Picture of attorney David L. Freidberg,
"I DON'T KNOW WHAT I WOULD HAVE DONE WITHOUT HIM..."
"MY SON AND I ARE SO GRATEFUL FOR MR. FREIDBERG AND WHAT HE HAS DONE..."
"DAVID IS A PHENOMENAL LAWYER AND HIS CHARACTER SPEAKS WONDERS..."
"IF YOU NEED AN ATTORNEY IN CHICAGO, I WOULD RECOMMEND HIM IN A HEARTBEAT..."

It has been a while since we have discussed the Ahmad Arbery case. The three men convicted of killing Arbery faced state murder charges in Georgia. Each was convicted on felony murder or malice murder charges, with the ringleader facing the harshest charges of the three. But their problems did not stop there. The federal government also wanted a piece of the men and convicted them on additional charges.

This does not happen very often, but the federal government can increase the misery of certain individuals by filing federal charges against those who have already been convicted of state-level charges. In the case of the Arbery killers, the three men were tried and convicted of murder based only on the facts of the crime. In other words, the Georgia prosecutors avoided bringing race into the prosecution at all. It was a tricky maneuver because everyone knew that this was a racially motivated attack. But Georgia has a large population of rural whites, which makes it among the most conservative states in the country next to neighboring Alabama. 

So state prosecutors decided to try the three men based on the facts of the altercation with Arbery and successfully gained convictions when the defendants failed to prove that Arbery had a weapon or was a threat when they rode him down in their pickup.

A Chicago man has been charged with the murder of an area dance instructor. Police do not know why the shooting occurred, but the dance instructor was shot outside of his studio and pronounced dead at the scene. He operated the studio as a non-profit and marketed it as a safe space for children. 

The suspect has been tied to the shooting through his vehicle and a distinctive gold bracelet he was wearing at the time of the shooting. Police officers also have shell casings that match the weapon used, and three cell phones that place him at the shooting when it occurred. They were able to track the suspect through his vehicle, which was caught on surveillance at the time of the shooting. 

Police do not know if the pair had interacted prior to the shooting, or are unwilling to tip their hand on the matter. It seems likely that the dance instructor was targeted for some unknown reason. In some cases, a criminal may put pressure on an individual to do something under the threat of death. If they fail to do what is demanded of them, then the criminal has to execute the consequence for not complying. 

Authorities allege that a Dixmoor police officer manipulated a police lineup in order to establish charges against a man who was later cleared of wrongdoing. The officer is now facing three felony counts of official misconduct. According to a witness, the officer suggested the correct answer to a witness in the lineup. The suspect was placed into lockup for 18 days. After his release, he pressed charges against the officer. 

According to his attorney, the man went into a store to buy a phone and was suddenly facing a 45-year sentence. Prior, an armed robbery had occurred at the store. An employee thought the man resembled the armed robber. The employee called the police. 

The officer who is now facing charges is accused of telling the witness which individual to pick from the lineup. The employee did as asked and the man was charged with armed robbery, a Class-X felony, the highest you can receive in Illinois. 

ORC or organized retail crime is now a huge buzzword for Chicago police after a string of robberies and burglaries targeting valuable retail merchandise. Police now have a man in custody who is believed to be a “ringleader” of a smash and grab ring that netted over $175,000 in capital. The ringleader is facing nine counts of burglary charges. He is suspected in dozens of more burglaries targeting various retail stores in the Chicago area. 

According to police, the suspect was apprehended by his car after private security footage caught the individual and three others dumping cash registers and other merchandise. Police are now targeting the crew employed by the ringleader to carry out the specific burglaries. If precedent has any say, the ringleader will be more than happy to provide any information the police want in exchange for a reduction of his sentence. However, the ringleader must be both willing and able to provide that information. Typically, prosecutors will not want to trade down to get lower-level contributors. The idea is generally to work in the other direction. However, law enforcement has been known to work the opposite way when it benefits them. 

Understanding Burglary Charges

The background is fairly simple. There is a controversial law on the books that allows the state to pursue first-degree murder charges against an individual who did not intend to commit the murder, but was in the process of committing some other forcible felony. As an example, if a man robs a liquor store and the clerk pulls a gun, the man cannot claim self-defense if he kills the clerk first. Instead, it is considered felony murder, the equivalent of first-degree murder. Makes complete sense, right?


Let’s move on to Alabama. You and a bunch of your friends are up to no good. Police spot you and tell you to stop. You do what kids do, and bolt. The police officer opens fire and kills your friend. You have now been charged with felony murder since fleeing law enforcement is considered a felony. Even though you did not pull the trigger, the law holds you responsible for the other teen’s death.

While the first situation makes complete sense, the second example is a gross perversion of the felony murder rule that is used to pin murder charges on mostly Black suspects. Hence, the felony murder rule is a target for police reformers who believe that the system is racist. 

The last time you heard about an ORC you were likely watching Lord of the Rings. Nonetheless, “organized retail crime” is becoming a major issue for Chicago retailers. CPD released a statement announcing a crackdown on organized retail crime after a 15-year-old was arrested and charged with 21 counts of theft from a beauty store. 

The problem for police is that it appears that teenagers are being used to carry out the crimes, are paid by adults for the merchandise they pocket, and then that merchandise is sold over eBay or related services for profit. Police believe that the conspiracy employs children because they are less likely to face serious criminal charges. They also hide the identities of the adults who are profiting from the theft. The children are paid a fraction of the cost of the merchandise. This makes it a win-win for both children and adults. However, the retail stores and the very backbone of our economy are placed at risk by retail thefts. 

Police have announced that they intend to track the merchandise and sales and come down hard on those who resell the stolen merchandise on the black market. 

A man with a criminal history has been charged with defacing a synagogue by painting swastikas on it. He has been charged with criminal damage and defacement and is facing four hate crime charges related to each swastika that he spray painted. Earlier in the day, police found evidence that someone damaged a different synagogue, and broke the windows of two businesses. It is unclear if the man charged with defacing the synagogue has also been charged in relation to these crimes, but the matter will be investigated further to track his movements throughout the day, so more charges could be forthcoming.

What is a hate crime?

The term “hate crime” refers to a specific class of crimes committed with a specific purpose in mind. The purpose is to enrage, belittle, or terrify someone from a protected minority. In this case, painting symbols associated with the systematic murder and genocide of a people shows the type of bias the government is looking for to prove a hate crime. 

A Chicago-area man has been sentenced to 18 years after the deaths of four of his customers due to overdose. The statute under which he was charged is meant to hold drug dealers accountable for the overdose deaths caused by their products. While the law makes sense in some ways, it fails to account for the millions of opioid deaths caused by pharmaceutical companies who lied about their product, facilitated its entry into the black market, and profited in the range of billions from the lives they destroyed. In some cases, these executive drug dealers are facing racketeering charges for knowingly funneling thousands of doses to locations with small populations. The orders to these locations were so large that even if every member of the community had a prescription, it would still be too much. These orders were, of course, diverted to the black market. Executives have faced criminal prosecutions based on what they knew or should have known about the orders. Nonetheless, not one of them is facing a first-degree reckless homicide charge.

Understanding the Law

The Chicago man has been charged under Wisconsin Statutes 940.02. The relevant portion of the statute reads as follows:

The law is seldom funny, yet here we are. Two women are being charged with felony burglary and battery after breaking into a man’s apartment and glitter bombing him during a dispute. Police say they have the altercation on video and at one point, one of the women threw the glitter can at the victim. Police later traced the women’s vehicle to their home. Police found evidence of glitter within the vehicle. 

How Serious are These Charges?

The two women are facing life in prison in Florida, where the crime occurred. Why? Because they burglarized a home and committed battery at the same time. Burglary + Battery + Florida = Potential Life Sentence. Florida is not a great place to play around. The Florida police are not necessarily going to make a huge distinction between someone entering a home to rob it and someone entering a home to play a prank. No matter what happened here, whether it was a domestic argument turned upside down or just a drunk prank, the actual penalties they are facing are extremely severe.

The law has never been exactly funny. Yet today, it is becoming funnier and funnier. Now that live-streaming is being used in courts to deal with the pandemic, several extremely funny things have happened. It is important to understand, however, that these things are not funny for any of the individuals involved.

Among the funniest things to happen in the era of courtroom live streaming, a couple was caught apparently having sex during a hearing, a federal informant divulged that he was an informant over YouTube, and now a judge made inappropriate comments concerning defense counsel after a hearing. 

In the last case, the judge did not realize that his conversation with two district attorneys and a public defender was still being broadcast over YouTube. During this banter, he made comments such as, “Can you imagine waking up next to her every morning?” The judge, apparently, did not like the way the lawyer conducted herself. The attorney interrupted him on multiple occasions and apparently moved her hands and arms in an agitated manner. 

Contact Information