APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. EDWARD
F. HEALY, Judge, presiding.
MR. JUSTICE STAMOS DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE COURT:
Plaintiff, Theodore Van Gerreway, a former police patrolman of the city of Chicago, was removed from office following a hearing before the Chicago Police Board. The circuit court of Cook County reviewed the proceedings under the Administrative Review Act and affirmed the order of the Board. Plaintiff appeals from that judgment.
The specifications filed against plaintiff alleged generally:
(1) On November 9, 1970, he violated Rule 2 by being involved in the sale of marijuana to undercover agents of the Illinois Bureau of Investigation;
(2) On November 25, 1970, he again violated Rule 2 by the same type misconduct;
(3) On November 9 and 25, 1970, he violated Rule 20 by failing to transmit information of these impending sales of marijuana to any supervisory member of the Chicago Police Department; and
(4) He violated Rule 44 by associating with one Joseph Mack, a person who had been convicted of a federal crime and confined in a federal penal institution.
The aforementioned rules read as follows:
Rule 2 Any action or conduct which impedes the Department's efforts to achieve its goals, or brings discredit upon the Department.
Rule 20 Failure to report promptly to the Department any information concerning any crime or other unlawful action.
Rule 44 Associating or fraternizing with any persons known to have been convicted of any misdemeanor or felony, either State or Federal, excluding traffic and municipal ordinance violations.
On November 7, 1970, agents Petersik and Cerceo, pursuant to a tip by an informant whose first name was Rudy, proceeded to the Huddle restaurant in the city of Chicago to arrange for a purchase of marijuana. Upon arrival at the restaurant the informant pointed out to the agents two men seated at the counter. These men were plaintiff, Theodore Van Gerreway, and one Joseph Mack. Plaintiff introduced himself and his companion. The agents used only their first names.
Plaintiff then initiated the conversation by stating that, first of all, there was a mutual distrust between all of them. He then proceeded to propose a sale of eight pounds of marijuana for a price of $800. The agents said they only had $100 and besides they wanted to examine the quality of the marijuana before making a purchase. After some bickering, plaintiff and Mack agreed to sell one-half pound of marijuana for $50 that night.
A discussion among them then ensued as to the steps to be taken in carrying out the agreement. After a half-hour of conversation it was understood that Mack would be paid $50 and then Mack and Rudy would proceed to ...