Guilty as charged! There is no respect deserved for a guy like that. Shady Shady thats what I think of him.

Another lib with too many connections, making too much money, thinks who the hell he is. This must not be his first time dwi because he needs the interlock on his car. never heard of a 2 time offender only getting 6 months suspension.

Wow..defiant to the end. I hope that Mr. Cirilo takes the 12 hours in the Intoxicated Driver Resource Center (IDRC) to reflect on how his behaviour could have negatively impacted others had the officer not stopped him before he killed someone.

Does anyone know, was he able to find a medical professional to testify? What was the underlying condition he was hoping to use as an excuse?

This should shup up all the idiots who said he didn't do it. All the posturing and delays only for what? I don't want this person as my Council President and I don't want this person as a leader in my town. Spare the forginess speaches from him and others. As a public figure I hold you to a higher standard. You're career as a politician is toast.

Maybe now he will keep his trap shut and let the Police Dept do their job and not cast judgment without knowing facts. Just as he asked the Public not to rush and judge him he should not judge. People do make mistakes in life but I guess he figured he could pull strings with all his postponements on his charges but I guess not even with his antics in the court that was possible . Just shows his true character here.

A personal tragedy. For the residents of West Orange Mr. Cirilo previously unpublicized background in partisan politics (Cirilo has also served as the field director for Sen. Robert Menendez’s suburban Essex County campaign operation and as chief of staff for state Assemblyman John McKeon) is more troubling.

He got off easy. I've seen ordinary folks get far worse deals than that. If it happened in West Orange, Judge Starett would have suspended his license for a year.

Mr. Cirilo "claimed the arresting officer did not tell him he would face charges if he refused a Breathalyzer test."

-and-

"except this time Cirilo agreed the arresting officer had informed him about the Breathalyzer and charges associated with refusal to submit to a test."

Interesting.

I suspect the judge came down hard on him because of the delaying tatics. Sorry to learn of his misfortune, hope he learns from his mistake and become a better person. I forgive him for this transgression..don't repeat it!

Many thanks to Sgt Tim Banta and Judge Paparazzo for taking this drunk driver off the road. We can all feel a little safer while on the road for the next several months.

Still no remedy for teabagger tourette's

Let's all keep in mind that "plea bargaining" remains a grey area in our criminal justice system as it essentially requires an accused to publicly allocute to an offense he/she may not have committed in order to benefit from whatever the terms of the "deal" are.

The bottom line remains that refusal to take the breathalyzer (under NJ Law) creates the automatic presumption of guilt and also conveys the penalties that go with it.

Mr. Cirilo refused to to take a breathalyzer test which, in and of itself, carries mandatory peanlties without any judicial discretion allowed...a matter that is the subject of legal action to overturn.

Mr Cirilo did have polio as a child, the result of which is a fused ankle which does not allow him to successfuly complete the typical, heel-toe, walk a straight line, field sobriety test.

Finally, three beers consummed over two hours by a 180 pound man will result in a BAC of between .02 and .04, which is half or less of the .08 threshold for a DUI charge. The BAC would be even less if one were simultaneously consumming food, which Mr. Cirilo was. Not only can numerous witnesses attest to this and his sobriety on leaving the establishment, there is also a receipt that could have been presented into evidence if allowed.

Unfortunately, that's not the protocol and the judge would not permit any "guilty with an explanation" but, only an allocution based on the plea.

It's a cautionary tale for all of us; if requested to take a breathalyzer there is no percentage in refusing as you then are automatically guilty, whether you are or not.

Presumably, however, a BAC reading under .08 would result in your not being cited for DUI...though you'll likely bw charged with whatever caused them to pull you over in the first place.

Well, you don't deal unless the consequences of not dealing are likely to be worse for you. It's not unheard of for someone completely innocent of the crime they're charged with (which I'm definitely not suggesting is the case here) to plead to a lesser charge rather than defiantly stand trial, proclaim their innocence, and end up imprisoned on circumstantial evidence. Like it or not, plea bargains are part of the system we have, and the only way to keep that system moving along. I have no problem with this outcome (and wouldn't think it was an injustice if he'd been sentenced more harshly, either), and think the voters can decide accordingly what to do next year, should he seek another term.

All i will say again on here is that Mr Cirilo should practie what he preached. He asked not to be judged when he was charged with the DUI but he is quick to Judge others. H knew damn well he had more then two-three beers that is why he refused the breatalyzer. But knowing him well enough he has become cocky and arrogant since elected thought he culd beat this. Well guess what maybe he should have read up abit on refusals. As far as only having 2-3 beers if i had a 1.00 bill for every time we heard that from someone when stopped or arrested for DUI i would be a VERY VERY VERY rich man that is the standard answer!!!!!!.
I dont feel sorry for him one bit he put himself in this position take your medicine like a big boy and do what is right. I would almost bet the general publi would be picketing the steps of Town hall if it was a Poice Officer or FF. can hear it now " They should have known better, They are supposed to be good examples, role models, etc etc etc" Well guess what he is a public figure too. Hey Mr Cirilo you might want to remembr these words before you speak next time "He without sin cast the first stone" especially when you ask not to be judged!!!!

Steve DeRosa:

I'm a little confused; just where and when did Mr. Cirilo pass judgment on anyone without due process? You keep alluding to this like it's common public knowledge and I'm certainly no aware of it.

Ken and Leigh Ann Zaolino:

This "plea bargain" wasn't some complicated, "Law and Order" deal; they dropped the DUI in a school zone and erratic driving charges in exchange for the pleas on the breathalyzer and DUI.

The bottom line remains that whatever defense Mr. Cirilo had (and he surely had some) he couldn't present because of the way the law is written and the lack of judicial leeway it provides.

Please read the statement he made to Mr Leckys mom for details as to what i am eluding to. You know exactly what i am referring to. He asked not to be judged bt he makes a staement that the olice will be dealt with?? Nothing like judging before al the facts are in.

Just in case you cant seem to find it her i copied and pasted it from the article and his comment or you. But i am sure you will spin it around to mean something other what it is seen to mean

The president of the West Orange Township Council Tuesday night assured the mother of a slain 22-year-old West Orange man "an example would be set" after two West Orange police officers

Now deny that he is not prejudging them??????

Unfortunately, there is a lot time being wasted on legal technicalities and opinions. Mr. Cirilo's only advocate seems to be on a campaign himself and I'm not sure what Mr. Englert's motives or connection is. The facts are simple, Mr. Cirilo made a bad judgment call and I would not want my children to find excuses for bad behavior. I believe the West Orange Council should decide whether or not Mr. Cirilo's behavior is unbecoming of a council member especially being President of the council. I know this will be one of the most challenging decisions the current council will have to make but this will let us all know if they deserve to be re-elected as well. Good luck.

Police Chiefs of New Jersey will deny all law abiding citizen a New Jersey Firearms Identification Card because of a DUI/DWI. This is because they label the citizen a DRUNK. So now that Victor Cirilo clearly has a DUI placed on his motor vehicle record, he would be labeled a DRUNK in the eyes of a police chief and if that is the case, how could a DRUNK be Council President of West Orange?

This council president is NOT the kind of example the residents of West Orange Township should be forced to have for our children. The people of this township need leaders who respect the law and since Mr. Cirrillo doesn't know how to do this, he should resign immediately.

Can someone tell me the difference between putting innocent people's lives in danger by driving drunk, and putting innocent people's lives in danger by tipping off suspected drug dealers to an imminent police raid? I don't see any difference.

john anthony prignano:

Is there a difference? Of course there is.

Generally speaking, someone making the decision to drive drunk, by the very nature of his/her condition, is making the decision while their judgment is impaired.

Whether or not the tipster in the drug raid scenario you suggest is similarly impaired is anyone's guess but, the crime is clear and the benefits of committing it likely tangible and measureable.

Gary,
"Generally speaking, someone making the decision to drive drunk, by the very nature of his/her condition, is making the decision while their judgment is impaired."
I'm an occasional drinker. I'll have a few drinks when I go to a wedding or similar type function. Before I even get my first drink, I look around at the party I came with and see who didn't drive and which one of them isn't going to touch a drink. If I find one I ask them to take me home and hand them my keys, If I don't find someone, I don't drink. It's called responsibility before you start drinking I guess a responsibility Victor Cirilo ether doesn't have or diudn't care about because he thought he wouldn't run into an officer that would ruin his life.

badbul:

The fundamental problem still remains that people are playing Monday morning quarteback armed only with Internet news reports and not having witnessed the game being played.

Any number of people who were with Mr. Cirilo that evening have told me he wasn't impaired and his receipt for the food and drink purchased suggests he wasn't. I can also see how the stop and go nature of viewing storm damage while driving might suggest someone is impaired...leading to all that followed.

Not having been an witness and absent any forensic evidence that the man was truly impaired, I'm simply keeping being objective about the whole affair.

Mr. Cirilo's plea is a result of refusing to take a breathalyzer test that might have cleared or further condemned him...and what the result might actually have been is anyone's guess.

All else is speculative.

My general impression of Mr. Cirillo from casual observation of council activities is that he tends try to appear to be saying something meaningful while offering nothing of substance. For this reason alone I would be inclined not to give him my vote and don't think that he merits the position of council president. I think the the evasiveness that I sense from what I've seen on the council is consistent with all the wiggling and squirming to get off the hook in this situation. Yes he appears to have been irresponsible; nevertheless, he is not alone, and I would generally give him another chance before throwing the book at him by moralizing or advocating more severe punishment. He will likely not get my vote in the future but not primarily because of this event, other than that it reinforces my impression of his general lack of candor.

We need to hold our town officials to a high standard and that does not include a Township Council President with a DUI. Mr. CIrilo should resign immediately and chalk his fate up to a very bad judgement call. Drinking and driving is no joke. The message it sends to our youth is disgraceful. Let's see if the Township Council will hold their colleague accountable for his actions -- their future as elected officials depends upon it.

Subjective and personal opinions are what get people elected to office. I suggest Mr. Englert take a step back and review the long list of political trangressors who have fallen on their own sword. What you seemingly fail to understand is that the court of Public Opinion far outweighs any legal blather. I'm going to speak for the Moms and Dads out there that don't want their political leaders cloaked in DWI, DUI or the like. As far as Mr. Cirilo's ability to hold elected office, you would have to say that if his judgement is lacking enough to drink and drive, what does that say about his credibility to make good decisions for the town? Zero. Furthermore, I seriously question the motives of anyone who is supportive of those who drink and drive. Who are you working for again?

Turpitude basically = depravity. What it is not is not the point, what it is, is the point. Now here's my question, and I do not know the answer: What would the 'typical' employer of a person in a responsible executive position do? There may be no typical employer but the question does occur to me. Is there a standard or is it subjective and all over the lot?

Did he have two beers?
Was it three beers?
Was it one beer?
Was it two beers and some prescription medication?
Who knows, who cares. All I know he got what he deserved for doing what he did. Case closed.
And thank you VPD

Right Gary, and there will be a DUI on his record. So the system worked.

The most important thing here is that Mr. Cirilio is just one term and done. If he chooses to run for office he will not get re-elected since his poor judgement of drunk driving will not sit well with the electorate. We have rid the township of another one of McKeon's boys and that means a good thing for all of West Orange.

john anthony prignano:

Please have no doubt that you are among the most irrelevant people I know.

badbul I agree that he got what he deserved, as hard as he tried to squirm his way out of the stark reality with the lamest of the lame excuses. (Seriously, polio and surveying storm wrekage? That is hilarious!!) Mr. Englert, I'm mystified that you choose to dismiss the observations of the police officer at the scene, whom I am certain has encountered the actions of many driving under the influence. Do you also refuse to believe that Mr. Cirulo lied to the judge? And do you now think that lying to a judge is becoming of a public servant? When will it all end?? Mr. Cirulo should resign because West Orange does not need a shady character running the town. His credibility is shot. Goodbye.

Mary L:

Rather clearly, what you (and most everone else) know of this entire situation is limited to what relatively little has been reported in on-line news reports, much of which is sensationalized and out of context. If that's what you choose to reach whatvever conclusion you do, that's certainly your choice.

It isn't mine, nor do I believe in demeaning someone and thereby proclaiming myself to be holier than them.

Childhood polio resulting in a surgically fused ankle can indeed preclude someone from passing a standard field sobriety test and, yes, stopping and going while viewing storm damage might lead one to believe the person is driving eratically.

Police officers are human beings and prone to err just like the rest of us and, since nobody ever heard the officer's testimony, it wasn't something anyone could consider.

What was before the judge were the summonses themselves and the matter was adjudicated with nothing else admitted into evidence.

The plea required Mr. Cirilo to allocute to the offense as charged and, once properly instructed as to what that meant, he did so; the man didn't lie about anything...other than quite possibly admitting to something he didn't think he was truly guilty of...and whether he was or not is now between him and his God.

Should the man run again for public office you can voice your opinion at the ballot box; there nothing in the law requiring Mr. Cirilo, or his Council colleagues, to take any further action.

Rather than be all over the place with wild theories such as polio, gawking at storm damage, police officers making mistakes, police not explaining what refusing a breathalyzer test meant, evidence that couldn't be heard, etc. there is a very simple explanation for all of this and that is that Victor Cirilo was driving drunk and got caught. It is nothing more than that.

Now we as voting citizens nuts decide if we think a drunk driver is the right example for our council president. We must decide if someone who exhibits such bad judgement as to go drunk driving is someone who we want using their bad judgement to make decisions for us all. Mr. Cirilo's one term will be over soon enough and we can all put this ugly period for our town behind us as he is defeated and sent packing.

Cirilo is a drunk, just follow him around on parade day and you can all see for yourseld

wohopeful:

If anyone is stretching anything, it is you stretching the truth...and my capacity to detect male bovine manure is really quite refined.

Just where and when, pray tell, was Mr. Cirilo previously stopped and accused of DUI?

I think anyone convicted of a DUI while in elected office should be dismissed.

Tom:

I believe the penalties for both DUI and/or refusing a breathalyzer are signicant and no further sanctions, not already memorialize in law, need be assessed against anyone...a function of the concept of equal protection under the law, from which each and every one of us benefit.

It is a breach of public trust.
I would support immediate expulsion.
No resignation required

Tom:

Any of your ill-conceived assertions to the contrary, neither a DUI nor refusal to take a breathalyzer conviction are crimes under NJ state law; they are motor vehicle infractions.

As such, they do not constitute anything that can be considered to be a violation of public trust and/or a crime of moral turpitude which would require someone to forfeit an elected/appointed public office.

Mr. Englert, I think you are missing the point. I have not followed each and every comment on this matter; I also do not know what your personal interest is; what I do know is that as a resident of this beloved Township, being required to step down by law is not the issue. Our leaders are people we as residents look up to with respect as we put our trust in their guidance and partner to our Mayor and administrative departments. The council president's misjudgement in actions and character is disturbing. Teenagers who are drivers in our community see this as a way to also get away with what we, as parents, strive to prevent. Our schools, parents, mayor, council, board of ed, and every resident want representatives to NOT have a lapse in the knowledge of who they are and that they represent our Township and this lapse in judgment has brought tarnish upon us. Mr. Cirillo should, above all else,not continue to be a "president" of a government body. m

Mr. Cirilo exeplifies the problems with our town administration and the pervasive poor judgement they exhibit each and every time an issue is brought before them. Mr. Cirilo made the fateful wrong decision to drink and drive and this is certainly not the standard to which we should allow the political offices of West Orange to descend to. Mr. Cirilo should exhibit some rehabilitation for his wrong dooings and resign at this week's council meeting.

wohopeful:

Mr.Cirilo is paying the penalties associated with having refused to take a breathyzer test and neither the court, the police, you, me or anyone else can attest to any degree of certainty whether or no he was actually impaired while driving...period.

You, and the rest of your anonymous ilk, need to stop suggesting you're God and that you know things to a certainty that you can't possibly know.

I'd also challenge all you oh so brave people to show up at Tuesday's meeting and put a name, face and reputation behind your demands for Mr. Cirilo's resignation.

My guess is the silence will be deafening.

john anthony prignano:

One would think that someone so often quoting The Bard of Avon could actually read and comprehend English but, it appears that skill has escaped you.

Rather that "defending Mr. Cirilo," what I've been doing here is articulating precisely what did and didn't happen; facts that seem to be escaping most of you.

Try as you might to suggest otherwise, the man was NOT found to have had a BAC over .08; the legal threshold for a DUI.

He plead guilty to refusing to take a breathalyzer test and the DUI charge that is statutorily presumptive as a result.

Whether or not he was actually impaired at the time is anyone's guess and I don't proclaim to know either way...and nor should anyone else.

You seem to miss some of the facts in this case Mr. Englert. Mr. Cirilo pled guilty, and allocated in a court of law that he was driving impaired that evening. Surely Mr. Cirilo would know wether he was impaired or not and surely he wouldn't lie to the judge, prosecutor and the citizens of Verona. Clearly drunk driving and poor judgement is not the example we want from our elected officials. Mr. Cirilo must go.

While I can appreciate your allegiance since Mr. Cirilo is one of McKeon's boys, surely you don't need to embarrass yourself defending the indefensible.

wohopeful:

I'm not the least bit embarassed having the ability to have an academic discussion concerning DUI laws and penalties in NJ.

Given the fact that you're unable to comprehend that, or that I'm defending principles and not anyone in particular, should be embarassing to you.

Folks: This thread in the conversation is getting too personal and it needs to stop. Please stick to the facts and what IS know, not speculation or the personal attacks. If the personal attacks do not stop, we'll be forced to close comments.
Thanks

Bottom line guys, Victor Cirilo made a "knowing and intelligent plea".
If Victor Cirilo tried to plead guilty or no contest but still claims to be innocent, a judge cannot accept the plea.
The State needs no "forensic evidence" to convict because Victor Cirilo knew that he was waiving his right to cross-examine his accusers.
Victor Cirilo knew he was waiving his privilege against self-incrimination.
Victor Cirilo wasn't forced into accepting the settlement that he was offered from the State.
Victor Cirilo pled guilty because he knew he was intoxicated and wanted to spare himself a trial and that outcome.

badbul: Your summary ignores the fact that one can't contest the refusal to take a breathalyzer in court and that the penalties for that refusal are automatic and come with an automatic DUI attached, with no judicial discretion.

The only charges that could have been contested (DUI in a school zone and careless driving (?), were dismissed with the acceptance of his plea.

True, Cirilo wasn't "forced" to accept the settlement but, the option facing his or anyone else in similar circumstances were non-existent...whether or not he was truly guilty.

Gary,
I understand what you're saying about the breathalyzer, he pled to that and was offered 7 months. Also in that plea agreement was a plea deal for pleading guilty to "DWI" for an additional "3" months of license suspension.
Any logical person that was innocent would stand trial. Why did Victor take a plea then?

Victor took the plea because he was guilty. Thats the long and short of it. And some people just don't want to accept that. But Victor seems to have his former campaign worker on here and other social media sites trying to convince people otherwise to shy away from the fact that he was caught driving drunk. I think the same campaign worker said earlier that this case is no different than the 30,000 or whatever number that was. You can try to paint that picture, but the fact of the matter is, out of those 30,000 lets just say 29,995 were of people who didn't hold publically elected office and by default their cases are scrutinized much more because of their status in the community in which they represent. But thats ok, keep on defending a drunk driver. The parade in town is coming up, lets hope he takes it easy this year.

badbul: You are ignoring the fact that refusing the breathalyzer and the DUI are a two for one deal; you refuse the former and you also get the latter.

The only consideration Cirilo got was the dismissal of the two lesser charges and the license suspension to run concurrently.

Bart: You need to work on you reading comprehension skill. I'm not defending a drunk driver, I am explaining exactly what did and didn't happen...without speculative nonsense and, unlike you, hiding behind a screen name.

He must resign from the council. This guy is a fake,phony,fraud. I have no respect for someone who is not honest. He should have taken responsbility and moved on. Instead, he lied and made all kind of excuses child polio-give me a break! He is shameless and can never be trusted to tell WO residents the truth. If a politician is not honest then he is no good.

Refusal to take the Breathalizer test is not the reason for Mr. Cirilo’s arrest. It is additional evidence the police are allowed to collect with Mr. Cirilo’s agreement. Refusal leads to license loss and is typically viewed as an admission of guilt, fair or unfair. This leaves room for reasonable doubt.

A municipal prosecutor is prohibited by the New Jersey Court Rules from plea bargaining a DWI charge. This means that prosecutors rarely dismiss a DWI charge unless they believe that the DWI charge cannot be won at trial. For a prosecutor to believe that a DWI charge cannot be won at trial, a DWI defense lawyer must convince the prosecutor that there are problems with the State’s case. Most often than not, these are due to some technicalities. This will often result in a dismissal of the charge or downgrade to a less serious offense.

Fact is that there is only one reason anyone including Mr. Cirilo would have refused the test in the first place and that is he knew he was impaired. An innocent person has no fear on submitting to this test.

This behavior the night of the incident and the months following it just show the poor judgement and lack of character Mr. Cirilo has. He will finish his one term and fade into the past as just another failed WO politician care of McKeon.

As a councilman being charged with a DUI, you should step down from your position.
Just like when you wanted to make an example out of two officers that weren't on duty for comments they made, you should also be made an example.

Just an update pertaining to this story. So far the town and council has refused to comment on this matter. Will Mr. Carrillo be reprimanded? Why hasn't the town commented? One clue could be the cozy relationship between the politically connected in West Orange. Mr. Cirilo's wife worked as an Aide to 27th District Assemblyman John McKeon, and as an West Orange assistant municipal public information officer. The current public information officer has said no comment, now we partially know why.

Paul P:

Mr. Cirilo plead guilty to what under NJ state law is a motor vehicle infraction. It is not a crime, let alone a crime of moral turpitude or violation of the public trust.

As such, the Council has no legal authority to sanction the man in any way so, no, you won't be hearing much of anything from them on the subject.

That said, your information about his wife's "political connections" is totally erroneous as she neither served as a Legislative Aid for Assemblyman McKeon nor as the "Assistant Public Information Officer"...a position that has NEVER existed, let alone been filled.

Mr. Cirilo's wife did work work for Congressman Pascrell (handling constituent inquiries/services) for a number of years but, has been employed in the private sector for some time.

I ascribe to the 'everybody makes mistakes' view. Fool me once, okay, fool me twice, you've blown it. Most important to me are: I think that if Victor Cirillo was innocent and had credible proof, he would have opted for trial - the fact that he didn't, his delaying tactics and from what's claimed above, his contradictory statements re-being advised about the breathalyzer test are consistent with what I see as his MO on the council: evasiveness and delay. It is my recollection that more than once he has kicked the can down the road and not delivered follow-up as he promised, as if hoping, it will disappear down a storm drain. To me this is a matter of character. I take solace that this will likely be his last term. If he runs for council again he should get an academy award for chutzpah.