Editor's note: This article has been updated to include a statement from Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart's Office responding to the lawsuit.
The family of a woman who was shot to death by her boyfriend have sued Cook County’s sheriff and chief judge, saying the county officials are responsible for her death because they placed the boyfriend on electronic home monitoring at the time and yet did nothing to stop him from traveling freely, allowing the woman to be murdered.
On June 17, attorneys with the firm of Wise Morrissey, of Chicago, filed suit in Cook County Circuit Court on behalf of Brandye McNair, identified as a relative and personal representative of the estate of Shanate Guy.
Robert Bingle
| Wise Morrissey
According to published reports, Guy was killed in June 2021, when her boyfriend, identified as Dominiko Johnson, entered her home and shot her to death. Johnson then allegedly killed himself, in what police labeled a murder-suicide.
According to the complaint, Johnson was able to murder Guy, even though he had been previously charged with aggravated unlawful use of a weapon and had been placed in Cook County’s Electronic Monitoring Program.
According to the complaint, Johnson “had been outfitted with an electronic monitoring device” and was purportedly under the supervision of the sheriff’s office and of the chief judge.
The complaint asserts, however, that the sheriff and the chief judge had placed Johnson into the electronic monitoring program, even though they knew the program lacked the staff and resources to actually electronically monitor him and to intervene should he travel without permission.
According to the complaint, at the time of Guy’s death, more than 3,500 people were outfitted, like Johnson, with electronic ankle bracelets, purportedly to monitor their movements, as they awaited trial on other charges. That number included more than 500 people who had been accused of unlawful use of a weapon, and who, before the monitoring program had been created, would have been in jail.
According to the complaint, the sheriff’s office “received an average of 850 alerts per day” from the electronic monitoring program, indicating those under the program were likely traveling without permission.
However, the complaint notes only 110 people were assigned to monitor those people, and to potentially respond to the hundreds of alerts each day.
Further, the complaint noted Sheriff Dart has publicly stated the program “was never designed for violent criminals.” Dart also said his office “needed a lot more personnel” to adequately monitor those in the program.
The complaint specifically accuses the sheriff’s office and the chief judge’s office of allowing “Johnson to physically be away from the home confinement for an inordinate period of time” and of failing “to provide adequate staffing for which to safely monitor” Johnson and other potentially violent offenders who were in the electronic monitoring program.
McNair is asking the court to order the county to pay unspecified damages.
In response to the lawsuit, the Sheriff's Office issued the following statement:
“Sheriff Dart has been adamant that electronic monitoring does not prevent violent offenders from continuing to engage in acts of violence. Despite these dire warnings violent offenders continue to be placed on electronic monitoring. Regardless, Sheriff’s personnel work tirelessly to monitor those ordered to the program and to prevent them from fleeing their charges or engaging in new crimes. Despite the tragedy, this lawsuit is without merit. The Sheriff’s Office will vigorously defend against what we believe are the complaint’s baseless allegations.”
Guy is represented in the action by attorney Robert J. Bingle, of Wise Morrissey.