Marianne Akers Chatham crash driver that killed 4 school girls faces no charges amid concern of Illinois State Patrol (ISP) integrity of investigations or former ISP employee and potential conflict of interest.
A 44 year old Chatham, Illinois woman continues to remain free without any charges amid community concern that the driver of a black Jeep that veered into a school building and killing 4 young girls and injuring another six bears criminal culpability.
Marianne Akers was driving close to the YNOT Outdoors Summer and After School Camp, located at 301 Breckenridge Road, Monday afternoon, circa 3.20 p.m, when she lost control of her vehicle, crashed through a fence, before fatally striking three young girls, along with killing another when her Jeep crashed through one of the buildings, before exiting the other side and slamming into a utility pole behind the building and finally stopping.
Chatham crash driver toxicology comes back negative amid new theory
Chatham crash driver, former ISP employee: a conflict of interest?
To date, Illinois State Police (ISP) have declined to charge the woman with the tragedy, stressing that the incident was not intentional. Authorities to date have not publicly stated what led to Akers ‘losing control of her vehicle.’
Scallywagandvagabond has previously reported a source saying that Akers had experienced a medical emergency while driving, leading to her having a seizure and losing control of her vehicle. A source at the hospital where Akers was taken, stated the driver having a second seizure, and unaware at the time of the four children she had allegedly killed earlier that afternoon.
As ISP continues to investigate the incident, including awaiting the results of toxicology tests, concern has now centered on any potential conflict of interest with ISP’s investigation and Akers, who had previously worked for the police department.
Fielding questions about the integrity of investigators, a Q&A with NewsChannel20 yielded the following responses in part, below.
ISP: ‘The driver in this case has not worked for ISP for nearly seven years, and when she worked for ISP, she had no role in investigations, or patrol, or any other part of ISP that is involved in this type of investigation. ISP is a large agency and conducts comprehensive, impartial investigations regardless of who is involved.’
The response led to the outlet further asking ISP, ‘What protocols are in place to ensure transparency in cases involving former agency personnel?’
To which ISP responded, ‘Any current employee who has a relationship with a former co-worker who is the subject of an investigation would recuse themselves from the investigation. This is standard operating procedure. No current ISP employee conducting this investigation has any previous work history with the driver.’
Q: Is ISP considering referring this investigation to an independent agency to avoid any perceived conflict of interest?
ISP: ‘There is no conflict of interest. ISP is specifically authorized to investigate these incidents by state statute and ISP will continue to work with the Sangamon County State’s Attorney’s Office that will determine what charges, if any, are appropriate.’
Charges forthcoming?
To date the Sangamon County State’s Attorney’s Office has indicated there are no charges forthcoming. That too could change pending the release of toxicology tests which could take 7-10 days to conduct to see what medication, drugs, if any, Akers may have been using leading into Monday’s tragedy.
And then there were these comments below that caught this author’s attention. See what you think?
‘Do you people really have so little faith or respect for ISP that you think they would cover up evidence in the deaths of four children?’
‘Very sad deal but u cant jail someone for having a seizure or other medical issue unless was told not to drive i do understand the grief and anger tho in a time like this we want answers justice and retribution but if it was truly medical it could of been any of us or our older parents and then ur comment would change lets find the answers before we judge.’
‘I wanna know why she isn’t behind bars. Idc medical or not she should be in jail. There are people in county on lesser charges.’
‘No word on toxicology report yet? Slow work or a cover up?’
