By Lauraann Wood
Law Bulletin staff writer

A Cook County judge on Thursday acquitted an Illinois State Police trooper, who fired several gunshots into his ex-girlfriend's home, of seven felony criminal charges that could have sent him to a minimum of 26 years in prison.

Associate Judge James B. Linn did find Trooper Juan Lopez guilty of misdemeanor reckless conduct and sentenced him to 18 months of court supervision following the one-day bench trial at the Leighton Criminal Court Building.

The Cook County state's attorney's office charged Lopez in July 2015 with four counts of home invasion, one count of aggravated discharge of a firearm and two counts of reckless discharge of a firearm.

In April 2014, Lopez went to the home of ex-girlfriend Angelica Aguilar — a fellow trooper with whom he had recently ended a two-year relationship — to pick up belongings and take her to church, said Daniel Q. Herbert, owner of the Law Offices of Daniel Q. Herbert & Associates who represented Lopez.

Upon arrival, Lopez noticed an unfamiliar car in Aguilar's driveway and damage to both her front and back doors, Herbert said.

Herbert said the damage was caused by a burglar three days earlier, but his client was not aware of it.

After a failed attempt at opening Aguilar's front door, Herbert said, Lopez saw a black man he did not recognize in her bedroom window and heard a woman screaming, but could not make out any words from the outside.

“She had really thick windows because she was by Midway Airport, so he couldn't hear what she was saying,” Herbert said.

Lopez's defense centered around the contention he believed Aguilar was in danger when he fired into the home six times.

He fired the first two shots at her windows but couldn't penetrate them, Herbert said, so he fired the next four at the front door he couldn't open.

“He fired them at a downward direction so they would go into the floor and open the door,” he said.

Once inside the home, weapon still drawn, Lopez entered the room in which he saw the man but was soon put at ease after Aguilar shouted that things were OK and everyone present was a police officer, Herbert said.

“He put his gun down, and that was it,” he said. “He and this other trooper that he didn't know walked outside and waited for the police to come.”

Herbert said Aguilar and the other trooper had initially relayed the same story to responding officers that day. But the two later switched their accounts, Herbert contended, potentially out of fear that they would receive disciplinary action in connection with the incident.

“They turned it into a crime of rage and passion,” he said. “It's the classic scenario of a breakup — you catch your wife or your girlfriend in bed with another man, that's the first thing people are going to think in that situation. But it just wasn't the case here.”

Herbert, who himself served as a Chicago police officer from 1992 until 2001, said the ruling was an important one “in light of today's climate of anti-police rhetoric.”

“Police officers, by nature of their job, they see and they interpret things differently than do civilians,” he said. “That's what causes them to be effective guarding us from evil.

“Sometimes those unique instincts turn out to be incorrect, but that doesn't make their actions criminal as long as it would be reasonable for a police officer to perceive what they were perceiving — even if it turns out that they were wrong,” he said.

Lopez's case also makes a good example of why it is important to try cases in a courtroom rather than in the court of public opinion, Herbert said.

“This is a classic case of, if you just heard the facts without knowing any other details, you would assume that the charges were a hundred percent accurate,” he said. “It was like peeling an onion — you peel the layers, and when the evidence came in and the rule of law was applied, the proper decision of not guilty was rendered.”

Cook County Assistant State's Attorneys Lauren Freeman and Risa R. Lanier prosecuted the case.

“This was a very serious domestic-related case that was charged in good faith based upon the facts, the evidence and the law,” said Sally Daly, a spokeswoman for the state's attorney's office.

“We are disappointed with the ruling, but we respect the court's decision and the fact that this defendant will be held accountable through court-ordered supervision and no-contact orders for the victims in this case.”

Lopez has been on administrative leave since being charged and his administrative investigation had been stayed until resolution of his criminal case, Herbert said.

“Now, I would hope that they would put him back to work with perhaps a minor suspension, but we will be prepared to represent him at the administrative hearing if they move to terminate him,” he said.

Herbert is no stranger to cases involving law enforcement under intense public scrutiny. In an unrelated case, he currently represents Jason Van Dyke, the Chicago police officer charged with murder for the 2014 killing of teenager Laquan McDonald.

The present case is People v. Juan Lopez, 15 CR 11844.

Posted by Daniel Herbert

Hiring plans for Police Departments throughout the country have instituted a Veteran's Preference for all veterans who served active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces. However, the reality is that some departments completely ignore this policy and actually institute a policy of disqualifying candidates because they are veterans. Of course, these departments have denied such discriminatory practices. After all, what kind of person would discriminate against the men and women who have gallantly sacrificed so much to fight for our country? It is impossible to get inside the heads and know the true motives behind those responsible for the hiring decisions of police departments. However, it is clear that something is amiss vnih the hiring practices of certain departments. A group of military veterans have filed a class action lawsuit against the CPD alleging that they were disqualified as candidates because they were veterans who served active duty The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, case number 13 C 4834, and the class has more than 60 members. Plaintiffs contend that employment decisions with the Chicago Police Department are being manipulated through the hiring and testing process and are actively being screened from view by utilizing aspects of the process that are shielded from scrutiny. The vehicle being used to disqualify these individuals is the psychological test. Pre-employment screening tests have been used by police departments for many years. The tests vary, but they must have certain attributes in common. They must be objective, meaning that they do not unfairly favor one group over another. A test battery including objective, job-related, validated psychological instruments should be administered to the applicant. Moreover, the interview must be conducted in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Veterans were not given the same tests as were non-veteran applicants. Instead, veterans were asked questions specifically designed to disqualify them from the application process. Obviously police departments have a responsibility to screen for officers who are mentally ill. However, in many cases candidates are being disqualified for psychological reasons that are non-existent. In many cases, the psychological interviews administered in Chicago consisted of nothing more than a five-minute discussion of current events. At the conclusion of the interview, the test administrator informed the candidate that they “should have nothing to worry about.” For the next several months, the candidates were scheduled for other pre-employment procedures. According to the suit, after completing all the pre-employment tests, months passed without any contact from CPD. The next communication these candidates received was a generic letter from the human resources department informing that they were disqualified because they failed the psychological exam. They were told they could not appeal the decision. They were not given any information about why they failed the exam. They were prevented from seeing the results of the exam. Of course, they were suspicious of the results. These candidates had passed all medical and psychological exams upon leaving the Armed Forces. One of the candidates was hired as a detention aide with the Chicago Police Department after passing the same psychological exam, given by the same company, in the same room, for the same department six months before he allegedly failed the CPD exam. All of these candidates were highly decorated officers who were honorably discharged from service. While on active duty, these candidates were psychologically qualified to guard President Bush; head the security details of U.S embassies around the world and lead combat missions in the most dangerous of situations. Yet, somehow, they are not psychologically fit to be a police officer in Chicago. Perhaps certain departments are concerned that veterans are more likely to be aggressive and thus subject their departments to excessive force complaints. Studies do not support this to be true. Veterans have a unique set of skills that appear to make them ideal law enforcement candidates such as: physical condition; firearms training; leadership experience; combat experience; respect for discipline and authority and experience working with culturally diverse groups. Fear of lawsuits should not be the overriding decision when assembling a police department. Although there may be a place in today's police departments for the “warm and fuzzy” police officer but departments must realize that police officers confront very dangerous people. Who would you rather have standing beside you when you enter a dark alley and are surrounded by thugs? The “warm and fuzzy” police or someone who has proven and tested fortitude? I know which officer I would want at my side.

View article here