What the Record Establishes
- His login printed the warrant record with 2022 traffic charges on a 2026 felony warrant. Eleven minutes later his email sent the draft FOIA answer to the county’s litigation lawyers.
What They Have Not Produced
- The Event Log and Service Attempts tables for warrant record 314270.
- The LEADS/NCIC validation history and whether the disputed fields replicated.
- The FOIA draft version history: what changed between the draft and the released response, and who approved it.
The Power This Office Actually Holds
A Sheriff’s records supervisor is the custodian of the warrant and records systems and the officer responsible for FOIA responses out of that office. The role controls what the database contains, what is printed from it, what is released to a requester, and what is certified as a complete search.
- Custodian of the Sheriff’s warrant database and its audit tables
- Responsible for FOIA search, response, and exemption determinations
- Controls what is printed, transmitted, and certified from the warrant system
- Accountable for the accuracy of records replicated to LEADS and NCIC
Fifty-two minutes on a Tuesday afternoon contain the whole problem. At 1:36 p.m. on July 15, a Sheriff’s sergeant forwarded Records Supervisor Raul Casas the May 28 eCourt warrant notification. At 2:17 p.m., the Warrant Details record was printed under his login — showing Active, Felony, and Violation, on two May 2022 traffic charge lines, with both bond fields blank and a village police department listed as issuing agency. At 2:28 p.m., he emailed a message titled “FOIA Guidance” to the Chief Deputy of the State’s Attorney’s Civil Trial Division, attaching the request, a draft response, that same Warrant Details print, and the warrant notification.
The database problem
A warrant record is an instruction to armed officers. Category, status, bond, charge description, and issuing agency determine how a person is stopped, held, and transported. This record describes a 2026 probation-revocation warrant using 2022 traffic charge lines and a felony category. The July 29 correspondence asks the office to correct each disputed field or explain it in writing. Read the full field-by-field analysis.
The routing problem
Public bodies may consult counsel on FOIA responses; that is not the issue and this page says so plainly. The issue is that the reviewing office is the division that litigates against this requester. A records determination that travels through the adversary’s counsel before release is no longer just a records determination. See the routing record.
What his own systems can prove
Warrant systems log every touch. The Event Log and Service Attempts tables name who created, modified, printed, transmitted, or reviewed the record and when. The FOIA draft history names every edit and approver. Both exist. Neither has been produced.
The Documented Chronology
- May 28, 2026
The eCourt warrant notification issues.
- July 15, 2026, 1:36 p.m.
Sergeant Katie Gordon forwards that notification to him.
- July 15, 2026, 2:17 p.m.
The Warrant Details record is printed under his login.
- July 15, 2026, 2:28 p.m.
He emails the draft FOIA response and warrant files to county civil counsel.
- July 29, 2026
A PAC request for review and a Sheriff correspondence letter are transmitted.
Still Not Produced
Each of these records exists inside a government system. Each has been requested. None has been supplied.
- The Event Log and Service Attempts tables for warrant record 314270.
- The LEADS/NCIC validation history and whether the disputed fields replicated.
- The FOIA draft version history: what changed between the draft and the released response, and who approved it.
If any of it is produced, or if Raul Casas disputes a documented fact on this page, the response will be published here in full, with its date. Read the correction standard.
Follow the same record into the next office
Every named official → · The investigation behind this dossier → · Add context or rate this profile →