Mausoleum 2009

Jeffrey Pirog, of Springfield, is no longer "chillin' on a church" at this mausoleum at the Gate of Heaven Cemetery in Springfield. He is facing charges claiming that he damaged it.

(Mark M. Murray / The Republican file)

SPRINGFIELD - On May 26, at about 2:45 a.m., Jeffrey Pirog climbed onto the balcony of the Most Holy Redeemer Mausoleum at the Gate of Heaven Cemetery and posed for a photo he would later regret.



The image shows him sitting on the balcony railing, with the mausoleum's tower behind him and a cross illuminated between his legs.

"Chillin' on a church, loving life!" the 20-year old wrote, sharing the photo with his Snapchat followers.

Life got less chilling for Pirog once the cemetery's owner, Springfield (Catholic) Diocese Cemeteries, Inc., discovered damage to the mausoleum and wanted him to pay for it.

The bill: $8,000.

During a police interview, Pirog admitted climbing the mausoleum tower and damaging some items on the way back down. To avoid criminal charges, he offered to reimburse the cemetery for repairing or replacing the items, according to court documents.

But negotiations between the Roman Catholic Diocese of Springfield and Pirog's lawyer bogged down, and criminal charges were filed.

Eight months after striking his Snapchat pose, Pirog pleaded innocent in to trespassing and causing injury to a church, synagogue or cemetery under $5,000.

He was released without bail, and ordered to stay away from the cemetery.



In a motion to dismiss the case, defense lawyer Joseph Cabrera challenged the trespassing charge, citing the lack of signs explicitly barring visitors from the cemetery at night.

One sign, for example, prohibits dogs and all-terrain vehicles and another, less prominent one, states "closed after dark," the lawyer wrote.

The defendant planned to climb the building, not vandalize it, and the resulting damage was unintentional.

The damage was limited to balcony rails, balusters, ventilation caps and two stone "pineapple-like statues," according to the motion.

"There is nothing (in the case) even hinting at the existence of hostility toward the cemetery or its operators," he wrote.

But a lawyer for the cemetery said the defendant was indifferent, if not reckless, to the possible consequences of climbing the mausoleum.

The damage resulted from several intentional acts, from entering the cemetery to climbing the mausoleum tower to sending a "mocking message showing himself atop the tower," Stephen E. Spelman wrote in a motion supporting criminal charges.

"None of his actions happened accidentally," he added.



At about 2:45 a.m., Pirog triggered an alarm at the mausoleum, but was gone when cemetery security arrived.

The next morning, however, Pirog sent his mausoleum Snapchat photo to a cemetery employee, who reported it to his bosses.

During questioning by police, Pirog refused to identify the person who took the photo, which received 16 'likes' from Pirog's Snapchat followers.

"Did you see god" one follower responded, according to court documents.

The defendant is due back in Springfield District Court for a pretrial hearing on May 26, the first anniversary of his mausoleum tower climb.