Evanston Police have arrested a suspect in an early Sunday morning shooting near the intersection of Dempster Street and Dodge Avenue.

Commander Tom Guenther says that just after midnight officers responding to a shots fired call found a teenage boy in the parking lot of the Burger King restaurant at 1829 Dempster St.

He’d been shot in the upper left arm and was treated by paramedics and taken to an area hospital where he’s reported to be in stable condition with a wound that’s not considered life-threatening.

Other officers called to the scene got into a foot chase with suspects fleeing the area and were able to take one suspect into custody who the victim later identified as the person who’d shot him.

The suspect, Anthony P. Davis, 17, of 6631 S. Claremont in Chicago, now faces aggravated battery and weapons charges and is scheduled to appear in Skokie District Court on Tuesday, July 15.

Alderman Ann Rainey, on her 8th Ward message board, said the shooting followed a large party near Dempster on Florence Avenue “with around 50 or so kids who dispersed to the Dempster Dodge area” where the 16-year-old was shot.

Noting that the incident took place well after the city’s new 11 p.m. weekend curfew, she said that if the victim had been picked up for violating curfew, the shooting wouldn’t have happened.

She said she had thought police were giving extra attention to that area after other major crime incidence on Florence in recent days.

“Now the neighbors can add a shooting to their troubles,” Rainey said.

Bill Smith is the editor and publisher of Evanston Now.

Join the Conversation

16 Comments

  1. A shooting in Evanston?
    A shooting in Evanston? What?!? Young Anthony Davis apparently was not aware of the local ban on handgun ownership. Oh wait…I almost forgot the true nature of the handgun ban – an imaginary measure to make the sheeple feel as though something were being done to solve a problem. Handgun ban = lazy politics.

    These shootings are (nearly 100% of the time) between gang members, so you & I will likely never be involved, but I will still keep a handgun in my home and be prepared the unlikely event that some lowlife does decide to break into my home. My life is worth more than his (in this hypothetical situation, the intruder just proved me right by breaking into my home). Thin the herd, one criminal lowlife dirtbag at a time. We will all benefit from this, but it may take some time for some of you to realize it.

    1. “but I will still keep a
      “but I will still keep a handgun in my home and be prepared the unlikely event that some lowlife does decide to break into my home.”

      Picture this: 50 or 60 underage kids wandering around Dempster and Dodge after a party, and ONE of them has a gun. Probably his father’s gun. You know–the one dad keeps next to his bed and loaded at all times in case of home invasions.

      The lowlife breaking into your house is the least of my worries, Lando. It’s young kids I know and care about out on a public street getting shot by YOUR gun.

  2. Man dats crazy now my cuzo
    Man dats crazy now my cuzo bout to get sum years for doin sumthn so stupid he just dnt know he thrown his life away by doin one little mistake

  3. Rainey
    This is the problem with this town. You have an alderman who blames the police for not arresting a juvenile who chose to be out after curfew and ended up being shot. I think that the police did a great job in arresting the shooter! I would think that the police were in the area because of their extra patrols in the area which allowed them to catch the bad guy. Alderman Rainey, quite doing the political thing and give credit where credit is due. The police don’t cause the problems, its those who choose to have kids and not care what they do. The parents and kids are the ones to blame. Not the police.

    1. I, for once, agree with Ald.
      I, for once, agree with Ald. Rainey . The story states that the police responded only when they received a report of shots fired. So the police weren’t exactly in that area to begin with. Unfortunately police are mostly effective as responders. I understand they can’t be everywhere all of the time, but they are rarely (if ever) there to prevent the crime.

      I feel that all too often the numerous ordinances (car radio volume, leaf blowers, stopping at a stop sign, etc) in this city are not enforced and I think Ald. Rainey was pointing out that fact in this one incident.

    2. shooting of children after curfew
      Ann Rainey
      Let me explain this incident – this was a gang related dispute between a 4 Corners Hustler and a Gangster Disciple. Yes, the juvenile was the intended victim.

      The curfew laws are in effect to protect kids from a variety of crimes including kiddie gang bangers from getting shot and from shooting others. You might not have a problem with juveniles choosing to violate curfew so that they can engage in gangland activity but I do.

      I am sick and tired our tax dollars going to constant, huge police actions, police and paramedic endangerment and hospitals treating the wounded children. Children, parents, guardians and anonymous posters who make excuses for curfew violations are guilty of endangerment. This is a problem with this town.

      My exact comment, misquoted by Evanston Now was,: “Minors at the party, violations of curfew? If the 16 yo had been picked up for violating curfew, he wouldn’t have been shot, at least not out in public.

      Just goes to show you, when there is no enforcement….”

      Fact is, a party of kids, numerous violators, had this VICTIM been picked up for curfew violation, he wouldn’t have been shot at this time at Dodge and Dempster regardless of whether or not he was the intended victim.
      Some other grown up gang banger might have been shot or an innocent by stander might have been shot, but the juvenile would have been in custody. Get it. This is a problem with this town.

      The police do a great job in this town, and you need to do more research.

      People who don’t have the courage of their convictions to put their name on their uninformed attacks are a new problem in this town.

  4. Agree Whole-Heartedly with Ald. Rainey
    Bravo to Alderman Rainey for having the guts to call out an important fact in her posting.
    First, I applaud the alderman’s clear assertion that the anonymous posters on this and other website–those who lack the courage to put their names to their often uninformed “opinions”–constitute a new problem for Evanston.
    To that end, I call for Evanston Now to end its policy of permitting anonymous posters to put up Comments. Of course, the editor of Evanston Now must realize that the reputation of his site is dramatically undercut by allowing these anonymous posts, which now seem to make up a majority of the Comments on this formerly respected website.
    The only “rationale” I have read from these anonymous posters is that they fear some type of retaliation if they were to post under their real names. I wish one of these individuals would describe his/her fear with some specifity. Does he/she fear being branded with a scarlet “A”? Does he/she fear losing the next Evanston popularity contest?
    I applaud sites such as that maintained by Central Street Neighbors Association, which does not permit anonymous posting, pointing out that this undermines the nature of community. I would urge Evanston Now to adopt the same forward-thinking policy.

    Cynthia Gage

    1. Sorry Cynthia, you’re wrong..
      While I do use my name in my posts I do not agree with your assertion that Evanston Now should disallow ‘anonymous’ posters. The fact that someone posts anonymously is not the problem as I heard your complaint but rather did they know what they were talking about. Ofcourse you know we all have opinions but from what I’ve seen on far to many blogs/forums alike is the uncivility that exists and the kind that use to pervade city council meetings.

      Writing anonymously somehow takes the sting out of your rebuttal if you are apt to fly off the handle and try to discredit me but can not use my real name. See what I mean? I agree I would like to see more names on the posts but I don’t like a law, a rule, a policy dictating that I should do so. I think Evanston Now is doing a fine job.

      1. Uncivility?
        John – is holding closed door meetings – that are not allowed civil behavior ?- because council members are not discussing things in public – the public might get the impression as you have “kind that use to pervade city council meetings.” they are not being uncivil – I suspect they are talking in private – quite a bit and not following the law – but the law has no teeth any way –

        I personal think we should follow the law – that is the public should know what they are talking about – if you were at the budget hearing – whent they were going to start talking about cuts – the mayor blew it and stated they would discuss it in closed session – (this is not allowed under the open meeting act ) what did several of the council members do ?- the stated they did not want to go into closed session and voted against it – by the way they still went into closed session.

        1. ain’t necessarily so
          Vito — your comments about the City’s budget process are always unique and coming from a different perspective. On this one, I believe that your perspective is wrong. You stated: “if you were at the budget hearing – whent they were going to start talking about cuts – the mayor blew it and stated they would discuss it in closed session – (this is not allowed under the open meeting act ) what did several of the council members do ?- the stated they did not want to go into closed session and voted against it”

          The Open Meetings Act does provide — under law — for the Council to discuss certain matters in Executive Session. I believe that these are law suits, land acquisition and personnel issues. The cuts that the Mayor was referring to were about proposed reductions in the City’s personnel lines. Staff cuts. While it is not required, it does allow discussion behind closed doors about staff positions, which have people’s names tied to them. Any decision to make those cuts has to be done in the public session. But an executive session would allow for talking about a number of options that may never be brought into place. I think that public discussion about every position that is even considered or speculated about for elimination would have a souring effect upon the morale of everyone involved, regardless of whether it ever happened.

          1. KPT02 -stop protecting incompetence!
            KPt)2 – the council members to do not care about employee moral – lets get real here – year after year they have gone through nonsense exercises on the budget – only fools would think the end result of their mismanagement – would achieve anything.

            They do not want to have a real discussion in public about making cuts – using the excuse it is a employee issues when it is a budget issue is nonsense.

            Ever budget cut involves employees – lets get real – here –

            Maybe you are proposing they have the entire budget hearing behind closed doors?

            The use of the closed meeting by this council is clearly is not in the public interest one of the main reason I think they are using so many of them is many of the members of this council do not have a clue what they are doing and don’t want the public to know.

            By the way if you went to the budget hearing – there appear to be little discussion about real cuts – why do you thins the budget grew by 15% – which amounts to a 15% tax increase,

            So please stop defending incompetence!

          2. Junad’s 15% increase
            Junad wrote:

            The use of the closed meeting by this council is clearly is not in the public interest one of the main reason I think they are using so many of them is many of the members of this council do not have a clue what they are doing and don’t want the public to know.

            By the way if you went to the budget hearing – there appear to be little discussion about real cuts – why do you thins the budget grew by 15% – which amounts to a 15% tax increase,

            Once again, Junad is making wild charges without any documentation or evidence.

            The following comes from the “2008-09 Proposed Budget”, p. 13, available at cityofevanston.org :


            FISCAL YEAR 2008-09 BUDGET OVERVIEW
            The total budget for the City of Evanston is $213,673,621. This number includes all funds. It represents a total increase of $25,139,483 (13.33%) over the prior year total budget. The largest increase in the total budget is due to the pension fund increases and the debt service requirements. These two items represent an increase of 4.64%. The General Fund increase is 8.95%, which also includes a transfer of $4,036,700 to the pension funds to fulfill the annual required contributions for the 2007 tax year. Without the one-time transfer to the
            pension funds, the General Fund increase would be 4.3%.

            So, Junad, to answer your question (” why do you think the budget grew by 15%?”) – the answer is: Mandatory debt and pension fund payments. Considering increased cost of gas and utilities, I think that a 4.3% increase in other spending is extremely reasonable.

            This brings up three more issues:

            a. Junad, please tell me who these clueless aldermen are. I want names.

            b. Recently the 8th ward alderman suggested that anonymous posters are a new problem in Evanston. As Junad’s many postings demonstrate, those writers who leave their names are not necessarily better informed or more responsible than those who do not.

            c. I suspect that taxes will go up soon. The reasons for this include the need to fund the pensions, the increasing cost of utilities, lower income from property transfers, and decreased revenue from sales tax due to the nationwide recession. Taxes will certainly not be lowered.
            When the taxes go up, the NIMBY’s will seek a scapegoat. Instead of considering the reasons that I mentioned above, they will say something like :
            ‘ See..we told you..the condos were built downtown, and our taxes didn’t go down- they actually increased. We told you so. ”

          3. Mr IHOP (WhO)
            I am well aware of why the budget increased – ( I am not making wild charges) I understand the pension caused the major part of the increase.
            A increase is an increase – it is still high period! The underfunding issue has been here for years –

            since you like to do research find out how much of the general fund is now going to pay pensions – it is far too high – but go do the researh – you might think its reasonable – ofcourse if you employer had those cost he would lay you off.

            I also understand there will be an increase next year – since you think it is also reasonable – I would like to know if you want another 10% increase since the numbers appear head there – also as you mention the other sources of revenue may go south – that means a higher property tax increase.

            The issue is not tax increases per se – but the amount of the increases = and how they are being spent – the only answer I keep hearing from you is more development – such as building an IHOP or Cosco on residential sites.

          4. KPTO2 and ain’t necessarily so
            Sorry to disappoint you, but if you check the various responses, I did not make that statement — it may have been Junad or someone else.

            To assume is to blunder.

          5. sorry vito
            “I did not make that statement — it may have been Junad or someone else.”

            You are absolutely right. And i knew that it was Mr. Rizki that I was responding to. My apologies. I was probably trying to read something and respond to something else. My ability to multi-task has failed me once again.

          6. KPTO2 reply
            Apology accepted.

            Multi-tasking is one of modern life’s curses.

            I feel guilty because I am not a type-A.

            regards,

            vito

Leave a comment
The goal of our comment policy is to make the comments section a vibrant yet civil space. Treat each other with respect — even the people you disagree with. Whenever possible, provide links to credible documentary evidence to back up your factual claims.

Your email address will not be published.