Samantha Steele DUI Trial: Day Two
- 2 days ago
- 2 min read
Live blogging from Courtroom 410 at the Richard J. Daley Center, Tuesday, May 5, 2026
Trial Day Two Testimony:
Proceedings resumed this morning in Courtroom 410 at the Richard J. Daley Center as the bench trial of Cook County Board of Review Commissioner Samantha Steele entered its second day. The misdemeanor DUI charge dates back to a November 10, 2024, single-vehicle crash near 5028 N. Ashland Avenue in Chicago’s Uptown/Ravenswood neighborhood, where officers reported finding Steele with slurred speech, an odor of alcohol on her breath, and difficulty standing. Day 1 had featured testimony from four Chicago police officers, a civilian crash witness, and body-camera footage; Day 2 the focus shifted squarely to the medical professionals who treated her afterward at Weiss Hospital’s emergency room.
The first witness called to the stand was the emergency room nurse at Weiss Memorial Hospital in Chicago who evaluated Steele shortly after Chicago police brought her in. The nurse described Steele arriving with noticeably slurred speech and immediately identifying herself as an elected official, insisting she “didn’t have to do what she was asked.” Steele refused both blood work and a urine sample.
Cook County Commissioner Scott Britton stopped by to see her during her time in the ER. The nurse further recounted Steele insulting the arresting officer, telling him he had “a small penis,” while also bragging that she was rich and made “lots of money.” Drawing on her professional training and direct observations, the nurse concluded that Steele was intoxicated.
Next came the emergency room physician who had treated Steele that night. Despite her complaints of chest and head pain from the crash, Steele refused any physical examinations. The doctor testified that her decision-making ability, overall demeanor, and uncooperative behavior throughout the visit led him to assess that she appeared intoxicated. When Steele was eventually discharged, the physician’s official medical record listed “alcohol intoxication and motor vehicle accident” as the diagnosis. The testimony from both medical witnesses painted a consistent picture of a combative patient who declined standard protocols while exhibiting clear signs of impairment.
With the medical testimony complete, prosecutors rested their case. The courtroom fell quiet as everyone waited for the judge’s ruling. After reviewing all the evidence, including the officers’ observations, the absence of chemical test results, and the medical assessments, Judge Donald Suriano delivered his decision: not guilty. The judge noted that while there had been a “suspicion of intoxication,” the state had not met its burden of proving the charge beyond a reasonable doubt.
