Many states are now considering legislation requiring sites such as Zoosk and Match.com to disclose whether their participants have undergone a criminal background check.

According to a report by the Chicago Tribune, the Illinois legislature is considering such a law to reassure online daters. The proposal would force dating sites to disclose to customers whether they run criminal background checks before users can start contacting potential dates. The disclosures would be displayed prominently (and repeatedly) to remind potential subscribers of whether candidates have been vetted.

Websites that fail to post such disclosures (or falsely advertise that they do background checks) would violate consumer protection laws. Violations would carry potential fines of up to $50,000.

The bill is based on the increasing need to protect users from dangerous people who hide through online personas. The Tribune report featured several prominent stories about online romances that turned bad. In one instance, a North Side public relations executive who used a dating site to meet women for drinks was accused of sexually assaulting two of his dates. In another, a man is accused of defrauding a woman he met online out of $225,000 with false promises of high-yield investments.

A number of dating sites conduct background checks already. Match.com and eHarmony currently screen subscribers against public sex offender registries. True.com screens participants by searching state and county databases for felony and sex offense convictions. Nevertheless, the bill's sponsor, state senator Ira Silverstein D-Chicago, believes that it would provide an added safety measure in online dating sites.

Source: Chicago Tribune "State Urged to Lower Risks of Online Dating" January 26, 2012

In the Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington 5-4 decision issued in early April, the justices found that strip searches or as the justices described them "close visual inspection[s] while undressed" could be completed for all detainees.

In the Florence case the arrest was premised on a mistake. Albert Florence was sentenced to pay a fine in monthly installments, but a warrant issued after he fell behind on his payments. A week after the warrant was issued, he paid the balance. However, the warrant was never removed from the system.

Several years later, Florence was arrested on the outstanding warrant during a routine stop for a traffic violation. As part of the booking process at two county jails, Florence underwent two invasive strip searches. Florence was released the day after he was admitted to the second facility and the charges were dropped.

New Jersey and many states across the nation have similarly invasive booking procedures for all detainees.

Justice Breyer writing for the dissent stated that someone like Florence was "often stopped and arrested unexpectedly. And they consequently will have little opportunity to hide things in their body cavities."

In Illinois, state law currently does not allow for strip searches when a person is arrested for a traffic, regulatory or misdemeanor offense unless reasonable suspicion exists to believe that the person is hiding a weapon or a controlled substance. However, the recent Supreme Court decision could allow for Illinois officials to move toward a blanket policy of strip searches for all detainees.

Source: Associated Press, "Supreme Court OKs routine jailhouse strip searches," Mark Sherman, Apr. 2, 2012.

As a part of a plea deal reached with the prosecution the three traffic charges were dismissed. The ultimate fighter pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). According to the Naperville Sun and court records, the DuPage County Circuit Court Judge sentenced the man to 18 months of supervision, a fine of more than $2,000 and substance abuse screening.

Hundreds of people in Illinois are injured and killed each year because of drunk driving accidents. Thus stiff penalties exist for those caught breaking the law. Some of the penalties include:

• First offense - up to one-year incarceration, a possible fine of $2,500 and loss of driving privileges for up to one year;

• Second offense - 30 to 60 days in jail with the possibility of one-year in jail, community service, a possible fine of $2,500 and license revocation for one to five years; and

• Third offense - mandatory prison time, fees and fines up to $25,000 and loss of driving privileges for ten years.

The penalties for a DUI conviction can not only be costly, but a conviction can follow you for many years making it difficult to obtain a new job or rent a new apartment. If stopped on suspicion of impaired driving, contact a skilled DUI attorney who can protect your rights.

Source: Naperville Sun, "Cage fighter sentenced for driving drunk in Naperville," Bill Bird, Dec. 16, 2011.

For example, murders in Chicago were down by over 13 percent in 2011 as compared to the previous year. Aurora also experienced a decrease in murders. However, the Aurora Sentinel noted that the decrease in murders was offset by an increase in violent crimes including sexual offenses, robbery and aggravated assault, which increased from 1,447 in 2010 to 1,467 last year.

Across the Chicagoland area property crimes, such as theft and breaking and entering were down. Property crimes in Aurora specifically fell 3.3 percent after increasing between 2009 and 2010.

The reduction in crime is not limited solely to these Illinois cities. Nationwide, violent crime dropped by approximately six percent and property crimes dropped by over three percent. These decreases are not unique to 2011. Crime rates also fell in 2010.

Questions regarding what has caused these decreases often arise and experts have different opinions to explain the drop. Some credit longer prison sentences with keeping those with records off the streets. Others say the decrease is a result of a changing focus in policing to target "hot spots" where more crimes are committed. One theory even claims that crime rates have declined, because lead levels in groundwater have declined.

Whatever the cause or causes may be, the FBI's latest statistics certainly debunk the stereotype and perception that recessions lead to more crime. Prosecutors may seek even stiffer penalties for those charged with crimes to further reduce crime statistics. An experienced criminal defense attorney can advise of rights and possible defenses.

Source: Aurora Sentinel, "Crime in Aurora down in 2011, police say," Brandon Johansson, Jan. 10, 2012

The editorial notes that court decisions have often gone against government prosecutors. However, the simplest answer is that prosecuting white collar fraud is extremely difficult.

Modern businesses are complex and their financial operations are even more complex. Couple that with the interaction of commercial and investment banking, stir, and then run through a shredder, and you have the raw material for a corporate fraud prosecution.

Murder, drug trafficking and other violent crimes produce physical evidence (most of the time). Tracing complex financial fraud, on the other hand, is much more attenuated. Hard evidence is often hard to obtain. Sometimes it is unclear if a company failed because of market conditions or because of looting by management.

Once an investigation begins, discovery is necessary to cull through thousands of emails and other documents. Prosecutors then have to develop a theory of the case, a narrative that tells their version of what when wrong. None of this is easy, and translating page after page of financial spreadsheets into a compelling case demonstrating guilt beyond a reasonable doubt for a jury can be problematic.

However, if targeted by an investigation or if white collar criminal charges are imminent, it would be unwise to be complacent. Merely because white collar convictions are difficult to obtain does not mean they are impossible. Defending these cases is no easier than prosecuting them.

Also, consider the damage to reputation, even if acquitted. Aside from possibly being involved for years in a prosecution and later appeals, the public does not always equate "not guilty" with "innocent."

Nothing to Hide?

Given the complexity of federal charges and the number of potential federal crimes, it is easy to say something that could inadvertently raise implications of a possible criminal offense.

If prosecutors want to speak with you, speak to an attorney first. An experienced Illinois white collar criminal defense attorney can work to ensure you are not an accidental target, and ensure your rights are protected.

Source: Chicago Tribune, "Crime Up, Prosecutions Down," Dec. 7, 2011

Within the last several months Oswego and Cook County have also discussed issuing tickets rather than jail time. Those in favor of "decriminalization" point out that the ticketing approach saves officers time and may also increase income for local cities and villages.

Naperville is unlikely to follow the lead of Evanston any time soon. In 2010, officers wrote 278 tickets for possession of a small amount of marijuana, according to the Naperville Sun. So far in 2011, 210 citations had been issued as of early November.

Police Chief David Dial does not support a change to existing laws. Dial does not believe that reducing the penalties for marijuana possession would make the community safer.

Current Penalties for Marijuana Possession

Possession of a small amount of marijuana is generally a misdemeanor. Jail time, fines and mandatory drug treatment are all possible penalties. The consequences of a conviction may also be wide-ranging and may make finding an apartment, new job or qualifying for financial aid more difficult, if not impossible.

Naperville remains tough on marijuana users even as other local communities discuss reducing the penalties for possession of a small amount of pot. An experienced criminal defense attorney is critical in Naperville and can provide defense options.

Source: Naperville Sun, "Bid to Change Marijuana Laws Brings Concern," Nov. 5, 2011.