Chicago, IL. Nov. 13 –Chicago oolice officer Richard Fiorito is now facing 37 lawsuits alleging he intentionally targeted gay and lesbian drivers to issue false DUI arrests.
The lawsuits claim Fiorito was looking to capitalize on overtime pay issued to police officers when they appear in court to testify in a DUI case. Fiorito made 313 DUI arrests between January of 2007 and June of 2008; the officer was even honored by MADD for his efforts. Most of these arrests were against gay and lesbian suspects. He supposedly targeted these individuals when they left gay and lesbian bars or frequented gay and lesbian areas.
New dash cam evidence is pointing to the fact these arrest reports may have been exaggerated if not totally falsified…
Fiorito has been placed on desk duty since the charges were first issued in early October. 16 more plaintiffs recently joined the case with the original 21, leading the total to 37 lawsuits against the officer. All testimony from Fiorito in any of these pending DUI cases will be on hold until internal investigations from the Cook County State Attorney’s Office and Independent Police Review Authority are complete.
Fiorito is not the only Chicago officer accused of these types of arrests in the previous few years. Officer John Haleas was suspected to be guilty of perjury last year, having about 50 cases dismissed, but was exonerated of criminal charges.
Determined to stop people from texting while driving, the Obama administration plans a campaign similar to past government efforts to discourage drunken driving and encourage the use of seat belts. The administration planned to offer recommendations to address the growing safety risk of distracted drivers, especially the use of mobile devices to send messages from behind the wheel.
“We can really eliminate texting while driving. That should be our goal,” said Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, declining to provide specifics of the recommendations. Researchers, safety groups, automakers and lawmakers gathered for a second day to discuss the perils of distracted driving, hearing government data that underscored the safety threat as more motorists stay connected with cell phones and mobile devices.
The Transportation Department reported that nearly 6,000 people were killed and a half-million were injured last year in vehicle crashes connected to driver distraction, often by mobile devices and cell phones. LaHood called distracted driving a “menace to society” and said the administration would offer a series of recommendations Thursday to encourage Congress, state governments and the public to curb the unsafe behavior. He said the government would draw from past efforts to reduce drunken driving and encourage motorists to wear seat belts. Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said support was building in Congress to ban text messaging by drivers. Their legislation would require states to ban texting or e-mailing while operating a moving vehicle or lose 25 percent of their annual federal highway funding. “No text message is so urgent that it’s worth dying over,” Klobuchar told participants.
The government reported that 5,870 people were killed and 515,000 were injured last year in crashes where at least one form of driver distraction was reported. Driver distraction was involved in 16 percent of all fatal crashes in 2008 and was prevalent among young drivers. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia have passed laws making texting while driving illegal and seven states and the District have banned driving while talking on a handheld cell phone, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Many safety groups have urged a nationwide ban on using handheld mobile devices while behind the wheel.
The conference attracted families of victims of accidents caused by distracted driving, who urged the government to take a strong stance against cell phone use in vehicles, whether it includes a hands-free device or not. They suggested technologies that prevent the mobile device from receiving e-mails or phone calls while the vehicle is in motion could help address the problem. “We started driving cars about 100 years ago. We started using phones about 80 years ago. We’ve only really combined those two activities to a great degree in the last five or 10 years. We’re finding out they don’t mix,” said David Teater of Spring Lake, Mich., whose 12-year-old son, Joe, was killed in a 2004 crash when a driver using a cell phone ran a red light.
Some researchers cautioned that banning all cell phone use by drivers would undermine the development of safety technologies that could allow vehicles to share traffic information with other vehicles and alert emergency responders to crashes.
It’s impossible to give a definitive answer. Attorneys set their own fees, which vary according to a number of factors:
The complexity of a case.
Most attorneys charge more for felonies than for misdemeanors because felonies carry greater penalties and are likely to involve more work for the attorney.
The attorney’s experience.
Generally, less-experienced attorneys set lower fees than their more-experienced colleagues.
Geography.
Just as gasoline and butter cost more in some parts of the country than others, so do lawyers.
A defendant charged with a misdemeanor should not be surprised by a legal fee in the neighborhood of $3,000-$5,000; an attorney may want $15,000-$25,000 in a felony case.
Most criminal defense attorneys want all or a substantial portion of the fee paid up front. Contingency fees (where the lawyer gets paid only if he wins the case) are not allowed in criminal cases.
Technorati is a popular blog directory service. It measures the popularity of a given blog as compared to all other sites that have been submitted to its system.
This blog currently has a Technorati rank of 1,603,173, which puts it in the top 2.29% of blogs tracked by Technorati.
A Fort Meyers man was arrested last week when a child fell of the swamp buggy he was allegedly driving while under the influence.
The incident occurred Wednesday evening around 7:30 PM. Police say the suspect, 58-year-old Glen Maxey, was in his F-350 pickup truck and chasing his ex-wife’s car down the road when they responded to the call. Deputies were able to stop Maxey, detain him and test him for drunkenness. Maxey told police he had been in an argument with his ex-wife.
The police arrested Maxey for DUI after administering several field tests. They then spoke with the woman, who told them she had dropped the children off for a visit and saw Maxey putting them in the swamp buggy. She said he was holding a child on his lap while driving erratically, and one of the children actually fell out of the vehicle on the way back to the home.
The child had bruises on the back and was vomiting at the scene of the arrest. The child was treated at the scene and then taken to a medical facility. Swamp buggies are particularly dangerous vehicles due to their height from the ground. Large tires are used to keep the vehicle elevated in the mud, meaning the child likely fell a significant distance when dropped from the vehicle.
In Florida, this DUI will appear on Maxey’s record same as a DUI for driving a car.
Aventura
Bal Harbour
Bay Harbor Islands
Biscayne Park
Coral Gables
Cutler Bay
Doral
El Portal
Florida City
Golden Beach
Hialeah
Hialeah Gardens
Homestead
Indian Creek
Key Biscayne
Medley
Miami
Miami Beach
Miami Gardens
Miami Lakes
Miami Shores Village
Miami Springs
North Bay Village
North Miami
North Miami Beach
Opa-locka
Palmetto Bay
Pinecrest
South Miami
Sunny Isles Beach
Surfside
Sweetwater
Virginia Gardens
West Miami
Learn some of the most common reasons why a defendant might want to enter into a plea bargain.
As criminal courts become more crowded, prosecutors and judges feel increased pressure to move cases quickly through the system. Trials can take days, weeks or sometimes months, while guilty pleas can often be arranged in minutes. This provides defendants with an opportunity to negotiate a plea bargain.
Incentives for the Defendant to Accept a Plea Bargain
For most defendants, the principal benefit of plea bargaining is receiving a lighter sentence for a less-severe charge than might result from taking the case to trial and losing. Also, the outcome of any given trial is usually unpredictable — but a plea bargain provides both prosecution and defense with some control over the result.
There are other benefits as well:
Saving money. Defendants who are represented by private counsel can save a bundle on attorneys’ fees by accepting a plea bargain. It almost always takes more time and effort to bring a case to trial than to negotiate and handle a plea bargain.
Getting out of jail. Defendants who are held in custody — who either do not have the right to bail or cannot afford bail, or who do not qualify for release on their own recognizance — may get out of jail immediately following the judge’s acceptance of a plea. Depending on the offense, the defendant may get out altogether, on probation, with or without some community service obligations. Or, the defendant may have to serve more time but will still get out much sooner than if he or she insisted on going to trial.
Resolving the matter quickly. A plea bargain provides resolution to the stress of being charged with a crime. Going to trial usually requires a much longer wait — and causes much more stress — than taking a plea bargain.
Having fewer or less-serious offenses on one’s record. Pleading guilty or no contest in exchange for a reduction in the number of charges or the seriousness of the offense looks a lot better on a defendant’s record than the convictions that might result following trial. This can be particularly important if the defendant is ever convicted in the future. For example, a second conviction for driving under the influence (DUI) may carry mandatory jail time, whereas if the first DUI offense had been bargained down to reckless driving, there may be no jail time for the “second” DUI.
www.duilawdefense.com
September 19, 2009 at 10:47 AM
HubSpot’s Website Grader
Report for www.duilawdefense.com
September 19, 2009 at 10:47 AM
A website grade of 93/100 for www.duilawdefense.com means that of the hundreds of thousands of websites that have previously been evaluated, our algorithm has calculated that this site scores higher than 93% of them in terms of its marketing effectiveness. The algorithm uses a proprietary blend of over 50 different variables, including search engine data, website structure, approximate traffic, site performance, and others.
The website www.duilawdefense.com ranks 112,911 of the 1,571,366 websites that have been ranked so far.
People are often surprised to learn that if a person hasn’t yet been arrested, the police may question the person and use the answers in court without first providing the Miranda warning.
Responding to Questions Before an Arrest
Does a person have to respond to police questions if he or she hasn’t been arrested? Generally, no. A police officer generally cannot arrest a person simply for failure to respond to questions.
The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the “right of silence.” This means that unless a police officer has “probable cause” to make an arrest or a “reasonable suspicion” to conduct a “stop and frisk,” a person approached by the police officer has the legal right to refuse to answer questions. Indeed, a person who has reason to believe that he or she is a potential suspect should politely decline to answer questions, at least until after consulting an attorney.
However, there are several exceptions to this rule.
hotmail.com
