2016 and Beyond—Come to Wisconsin

Wisconsin is making international news again.

This time it's a bunch of corrupt and despicable hicks from Manitowoc County.

Don't let these people define Wisconsin. They're a disgrace, an infamy to justice.

But for every ex-prosecutor like Kenneth Kratz, Wisconsin can point to a jurist like Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Shirley Abrahamson and attorney Dean Strang.

Scott Walker has been exposed as the pathological liar and know-nothing he always has been. He could not get elected to any statewide office now, in any mid-term.

The year 2016 will see Wisconsin with two U.S. senators—Tammy Baldwin and Russ Feingold—who will lead the nation as the nation's two most progressive senators.

Madison remains Madison ever-leading the Midwest, as Dane County is leading the state in new private-sector jobs and progressive politics.

Need an educated and skilled workforce, come to Dane County. Looking for human decency, an oasis of an engaged citizenry, come to Dane County.

Despite the damage done by Walker and his band of corrupt Republicans, citizen action, an innovative economy and progressive politics will define a state that shamed itself under the reign of the sociopaths.

Look to the future and the rise of the people pushing every Koch brothers piece of shit to the bottom of Lake Winnebago where they belong.

Prosecutors' Absolute Immunity Takes Another Hit in Second Circuit

"The U.S. Second Circuit has ruled that a prosecutor can be held to a standard of 'qualified immunity,' and thus can be sued, for knowingly presenting false information to a Grand Jury," notes Phil Locke in a case decided earlier this month (Wrongful Convictions) (Kaiser, Above the Law).

The case follows last year's ruling from the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Fields v. Wharrie (2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 1333) which knocked absolute immunity as well.

The Second Circuit case is Morse v. Fusto.

Morse comes as a flurry of political work across the nation challenges policing in a democracy and the police-prosecutor state resulting in mass incarceration and massive fining of the citizenry to fund local communities' budgets, emphatically in minority communities.

Prosecutorial misconduct and malicious prosecutions are routine. In Wisconsin, one can just cast a glance at Iron County, for instance.

Notes Judge Alex Kozinski, Chief Judge of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in a foreword to Sidney Powell's Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice (Brown Books Publishing Group, 2014), Brady violations by prosecutors are rampant and the nation needs "a serious conversation about whether our criminal justice system continues to live up to its vaunted reputation."

The Morse case may also interest Scott Walker and allies' attacks on Wisconsin law enforcement probes of misconduct in Walker's office while serving as Milwaukee County Executive, and Walker's scheme coordinating campaign funds and independent expenditures against the 2011-12 recall campaign.

St. Louis Co Prosecutors Charge Journalists with 'Contempt of Cop'

Radley Balko in the Washington Post notes the corrupt and malicious ways of the St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney's office.

Imagine being black in St. Louis County if this is the way they treat journalists.

Writes Balko today:

Two journalists, one from the Huffington Post and one from the Washington Post, who were arrested during last year’s Ferguson, Mo., protests have been charged with what essentially amounts to 'contempt of cop.' That isn’t and shouldn’t be a crime, but it isn’t even clear they did that. Certainly doesn’t do much to dispel the accusation that St. Louis County prosecutors are petty, vindictive, and use their power as a weapon.

If ever there were an argument for hitting absolute immunity of prosecutors, this case would stand out. Ryan Reilly (Huffington Post) and Wesley Lowery (Washington Post) are charged with  "trespassing and interfering with a police officer’s performance, a chilling setback for press freedom coming nearly a year after their arrests in Ferguson, Missouri."

Prosecutors enjoy the power of the Sovereign: The government in all its power, glory and might.

"The prosecutor wields all of the power and might of the government as the Sovereign and enjoys all of the immunity that protects the Sovereign," notes one jurist commenting on the power of the prosecutor earlier this year.

Scott Walker Runs from Plea Deal Question, Releases Unresponsive Statement

Scott Walker again refused to engage the story alleging that his attorney is involved in plea deal talks with Wisconsin John Doe officials.

"Neither Governor Walker nor his campaign committee are parties to the federal lawsuit. This means they have no legal standing to reach a settlement or deal in their lawsuit," Walker's statement reads in full.

This statement has nothing to do with the possible plea negotiations with state investigators conducting the John Doe probe looking into possible illegal collusion between Scott Walker's campaign and rightwing groups that poured $tens of millions into the 2011-12 Recall races.

Walker is referring to Eric O'Keefe's Wisconsin Club for Growth federal action now before the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz.

Walker refuses further comment on the plea deal story.

Rudolph Randa Hit on the Chris Hayes Show

Judge Rudolph Randa drawing flak

Update: "He never should have allowed himself to be involved in that case (Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz) ," said Monroe Freedman, a Hofstra Law School professor and judicial ethics expert, of Randa. (Elbow, The Capital Times)

In a segment on the judge who ended Scott Walker's probe (for now) and tried to destroy all evidence, MSNBC's Chris Hayes referenced U.S. District Judge Rudolph Randa's all-expenses-paid trips to legal seminars, "funded by the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and other ideological and corporate interests," as previously reported by PRWatch. 

Randa's outrageous ruling stopping a criminal investigation is drawing new attention as $tens of millions of rightwing money has apparently rendered some of the judiciary incompetent or corrupt.

"You can't lobby a judge, but you can wine and dine them," said Nicholas Confessore, correspondent for the New York Times.

Undercutting Scott Walker's Criminal Plea Bargaining

Update: Jason Stein, Patrick Marley and Bill Glauber report, "A legal civil war broke out Wednesday among targets of a John Doe probe, as a conservative group sought Wednesday to block prosecutors from having settlement talks with Gov. Scott Walker's campaign. In a letter sent Wednesday, the Washington, D.C., attorney representing the Wisconsin Club for Growth and one of its directors questioned whether a special prosecutor in the case is negotiating with the GOP governor's campaign to seek concessions that the Club might oppose."

The AP has a source confirming discord among Scott Walker and "other parties caught up in" the John Doe investigation.

This likely means the parties who have been subpoenaed.

The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday in its opinion page: "We've [the Wall Street Journal] learned that Steven Biskupic, who represents Friends of Scott Walker, has been negotiating with Wisconsin special prosecutor Francis Schmitz to settle the state's investigation. The understandable concern among the direct targets of the John Doe is that Mr. Biskupic will cut a deal that would exonerate Mr. Walker while wresting concessions from some of Mr. Walker's allies."

Actually, there are not "targets" in Wisconsin John Doe probes unless criminal charges are brought. John Doe probes are not grand jury proceedings.

The Wall Street Journal editorial sounds like a stern warning to Walker not to forget as the title of the piece reads, "Scott Walker's Friends."

So, who issued the warning? David Koch for his work on behalf of recalled Wisconsin state senators and Scott Walker in 2012? Apparently not.

It's a guessing game.

Biskupic—the former U.S. attorney for the eastern district of Wisconsin (2001-08)—has launched some corrupt schemes before in service to the Republican Party and fouled them up, and he certainly has some fellow Republicans concerned now.

In February, Brendan Fischer reported, "Newly-unsealed court documents and media leaks add to a growing body of evidence that Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker's campaign is at the center of a wide-ranging secret probe into campaign finance violations during the state's contentious 2011 and 2012 recall elections."

One possible explanation for why Republican sources are leaking to the media is their concern that Biskupic doesn't believe the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit will sustain Judge Randa's decision and his May 8 finding of frivolousness, so Biskupic is simply trying to get the best deal possible for Walker.

As One Wisconsin Now opines: "If Gov. Walker was confident his campaign hadn't engaged in wrong-doing, he wouldn't be trying to cut a deal. It's not a coincidence that as the court is considering making thousands of secret documents public, Gov. Walker is suddenly negotiating. Gov. Walker has approached this unseemly affair the same way he governs and campaigns, which is to say he doesn't believe the rules apply to him."

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is composed of 14 judges, including two Republican-appointed judges—Frank Easterbrook and Richard Posner who are generally regarded as geniuses utterly unconcerned with smashing the toes of litigants, if warranted.

Ten judges were appointed by Republican presidents, four by Democratic presidents.

The general perception of the Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit as leaning to the right may be far-off.

And the consensus opinion of Judge Rudolph Randa as having fallen off the deep end may be spot-on.

If Biskupic is giving Walker advice like this, seeking a plea bargain, Walker might wish to listen and so should Walker's friends, unless they see themselves as beyond the law or are deluded about what the law and specific judicial doctrine are as it applies to campaign finance.

Whatever is going on in Wisconsin Republican land, its John Doe probe is a partisan witch hunt line is about as credible as Scott Walker claiming to be an open, transparent and accessible governor.

Report: Scott Walker Campaign in Plea Deal Negotiations

Update: From PRWatch: "The news of settlement talks further undermines their description of the probe as a baseless investigation. It seems hard to believe that Walker would be negotiating settlement if his high-priced lawyers thought this investigation was going nowhere."

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is reporting the following: "Gov. Scott Walker's campaign may be negotiating with prosecutors as part of a secret investigation into the 2012 recall campaigns involving him and other candidates, according to an anonymously sourced opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal."

The Wall Street Journal [paid site] editorial is condemnatory of Scott Walker's alleged legal maneuvers.

Write Jason Stein, Patrick Marley and Bill Glauber, quoting the Wall Street Jounral: "We've [the Wall Street Journal] learned that Steven Biskupic, who represents Friends of Scott Walker, has been negotiating with Wisconsin special prosecutor Francis Schmitz to settle the state's investigation. The understandable concern among the direct targets of the John Doe is that Mr. Biskupic will cut a deal that would exonerate Mr. Walker while wresting concessions from some of Mr. Walker's allies."

It's not clear since Judge Rudolph Randa halted the John Doe probe in early May in Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz, how and why attorney Biskupic may be negotiating a plea deal for Scott Walker's 2012 Recall campaign.

The Wall Street Journal speculates that "Mr. Walker is facing a rough re-election fight this year, and perhaps he and his lawyers want to remove any chance of a September or October legal surprise."

Concludes the Wall Street Journal editorial: "On Tuesday a very clipped Mr. Biskupic told us that he was "'not going to comment on anything related to any John Doe in Wisconsin because doing so would be a violation of court orders.' But after he hung up with us he warned other friends of Scott Walker about our call. Sounds like Mr. Walker has to decide whose side he's on—his own, or the larger principles he claims to represent."

Stay tuned.

Judge Rudolph Randa Is Perhaps the Most Corrupt U.S. District Judge

A bombshell report broke today on Judge Rudolph Randa—whose writing contrived and heavily criticized orders halting the Wisconsin John Doe probe investigating dark money and possible illegal collusion with the Scott Walker Recall campaign—regularly attended all-expenses-paid junkets, "funded by the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, and other ideological and corporate interests."

Brendan Fischer broke the story at PRWatch today.

Randa has a history of nakedly corrupt judicial policymaking.

Randa presided over the infamous prosecution of Georgia Thompson in 2007 by former U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic (2001-2008).

And Randa also refused to recuse himself from a case, decided by a federal bankruptcy judge—the child molestation scandal-bankruptcy proceedings by creditors of the Milwaukee Archdiocese (Goodstein, NYT) with whom Randa was associated.

Randa reversed the decision of a federal bankruptcy judge in July 2013 after the Milwaukee Archdiocese transferred $57 Million to a cemetery fund to avoid paying the rape and sexual assault victims of Catholic priests.

Wisconsin Whistle-blowing Veteran Vindicated as Neocons Target Shinseki

To listen to Republicans today, the decades-long culture of the VA of Delay, Deny and Hope You Die sprung into being in January 2009.

During the Bush-Cheney administration Vietnam-era veteran, an early whistle blower of VA abuse and neglect, Keith Roberts of Wisconsin, navigated through the maze-like process of filing his claim for disability benefits for his diagnosed PTSD.

Roberts accused the VA officials at the Clement J. Zablocki VA Medical Center of fraud, fabricating the minutes of a benefits hearing and altering his C-file (claim file).

Roberts said the VA were a "bunch of crooks." In retaliation top VA officials and a corrupt U.S. attorney indicted and criminally convicted Roberts in 2004-05 to shut him up. The indictment was based solely on the testimony of VA special agent with the VA regional Inspector General office in Hines, Illinois.

When President Obama announced on December 7, 2008 that he would appoint Eric Shinseki to become veterans affairs secretary, Roberts and a small band of veterans' advocates said Shinseki needed to clean house at the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA) (VA).

Rid the VA of bureaucrats from the some 1,700 medical centers, the deputy assistant secretaries at the Veterans Benefit Administration (VBA) like Michael McLendon who during the Bush administration blamed PTSD on lack of belief in God and country. (McKelvey, Boston Review) and search out and can the people who don't want veterans to receive benefits.

What eludes most mainstream news is that embedded neocons throughout the VA have sabotaging the VA for decades because they are ideologically opposed to the mission of caring for veterans in the first place, and want to privatize the whole agency.

While former VA staff attorney and Vietnam veteran Robert Walsh (who now works for veterans in private practice), former VBA staffer Paul Sullivan, and Anthony Hardie (Gulf War veteran and advocate) and veterans’ advocate Steve Robinson (a veteran who served in Ranger and Special Operations units) kept spreading the word about the neocons and anti-veterans' cabals at the VA, they found in Secretary Shinseki who a man who didn't listen.

Said Robinson in 2010: "(Y)es, there have been some improvements, ... but it baffles the mind to think that the Administration believes change will occur if they don’t clean house, and remove the entrenched bureaucrats, and policy wonks, who are gatekeepers to affecting that change. I don’t know why they haven’t moved them out, but they are still there, and they are, in fact, sabotaging Shinseki on several fronts."

Shinseki, as noted on the Rachel Maddow Show last night, was a whistleblower himself as a military general on the Bush-Cheney 2003 invasion of Iraq, and now Republicans want him as a fall guy and political punching bag for "(c)hronic VA problems." 

I don't feel too bad for Shinseki. 

As a whistleblower, he didn't bare anything like the injustices of Wisconsin veteran Keith Roberts at the hands of the VA and U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic.

Shinseki never listened to the likes of Keith Roberts, Bob Walsh, Paul Sullivan, Anthony Hardie and Steve Robinson.

Journal-Sentinel Piece on John Doe Statute as "Witch Hunt" Is Odd

Update: See After Railing Against John Doe Secrecy, WI Club for Growth Fights to Keep Docs Secret

The best work on the Scott Walker-John Doe probes without question is the reporting by the staff of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel.

We know about Scott Walker's stonewalling of his aides' embezzling from veterans' funds, and Scott Walker's many lies on this embezzling because of Dan Bice (Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel; May 31, 2012).

We know that John Doe I grew from John Doe II (Bice, MJS; Oct. 21, 2013).

Jason Stein, Patrick Marley and Daniel Bice's piece of explanatory journalism today is not on a par as the staff's prior work, and arguably constitutes Republican propaganda—everyday operations in GOP-land, but in this election year a crashing project.

This is what happens when good journalists insert foolish talking points from the Republican Party into a news piece, towards what end is not clear.

Republicans will make up talking points and contradict themselves within hours, and not get called out in the news columns.

Today's headline reads: "Courts to decide whether John Doe a useful tool or unfair witch hunt."

It's a good bet neither of these two questions will be addressed or answered by the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. And it is unlikely any Court will rule on the constitutionality of Wisconsin's John Doe statute.

Witch Hunts Need Witches

To conduct a witch hunt, one needs to understand that there are by definition no witches.

[Note: With sincere apologies to the Wiccan religious embrace of life; no disrespect is intended to these positive and life-affirming people.]

Let's consider John Doe I, there are plenty of "witches."

Prosecutors secured multiple criminal convictions against six of Scott Walker's appointees, top staff, and a campaign contributor.

There are no claims of innocence, save Kelly M. Rindfleisch who is appealing her conviction of misconduct in public office.

Would any Republican claim Rindfleisch is innocent?

We know from multiple emails released by Rindfleisch that Scott Walker and his staff ran an illegal political operation out of the Milwaukee County Executive's office, an operation that began as far back as 2002 when Bob Kiefert set up a secret Internet system—an effort coordinated by then-deputy chief of staff Tim Russell (who embezzled over $10,000 from a veterans' fund) and Kiefert was given the nod by then Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker. [See also Scott Walker Knew about 'Secret' Email System at Milwaukee County; Kiefert, Green Bay Progressive; February 19, 2014).

Seizure by Police

Seizure and serving of subpoenas are intrusive and invasive, which is precisely why we have the Fourth Amendment, and the ACLU. R.J. Johnson should remember this the next time he blasts the ACLU.

In any event, the Journal-Sentinel's appreciation for civil liberties is to be applauded. However, today's piece sensationalizes police work.

If the police acted improperly in seizure of property and serving subpoenas, they should be held accountable. But how does this call into question the John Doe statute or the prosecutors conducting a witch hunt?

Attacking Prosecutors

The "national trend ... attacking prosecutors" while being a "target" mentioned may be relevant to the routine "Brady violations" in which prosecutors illegally withhold exculpatory or other evidence favorable to the defense in a criminal trial.

See‘Epidemic of Brady violations’ decried in Judge Kozinski's opinion, the many wrongful convictions, and the important opinion by Judge Richard Posner (with Wisconsin's Judge Diane Sykes dissenting) of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in which Judge Posner hits absolute immunity for prosecutors, and refuses "to bless a breathtaking injustice" of an innocent man. This innocent man was imprisoned for 17 years, and was the victim of an Illinois prosecutor "coercing a man’s false testimony that led to his conviction and sentence to death row." This repulsive prosecutor was defended by Justice Sykes' opinion.

But Wisconsin John Doe probes determine if and by whom a crime has been committed, and if a case were to forward. There are no targets, as in grand juries, until and if someone is charged.

In this specific John Doe probe, the investigation itself is being attacked, not the prosecution as there is not a prosecution.

The probe has not determined if and by whom a crime has been committed.

The district attorneys are Constitutional officers whom Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen refuses to defend by intervening in Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz, et al while the case is under appeal.

This is because the Scott Walker campaign and the Wisconsin Club for Growth's R.J. Johnson and other groups apparently illegally coordinated their campaigns during the 2012 Recall elections, and these are factions to whom Van Hollen owes his allegiance.

If this is false, why are Republican spending $ millions trying to stop this investigation?

John Doe Judges

As for Wisconsin's Republican attorney general, J.B. Van Hollen is quoted as saying, he wants judges to no longer preside over filing charges by district attorneys.

Van Hollen may or may not be aware that a presiding judge is a protection against a district attorney who might violate citizens' rights.

Again, witch hunt?

Witch Hunt

By insinuating that Wisconsin's John Doe statute is a witch hunt and calling into question the operation of this John Doe probe, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel piece contrives a controversy where none exists, if facts are the foundation of this analysis.

Just because a bunch of Republicans yell "witch," this does not mean witches' casting spells are real or that Scott Walker is a straight shooter who holds 100s of no-holds-barred listening sessions with the Wisconsin people.

These things don't happen.

Wisconsin DAs Call out Judge Ruldoph Randa: Open John Doe Records

Update III: Wisconsin Public Radio has updated their story, and confirmed that the story is inaccurate with a link to Judge Randa's proposed order: "CORRECTION: "Wisconsin Public Radio reported this morning that Judge Rudolph Randa had issued a ruling in the John Doe lawsuit ordering nearly all documents in the case to be released to the public. It was a proposed order, not a final order, and has not been signed by Judge Randa.We regret the error."

Update II: Wisconsin John Doe attorneys have filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to reauthorize their authority over the John Doe investigation, and are seeking an order preventing U.S. District Judge Ruldoph Randa from taking further action on this law enforcement investigation while it proceeds, Patrick Marley reports.

Update: Wisconsin Public Radio report is inaccurate; and is retracted . Judge Ruldoph Randa ordered the release of more than 100 documents, reports Wisconsin Public Radio. Randa orders that four documents stay sealed because the Wisconsin Club for Growth says their secrecy is needed to secure their First Amendment rights. See update above.

Judge Ruldoph Randa likely is not aware how ridiculous his rulings shutting down the John Doe investigation are.

No one has been charged; no one has gone on trial; the Wisconsin John Doe statute calls for determining these two questions.

But Randa decided it is for him as a federal judge to decide a First Amendment objection during an ongoing state law enforcement investigation.

Worth noting is that no one is targeted before he or she is charged in Wisconsin John Doe probes, despite what readers are told by GOP flacks.

Rightwingers including Judge Randa have complained about the secrecy codicils allowed under Wisconsin's John Doe statute, in Randa's order to shut down a law enforcement investigation.

In Randa's opinion, Randa writes, "the first John Doe developed into a long-running investigation of all things Walker-related," (p.4) a foolish reference to the apparent orderly, bipartisan probe overseen by a presiding judge.

Randa displays his naked bias often in his opinion Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz, et al (Case No.  14-C-139), filed May 5, making several references about the "secret" nature of the John Doe probe subpoenas, though secrecy in John Doe probes is typical

In the face of rightwing accusations of "police-state" (George Will) targeting of the Scott Walker campaign and rightwingers, prosecutors yesterday made a motion to open the records, per the John Doe statute.

"Subject to s. 971.23, [Discovery and Inspection] if the proceeding is secret, the record of the proceeding and the testimony taken shall not be open to inspection by anyone except the district attorney unless it is used by the prosecution at the preliminary hearing or the trial of the accused and then only to the extent that it is so used," reads the John Doe statute.

The presiding judge has the discretion to ultimately determine if the record is to be made public.

Previously, the Wisconsin Club for Growth had made a call for discovery.

Report Dan Bice and Patrick Marley:

In a surprise move, prosecutors said Wednesday they support opening hundreds of pages of documents from a John Doe probe into fundraising and spending by Gov. Scott Walker's campaign and its conservative allies during recent recall elections. ...

State Reserve Judge Gregory Peterson, who is supervising the probe, filed a one-page response saying he neither supported nor opposed the effort to unseal the documents the journalism groups are seeking.

Randa who has injected himself into the case in a heavily criticized decision and order, is now the deciding authority on if and what records will be released.

Randa's authority may be short-lived, however, as an appeal filed by the five Wisconsin district attorneys, the presiding John Doe judge, and the special prosecutor, a self-identified Republican, Francis Schmitz is still to be decided.

If Randa is to reclaim a shred of credibility, he should order full transparency of the John Doe records, per the District Attorneys' discretion in keeping with state law.

Unless Randa is prepared to declare the Wisconsin John Doe statute unconstitutional on whatever contrived grounds he can imagine [ludicrous but this is Randa], the people of Wisconsin and the litigants will be served by transparency in this case in which Randa should never have made his sweeping decision he ordered on May 5, and his finding of frivolousness by the district attorneys two days later.

Attorneys Samuel Leib, who is representing Milwaukee DA John Chisholm, said: "(Randa's) decision threatens the constitutional authority of every district attorney and the attorney general of the state of Wisconsin." (Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel)

Yes, the constitutional authority is endangered and one wonder why Wisconsin's governor and attorney general are not intervening on the basis of these concerns.

Sure, Scott Walker's campaign is likely implicated in illegal coordination in violation of Wisconsin campaign finance law, but Walker did take an oath to defend the U.S. and Wisconsin constitutions, and so did J.B. Van Hollen.

Rudolph Randa's Reversals by Appellate Court Draw Attention

John Doe probe halted by Judge Rudolph
Randa is an investigation that grew out
of embezzlement from military veterans'
funds by Scott Walker appointees.
From left to right: Tim Russell, Scott Walker
and Brian Pierick, Four other Walker associates
were convicted in a Wisconsin John Doe probe

Updated - As Wisconsin awaits the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit on Judge Rudolph Randa's order to halt the law enforcement investigation known as John Doe II, attention is being focused on Randa's many other rulings reversed on appeal.

Randa's two orders last week to halt the probe of possible collusion by Scott Walker's campaign and out-of-state independent expenditure groups have attorneys mystified, though attorneys are prevented from questioning the ethics of Randa by rules of the State Bar of Wisconsin.

Randa's decision in Eric O’Keefe and Wisconsin Club for Growth, Inc. v Francis Schmitz, et al (Case No.  14-C-139) is contrived to reach a desired result.

Federal Election Commission (FEC) Vice Chair, Ann Ravel says Randa "has cut and pasted a lot of decisions, a lot of language from various decisions, in a way that is actually not applicable. And if it were to be carried out to its full meaning, there would be very few campaign [finance] laws that would continue to be able to be enforced"

Now, Randa's past ruling are drawing attention as a window into the ethics of Randa by journalists.

This weekend's pieces (Bice, Stein and Dietrich, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel) includes this passage:

For instance, in 2007, Randa referred repeatedly to a drug dealer's Mexican heritage, saying 'you people' and 'those people,' during sentencing. The judge also discounted the defendant's claim of being a good family man, saying 'even Adolf Hitler was admired by his family. Adolf Hitler loved his dog. Yet he killed 6 million Jews.'

Randa has a reputation as an imperious judge, reminding some of the late U.S. District Judge John Shabazz in this respect whose open contempt for litigants and his own self reverence were infamous.

But Randa takes his self-regard down to the vainglorious, ordering the physical structure of the courtroom architecture altered in a bizarre move transforming the appearance of his bench into something resembling a throne.

Report Bice, Stein and Dietrich: Known for his "authoritarian" manner in court, about a decade ago, "Randa spent $1.85 million in taxpayer dollars to upgrade his courtroom, chambers and library, even adding a 400-pound, hand-carved wooden U.S. District Court seal to the wall and moving the six courtroom chandeliers so they aligned with his bench, not the windows."

But it is Randa's frequent reversals more than his manner that has jurists alarmed.

Randa presided over the infamous prosecution of Georgia Thompson in 2007 by former U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic (2001-2008), [Biskupic's wife works as a judicial assistant on Randa's staff and Biskupic now represents Scott Walker's campaign in his law firm begun with his former assistant from the U.S. Attorney's office], that in a spectacular action was reversed by a bipartisan panel on appeal immediately after oral arguments with the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals of the Seventh Circuit, Frank Easterbrook, ordering Thompson freed, and ordering her acquittal.

Randa insisted Thompson remain jailed during the appellate process though the conviction was condemned across the nation.

More examples abound, and it would take a large undertaking to examine all the victims under Randa's judgeship.

One case involves Randa refusing to recuse himself in the child molestation scandal-bankruptcy proceedings by creditors of the Milwaukee Archdiocese (Goodstein, NYT) with whom Randa was associated.

Randa reversed the decision of a federal bankruptcy judge in July 2013 after the Milwaukee Archdiocese transferred $57 Million to a cemetery fund to avoid paying the rape and sexual assault victims of Catholic priests.

"In his ruling, Judge Randa decided that forcing the archdiocese to tap its cemetery fund would violate the First Amendment’s free exercise of religion clause and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, a law passed by Congress in 1993, " reports Goodstein. (emphasis mine)

That decision has not yet been appealed. 

See also ThinkProgress (Millhiser) for more information on Randa.

If anyone had any doubt that George Will is just another propagandist for the GOP, this doubt can properly dispensed with reading Will's take in which he writes, "U.S. District Judge Rudolph T. Randa, revolted by the police-state arrogance of some elected prosecutors, has stopped a partisan abuse of law enforcement that was masquerading as political hygiene."

Will as usual ignores inconvenient facts, including the fact that two district attorneys are Republicans, the special investigator is Republican, and the vote by the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board to investigate was unanimous.

"Former judges on the state Government Accountability Board voted unanimously last year to authorize the investigation of fundraising and spending by Gov. Scott Walker's campaign and his allies during the recent recall elections, according to a Tuesday court filing," report Patrick Marley and Daniel Bice (April 15, Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel).

Moreover, John Doe probes in Wisconsin are overseen by a judge and the John Doe probe is an investigation; John Doe probes do not mete out the trial and conviction and sentence as Will would have readers believe in his deceitful prose.

Doesn't George Will research his columns?

Unnamed Parties Ask Wisc Supreme Court to Stop DAs' Probe of Scott Walker/GOP Groups

The Republican Party-aligned special interests pumping $ millions into Wisconsin elections really, really do not want law enforcement to investigate possible criminality on their part.

Mary Spicuzza reports that a "pair of unnamed petitioners filed an original action with the state Supreme Court, meaning they are trying to send the matter directly to the high court instead of starting in lower courts and advancing through appeals."

The petition seeks to stop the John Doe probe looking into $10s of millions of GOP-aligned money that is being investigated after reasonable suspicion was presented to a judge that crimes have been committed.

The probe is being conducted under Wisconsin's John Doe statute, Wisconsin statute 968.26, and represents a threat to the Republican Party's project of injecting $ millions into the political system to consolidate their political power.

This action follows  a complaint in federal court filed by some of the same lawyers who drafted the Supreme Court petition, contending First and Fourteenth Amendment violations by John Doe investigators and prosecutors, including the presiding judge.

The two legal actions precede the release of 1,000s of e-mails next week by former top Scott Walker aide, Kelly Rindfleisch, convicted of a felony while employed in Walker's office.

Republicans fear the e-mail release could torpedo any presidential aspirations Scott Walker may be harboring, and labored to stop the release of the e-mails that may also pose a threat to his reelection as governor in November.

"The records in question include emails from Rindfleisch's personal computer and private email account, affidavits supporting John Doe search warrants, and a transcript of a secret hearing on search warrants issued the day before Walker was elected governor in 2010," notes Dan Bice.

Look for Dismissal of Club for Growth Complaint Against Law Enforcement Probe into GOP Groups

Scott Walker posed at Operation Freedom
event. Walker's personal aides stole
from this fund meant for veterans. [Note to
Scott Walker: You really want this shot on
a TV spot when you run again for office?]

Update: Wisconsin politico Xoff makes another point for likely dismissal or withdrawal: "So the Club for Growth is now suing in federal court to try to stop a John Doe investigation into whether it and other conservative groups illegally coordinated their activity with Scott Walker's campaign. They could get more than they bargained for if the now-secret Doe material is used in court to defend the Milwaukee DA's office. Interesting that there are five county DAs involved but they are only suing John Chisholm's office. Also interesting that two of the five DAs are Republicans, so it makes the claim that this is some partisan witch hunt a little hard to believe. These are bully tactics by right-wingers who think they have enough money to do whatever they want. Hope they're wrong."

Hey, Eric O'Keefe and Club for Growth, don't get so upset at us because Scott Walker appointed crooks who embezzled from veterans, and then tried to stonewall the investigation into Operation Freedom, money purportedly to be used to honor veterans and their families; not to be promptly embezzled by Scott Walker's longtime aide, Tim Russell.

Reading the complaint filed in federal court against the Wisconsin John Doe judge, prosecutors and investigators one can see that the complaint's specific items amount to little more than whining that the Club for Growth and Republicans are roundly disliked in Wisconsin, so they should be immune from the law enforcement tool known as the John Doe probe.

The heavily redacted complaint reads that District Attorney John Chisholm is a Democrat; Dean Nickel is a Democrat; and so on is a Democrat [no mention is made of the two Republican District Attorneys also conducting the probe) and Scott Walker is intensely unpopular, therefore investigating under Wisconsin's John Doe statute, Wisconsin statute 968.26, is an unconstitutional infringement of the Club for Growth and Eric O'Keefe's First and Fourteenth Amendment freedoms.

The arguments are a joke.

The complaint also asserts that the investigation into Scott Walker's Operation Freedom that found more instances of criminality that led to other criminal convictions and the probe's broadening "exponentially," [the Club for Growth really should look up that word as it does not apply here and federal court is not the forum for hyperbole], even "breathtakingly broad."

That's pretty broad, but it should be noted the John Doe probe gathered evidence and testimony that led to six people being criminally convicted with no claims of innocence on their part.

No argument is made that the John Doe statute has been procedurally implemented in an unsound manner, other the unsupported political assertion that the "Milwaukee County Attorney's [sic] Office Is Biased Against Walker and the Budget Repair Bill (of 2011)."

The complaint is more a long op-ed screed than a complaint in federal court.

Look for the complaint to get tossed even by the like of Federalist Society hack, Rudoph Randa.

And by the way, if evidence and testimony point to possible criminality and lead to new directions as probes do, under the supervision of the presiding judge the law enforcement entity in the John Doe probe can expand the scope of the investigation.

Look at the plain language of the John Doe statute:

968.26  John Doe proceeding.

968.26(1)(1) If a district attorney requests a judge to convene a proceeding to determine whether a crime has been committed in the court's jurisdiction, the judge shall convene a proceeding described under sub. (3) and shall subpoena and examine any witnesses the district attorney identifies. ...

Club for Growth Wants to Kill John Doe Probe in Complaint before Federalist Society Judge

From left to right: Felon Tim Russell, Scott Walker
and Felon Brian Pierick, Four other Walker associates
were convicted in a Wisconsin John Doe probe (2010-13).

Update III: Prediction that the Randa rules against the criminal class of Republicans now holding sway in Wisconsin was confirmed April 8, 2014. (Marley. MJS)

Update II: Today, it was reported that due to Randa's ruling a proposed settlement to rape and molestation victims announced today, "would be by far the smallest sexual abuse settlement in any Catholic Church bankruptcy of this size filed to date." Nice job, Rudolph Randa, you protected sexual predators and screwed their vicitms.

Update: Reader notes Federalist Society Judge Rudolph T. Randa made news by fronting for the Milwaukee child-molesting set in ruling for the Archdiocese of Milwaukee in a bankruptcy case in July 2013, insulating $50 million in the process, and failed to disclose his connection to the archdiocese. See also Judge Randa Is Asked by Creditors of Archdiocese to Leave Case (Goodstein. NYT).

When is a law and its implementation by law enforcement unconstitutional?

When it's used to determine if and when crimes have been committed by Republicans, who now-a-days see themselves as above and beyond the reach of Wisconsin statutes, aka the law.

So contends Wisconsin Club for Growth (WCG) and WCG's Eric O'Keefe who evidently do not like Wisconsin's John Doe statute, Wisconsin statute 968.26, and call for its implementation and perhaps its existence to be stuck down as unconstitutional in a complaint filed in federal court this week.

WCG is hoping Senior U.S. District Judge Rudolph Randa will agree.

Randa is a judicial rightwinger who as recently as February 21, 2013 was listed as an advisor to the rightest Milwaukee Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society for Law and Public Studies.

The Federalist Society advocates a roll back of civil rights, reproductive choice, and civil liberties under the rubric of what they claim is a valid approach of textual originalism to constitutional interpretation. (See Richard Posner for a scathing review of this "gotcha jurisprudence.")

Randa is the judge who sent an innocent Georgia Thompson to prison, a ludicrous affair later overturned in an extraordinary decision in oral arguments before a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Randa is listed along with other activist rightwingers as Federalist Society Members, including the following:  Ken Starr, Theodore Olson, Edwin Meese, Robert Bork, Antonin Scalia, Alex Kozinski, Ann Coulter, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, Randy Barnett, Samuel Alito, Troy Eid, Hugo Teufel III, Charles Fried, Richard Allen Epstein, Priscilla Owen, Spencer Abraham, Edith Brown Clement, Rudolph T. Randa, William H. Pryor, Jr., Diane S. Sykes, David M. McIntosh, Maura D. Corrigan, C. Boyden Gray, John Sitilides, David Schizer, Jeff Ballabon, Roger Pilon, Nilda Pedrosa, Charlie Korsmo, Nicholas Quinn Rosenkranz, Stephen Bainbridge, Michael I. Krauss, Holly Coors, Don Wagner, Steven G. Calabresi.

The Wisconsin John Doe statute is a law enforcement tool used to determine the existence of criminality when for example conflicts of interests, stonewalling (as in John Doe One that found multiple felonies and misdemeanors in Scott Walker tenure of Milwaukee County Executive), practical difficulties and concern for the good name of innocent citizens mandate launching a John Doe probe after approval by a judge, administered by district attorneys, their agents and a supervising judge.

But the Wisconsin Club for Growth and other Wisconsin rightwingers object again today.

They continuously blasted the first John Doe probe that netted six criminal convictions of Scott Walker appointees, top staff members, and associates. No retractions from the rightwing exist about their smears of John Doe jurists and no claims of innocence exist on record from any of Walker's allies.

Now, WCG and O'Keefe have filed a complaint in federal court contending First and Fourteenth Amendment violations by John Doe investigators and prosecutors, including the presiding judge.

The complaint offers a bizarre history of Scott Walker's tenure and essentially a political editorial that WCG does not like progressives. The complaint also references the federal Citizens United decision as part of its argument that the probe is unconstitutional.

As noted by Jason Stein and Patrick Marley of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, the named "defendants in Monday's suit are Reserve Judge Gregory A. Peterson, who is overseeing the investigation; special prosecutor Francis Schmitz; Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm; Assistant District Attorney Bruce Landgraf; Assistant District Attorney David Robles; and investigator Dean Nickel."

Attorney Marcus J. Berghahn offers an instructive research memo on Wisconsin's John Doe statute in which he writes in part:

 Unlike normal criminal proceedings, which can be initiated if there is probable cause to believe a person has violated the law, John Doe proceedings help law enforcement develop the evidence necessary to establish the very existence of probable cause.

If a district attorney requests a judge to convene a proceeding to determine whether a crime has been committed in the court's jurisdiction, the judge shall convene a proceeding," says Wisconsin's John Doe statute. ...

(T)he proceedings are also designed to protect innocent citizens from the fallout of frivolous prosecutions. [See State ex rel. Reimann v. Cir. Ct., 214 Wis. 2d 605, 621, 571 N.W.2d 385, 390 (1997)]

As the Wisconsin Supreme Court stated in 1889: 'When [the John Doe] statute was first enacted the common-law practice was for the magistrate to issue the warrant on a complaint of mere suspicion, and he was protected in doing so. This was found to be a very unsafe practice. Many arrests were made on groundless suspicion, when the accused were innocent of the crime and there was no testimony whatever against them. This statute was made to protect citizens from arrest and imprisonment on frivolous and groundless suspicion." [State ex rel. Long v. Keyes, 75 Wis. 288, 294-95, 44 N.W. 13, 15 (1889).]

The complaint, if not dismissed, will offer a test on whether Randa wants to go out as a jurist committed to the rule of law or a rightwing hack posing as an impartial judge.

My own reading here is that the complaint is a distraction and stalling tactic meant to buy time for Scott Walker's reelection bid in November.

On February 19, many papers and e-mails concerning the criminal conviction of former Walker aide, Kelly Rindfleisch (aka Multiple Kelly), will become public.

Rindfleisch is another Walker aide convicted in the last John Doe probe, but the resulting political embarrassment of criminality in Walker's office will not be decreased by stalling the current John Doe probe, though the mounds of information coming from Scott Walker's former office will offer a nice introduction to the country of who Scott Walker is.

As for the current John Doe, since when do federal judges get to declare law enforcement investigations unconstitutional just because the subject matter involves possible criminality by Republicans?

I would not bet on a favorable ruling on this complaint for the criminal class of Republicans now holding sway in Wisconsin.

Too much of a stink would result, and the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is not exactly staffed by dummies, Diane Sykes notwithstanding.

Richard Posner Hits Absolute Immunity for Prosecutors

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit's Richard Posner hit prosecutors who violate defendants' rights in an important case just out.

The case is Fields v. Wharrie, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 1333.

Jonathan Turley has the scoop.

Scott Walker and One Marine

Disposable Humans - Eugene Higgens

Update: Readers wishing to help this Marine can follow this link.

"I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice."
- Abraham Lincoln, address in Washington D.C., 1865

Eric Pizer is a decorated combat Marine (2000-2004) from southwestern Wisconsin, He chose the Marines out of idealism and a commitment to serve.

Now, Pizer lives in Madison. After completing an Associate’s Degree in Criminal Justice he wants to serve with the Madison Police Department, back home from two tours in Iraq, safe with his wife and two kids.

Pizer's dedication to his unit in combat—a commitment honed to degree most of us will never attain—makes Pizer an ideal candidate to join the Madison Police.

Two obstacles stand in Pizer's way: Grant County (Wisconsin) District Attorney Lisa Riniker and Asst DA Anthony Pozorski (to be candid, rogue jurists and hopeless dolts ) and Gov. Scott Walker.

This is because Pizer, two days after his return from to Boscobel, Wisconsin, was ludicrously charged with criminal assault one evening, and was then represented by an attorney who should have proven that Pizer lawfully engaged in crime prevention. Poor attorneys are common; and so are obtuse district attorneys. 

Eric Pizers are rare.

Here's a summary from Pardon Eric Pizer:

Two days after his return from Iraq, Eric was on leave back in Wisconsin and he and two friends from high school went to Boscobel (Wisconsin) to visit the cousin of one of the friends. Together they went to a local bar to play pool. One of the friends became friendly with a woman the cousin knew and she returned with them to the cousin’s house to play cards. The woman’s husband and a friend of his then appeared at the house shortly after midnight and he and his friend aggressively threatened Eric and his friend. When they would not stop the aggressive behavior and the husband suddenly approached Eric from the side, Eric reacted and struck him once, breaking his nose.

That is the size of the felony "crime" that now prevents Pizer from serving as Madison Police Officer.

Pizer needs a pardon from Scott Walker, or a stipulation from the Grant County District Atty vacating this felony to which Pizer's past attorney foolishly advised a no contest plea.

The problem with Scott Walker is his bizarre and stubborn refusal to grant pardons—inexplicable; though the five Wisconsin governors prior to Walker issued more than 800 pardons combined.

Only Scott Walker has the power to to grant pardons.

Wisconsin Constitution [Article 5, (Section 6)] Pardoning power - "The governor shall have power to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, after conviction, for all offenses, except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions and with such restrictions and limitations as he may think proper ... He shall annually communicate to the legislature each case of reprieve, commutation or pardon granted, stating the name of the convict, the crime of which he was convicted, the sentence and its date, and the date of the commutation, pardon or reprieve, with his reasons for granting the same."

The point of this citation of the Wisconsin Constitution is to alert readers to an injustice, and get folks to act.

Eric Pizer wants to serve and protect with the Madison Police, we need him.

I think Eric Pizer is wrongfully convicted and in any event deserves justice, specifically a pardon.

Back in the 19th century, in England no less, correcting an injustice inflicted by the judiciary was seen as a moral imperative:

"There is no safe path for judges to tread but to ascertain the law to the best of their ability and to declare it according to their judgment; and if in any case the law appears to be too severe on individuals, to leave it to the Sovereign to exercise that prerogative of mercy which the Constitution has intrusted to the hands of the fittest to dispense it."
- 14 Q.B.D 273 (1884)

The "prerogative of mercy," don't turn away from this one, Governor Walker.

Wrongfully Convicted: Keith Roberts Redux

PTSD fraud at the VA is like voter fraud on a national level, there is no 'there' there

Had an interesting exchange with Attorney Robert P. Walsh, a Vietnam War Army combat veteran, who devotes his life to helping military veterans in his law practice.

Walsh was the attorney of Wisconsin's Keith Roberts, a Navy Vietnam-era veteran, unjustly convicted of wire fraud in 2006. [The conviction was upheld on appeal to the federal Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in a July 2008 decision reading in part: "The record might also have supported a jury determination that Mr. Roberts sincerely believed that his statements were true and that he had no intention to defraud the Government," by Justice Kenneth Ripple. But Ripple notes of the guilty verdict, that, "It is beyond our authority to disturb such a finding on appeal."]

Roberts' real crime, in the eyes of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, was hounding the VA (DVA) and taking seriously his right to pursue a disability benefits claim—a dangerous practice for veterans during the Bush-Cheney administration.

And to listen to Walsh, this is a danger that has been carried on in the Obama administration.

Personally, I thought the embedded neocons at the VA and Veterans Benefit Administration and the corrupt US attorneys were mostly gone.

Walsh doesn't give a damn about anything except helping veterans, so he is someone worth listening to, if one takes helping veterans seriously.

Some edited notes from Bob Walsh on veterans and VA:

The VA has used and continues to use the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) as their enforcer, a private police force.

Wisconsin's Keith Roberts is only one example.

The probable cause that a crime had been committed in the Roberts case: "there were inconsistencies in the VA benefits claims file."

Since the benefits disability system is ex parte and non-adversarial and dozens of employees have access to the file, that should not warrant a criminal indictment in Federal District Court, as it did.

Had the VA Office of General Counsel not been a No Show in the entire process (who knows what closet they were cowering in during the criminal proceedings) there would not have been an indictment.

The VA Regional Counsel in Detroit, Michigan, with jurisdiction over Wisconsin, had no knowledge of the indictment at the time Roberts' criminal trial began, as required by administrative law regulations.

The VA Regional Office in Detroit and the VA OIG had attempted the same ploy on a decorated WW II veteran in Michigan a few years earlier. We were able to increase that veteran's benefits to the Special Monthly Compensation rate for his war wounds. When he died he was receiving about $3,500.00 per month. We were never able to recover the $ 50,000.00 that VA stole from him and his family when they created the false overpayment in his case.

The VA had put him in overpayment and then attempted to have him prosecuted for fraud like Roberts.  Our U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Michigan had the integrity to tell the VA OIG to go to hell. The political hacks in Milwaukee were only too happy to do the bidding of the Bush-Cheney White House and make an 'example' of Keith Roberts.

Roberts was to be the poster boy for PTSD fraud. The 'welfare Cadillac' of veterans benefits.

PTSD fraud at VA is like voter fraud on a national level. There is no 'there' there.

Most of the real fraud turns out to be VA staff and Service Officers, not individual veterans.

Most of the real waste to the taxpayers is in executive compensation and bonuses.

Where else but VA can you have an 85 percent error rate and get a promotion and bonus in the same year?

Maybe on Wall Street in a mortgage unit. Other than that, can’t think of an example.

Justice delayed is not justice in full measure. Veterans are not third-class citizens. They are entitled to the same due process a mass murderer is afforded.

High time the basic due process and the protection of the Administrative Procedures Act is imposed on the VA.

The path through which American citizens can impact the regulation-rulemaking process is through the federal law called the Administrative Procedure Act, mandating federal agencies solicit public comment before instituting new rules and regulations that implement legislative acts such as the Veterans Judicial Review Act and other statutes intended to help veterans, their families and our country.

GOP Moves to Stop Testimony on African American and Latino Voter Obstruction

Drawing by George Grosz - Keep this dark guy
from voting or making any other trouble,
by any means necessary

"Moreover, law makers have embarked on a new voter suppression tactic: voter identification requirements. The tactic involves imposing new laws and rules requiring voters to show identification in order to vote, despite virtually no evidence of voter misidentification fraud. Identification requirements pose a special burden to the poor, racial minorities, and senior citizens who often do not have specific forms of identification. The pretextual color-blind race neutrality argument made by state legislators rings hollow when this nation’s history of voting obstruction is considered."
- E. Earl Parson and Monique McLaughlin (Columbia Journal of Race and Law; Vol 3.1, pp 103-118) (2013)

Now there a couple of good rebuttal witnesses for civil rights activists in the landmark trial of the Wisconsin Photo Voter ID law used for voter obstruction, in violation of the Voting Rights Act. I'm no attorney but I would get a hold of these folks.
---
Leland Beatty of Ethnic Technologies LLC will offer expert testimony in the Wisconsin voter ID trial.

Beatty will explain how African American and Latino registered voters are stopped from voting by Wisconsin Act 23, the GOP Photo Voter ID law passed with unanimous GOP support against the opposition of Democrats, civil rights groups, voting rights groups and local officials.

Voter obstruction, it's as Republican as opposition to women's' reproductive health.

What has the GOP in a tizzy about Leland Beatty is the plaintiffs' plan to put Beatty on the stand as an expert witness, and also put on the stand a former employee of Ethnic Technologies, John Mas, to describe what Ethnic Technologies does in plain, lay language.

Reads the plaintiffs' November 4, 2013 motion on the matter:

Mr. Beatty will testify about the impact of the voter ID provisions of 2011 Wisconsin Act 23 on African American and Latino voters. Specifically, Mr. Beatty’s expert testimony will include an analysis of the percentages of African American and Latino registered voters who lack driver’s licenses or state-issued identification cards that match their voter records, and how those compare to the percentages of white voters who lack similar identification. ... Plaintiffs contacted Mr. John Mas, a former employee of Ethnic Technologies, and asked him to offer factual testimony describing Ethnic Technologies and the services it performs. 

Yep, Mr. Mas must be stopped, the GOP lawyers say.

And that goes double for African American and Latino voters.

The federal trial features two consolidated cases, Frank v. Walker, (Case 11cv1128), and League of United Latin American Citizens of Wisconsin v. Deininger (Case 2:12-cv-00185.

The League case is the first trial in the country post-Shelby County v. Holder using Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act after the U.S. Supreme Court gutted the Act (Section 4) last summer, as noted by The Advancement Project.

Scott Walker held a press conference the first day of the trial in Milwaukee last week and pronounced: "There really is no barrier for people (posed by mandating GOP-crafted Photo Voter ID as an additional requirement to vote)." (Marley. MJS)

It's a very bet Scott Walker never talked to any of the plaintiffs, any homeless veterans, and certainly not Leland Beatty, John Mas, Lorraine Minnite, or any other voter, trial witness or expert who could easily disconfirm Walker's stated belief.

The reason is voter obstruction is Walker's objective, and Walker has no interest in what any civil rights advocate, voting rights expert, or Wisconsin citizen who does not know his place has to say about voting.

Help for Exonerated Individuals in Wisconsin Needed

A District Attorney destroys exculpatory evidence; a presiding judge
has an affair with the alleged victim, and an innocent Don Miller
draws a 42-sentence in a clear abuse of office. The Wisconsin
Innocence Project is on the case as the Miller family endures.

"There is no more cruel tyranny than that which is exercised under cover of the law, and with the colors of justice." [UNITED STATES v. JANNOTTI (No. 81-1020), UNITED STATES v. SCHWARTZ  (No. 81-1021)]

A long over-due discussion is needed on innocence and what we as a society can do about the criminal justice system herding innocent people into prisons in a manner right out of the dark ages.

This phenomenon is not caused solely by corrupt prosecutors, though they play a prominent role.

Very few institutions exist to address this atrocity of an innocent person, unjustly arrested, falsely accused and unjustly convicted.

Ask Penny Brummer; hey, she's a lesbian so in a more bigoted time she was an instant suspect, and ultimately convicted because of her sexuality in Madison, Wisconsin.

Sheila and Doug Berry document Ms. Brummer's case in their Who Killed Sarah?

In the book, readers are treated to "a twilight zone where evidence is ignored or manipulated, innocence is disbelieved and justice is denied to both Penny Brummer and Sarah Gonstead (who was murdered with a gun)."

Writes David Protess in The Huffington Post, "In light of the progress that's been made by the LGBT movement, it's hard to imagine that not too long ago an innocent woman could be convicted of murder because she was a lesbian. And, it's harder still to believe that it could happen in a progressive city like Madison, Wis."

This twilight zone is the reality when innocents are systemically fed into the Police-Prison meat grinder; liberty and dignity prevented, human spirit assaulted and any type of human kindness systemically prevented, and life destroyed.

There are journalists, Dee Hall of the Wisconsin State Journal and Bill Lueders of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism are examples; institutions such the Milwaukee-based Innocence Consultants and the University of Wisconsin Law School's Innocence Project, all of whom do tremendous work.

Facing the power of the prosecutor's office, the mindlessness of politicians, the unthinking actions of law enforcement and the apathy of the public, an innocent man or woman convicted of a crime is up against what author Glenn C. Loury terms an "American ... leviathan unmatched in human history."

A leviathan today is defined as a totalitarian state with a vast bureaucracy. 

And a leviathan is an uneven match in our nation of by-standers, as politicians posture as tough-on-crime, and the prison-for-profit industry soars and one company is actually publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange, as it too lobbies for harsher sentencing laws.

Keith Findley, faculty director of the Wisconsin Innocence Project, discusses in this linked video an effort to help exonerated innocents in Wisconsin.

It would of course be better that innocents never be convicted. 

The putative nature of American culture and the careerism of American jurists and law enforcement in the system make the incarceration of innocents almost a fait accompli.

The English jurist William Blackstone in his 18th century Commentaries on the Laws of England famously declares, "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

One can only reference Blackstone today with dark irony

Too many American jurists delude themselves into thinking Blackstone's tenet guides the criminal justice system. 

Denying liberty is the go-to move today, it's convenient for police, prosecutors and judges.

Most of us—untouched by the cruel tyranny of the criminal justice system—view a common effort with the unjustly incarcerated (done in our names) as relevant to our lives as the passing appearance of the moon.

One person who can be helped now is Penny Brummer. She gets a DNA test, she'll get cleared.

Writes Protess:

Penny Brummer - Arrested and convicted of murder
because of absurd, atavistic bigotry towards lesbians.
No evidence, no eyewitness, just ignorance and hate

The best hope at this point, Sheila (Berry) says, is DNA from the bullet that pierced Sarah's brain. Funds are needed to conduct Y-STR testing, which produced results in another infamous Wisconsin murder case involving Laurencia "Bambi" Bembenek. The testing costs $10-15,000, and the Berrys are offering copies of Who Killed Sarah? to anyone who makes a donation.

Will the justice system ever admit its mistake? Penny herself thinks so. "Something's got to happen," she told investigative reporter Bill Lueders, who first exposed the injustice. "God's not going to let me sit here for something I didn't do. I feel he's guiding somebody out there to help me."

But without the DNA testing or other new evidence, Penny's chances are slim. Now 43, she will not be eligible for parole until she turns 70. Unless something does happen, Penny will die in a Wisconsin prison, damned for a relationship once forbidden in an era of intolerance.

An online contribution, or a check can be sent to:

Penny Brummer Defense Fund
The People's Community Bank
P. O. Box 369
Spring Green, WI  53588