I've mentioned several times that Illinois seems to have a real culture of corruption in its politics - even "carpetbagger" senatorial candidate Alan Keyes has picked up on the theme, explaining why it was necessary to get an out-of-state candidate to run on the ticket. (This kind of talk is exactly what made the Republicans here abandon Peter Fitzgerald, btw.)
But here's what is possibly a new low - with the usual disclaimer that people are assumed to be innocent until proven guilty - for a public official here:
quote: Ex-fire chief, wife called financial terrorists
August 19, 2004
BY DAN ROZEK Staff Reporter
Joseph Drick, who has quit as Joliet fire chief, and his wife committed "financial terrorism'' by defrauding an elderly widow of at least $200,000, Will County authorities said Wednesday as they announced felony charges against the pair.
Drick, 48, and his wife, Cheri Drick, 46, are charged with misappropriating funds from an 84-year-old neighbor, then using the money to buy a Cadillac Escalade sport utility vehicle and pay for trips, credit card bills and household expenses.
The Dricks allegedly began using the money in February 2003, shortly after Cheri Drick obtained power of attorney over Gladys Farrington's financial affairs, prosecutors said. They had met the elderly woman by chance in November 2002, when they offered her a ride home on a cold morning after spotting her walking in their neighborhood.
"But the financial exploitation -- financial terrorism that nearly destroyed a widow's quality of life -- continued until earlier this year,'' Will County State's Attorney Jeff Tomczak said.
The elderly woman had a net worth of more than $1 million, authorities said.
Drick and his wife were both charged with financial exploitation of an elderly person and theft by deception, both felonies that carry a possible four- to 15-year prison term. They also were charged with conspiracy to commit financial exploitation, a lesser felony.
Joseph Drick, fire chief since 1998, resigned Wednesday from his job leading Joliet's 179-person fire department.
[ August 19, 2004, 02:30 PM: Message edited by: sndrake ]
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
This is sad. It makes you wonder if the Fire Dept. should take a real close look at their books.
On a lighter note, at least he will be qualified to assist his attorney. His job will be to put out all the publicity fires.
[ August 19, 2004, 04:56 PM: Message edited by: punwit ]
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Strange, the most common crime commited by fire fighters is Arson. (If you love fires, that is where you will go for a living, so many arsonists become fire fighters) In Atlanta, in the small town where my mother-in-law lives, they arrested the volunteer fire chief a few years ago. He wanted to train his men, but couldn't afford taking them to training facilities. In an effort to save the city some money, he set fire to vacant buildings and used them as training material.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
That's just awful, but on the ligter note, did anyone else catch the "financial terrorism" thing. Why do I get the feeling that in the 50s, it would have been "financial communism" and in the 40s "financial nazism". For Rush Limbaugh, "financial liberalism", for Michael Moore "financial Bushism". For Rick Santorum, "financial hot sweaty man-on-man action". For Snoop Doggy Dog "financial Kenny G-ism", for OSC "financial intellectualism". I think someone shot Godwin's LAw with a blast of 50s drive-in movie radiation, because it's mutating out of control.
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
Squicky-- I agree, it's not like they were setting bombs to extort her money. I suppose financial embezzlement would suit better if they need something more than simply embezzlement.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
MrSquicky and Punwit,
I agree with you both. The term is complete BS - and suited for the times.
Why not just call them what they are accused of?
Two criminals hustling an elderly woman out of her life savings?
Does that description really NEED any more to spark anger? (The first article I read didn't contain the "terrorist" remark - but I often link to the Sun-Times because there's no registration.)
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
To me financial terrorism means, "Hello. Give me your money or I will skin you alive and behead your family."
This is theft.
Posted by rubble (Member # 6454) on :
To me financial terrorism would be a group electronically "erasing" wealth from an identifiable group of people (ethnic, national), publicising this act, and stating that it was done in the name of that group's cause.
On a national level it could be the attempted or successful destruction of a nations economy by a non-governmental group through financial or economic instruments. In my mind if the act was accomplished by a nation-state rather than a non-governmental group it would be an act of war not terrorism.
*ducks accusatory glances for not keeping to the "fluffy" nature that the tread started out*
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
I think we can agree the word is used as the new, generic adjective for all things bad and not nice.
The same way reporters refer to anything larger than a handgun as "machine guns."
-Trevor
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
Dan there is already a term to cover your defintion. I believe that would be called extortion. I think embezzlement covers it best.
quote:To take (money, for example) for one's own use in violation of a trust.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
To me, it's more a combination of embezzlement and con artist - they worked to gain the woman's trust, gained control over some of her assets.
And they were apparently in the process of trying to get total control of her life - that's what guardianship is all about.
It's more than embezzlement.
It also ain't terrorism.
(I also think it was a little misleading for the article to refer to him as the EX fire chief. He quit YESTERDAY, for crying out loud.)
[ August 19, 2004, 06:04 PM: Message edited by: sndrake ]
Posted by AmkaProblemka (Member # 6495) on :
We don't know all the details. It may have been called 'financial terrorism' because the couple used fear to make the widow give them access to her money. When she noticed something wrong, they may have continued to use fear in their manipulation of her.
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
Ok, but there is already a term for that, it's called extortion.
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
quote:The same way reporters refer to anything larger than a handgun as "machine guns."
Or the way those same reporters refer to someone using a gun on coworkers as "disgruntled." Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Yeah, disgruntled is putting a dead fish in the heating duct.
Handguns indicate that the employee is at least perturbed.
Dagonee
Posted by sndrake (Member # 4941) on :
Gotta agree with Punwit on this one.
Occam's Razor (and a knowledge of Illinois politicians) would point to the simplest explanation being the Will County State's Attorney is just engaging in grandstanding and hyperbole.
Posted by rubble (Member # 6454) on :
To my mind the reason the terrorism label is inappropriate is that there is no intention to coerce a state or government.
Terrorism is a tool used by groups that have little power in the conventional system to attack that system using unconventional avenues of approach that through instillation of fear attempt to cause a change in the status quo.
Posted by Mabus (Member # 6320) on :
Has anyone here ever met a gruntled person?
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
While I don't disagree entirely with your defintion, rubble, there are other defintions of terrorism. This is the one that embodies my personal concept:
quote: n : the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear
The difference between your concept and mine is that terrorism, in my eyes, targets the populace rather than the Powers That Be. I guess it's a roundabout method nonetheless since, in a democracy, you expect the populace to exert pressure on the PTB.
[ August 19, 2004, 06:52 PM: Message edited by: punwit ]
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
My mom grew up in Joliet . . .
And this thread made me laugh very hard. Clearly, there is something wrong with me. I blame Squicky, sndrake, and Dagonee.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)