Courtney Ealy was born October 9, 1994 in Chicago, IL. He was raised in a single parent household and dropped out of school during his sophomore year of high school. In March of 2014 he and a friend were arrested and charged with first degree murder. During the trial phase Courtney and his Co defendant were represented by separate attorneys. On multiple occasions, during both opening and closing arguments and also during the trial itself the counsel for Ealy’s co defendant alluded to the innocence of his client and guilt of Mr. Ealy.

The issues with the trial are evident, one cannot defend himself properly when his own team is presenting evidence against him.

The laws with regard to this type of scenario are clear:

“The general rule is that defendants jointly indicted are to be jointly tried unless fairness to one of the defendants requires a separate trial to avoid prejudice. (People v. Lindsay (1952), 412 Ill. 472, 480.) At least two varieties of prejudice can be readily identified. First, a defendant may be denied his constitutional right of confrontation if, in a joint trial, the State introduces the admission of a codefendant which implicates the defendant. (Douglas v. Alabama (1965), 380 U.S. 415, 419, 13 L. Ed. 2d 934, 937, 85 S. Ct. 1074, 1077.) Because the defendant cannot call the codefendant to the stand for cross-examination, either a separate trial should be ordered or the admission should be redacted to eliminate any references to the defendant. (Bruton v. United States (1968), 391 U.S. 123, 134 n. 10, 20 L. Ed. 2d 476, 484 n. 10, 88 S. Ct. 1620, 1626-27 n. 10; People v. Clark (1959), 17 Ill. 2d 486, 490.)”

Specifically, counsel for Courtney’s co defendant solicited testimony regarding hearsay statements that not only implicated Courtney in this crime but also violated his due process rights to a fair trial by subjecting him to a conflict of interest.

“Mr. Will:

Q: Kaprice?

A: Yes

Q: The only person that talked to you about what happened that night is Cdai, correct?

A: Yes

Q: Rondo never spoke to you?

A: No

Q: You never saw Rondo with a gun?

A: No

”

Mr. Ealy’s second contention is the fact that among the witnesses against him was a coerced witness. Newly discovered evidence has arisen that shows that among the officers investigating his case were several officers who had multiple complaints of abuse and coercion filed against them, those same officers perpetrated a crime against Courtney Ealy by coercing witnesses to tell a version of the story that implicated Courtney in these crimes.

Mr. Ealy now comes forward and asks for your support in getting his petition heard and his chance at a fair trial. In 2016 he was found guilty of first degree murder and sentenced to 38 years in the Illinois Department of Corrections where he is currently being held.