Harris’ attorney explains why she wants to use affirmative defenses

An attorney for Xandria Harris is asking the court to allow her to use two affirmative defenses during her trial in September.

Attorney Cierra Norris filed the document Thursday with the Kankakee County Circuit Clerk’s Office.

The motion will be argued before Kankakee County Circuit Judge Kathy Bradshaw-Elliott during Harris’ next court appearance, which is set for Aug. 11.

The 29-year-old Harris is charged with first-degree murder, attempted murder and three counts of endangering the life of a child in the Dec. 29, 2021, shooting death of Bradley Police Sgt. Marlene Rittmanic and serious wounding of now-retired Sgt. Tyler Bailey.

Harris’ boyfriend, Darius Sullivan, 28, was the actual shooter. He was convicted in September 2024.

Sullivan is serving a mandatory life sentence for killing Rittmanic.

After serving that sentence, Sullivan will serve a consecutive sentence of 80 years for attempted murder of a peace officer.

At the time of the shooting, Harris had two children and was pregnant with another. Sullivan is the father of all three children.

In the court document, Norris said Harris suffers from battered woman syndrome.

A psychologist was hired by Norris to determine whether Harris was under duress at the time of the shooting because of alleged domestic abuse situations between herself and Sullivan.

Norris filed a motion in December 2022 asking the court to allow the use of an affirmative defense.

An affirmative defense is when the defendant introduces evidence that negates criminal liability or civil liability, even if it is proven that the defendant committed the alleged acts, according to Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute.

The affirmative defense must be found credible to be successful, and the party that raises it has the burden of proof on establishing it.

Examples of affirmative defenses include self-defense, entrapment, insanity and necessity.

Norris also argued that it was necessary for Harris because she believed such actions “were justifiable to avoid injury greater than the injury, which might reasonably result from [her] own conduct,” according to the court document.

In the document, Norris said they will assert the affirmative defense of necessity if prosecutors intend to argue or provide evidence “that Ms. Harris took the drum of Darius Sullivan’s firearm intentionally.”