevention, firearm trafficking, public safety, criminal justice, or investigative journalism, this conversation provides an in-depth look at how data can help uncover patterns that might otherwise go unnoticed.

Listen now to learn:

Send us Fan Mail

California’s public records law is designed to give residents access to government information, but proposed changes to Assembly Bill 1821 (AB 1821) could significantly reshape how that access works in practice.

In this episode, we sit down with Sean McMorris, Transparency, Ethics & Accountability Program Manager at California Common Cause, to discuss the ongoing debate surrounding AB 1821 and what it could mean for government transparency, public oversight, and the public’s right to know.

Sean breaks down the bill’s proposed amendments, including provisions that could increase costs for public records requesters, extend response times for government agencies, require requesters to disclose why they want records, and, in certain circumstances, allow government entities to challenge or sue requesters based on their intended use of the information.

We explore the broader implications for journalists, watchdog groups, community organizations, researchers, and everyday citizens who rely on public records laws to hold government accountable. What is at stake for transparency in California, and how could these changes affect the future of public access to government information?

Whether you’re concerned about open government, freedom of information, public accountability, or civic engagement, this is a conversation you won’t want to miss.

Topics covered:

Send us Fan Mail

What happens when a police unit operates outside traditional oversight and is staffed by officers with troubling disciplinary histories?

In this episode, we take a deep dive into the New York Police Department’s Community Response Team (CRT), a controversial unit that has drawn scrutiny for its aggressive tactics, alleged constitutional violations, and lack of accountability. We examine reporting that raises serious questions about the unit’s operations, including allegations that CRT officers repeatedly engaged in unconstitutional stops, searches, and enforcement actions.

Our discussion also explores the makeup of the unit itself, including the significant number of officers assigned to CRT who have histories of sustained misconduct complaints. We unpack what that says about police culture, leadership, and the broader challenges of reform.

Perhaps most troubling, we examine claims that the unit functioned outside the NYPD’s traditional chain of command, with key decisions allegedly driven directly by Mayor Eric Adams’ office rather than department leadership. What does this mean for transparency, accountability, and democratic oversight of policing?

Joining us is Eric Umansky, Editor-at-Large at ProPublica, whose investigative reporting helped uncover the inner workings of the CRT and the political dynamics surrounding the unit.

This is a critical conversation about policing, public accountability, constitutional rights, and who really controls law enforcement in one of the nation’s largest cities.

Send us Fan Mail

More than 100,000 Automated License Plate Reader cameras are now operating across the United States, feeding data into networks shared by thousands of police departments and federal agencies. But where are these cameras located, and who is most affected by this growing surveillance infrastructure?

In this episode, we speak with Professor Steven Keener of Christopher Newport University, first author of the recent study “Surveillance Inequality: Race, Poverty, and the Geography of Automated License Plate Reader Deployment.“ Together, we explore the findings of the research and what they reveal about the relationship between surveillance, race, poverty, and community impact.

As part two of our series on Flock Safety and ALPR technology, this conversation examines how these systems work, how data is shared among more than 3,000 law enforcement agencies, and why these developments are generating growing concern among researchers, advocates, and community members.