Defense rests in trial of ex-DCFS workers charged in A.J. Freund's death
CHICAGO (CBS) -- Testimony has wrapped up in the trial of two former child welfare workers charged in connection with the death of 5-year-old A.J. Freund.
Former Illinois Department of Children and Family Services employees Carlos Acosta and Andrew Polovin both chose not to testify in their own defense, leading to defense attorneys resting their case on Friday without calling any witnesses.
The judge handling the bench trial said he would like to have closing arguments sometime during the first two weeks of October. Since it is a bench trial, it will be a judge instead of a jury determining the verdict.
McHenry County prosecutors presented four days of testimony against Acosta and Polovin this week. The pair are accused of ignoring red flags that might have saved A.J.'s life. The 5-year-old was murdered by his parents in 2019.
The Crystal Lake boy was first reported missing by his parents in April 2019. His body was found later, and his parents, Andrew Freund Sr. and JoAnn Cunningham were charged with murder. A.J.'s father pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter, aggravated battery, and concealing a homicide, and was sentenced to 30 years in prison. Cunningham pleaded guilty to murder and was sentenced to 35 years in prison.
In a rare move, Acosta, a former specialist, and Polovin, a former supervisor with the department, were charged with endangering a child's life and reckless conduct, accused of failing to protect A.J.
Prosecutors have said multiple police reports clearly outlined a history of problems at the family's home.
In one incident, officers were at the home and observed a bruise on the boy. Prosecutors said Acosta failed to recognize the severity of the injury and moved forward to close the case, putting A.J. and his younger brother back into the care of their mother.
During emotional testimony, a police officer recalled when she asked the boy about the bruise. She said she was troubled by the way the boy's mother prompted him to blame the family dog, telling the judge "there was no way that the dog could've possibly done that to him."
An emergency room doctor who treated A.J. for the bruises testified A.J. was not in pain, but he indicated that Cunningham used a belt to strike him. She said, to her, that was credible evidence that A.J. should remain in protective custody.
But according to prosecutors, despite those revelations, that protective custody ceased when Acosta closed the case and attributed the bruising to the family dog.
The defense attempted to poke holes in the police reports where testimony from officers differed from what they documented when the reports were filed.
Also during the trial, Carol Ruzicka, a former DCFS supervisor deemed an expert on department protocol, criticized Acosta's handling of A.J.'s case.
"He doesn't explore anything with the child. It's very, in my opinion, superficial. He's not utilizing any of his clinical skills," Ruzicka said.
But defense attorneys maintain that the former DCFS workers followed procedures, and both had limited information at the time protective custody of the child lapsed, resulting in him returning to his mother's custody.
Both sides are due back in court on Tuesday to discuss scheduling of closing arguments. It's unclear how soon the judge could rule after hearing closing arguments.