Cops plan benefit for officer charged in fatal DUI

[Modbert]

Cops plan benefit for officer charged in fatal DUI - Chicago Breaking News

Chicago police officers are planning a benefit this weekend at their union headquarters for Joseph Frugoli, who is accused of crashing into a car while driving drunk on the Dan Ryan in April, killing two people.

An invitation to the event is posted on the Web site of the Fraternal Order of Police, and appears next to the numbers "10-1," radio code for officer in need of assistance.

"You're invited to assist Detective Joe Frugoli," the posting reads. Tickets cost $50. A detective lists his name and phone number for further information.

Police said Frugoli's blood-alcohol content was more than three times the legal limit when his Lexus SUV struck a car that had pulled over on the Dan Ryan Expressway north of 18th Street. The car exploded into flames and killed Andrew Cazares, 23, and Fausto Manzera, 21.

Frugoli is also accused of leaving the scene.

FOP President Mark Donahue distanced the organization from the event, saying it was planned by some of the officer's friends.

Donahue said FOP members have a right to use the building, and emphasized that the FOP was not involved or advocating one way or the other regarding the Frugoli case.

Yes, because using the building and posting an event invite on the FOP website has nothing to do with the FOP.

I wonder if these cops will have a benefit for the victims families of the two people that this officer is accused of killing.

 

[JD_2B]

Cops plan benefit for officer charged in fatal DUI - Chicago Breaking News

Chicago police officers are planning a benefit this weekend at their union headquarters for Joseph Frugoli, who is accused of crashing into a car while driving drunk on the Dan Ryan in April, killing two people.

An invitation to the event is posted on the Web site of the Fraternal Order of Police, and appears next to the numbers "10-1," radio code for officer in need of assistance.

"You're invited to assist Detective Joe Frugoli," the posting reads. Tickets cost $50. A detective lists his name and phone number for further information.

Police said Frugoli's blood-alcohol content was more than three times the legal limit when his Lexus SUV struck a car that had pulled over on the Dan Ryan Expressway north of 18th Street. The car exploded into flames and killed Andrew Cazares, 23, and Fausto Manzera, 21.

Frugoli is also accused of leaving the scene.

FOP President Mark Donahue distanced the organization from the event, saying it was planned by some of the officer's friends.

Donahue said FOP members have a right to use the building, and emphasized that the FOP was not involved or advocating one way or the other regarding the Frugoli case.

Yes, because using the building and posting an event invite on the FOP website has nothing to do with the FOP.

I wonder if these cops will have a benefit for the victims families of the two people that this officer is accused of killing.

I hate corrupt cops..

 

[Charles Stucker]

This sort of "Blue Brotherhood" is precisely why the public opinion of police is so low. Had this been "Joe Citizen" instead of "John Law" the LEO's would be all "This sort of criminal behavior must be stopped." but because it is a police officer, well "we have to defend our brother; here's how you can help"

FYI - I've been excluded from a jury empaneled on a charge of DUI because I don't drink. At all.

 

[Diuretic]

This is interesting. I would assume that it's about raising money for him so he can hire a lawyer for the process. From reading the story it appears that the FOP isn't financially supporting him so his mates are chipping in. Since he hasn't been to trial yet he is presumed not guilty and can look forward to due process. So, if it's about helping him fund a legal defence I find it hard to get outraged. If this were a bunch of bricklayers getting together to raise funds for a workmate in the same situation I doubt it would get a story in the newspaper.

Having said that I can see why people would get upset, but as I said, presumed innocent. The time for his occupation to be considered would be if he's convicted then the judge can take that into consideration during sentencing.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Having said that I can see why people would get upset, but as I said, presumed innocent. The time for his occupation to be considered would be if he's convicted then the judge can take that into consideration during sentencing.

If he's found guilty is he apt to get a lighter sentence for being an officer?
I would argue he should get the maximum sentence.
He got drunk
He drove his car
He killed an INNOCENT person.

I doubt the fact of his operating a vehicle involved in the collision is in question. I doubt the death is in question. I finally doubt he was stone cold sober when the collision occurred. All this adds to Vehicular manslaughter, or if he was drunk enough to get felony DWI, then Felony Murder. If this were a Joe Citizen driving while intoxicated and a John Law dead, the same facts would have the police screaming for his head, as an example.
Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
No plea bargain
No dismiss the charges
No light sentence

 

[William Joyce]

This is interesting. I would assume that it's about raising money for him so he can hire a lawyer for the process. From reading the story it appears that the FOP isn't financially supporting him so his mates are chipping in.

Probably. Where I used to work, we defended "good" cops, i.e., ones who'd been cleared of wrongdoing but still facing a civil lawsuit. If you were a "bad" cop, you got a PBA lawyer. If you were REALLY bad, like Frugoli here, you were on your own. Probably not the best judgment for these guys to do up a fundraiser public-like for their boy... they probably could have done this a little quieter.

 

[Diuretic]

Having said that I can see why people would get upset, but as I said, presumed innocent. The time for his occupation to be considered would be if he's convicted then the judge can take that into consideration during sentencing.

If he's found guilty is he apt to get a lighter sentence for being an officer?
I would argue he should get the maximum sentence.
He got drunk
He drove his car
He killed an INNOCENT person.

I doubt the fact of his operating a vehicle involved in the collision is in question. I doubt the death is in question. I finally doubt he was stone cold sober when the collision occurred. All this adds to Vehicular manslaughter, or if he was drunk enough to get felony DWI, then Felony Murder. If this were a Joe Citizen driving while intoxicated and a John Law dead, the same facts would have the police screaming for his head, as an example.
Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
No plea bargain
No dismiss the charges
No light sentence

I don't know what the sentencing guidelines are in Illinois. But putting those aside for a moment and looking generally at it. Should he get a heavier sentence than a non-police officer in exactly the same circumstances? If so, on what grounds should that be? That the man is a hypocrite? Or should it be on the grounds that he has a position of trust in society and society should be able to express its extreme displeasure at him through the judge giving him a heavier sentence. Or could it be that every police officer in Illinois might be deterred from DUI by such a sentence? I don't know. I do know that he should not be treated any more leniently than a non-police officer in exactly the same situation. That would be untenable.

 

[Diuretic]

This is interesting. I would assume that it's about raising money for him so he can hire a lawyer for the process. From reading the story it appears that the FOP isn't financially supporting him so his mates are chipping in.

Probably. Where I used to work, we defended "good" cops, i.e., ones who'd been cleared of wrongdoing but still facing a civil lawsuit. If you were a "bad" cop, you got a PBA lawyer. If you were REALLY bad, like Frugoli here, you were on your own. Probably not the best judgment for these guys to do up a fundraiser public-like for their boy... they probably could have done this a little quieter.

I suppose it depends on the particular culture in a particular place. There is such a thing as police culture and in many ways the police culture (broadly speaking) in the US (gross generalisation but I'll shine that up in a moment) is not that dissimilar from the police culture (again a bit too general) in Australia (or the UK or New Zealand for that matter). But are localised differences. Where I am it's entirely probable that there would be no benefit. I can tell you with some authority our Association (fully registered union) would not fund him. I have been to Chicago but not hung out with the cops there but I suspect that the police culture in Chicago is very tough, perhaps reflective of the tough work Chicago cops have in that city there is a very closed police culture there, probably a very "us v them" approach. I'm not decrying it, just speculating. Police cultures, in my experience, tend to be reflective of broader social relations.

Interesting you used to work for a firm that would defend cops. In a previous position I held I was used to hearing cops sound off against lawyers but the minute they needed one they'd demand a Queen's Counsel and if they were acquitted they'd be full of praise for their lawyer. But that's another topic.

Anyway this bloke is in a world of hurt and frankly I'm not that sympathetic to him. Two people are dead allegedly as a result of his actions. What he deserves as a right is due process, what I refuse to give him is sympathy.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Should he get a heavier sentence than a non-police officer in exactly the same circumstances? If so, on what grounds should that be? That the man is a hypocrite? Or should it be on the grounds that he has a position of trust in society and society should be able to express its extreme displeasure at him through the judge giving him a heavier sentence.

As a police officer he would have been directly exposed to the dangers of drinking and driving. That vivid illustration of the dangers is more than most receive, yet there is more. Has this officer been forgiven for DUI/DWI by "brother" officers in the past? We can't know as any officer guilty of forgiving him would want to remain quiet about it now to limit their own liability in those two deaths, as an enabler. Further, if you give him less than the maximum sentence it is unjust to everyone who gets the maximum sentence.

I do believe the United States needs laws regarding Betrayal of Public Trust and Betrayal of Public Office to cover diverse situations which lead to loss of public confidence in the government. But as Politicians would be a prime target for such laws do not expect them to ever be enacted.

 

[Diuretic]

Should he get a heavier sentence than a non-police officer in exactly the same circumstances? If so, on what grounds should that be? That the man is a hypocrite? Or should it be on the grounds that he has a position of trust in society and society should be able to express its extreme displeasure at him through the judge giving him a heavier sentence.

As a police officer he would have been directly exposed to the dangers of drinking and driving. That vivid illustration of the dangers is more than most receive, yet there is more. Has this officer been forgiven for DUI/DWI by "brother" officers in the past? We can't know as any officer guilty of forgiving him would want to remain quiet about it now to limit their own liability in those two deaths, as an enabler. Further, if you give him less than the maximum sentence it is unjust to everyone who gets the maximum sentence.

I do believe the United States needs laws regarding Betrayal of Public Trust and Betrayal of Public Office to cover diverse situations which lead to loss of public confidence in the government. But as Politicians would be a prime target for such laws do not expect them to ever be enacted.

As you would be aware the court can only sentence on the facts presented to it. One of those facts is that the defendant (if convicted and facing sentencing) is a police officer. I have no doubt the court would take judicial notice of the everyday experiences of a police officer and may well wonder what the bloody hell possessed this bloke to do what he is alleged to have done. The court may well decide to drop the hammer on him for that reason, but that's up to the court.

Has he been given a get out of gaol deal for DUI in the past? I have no idea.

As far as the max is concerned, it's obviously up to the court. If it's in the sentencing tariff that cops get the max for DUI then so be it.

Interesting point about trust and betrayal. I would have thought the old common law offences relating to abuse of public office would have been translated into state's laws in the US, they certainly are where I am. But in the circumstances that this bloke is allegedly in they wouldn't apply (in my jurisdiction), I obviously can't speak for Illinois.