The lawyer for the Highland Park massacre suspect’s father is seeking to call the son as a witness in the father’s trial set to begin early next month.
In a series of motions filed last week, Robert Crimo Jr.’s lawyer also asked a judge to use video of the son’s 8-hour interrogation with police as evidence.
The shooting suspect’s father is set to go to trial Nov. 6 on counts of reckless conduct for signing his son’s gun-ownership application in 2019 when the son was underage.
His son Robert Crimo III remains held in Lake County Jail on 117 felony counts in connection with the July 4, 2022 shooting that left seven dead and 48 wounded.
The written motions don’t say why Crimo Jr.’s lawyer, George Gomez, wants to use video of the son’s interrogation. But in another document, Gomez writes that he wants to call Crimo III as a witness to testify about that interrogation and about his father signing the Firearm Ownership Identification Card affidavit.
It’s still unclear if Crimo III’s lawyers will make him available to testify, Gomez told the Sun-Times this week. He declined to elaborate about the reasons for wanting the son to testify. Crimo III’s lawyers won’t comment.
Some of these issues could be addressed on Monday when Gomez presents the motions to Judge George D. Strickland.
Gomez is also seeking to exclude text messages between Crimo III and Crimo Jr. from 2019 that apparently show that the son “was attempting to harm himself at a specific time period.”
Gomez also wants to block testimony from a therapist of Crimo III’s younger brother. This therapist had initiated the well-being checks that led to the police reports that documented Crimo III’s self-harm and thoughts of hurting others. Gomez wrote that the testimony would be hearsay.
He also wants to block testimony of a man who told police about a 2013 incident with the father and son at a “Christian-based outreach group.” It’s unclear what happened. Gomez writes in his motion that the event happened too long ago to be relevant, and that the man gave a changing description of the year it happened, and that other people recalled the event differently.
Gomez is also asking for its previously denied motion to dismiss to be reconsidered. He makes the same points he did when the judge rejected the motion the first time.