rem16
05-24-2008, 09:05 AM
If suspect in Stacy's disappearance is convicted of weapons charge, a hearing would determine future of retirement pay
By Matthew Walberg | Tribune reporter
11:10 PM CDT, May 23, 2008
Drew Peterson stands to lose more than his freedom if convicted of a felony weapons charge leveled against him this week—he also stands to lose a lucrative pension for his 30 years as a police officer.
Peterson, 54, was charged Wednesday with unlawful use of a weapon for having an assault rifle with a barrel nearly 5 inches shorter than allowed by law.
His attorney, Joel Brodsky, contends the gun was legal because while Peterson bought it with his money in the late 1990s, he registered it with the Bolingbrook Police Department as a duty weapon for use on the department's SWAT team.
Bolingbrook police officials contend they have no knowledge of the weapon and that Peterson was issued a department-owned assault rifle for his work with the SWAT unit.
What is undisputed is that police investigating the disappearance of Peterson's wife, Stacy, took custody of the gun nearly two weeks before Peterson retired from the department.
Attorney Richard Reimer, who represents the Bolingbrook Police Pension Board, which issued the former sergeant's $6,068 monthly pension in November, said: "Peterson and his attorney have both contacted me, and at this point in time his pension stays. It's all premature—we have to wait to see if there's a conviction."
If Peterson is convicted, Reimer said the next step would be to determine whether there is a connection between the crime and Peterson's official duties.
"If convicted, I would advise my client that we would hold an administrative hearing, publicly and with a court reporter, for the purpose of finding out whether or not his conviction should result in the forfeiture of his pension," Reimer said. "Not all felony convictions will divest police officers of their pensions. There are cases where police officers have committed felonies that were not job related and they were allowed to maintain their pensions. There has to be some factual showing that the person misused and abused his authority as a police officer to commit the felony for which he was convicted."
Attorney John Murphey, who has represented numerous municipalities in the Chicago area, agreed.
"That jeopardizes his pension if he's convicted," he said. "But they have to show that this conviction rose out of his employment."
Brodsky said either way, his client's pension is safe.
"If he had an illegal gun, and it's not connected to his duty, then it won't affect his pension," he said. "If it was his duty weapon, then the length of the barrel is a moot point."
mwalberg@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-drew_peterson_both_24may24,0,1633070.story
:s1gyahoo: Right Brodsky.. :0doh:
By Matthew Walberg | Tribune reporter
11:10 PM CDT, May 23, 2008
Drew Peterson stands to lose more than his freedom if convicted of a felony weapons charge leveled against him this week—he also stands to lose a lucrative pension for his 30 years as a police officer.
Peterson, 54, was charged Wednesday with unlawful use of a weapon for having an assault rifle with a barrel nearly 5 inches shorter than allowed by law.
His attorney, Joel Brodsky, contends the gun was legal because while Peterson bought it with his money in the late 1990s, he registered it with the Bolingbrook Police Department as a duty weapon for use on the department's SWAT team.
Bolingbrook police officials contend they have no knowledge of the weapon and that Peterson was issued a department-owned assault rifle for his work with the SWAT unit.
What is undisputed is that police investigating the disappearance of Peterson's wife, Stacy, took custody of the gun nearly two weeks before Peterson retired from the department.
Attorney Richard Reimer, who represents the Bolingbrook Police Pension Board, which issued the former sergeant's $6,068 monthly pension in November, said: "Peterson and his attorney have both contacted me, and at this point in time his pension stays. It's all premature—we have to wait to see if there's a conviction."
If Peterson is convicted, Reimer said the next step would be to determine whether there is a connection between the crime and Peterson's official duties.
"If convicted, I would advise my client that we would hold an administrative hearing, publicly and with a court reporter, for the purpose of finding out whether or not his conviction should result in the forfeiture of his pension," Reimer said. "Not all felony convictions will divest police officers of their pensions. There are cases where police officers have committed felonies that were not job related and they were allowed to maintain their pensions. There has to be some factual showing that the person misused and abused his authority as a police officer to commit the felony for which he was convicted."
Attorney John Murphey, who has represented numerous municipalities in the Chicago area, agreed.
"That jeopardizes his pension if he's convicted," he said. "But they have to show that this conviction rose out of his employment."
Brodsky said either way, his client's pension is safe.
"If he had an illegal gun, and it's not connected to his duty, then it won't affect his pension," he said. "If it was his duty weapon, then the length of the barrel is a moot point."
mwalberg@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-drew_peterson_both_24may24,0,1633070.story
:s1gyahoo: Right Brodsky.. :0doh: