Now he’s free to enjoy life.
At 89 years old.
Charles E. Friedgood, avoided being fried good on the electric chair and is now out. He was a wealthy surgeon in Long Island who was convicted way back in 1976 of murdering his wife and is now in a veteran’s hospital.
“There is a reasonable probability that, if released, this inmate will live and remain at liberty without violating the law,” said the parole commissioners. Yeah, I’ll definitely agree that at age 89, his best crime years are behind him.
He will now participate in an anger management course (undoubtedly the “old guy” at the classes), will undergo a mental evaluation, and cannot contact the victim’s family. Which happens to include his own children and grandkids unless there’s a parole officer present.
Sixth times’ a charm
He actually was considered for release six times before they let him free.
“While some have formally expressed opposition to this inmate’s release, for various reasons, they are significantly outnumbered by those expressing support for his release.”
Money was a factor
Now don’t go thinking that the parole commission was being really nice that day and decided to let this ol’ grandfather go. Money plays a role. The doctor has terminal cancer, has undergone many operations, including a colostomy. All these have amounted to $300,000 in costs for the state.
How did he murder his wife?
Originally, the investigators on the case ruled that his wife Sophie died from a stroke. This was recorded on her death certificate. However, the police were very suspicious because Dr. Friedgood signed the death certificate himself and then made sure her body was rushed out of New York for a quick burial. When the medical examiners fully examined the body, they discovered he used his state medical license to get responsibility for his ailing wife and then inject her five times with Demerol which killed her. He was then arrested five weeks later at Kennedy International Airport with $450,000 of his wife’s money, bonds, and jewelry. He was actually on his way to Europe to hook up with his mistress, who was a Danish nurse with whom he had two kids already with. He was then tried and subsequently convicted of second-degree murder.
Final comments by the parole commissioners
One commissioner, Chris Ortloff, vigorously opposed the release. He felt that releasing Dr. Friedgood, “so deprecates the seriousness of his offenses, the murder of his wife and subsequent grand larceny of hundreds of thousands of dollars from her estate, as to undermine respect for the law. In colloquial terms, this case, given the inmate’s advanced age and medical prognosis, raises the proverbial question: ‘If any offense deserves the maximum sentence of life in prison, does this one not do so?’”
Most, however, were sympathetic to Dr. Friedgoods advanced age.
“During your interview, you repeatedly cited your status as a senior citizen. It is important to recognize that your actions deprived your wife of the ability to enjoy such status.” said commissioner Thomas P. Grant. However, “the likelihood of your engaging in criminal activity in the community is virtually non-existent.”
Should senior citizen status be enough to parole a convicted murderer?
Danish Nurse and 450.000$ sounds good - but to kill your wife…
As a law school student just starting criminal law, I can see why they let him go, but I still feel that it is an offense to the entire system. Life in prison is a perfectly reasonable and legal sentence for first degree murder, and it should be served. Something like this sets precedent for others to be released early, and not all are “harmless.” Not to mention the fact that advanced age is not necessarily evidence of being reformed or being unable or unlikely to commit another crime.
89 Years old… i wonder how many times he was banged in the butt.
When you’ve lived a full “life” THEN you can state that “life in prison is a perfectly reasonable and legal sentence” the reason for the legal system is (or at least should be in my opinion) to remove potential threats from society in a humane manner … this guy is fucking 89 … besides the old fart’s takin up space.
The moral implications of a life term spent in prison compared to spending the last years of one’s life with treatments necessary to fight cancer is rather easy for me to reason. I’ve had treatment for Hep C with alpha interferon. The treatments bring with it the same side effects that come from chemo treatments for cancer patients. The side effects are more than enough punishment (if he’s still having chemo). The side effects are horrible, such that I was forced to discontinue the treatments. If he followed the same and quit treatments with the cancer not in remission, he’ll die soon anyway. So does it really matter? Not really. He’ll still face judgment in the end anyway.
If you don’t think an 89 year old man is a threat, you haven’t read the cases that I have. The one that sticks out in my mind is the 100 year old man who attempted to rape a young woman and actually succeeded in harming her, although the actual rape did not come to fruition. And I don’t have to live a full life to know that he took one and that he’s been given back part of his. This sets precedent for other early releases, and one of THOSE may not be this old and may be very dangerous. Early release happens all the time, and people have been seriously harmed or died because of it. The more this happens (no matter the circumstances) the more cases other inmates will have to point to in order to support their release. It’s a slippery slope.
Agreed.
Definitely an idea to think about.
It really is a slippery slope.
Slippery slope is right!
It’s made me think about it also.
:/
I can definitely understand where you’re coming from on this.
You guys have completely missed the point. Releasing Dr. Friedgood had nothing to do with being merciful to elderly inmates, and not a whole lot to do with public safety.
Dr. Friedgood was released so that the state could free itself from having to absorb the costs of treating his terminal cancer.
Personally, I think it’s a logical practice. Why should the state absorb the cost of treating terminally ill prisoners, when it could simply release these prisoners and absolve itself of the burden?
I realize that money was the reason. But if you set economic loss as a reason for releasing inmates, it will happen more often with more dangerous inmates. And do we really want someone getting hurt or killed for the sake of saving money?
But that’s the thing, because on the flipside there are resources that are being diverted from: Medical Programs, Law Enforcement, Education, and other goverment responsibilities to put these inmates up and keep them alive. Resources that could have been utilized to save lives, educate the young, and provide goods and services…were instead wasted on removing Dr. Friedgood’s crap-factory.
But perhaps it’s the entire paradigm that’s the problem. Is simply segregating criminals into prisons really the best solution we can come up with? There’s got to be a better way.
I don’t think that people who have committed such heinous crimes that they were sentenced to life imprisonment should be released. The cost of keeping them in prison is not enough to release those inmates.
This guy is old!
Do you guys think he should be freed or just rot in jail?
This is a tough situation for sure!
This man is old - so if he gets released then he’s not likely to kill again.
Is there a better solution? Can we send him to a mental asylum (crazy house)?
Hi webmaster!