Too Politically Sensitive Book Cover

Land of Lincoln Press, Inc.
Hardcover: 416 pages

Buy the Book

"Karen and Dyke ended their lives and started a nightmare for the rest of us for the rest of our lives."

—Andrea Trapp, sister of Dyke Rhoads, The State Journal-Register, August 30, 2004


"Five times I tried to reopen the murder case of this young, newlywed couple, and each time my superiors told me the case was "too politically sensitive." How is a murder 'too politically sensitive'?"
—Retired ISP Lieutenant Michale Callahan, 48 Hours, Dec. 17, 2005


"The long simmering cauldron of putrid ooze that is the prosecution of Randy Steidl and Herbert Whitlock has at last boiled over. ... If what Callahan and his allies say is true, it amounts to a huge and even frightening scandal that suggests a cynical dereliction of duty inside the state police hierarchy at best, a high level conspiracy to obstruct justice at worst..."
—Eric Zorn, Chicago Tribune, March 8, 2005


"This case reveals every citizen's worst nightmare, an ethically compromised police organization looking the other way instead of doing its duty. Unfortunately, this is not the first time the Illinois State Police have been corrupted by political consideration." 
—Jim Dey, The News-Gazette, 2005


"At one time, the Illinois State Police represented a gold standard of investigations. If they did something, you believed it. I did, anyway. Not so much these days." 

—Terry Bibo, Peoria Journal Star, October 28, 2005


"While Herb Whitlock and Randy Steidl today have the freedom they have sought for so long, Dyke and Karen still do not have the justice they deserve. ... It's impossible to believe that the Illinois State Police have any interest in performing their job duties in a manner that promotes justice for Dyke and Karen." 
—Rhoads Family statement, January 8, 2008


"...this story...serves yet another frightening example of how the engine of the state, once in motion can roll right over the innocent as well as the guilty."
—Eric Zorn, Chicago Tribune, May 17, 2000


"When public employees make statements pursuant to their official duties, they are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline..." 
—United States Supreme Court, Garcetti v. Ceballos, May 30, 2006


"In a perverse legal ruling, Illinois State Police commanders have been spared from taking responsibility for their egregious misconduct. ... they have escaped public censure on the most narrow of legal grounds, and the basic facts of this case remain undisturbed. Leaders of this politically compromised and ethically challenged agency should be hanging their heads in shame over their failure to do their sworn duty." 
—Jim Dey, The News-Gazette, May 27, 2008


"The concept of depriving peace officers of free speech on any matter that touches at their profession robs all of us the information that only cops possess. ... The implications for police officers—already muzzled by the 'blue wall of silence'—are scary enough. The implications for the rest of us are even more troubling." 
—Dusty Rhodes, The Illinois Times, June 5, 2008