Where to start? I'll let parts of the article speak for itself:
So upon Analysis of this line, I am assuming the Ex-Cop is still making out at least $964,000 ahead.
"A former veteran Chicago police officer convicted of swindling an elderly man with Alzheimer's disease out of his $1 million estate was sentenced today to 3 years of probation and fined $36,000."
"Judge Timothy Joyce said he did not believe Owsley's position as a police officer was "a significant aggravating factor"... Joyce acquitted him of official misconduct, saying that although Owsely met his victim through his job on the force, he did not believe Owsley used his office in furtherance of the fraud scheme."
Isn't the very nature of being an Above all the laws of the land police officer enough to conclude any police officer's involvement in a crime is a significant aggravating factor?
Owsley was charged criminally in late 2004 hours after a Cook County judge, ruling in a civil lawsuit filed by the Cook County public guardian's office, found that the officer had swindled Hoellen out of his estate.
We're talking about there being enough evidence to convict a man of the crime of some type of manipulative theft in an outrageous amount, and he got no jail time, and only had to give back 3.6% of that stolen, and that was in the form of a fine that will be going to the county, and not to the family members the money was wrongfully removed from! This is really what's wrong with the legal system.