Glen R. Ramey, new IDOC mug as of this fall.
RICHLAND CO., Ill. - The man who was accused of murdering 8-year-old Sabrina Stauffenberg two years ago in Olney is back on the docket after his guilty plea was withdrawn.
Glen R. Ramey, now 55 and after spending the last six months in Illinois Department of Corrections, has a new lawyer and, for all intents and purposes, is probably looking at a new trial.
This is the situation in the muddled case that has been plagued with recriminations since the day the child's murder took place: November 23, 2016...and now, it appears as though Ramey has been given enough rope to either hang himself with, or to hang a whole host of people responsible for the fact that he's in prison for 60 years over the rape of Stauffenberg as opposed to life for murdering her.
Regular readers will recall the whole grisly ordeal for Sabrina's family, which ostensibly ended on March 22 of this year when Ramey entered a plea to a charge of Predatory Criminal Sexual Assault. While that was okay, what was NOT okay was the fact that the First Degree Murder charge filed against Ramey over the same incident - in which allegations indicate that after Ramey raped the child, he killed her and concealed the body - was dismissed.
The reason for dismissal is likely why Ramey sought withdrawal: There wasn't enough evidence available to convict him of murder.
This is pertinent because by withdrawing his plea, this puts things back in the lap of the prosecution (in Richland, Brad Vaughn), who can now pull all of the "deal-making" that went down prior to the March sentencing and seek a new trial...and possibly new charges.
What Ramey is thinking, by effectively seeking a new trial when the evidence against him on the rape is dead to rights, is unknown.
What's also unknown is why Richland County resident Judge Larry Dunn approved the motion - made by Ramey's new attorney, Tania Cullison - when the actual filing of it was well past the 60-day time frame in which it should legally have been done, and which the state apparently brought to the court's attention, to no avail.
However, there might be a greater strategy involved.
If indeed Ramey will have to face a new trial, a conviction could get him a more intense sentence than the 60 years he was handed in March. However, Ramey - while being proven fit to stand trial a little over a year ago - isn't the swiftest person on the cell block, and the prospect of that has probably flitted right over his DOC-coiffed head...so he might be missing the larger picture here, and setting himself up for a gigantic fall.
Cullison has taken the place of Jim Lane, who was able to adequately represent Ramey throughout the pendency of the matter; when we covered Ramey's hand-written withdrawal of plea notice (which 'handwritten' status is part of what the state is objecting to, since Ramey didn't quite follow the form he was supposed to in order to make a legitimate motion to withdraw), Lane's part in the matter was unclear.
Cullison's courtroom prowess is also something that's unclear at the moment; she's only been around for a few years and a as far as we can recall, she's never handled a case of this magnitude.
Whatever the case, all the action went down in Richland County Circuit Court in Olney last Friday (September 21), and a next court date was set for November 16, at which time Cullison should be up-to-speed with the intricacies of his case...and maybe will have advised him that this latest stunt - one in a long line of many, as that's how he's used to functioning - might not be to his advantage.