Brad Lakin and Lakin Law Firm have been dismissed without prejudice from a civil lawsuit that accuses the firm’s founder – Lowell Thomas Lakin – of sexually assaulting a 15-year-old boy.
Brad Lakin, who now operates SL Chapman – successor to the Lakin Law Firm, was originally named a co-defendant in the suit brought in 2006 by the boy’s mother. Brad Lakin, son of Thomas Lakin, was accused of concealing evidence of abuse.
St. Clair County Associate Judge Heinz Rudolf wrote in an order Jan. 15 that Brad Lakin and the now dissolved Lakin firm were dismissed per agreement of the parties.
Since a stay was lifted in the civil case, Thomas Lakin has been fighting a plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
Plaintiff’s attorney Ed Unsell seeks summary judgment arguing that Lakin admitted to Judge Charles Romani in 2011 that he sexually abused a boy.
Lakin’s attorney Clyde Kuehn of Belleville, however, argues that the stipulation Lakin entered into in the bench trial before Romani is not binding in civil court. Kuehn says that when his client went before Romani in 2011, the “judgment of conviction was made upon a finding of the trial judge and not upon a plea accepted…there was no admission, judicial or evidentiary, in the proceedings that took place.”
Unsell calls that argument “ludicrous.”
Rudolf has set a hearing on the motion for summary judgment on March 25 at 1:30 p.m.
In federal court, where Thomas Lakin pleaded guilty in October 2008 to charges of maintaining a residence for distribution and use of a controlled substance, possession with intent to distribute cocaine and distribution of cocaine to a minor, the same judge who sentenced Lakin - U.S. District Judge Phil Gilbert - today granted motions to modify conditions of release.
Lakin, who was released from prison in November, had served five years of a six-year sentence that also included six years of supervised release.
The government and Lakin agreed to the following terms:
“The defendant shall register with the state sex offender registration agency in the state where the defendant resides, works, or is a student, as directed by the probation officer.
“The defendant shall participate in an approved sexual offender treatment program, as directed by the probation officer. If deemed necessary, the defendant shall submit to an approved, sexual-predator evaluation, as directed by the probation officer.
“The defendant shall abide by all rules, requirements, and conditions of the treatment program, including submission to polygraph and/or plethysmograph examination to determine compliance with the conditions of release. The defendant shall remain in the program until successfully completed, or until such time as the defendant is released from the program by the Court and/or probation officer. The defendant shall pay for the costs associated with services rendered, based on a Court approved sliding fee scale as directed by the probation officer. The defendant's financial obligation shall never exceed the total cost of services rendered.
“The defendant shall not associate with persons under the age of 18 except in the presence of a responsible adult, who is aware of the nature of the defendant’s background and current offense and who has been approved by the probation officer.
“The defendant shall permit the probation officer to have access to any personal computer and/or electronic device capable of accessing the Internet, World Wide Web, and Electronic Mail. The defendant shall also allow the probation officer or designee to conduct regular searches of his computer and/or electronic device using software monitoring devices if determined necessary by the probation officer. The defendant shall consent to third-party disclosure to any employer or potential employer, concerning any computer-related restrictions that may be imposed upon him.
“The defendant shall inform other residents or occupants of his home that computer systems will be subject to inspection by the probation officer and/or authorized contractor.”