Grand Jury Indicts Deerfield Teens

Charges in formal indictment against Joseph Mahoney and Josh Norris for Highland Park home invasion and other crimes total more than 100 possible years in jail.

were indicted Wednesday on 10 separate counts each by the Lake County Grand Jury, according to Patricia Fix, the chief of the felony trial division in the Lake County State’s Attorney’s office.

Joshua Norris and Joseph Mahoney, both 17, were charged with 10 separate offenses each, which total more than 100 years of possible jail time, according to Fix. They are both accused of the same offenses.

The indictment includes home invasion with a weapon, residential burglary, conspiracy to commit a possible burglary, unlawful use of a stolen firearm, use of a firearm in the commission of a crime, possession of a stolen firearm and aggravated unlawful use of a weapon.

The most serious accusations, according to Fix, are the two counts of home invasion of a home in the 3000 block of Parkside in Highland Park, a Class X felony carrying a six- to 30-year prison sentence.

“We can add an additional 15 years if we prove aggravation,” she said.

Mahoney and Norris are also charged with one count of residential burglary for breaking into the Highland Park home Aug. 2 and , according to information from the Deerfield and Highland Park Police departments.

The residential burglary claims are Class 1 felonies carrying a possible four- to 15-year prison sentence. Neither those charges nor the home invasion accusations can result in probation, according to Fix.

The conspiracy count as well as the stolen weapons offenses are Class 2 felonies. They could result in three to seven years of jail time, according to Fix. Aggravated unlawful use of a weapon is a Class 4 felony which could lead to one to three years in prison. These charges can result in probation.

Norris and Mahoney are scheduled to appear in Lake County Criminal Court at 9 a.m. Sept. 27 for arraignment on the charges. At that time, they can enter a plea of guilty or not guilty, according to Fix.

For news about Deerfield and Highland Park in your mailbox every day, subscribe to the Patch newsletter. For more news and updates, like Highland Park and Deerfield Patch on Facebook.

Jack Straw September 14, 2012 at 11:00 PM
These two are what you would call dumb-ass kids. Not much more or less. Remember when they were seen they ran like rabbits. But class x felons the states att is on crack.
Jeff Wheeler September 14, 2012 at 11:24 PM
David - Definitely NOT. I am VERY against the 2nd Amendment....
Mandi September 15, 2012 at 12:02 AM
So folks, what do you think the appropriate punsihment should be? Huffing behind the wheel of a 2 ton vehicle, jumped curb, ran over an entire family( I forgot minus the dad), killing a small child. What would be just punishment? Please, do tell !!
David Greenberg September 15, 2012 at 01:09 AM
Q: It doesn't matter if no one was hurt, the fact is that the accused showed up with a firearm - the victim(s) at the house don't know if that firearm is loaded or unloaded, AND if it were loaded, there's the chance that someone could be shot. If it weren't loaded, a victim could have a heart attack from fright, or they could suffer from some other accident trying to escape the criminal with the firearm. Rather than fooling around trying to figure out if the firearm was loaded, unloaded, cocked, uncocked, etc. the distinction is simply that one showed up with a firearm to commit a criminal act. Otherwise, you get every 2-bit criminal who'd show up with a firearm and then claim it was OK because it was unloaded. And loaded or unloaded, using a firearm in the commission of a crime is not OK. So to send the message that it's NEVER OK, we assign a very high penalty to that act - in this case, 6-30 years.
Curious Resident September 15, 2012 at 01:09 AM
Mandi...that's two different cases. That's what some people seem to be saying. I usually agree with RonnietheLimoDriver, but today you are incorrect. Just because you live in the suburbs doesn't mean there is no one that hasn't comitted a crime. Two "adults" that did this crime, should have some sort of punishment, but to go to jail for the rest of their lives, not such a good idea. Carly Russo, she should have a serious punishment, but unfortunately the laws are different. She can't be charged the same way these "adults" were.
David Greenberg September 15, 2012 at 01:13 AM
TJ - the 2nd Amendment doesn't just cover firearms - it reads, in part, "...the right to keep and bear ARMS shall not be infringed" [emphasis mine]. So what if they didn't show up with a firearm, but showed up with a sword? Giant bowie knife? Butcher knife? Baseball bat? Crossbow? Broken bottle? Spear? Nunchucks? Throwing stars? Are those then somehow OK? I'm not saying that they are by any stretch of the imagination - merely trying to illuminate the fact that it doesn't matter what the weapon is - they are accused of committing a criminal act with a weapon, and it deserves a long sentence.
Jack Straw September 15, 2012 at 01:31 AM
I’m glad I am not the Judge; both cases would be very hard to balance, Punishment plus what’s the correct thing to do for these young people, A good judges would wish to make a positive difference in there life’s.
RonnieTheLimoDriver September 15, 2012 at 01:47 AM
Their lives were ruined the moment their crimes were made public. This is the Internet age. Who hires people without googling their name? Even if they were young, what they did was too serious for most people to ever trust them. When most jobs have many applicants, why hire this guy ?
Jeff Wheeler September 15, 2012 at 03:01 AM
David - We are in agreement -- it does not matter the weapon they showed up with. Curious to know if they had a weapon other than a gun, would it still be as strict of a crime they were charged with (my guess is probably not)? The sentence of 30 years is lengthy. I wonder what sentencing guidelines the Judge would use if they go through with a trial. It's basically a slam dunk for the prosecutor. My guess would be the case might get plead down to 3~5 years and probation because it would surprise me if they really do get 30 years for 'stupid teenager stuff' -- like trying to pull a stunt (if this is what their intention was) or just steal some cash and weed. If they are smart, they'll probably come out of jail with college degrees (or close enough to them) and still have to check off the 'felon' box on job applications -- but they will be taught a lesson. Carly on the other hand, 14 years is not enough time for killing someone with an automobile while high on dust-off (or whatever drug or alcohol for that matter if it was anyone else). She did not learn her lesson from her possession of marijuana citation and moved onto other drugs. She might as well just have fired a couple bullets from a gun hoping nobody would get hurt.
RonnieTheLimoDriver September 15, 2012 at 03:05 AM
From what I understand, the charges that were brought carry some mandatory sentencing guidelines, so if the judge decides the accused are guilty of these crimes, he/she must then give these guys the required punishment. However, I agree with you in that I am glad I am not the judge. The idea of sending someone this young to jail for a long time is not an easy thing to do, despite the serious nature of their acts. One wonders if one of the teal bandits is going to end up plea bargaining some lesser charges in exchange for testimony against the other. As an aside, to the people that reported the widespread / open drug use by teens in our community, I witnessed this myself last week. In the McDonalds parking lot, I saw teens smoking what certainly appeared to be a marijuana pipe openly near the picnic bench. It was daylight. They must have noticed my reaction, (jaw dropped that they would be openly doing this during daylight hours) because they ran off before I could do anything such as confront them or contact police. I really couldn't see their faces, as the only one facing me was wearing a hoody, but it looked like 2 girls and a guy and they were 16 at the oldest. I don't agree with the whole Reefer Madness theory, but in my day, teens at least went through the effort of trying to be subtle about their weed smoking. If you are that brazen about it, there is a problem. At least I didn't see them drive off.
Jeff Wheeler September 15, 2012 at 03:08 AM
Felons CAN find jobs and CAN graduate college during or after serving time. They deserve some prison time for this. In the past I've hired three ex-cons (through Illinois WorkNet program and all felons), one still works for me, one went off and started his own business, and another found a better job paying more money. All had learned their lessons. If they get off with probation it just sends a message to all the other kids that "hey, it's OK, if you get caught like those two boys did we can do it too but we wont get caught". They will learn how to be a thug in prison only if they choose that path to go down.
Malta September 15, 2012 at 02:06 PM
The disintegration of families that began with the "great society" programs of the Lyndon Johnson era have brought moral decay to such an extent that teens to a large extent have no respect for authority. The school system in chicago is. A disaster. The material on TV blatantly promotes sexual permissiveness soon enough the random shootings of south chicago will migrate to the northern suburbs............and the band played on!
David Greenberg September 15, 2012 at 07:39 PM
Justice is supposed to be blind. To that end, the Judge isn't supposed to care who wins or loses. The law sometimes gives the Judge some wiggle room, and sometimes not. That wiggle room could be probation, mandatory treatment, electronic monitoring, the length of a sentence, and in that case the Judge has to look at the seriousness of the crime, chance of recidivism, and the record of the defendant(s). In the case of the teal bandits, we don't know if they got certain chances beforehand, but the current crime is a Class X felony folks - we have a very serious crime with no wiggle room so the Prosecutor doesn't have to negotiate anything through a plea bargain. Moreover, they apparently have long records of theft and other issues, so why would anyone want to negotiate? As for Carly - she apparently got plenty of chances already and now you have a heinous crime committed by an addict. Whatever the reason for her addiction, even after rehab she hasn't gotten it under control and she killed someone. The chances of recidivism are great, the danger to society extremely large. I'd ship her off to prison for a long time too - maybe when she gets out she'll be done with drugs, maybe not. But in the meantime, we don't have to worry about HER driving around in a vehicle getting high and plowing down people on the sidewalk.
David Greenberg September 15, 2012 at 07:41 PM
"soon enough the random shootings of south chicago will migrate to the northern suburbs" - it's already happening. North side of Chicago is already a war zone. Evanston - people getting robbed and shot. Waukegan. North Chicago.
Malta September 15, 2012 at 10:35 PM
The liberal politicians. Will be the death of us all.......political correctness a poison we all have to swallow .....
john September 15, 2012 at 11:12 PM
Break into my home with me and my girl sleeping. I would gave shot them both. The gun they have loaded or not. Mine is.
RB September 15, 2012 at 11:16 PM
These students attended one of the better school systems in Illinois, not the Chicago schools. Their acts were not a migration of moral decay to the suburbs brought on by television.
RB September 15, 2012 at 11:18 PM
Oh, before it was migration from Chicago and television. Now, it's liberal politicians and Political Correctness. I bet you're a real hoot at bridge club.
Benny G. September 16, 2012 at 09:16 PM
So much hyperbole and drama. Rousso and these two punks will do far less time in jail then charged with whether by a plea deal or mandatory guidelines. The their attorneys feel the judges in these cases have a "serious downside" they plea them out. The reason the home invasion crime aggravated with a weapon is more serious then the Rousso charges is that it is premeditated with forethought. The Rousso charges are negligence oriented. Is that so hard for anyone to comprehend?
Benny G. September 16, 2012 at 09:20 PM
FWIW, Illinois has far less harsh laws and mandatorys on the books then say Texas and many Southern states. You can thank the liberal legislature for that and the great blue state of Illinois. I have seen aggravated DUIs (with a death) do one year jail time and 10 years probation and all the worthless classes. Aggravated home invasions are much more serious in general because of the planning and forethought.
gigi canavan September 19, 2012 at 12:00 AM
David it has to do with intent. The intent of these two boys is unclear,however you have a firearm and you are entering a home while driving impaired is negligent homicide. That is why only 14 uears
Dag September 19, 2012 at 02:07 AM
I hope that everyone learns from these shattering events, and the young adults of the communities around here understand the difference between mischief and criminal acts. I feel terribly for all the families involved, and the lives affected.
Benny G. September 19, 2012 at 02:48 AM
Huh?? The intent was home invasion, breaking and entering, burglary of a habitation. How much clearer could it be. Most likely they were looking for the weed that the kid had. They couldn't find it but the cops sure did...LOL The malice and forethought of burglary of a hab (aggravated with a weapon) is far more serious than anything negligent including the Rousso case.
gigi canavan September 19, 2012 at 12:56 PM
Intent under the law is viewed differently than how a lay person defines intent
Benny G. September 19, 2012 at 05:25 PM
gigi, the prosecution has to show their intent was to steal. It is not a very complicated concept. To prove the charge they must prove intent to steal something. Not too complicated even for a lay person.
TheGing October 01, 2012 at 05:35 PM
David obviously knows everything I think we should all listen to him
John Doe October 06, 2012 at 02:31 AM
I'm fighting a class x on cannabis and class 1 on cannabis also. First offense no prior records. What am I looking at? I have a great attorney and I've been going to school for nursing, have my own home, worked in the union 10 yrs, have 3 kids and a wife. Is there a possibility I can get probation?
John Doe October 06, 2012 at 02:32 AM
Kane county illinois.
John Doe October 06, 2012 at 02:48 AM
I feel that these kids deserve a second chance. I hope all goes well for them.
Edward Richarson February 28, 2013 at 03:33 AM
One was an accident and the other was premeditated home invasion with a deadly weapon.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »