The former director of the Illinois State Police’s disciplinary office says his reputation is being held hostage in court by a woman who he claims falsely accused him of sexual harassment in an attempt to escape consequences for charges of forgery and fraud, and then allegedly used her political ties to Gov. JB Pritzker to get him removed from his job.
On Oct. 20, Jack Garcia, the former director of the Illinois State Police Merit Board, filed a motion in Chicago federal court, asking the court to allow him to proceed with his lawsuit against Jenny Thornley, who formerly worked under Garcia’s supervision at the ISP Merit Board office.
“For over eighteen months, Jack Garcia has had to live with the stigma of a federal lawsuit accusing him of insidious conduct,” Garcia’s attorneys wrote in the motion.
“… Ms. Thornley should be required to test her baseless claims through the litigation process that she initiated. She should not, however, be permitted to use the power of the federal judiciary to hold Mr. Garcia’s reputation hostage indefinitely.”
Garcia and Thornley have been at odds in court since April 2021, when Thornley filed suit against Garcia and the ISP Merit Board.
Pritzker ties?
In that complaint, Thornley accused the Merit Board of firing her in retaliation for accusing Garcia of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Thornley had worked as the Merit Board’s chief fiscal officer and director of personnel.
Garcia then sued Thornley in response. In his counterclaim, Garcia said Thornley had completely fabricated the sexual assault accusations to protect herself from possible criminal prosecution.
Garcia investigated Thornley, allegedly beginning in 2019, for allegedly falsifying her timesheets and forging Garcia’s signature to get paid overtime for hours she allegedly had not worked.
According to Garcia’s lawsuit, Thornley then allegedly launched a campaign to seek his removal, accusing him of the alleged sexual misconduct and calling on political allies, allegedly including Gov. Pritzker and his wife, M.K. Pritzker, to get Garcia removed from his job.
Thornley had worked on Pritzker’s 2018 campaign for governor.
Garcia was later removed, and the investigation into Thornley’s alleged misconduct was halted, moments before Garcia was to meet with Springfield Police concerning the matter.
A later outside investigation into the competing claims led to criminal charges against Thornley and her termination from the Merit Board office. The outside investigators found no basis to Thornley’s claims, allowing Garcia to be reinstated.
Thornley has claimed the outside investigation was a sham, conducted by people friendly to Garcia.
But about a year after Garcia got his job back, Pritzker and his Democratic allies in the Illinois General Assembly enacted a law forbidding anyone who previously worked in the Illinois State Police from serving as director at the ISP Merit Board.
That action resulted in Garcia’s permanent removal from his job.
Critics asserted the legislation was politically motivated to target Garcia for removal.
After she was removed from her job following the investigation, Thornley filed for workers’ comp, based on those unfounded sexual assault claims. Thornley allegedly listed Gov. Pritzker as her supervisor, even though she had worked at the Merit Board. Documents also indicate she sent M.K. Pritzker a text about the issue.
In all, the Chicago Tribune reported in December that Thornley was paid more than $71,000 in workers’ comp and disability benefits from that claim.
With criminal investigations continuing, Thornley had argued it would be “fundamentally unfair” for Garcia to allow her to sue her over the same allegations at the same time. She asked the judge to put Garcia’s lawsuit on hold until the criminal case was completed.
U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman agreed to that stay.
However, as the criminal probes drag on with no apparent end in sight, Judge Coleman signaled she would be open to consider allowing Garcia to move forward with his defamation claims against Thornley. She ordered both sides to present arguments on whether she should.
Shortly after she issued that order, federal judges overseeing operations at the Northern District of Illinois federal court ordered the case to be transferred to a newly appointed federal judge. The case was purportedly included at random, with dozens of other cases, following the appointment of new District Judge Nancy Maldonado.
Maldonado, however, recused herself from the case, because she had served on the ISP Merit Board at the time the allegations concerning Garcia and Thornley arose.
Maldonado had been appointed to the Merit Board by Gov. Pritzker.
The case was then transferred back to Judge Coleman.
Garcia’s attorneys then filed their motion, asking the judge to allow them to move ahead with their claims against Thornley.
'Nothing in common with forgery, theft'
In the motion, they noted Garcia’s claims concern Thornley’s sexual harassment accusations.
And those, Garcia says, stand apart from the criminal charges pending against Thornley.
“… Defamation and false light share nothing in common with forgery, theft, and official misconduct, the crimes with which Ms. Thornley is charged,” Garcia’s attorneys wrote.
“… Ms. Thornley’s criminal conduct is independent of the core facts that Mr. Garcia must prove. That is to say, Mr. Garcia must proved that Ms. Thornley made harmful, false statements. Her criminal conduct provides important context for why she made those statements, but it is ultimately not the heart of Mr. Garcia’s case.”
Garcia further noted his case does not represent any effort to somehow dig up evidence state prosecutors could use against Thornley in criminal court.
He noted he is only in court because of the accusations leveled against him by Thornley, as laid out in the lawsuit she filed.
Garcia said his lawsuit is solely about making Thornley answer for the “baseless accusations” she allegedly falsely leveled against him in her alleged bid to use her political ties to thwart an investigation that would lead to her losing her job and facing criminal prosecution.
And, Garcia noted, Thornley appears to be carrying out similar stalling tactics in her criminal case, continuously requesting continuances, and dragging out both the criminal and civil proceedings.
The longer Thornley is allowed to delay proceedings in the lawsuit, the more difficult it will be for Garcia to resurrect his reputation, he said.
“Mr. Garcia has two interests: Clearing his name of the taint of Ms. Thornley’s false allegations and vindicating his rights through his defamation claims,” Garcia’s attorneys wrote.
“The longer the stay persists, the longer and more calcified the taint becomes. And the longer the stay persists, the more witnesses’ memories fade and the harder it becomes for Mr. Garcia to prove his defamation claims.”
Judge Coleman gave Thornley until Nov. 4 to respond to Garcia’s motion to lift the stay.
Garcia is represented in the case by attorneys Jeremy D. Margolis and Neil G. Nandi, of the firm of Loeb & Loeb, of Chicago.