Ex-Cop that killed 2 Girls Wants Workers Comp

**Nhra Firebird** · 10-04-2010, 03:33 PM

http://www.aolnews.com/nation/articl..._lnk1%7C175331

**Schmalgar** · 10-04-2010, 03:52 PM

Wow. He was sending emails and talking on the phone while driving 126 mph to an emergency site. What the hell was he thinking? You LEOs out there, if you're driving 126 mph are you going to be sending emails to your girlfriend? Not just talking to her, but emailing... I have to imagine every one of you is going to say 'no'...

And the line that he will probably win his compensation because he was on the job at the time is complete bs. If you are doing your job in a negligent manner, why should you qualify for workers comp?

**Murder after Midnight** · 10-04-2010, 06:40 PM

Originally Posted by Schmalgar

Wow. He was sending emails and talking on the phone while driving 126 mph to an emergency site. What the hell was he thinking? You LEOs out there, if you're driving 126 mph are you going to be sending emails to your girlfriend? Not just talking to her, but emailing... I have to imagine every one of you is going to say 'no'...

And the line that he will probably win his compensation because he was on the job at the time is complete bs. If you are doing your job in a negligent manner, why should you qualify for workers comp?

Why Are you mad law dog will do what he wants when he wants.

**FORD RECOVERY EXPERT** · 10-04-2010, 07:35 PM

**Mieux97** · 10-04-2010, 10:56 PM

That sorry no good son of a !@#$% How can you say you are NOT liable for the death when it was YOU that killed them!?!?!?!?

**korndawg** · 10-05-2010, 05:21 AM

Wow. I could only wish for daily anal raping's for that stupid SOB.

**clovenhooves** · 10-05-2010, 08:31 AM

A regular cop car can do 126? That guy will lose his case, and I hope he wastes his money in the process.

**lawless** · 10-05-2010, 10:52 AM

i wonder how many tickets this little shit wrote for people using their phones while driving. and look at him now... my thoughts go out to the parents of the two girls... what a scumbag.

**Zinergy** · 10-05-2010, 11:16 AM

Originally Posted by lawless

i wonder how many tickets this little shit wrote for people using their phones while driving. and look at him now... my thoughts go out to the parents of the two girls... what a scumbag.

Does the world know no morals? Yes we have laws and processes but any sane moral person can see what a clear cut case this is and that ex-cop should be told to f%^k off. It doesnt need to go to court, the case did he was guilty of killing two teens because hes a moron. He should shunned and cast out. He should have I KILLED TWO TEENS BY BREAKING THE LAW WHILE SWORN TO UPHOLD IT THEN ASKED FOR STATE MONEYcarved into his face. So everyone can know what a POS he is.

**Mieux97** · 10-06-2010, 03:03 AM

Here in chicago emergency personnel are exempt from the mobile phone rule. I don't know if that's the case with the state troopers. Still, in any case, his stupidity defied logic.

**RJWZ28** · 10-06-2010, 02:05 PM

The ability to talk on a mobile device (radio or cell phone) while driving at a high rate of speed is not only okay for an officer but a necessity, due to the nature of the job. However, sending e-mails is beyond reproach and he should most definitely have lost his job and been held responsible for negligent homicide. However (and I know I'm likely to get flamed for this) unless the department has a policy against sending messages (e-mail or text) while driving, I don't think he will be denied his claim. If you exercise bad judgement on the job and get hurt, unless you were acting outside of policy there is usually no legal ground for your employer to stand on that will enable them to deny your claim. If he had been high, or drunk, or acting outside of policy, then they would have footing to stand. My agency, for example, has policy against texting while driving a service vehicle. If I got an accident while doing so and injured myself, I believe I would be denied compensation. However, if I was talking on my phone and got in an accident, they would have no ground to stand on because there is no policy against talking on the phone while operating a service vehicle. I don't believe it would matter whether I was driving 26 or 126. That is a bad example due to an LEO's inherent need to update others on current position during a chase, but it was the best I could come up with. It is a terrible situation, and I believe he should be held accountable for his idiocy, but I don't think he will be denied his claim unless his actions directly violated policy.

**WICKEDLS1** · 10-06-2010, 02:14 PM

i think someone should put him 6 feet under cause thats total bs and just because he was an officer does not mean that he is above the law, for example if one of us civilians did something like the we would get hard time but no he just gets to go on about his daily life, and then has the balls to ask for conpensation from us???

**nhraformula** · 10-06-2010, 04:49 PM

The guy was hurt on the job. Unless there are rules in place that do not allow him to use a phone while driving, he wont be denied workermens comp and should not be.
Yes it is terrible that two people died, but that has no barring on what the outcome will be.

**Nhra Firebird** · 10-06-2010, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by nhraformula

The guy was hurt on the job. Unless there are rules in place that do not allow him to use a phone while driving, he wont be denied workermens comp and should not be.
Yes it is terrible that two people died, but that has no barring on what the outcome will be.

Talking on the phone is one thing, but emailing while going 126 mph is another ball game.

**nhraformula** · 10-06-2010, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by Nhra Firebird

Talking on the phone is one thing, but emailing while going 126 mph is another ball game.

Unless theres a rule at work that does not allow it, its a moot point

**Nhra Firebird** · 10-06-2010, 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by nhraformula

Unless theres a rule at work that does not allow it, its a moot point

Talking on the phone and emailing your GF is not work related and I'm sure Its breaking DOT laws

**nhraformula** · 10-06-2010, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by Nhra Firebird

Talking on the phone and emailing your GF is not work related and I'm sure Its breaking DOT laws

is there something that says it must be work related?

**Nhra Firebird** · 10-07-2010, 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by nhraformula

is there something that says it must be work related?

You can take it however you want but It's vehicular manslaughter.

**nhraformula** · 10-07-2010, 04:20 PM

The attorney thinks it's likely that Mitchell will win the workers' compensation, since he was on the job at the time of the crash.

Ed Herman, an attorney and spokesman for Mitchell, declined to comment specifically about the case. "The state of Illinois has a process for these claims, and we need to let the process play itself out without outside influence," he said by telephone.

**RJWZ28** · 10-08-2010, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by Nhra Firebird

You can take it however you want but It's vehicular manslaughter.

Nobody is arguing that it isn't vehicular manslaughter. I think he should've gone to jail for several years and paid the family some heavy damages. I hope he can never get past this incident in his mind. However, this wasn't about the crime he committed. Workman's comp has nothing to do with whether you were being stupid, it's about whether you were acting outside of the rules. I know it's splitting hairs, but that's how these things go. Bear in mind that the same rules that dictate whether he gets compensation for his work-related injuries also would likely dictate whether his family recieved compensation in the event of his death. Just because he was stupid does not mean that benefits will (or should) be denied.