Disgraced Wisconsin District Attorney Wants NYT v. Sullivan 'Overturned' Following Legal Defeat for Cop

Goya Here Comes the Bogeyman,
plate three from Los Caprichos.
Bogeyman do not like criticism
from citizens.

Crooked Cops Fly Together

Commentary

Madison, Wisconsin — Disgraced Calumet County District Attorney Ken Kratz resigned in 2010 following allegations Kratz sexually harassed several women, including a sexual assault claim alleging Kratz "had forcible sex with an emotionally vulnerable woman after previously prosecuting the woman," (Wisconsin Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Kratz (In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Kratz)).

Kratz is also notorious for his crooked prosecutions of less than two years earlier from Kratz' harassment and assault, a time during which Kratz corruptly prosecuted two innocents featured in the Emmy-winning Making a Murderer (Netflix) docuseries. Kratz termed himself a "dick" for the assaults, not for the crooked prosecutions.

The "dick" blamed his narcissistic personality disorder and multiple drug addictions, after being driven from the district attorney's office after the allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault came to light, after which he was driven from the Wisconsin legal profession altogether in 2019.

Steven Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey, were convicted of first-degree homicide by Kratz for the 2005 murder of a young photographer, Teresa Halbach. Both men are serving life sentences in spectacular miscarriages of justice, supported by Wisconsin Democrats, the better to look tough on crime.

Now, a retired cop, Andrew Colborn, whom Wisconsin citizens say helped frame Steven Avery just lost a civil suit for defamation against Netflix. The case is Andrew L  Colborn v. Netflix, Inc,, et al,, case No. 19-cv-0484-bhl); and the case was dismissed on summary judgement.

The crooked prosecutor Ken Kratz has raised his head again after being driven from office, the law profession and the state of Wisconsin.

Kratz wants the landmark First Amendment case, New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) overturned.

"Shifting the burden to the defamed person to prove he didn’t plant evidence is, of course, an impossible standard. Courts continue to protect big media against any accountability for outrageous claims made in the name of entertainment. It’s time to overturn the NY Times vs Sullivan’s actual malice hurdle and recognize that real people, and their reputations, are being crushed in the process," the Wisconsin Law Journal quoted Kratz last week.

Kratz' statement follows plaintiff Andrew Colborn request to gut NYT v. Sullivan in a legal filing in 2019, a maneuver widely seen as Hail Mary call.

The core holdings of Sullivan protect rights of people in communities to criticize and hold accountable crooked public office holders Kratz and cops in east-central Wisconsin who routinely view with suspicion those citizens who fervently object to their conduct.

Colborn and Kratz are crazy.

Kratz lies whenever he speaks. He lost his career & reputation long before MaM, when he sexually harassed victims in cases he prosecuted & 15 women came forward. MaM just revealed his true character & his wrongful prosecution of innocent BD & SA. #Ibelieve15women #MakingAMurderer https://t.co/e7tGSnFJw6

— Jerome Buting (@JButing) March 16, 2023

New York Times v. Sullivan

In 1964, the New York Times and civil rights workers prevailed over tyrannical Montgomery police and its odious City officials at the United States Supreme Court, New York Times v. Sullivan .

Justice William Brennan writing for a unanimous court authored a defense of the liberty of the people against government tyrants, a principle that today stands as both an inspiring statement for liberty and a landmark declaration of the power of citizens over public officials.

Writes Brennan:

The First Amendment, said Judge Learned Hand,

presupposes that right conclusions are more likely to be gathered out of a multitude of tongues than through any kind of authoritative selection. To many, this is, and always will be, folly, but we have staked upon it our all. United States v. Associated Press, 52 F.Supp. 362, 372 (D.C.S.D.N.Y. 1943).

Mr. Justice Brandeis, in his concurring opinion in Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 375-376, gave the principle its classic formulation:

Those who won our independence believed . . . that public discussion is a political duty, and that this should be a fundamental principle of the American government. ... Believing in the power of reason as applied through public discussion, they eschewed silence coerced by law -- the argument of force in its worst form. Recognizing the occasional tyrannies of governing majorities, they amended the Constitution so that free speech and assembly should be guaranteed.

Thus, we consider this case [New York Times v. Sullivan] against the background of a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials. (New York Times v. Sullivan).

Parable of Racist Police

To understand the power of Sullivan today, consider a recent example of racist Wisconsin police in which the DeForest, Wisconsin Police Chief Daniel Furseth was caught on video surveilling and mocking a group of black teenagers dressed for their high school prom, and stopping by an area restaurant, as was reported by a former police intern on YouTube in June 2018.

DeForest, Wisconsin Police Chief Daniel Furseth is a racist
cop who surveiled and mocked five young black men
in some faux black slang with a demeaning, racist and
derogatory narrative caught on video. Furseth was widely
criticized, resigning under fire before joining like-minded police
at the Town, not the City, of Madison, Wisconsin. Prior to
the holdings in New York Times v Sullivan (1964), public
officials like the Furseth could prevail in libel actions, pleading
libel per se against those such as the police intern who
published the video on YouTube. Wrties the whistle-
blower: "This is what the stupid, ignorant, and imbecilic Village
of  DeForest elects to be their 'Top Cop.' This is the racist
Chief of Police Daniel Furseth, who is much like the rest of
DeForest, poorly educated, socially intolerant, and completely
incompetent when it comes to federal law (you know
the one that trumps state and local law when it’s in conflict
with it). Only a redneck and backassward community like
DeForest would want someone like this as a Chief to keep the
black man out."

Observing the youths and commenting in mocking accent, Furseth said: "Okay, we is out on our dates. We got the bitches, we gonna get them, and we gonna give them food. I got my cane, I’ve gots (sic) my suit. Oh baby … Okay, boys, let’s go in. This is the fanciest restaurant we ever been to and it’s called the Steak ‘N Shake. (Laughter) Unbelievable."

A reader should listen to the 36-second clip on YouTube to get a full accounting of the malice and racism that most small-town Wisconsin cops know to keep under wraps. Furseth and his all-white police force really do not like black people.

In August 2018 came reports of four new counts of misconduct by Furseth, (WISC-TV).

Chased out of office, the racist Daniel Furseth was never heard from again, right? Wrong.

Furseth was quickly hired by the town of Madison, not the City, in October 2018.

An official with the town of Madison police department, not the City, confirmed by phone on August 14, 2019 that Furseth is still employed with the Town police, locally notorious for racism, harassment, bogus citations and misconduct.

Pre-New York Times v Sullivan (1964), or had American jurisprudence taken another direction, the Town, DeForest and Furseth may have enjoyed cause for civil action for my opining that Daniel Furseth and Town and Village officials are racist, ignorant pig-fuckers who should have their teeth kicked out.

The former police intern who blew the whistle on YouTube similarly might not enjoy protections for his commentary about the character of the DeForest, Wisconsin Police Dept in which Furseth rose through the all-white ranks to become chief in 2015.

The judiciary over the last 60 years has risen to become a refuge for civil pleadings from social movements working for those persecuted by the State — often the repository of lurid souls like Daniel Furseth and L.B. Sullivan who, one may believe, should be anomalous is a classical liberal society.

Liberties Prevail

The United States Supreme Court of the 1950s, 60s and 70s in significant areas made it appear individual rights prevailing were a dynamic as inevitable as the triumph of reason over racism and liberation over atavistic taboo.

Landmark legal rulings after rulings were won and each victory seemed a fulfillment of long-denied liberties as the civil rights and peace movement flourished.

Brown v Board of Education (1954), New York Times v Sullivan (1964), Loving v Virgina (1967), Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969) and United States v. United States District Court (1972) and dozens more Court holdings promised to buttress citizens against routine incursions of liberty by State actors and law enforcement.

Sullivan under Attack
 
Many today fear an epic backlash, and the challenges to Sullivan are emblematic.

 There are now at least three cases in three different appellate circuits — Second, Sixth and Seventh — in which rightwing plaintiffs appear intent on revisiting New York Times v. Sullivan.

• Sixth Circuit - Nicholas Sandmann v. WP Company LLC, d/b/a [doing business as] The Washington Post (2:19-cv-00019). Plaintiff says he will appeal the dismissal decided in jUly 2019.
• Seventh Circuit - Andrew Colborn v. Netflix, Inc (1:19-cv-00484). Likely to be dismissed in a  Dec 19, 2019 hearing in District court. An appeal is possible.
• Second Circuit - Sarah Palin v New York Times Co, 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 17-3801. Case will be heard on the merits in U.S. District Court.

 Political rightwingers and disgraced cops. Yuck.

Wisconsin Democrats Silent on New Steven Avery Filing as Midterm Voting Begins

Democrats blocking innocents' freedom will lose votes — some votes

Update: See new legal filing and updates site.
Updated - Madison, Wisconsin — Republicans attacking Democrats in Wisconsin on crime and law enforcement are nearly as fervent as Democrats' asserting police support.

Midterm absentee voting has begun in Wisconsin, and key Wisconsin Democrats are all in, (trying to be), for police, no matter the misconduct they defend, no matter the innocent lives destroyed in wrongful conviction cases.

The August filing by wrongfully convicted Steven Avery details a new witness who contacted the Manitowoc County sheriff office to report he saw the prosecution's star courtroom witness pushing the murder victim's car onto the property of the defendant. The August filing also details that Manitowoc County Sheriff Dept failed to disclose the witness's phone call, a partial copy of which was obtained by Avery' s post-conviction attorneys, another clear Brady violation.

In this state with a horribly corrupt criminal justice system, the question remains whether Wisconsin voters will reward statewide Democratic Party officeholders who continue to block freedom for the innocent Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey, both of whom the state attorney general and governor know were framed by corrupt law enforcement, amid Brady violations, evidence planting, among other misconduct. highlighted to a worldwide audience in the Emmy-winning Making a Murderer docuseries.

Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey, were convicted of first-degree homicide in separate trials in 2007 for the murder of a young photographer, Teresa Halbach. Both men are serving life sentences.

The case is State of Wisconsin v Steven Avery, featured in Making a Murderer in a spectacular examination of police and politcal corruption.

Dassey is seeking a pardon from Gov. Tony Evers, pointing out the convictions are unreliable. Evers says falsely he cannot pardon Dassey because his Pardon Advisory Board advises him not to pardon Dassey.

Wisconsin Democratic Party officials, Gov. Tony Evers and Attorney General Joshua Kaul, have made the political decision to work for this corrupt law enforcement, even the disgraced district attorney Kenneth R. Kratz who prosecuted both the Avery and Dassey cases. Ken Kratz.

This is political liberalism at its most irrational. Tony Evers and Joshua Kaul will not allow crooked Wisconsin police to take a hit, and both Democrats oppose pardons and agreements to vacate the Dassey-Avery wrongful convictions.

One month into his term in 2019, Attorney General Kaul filed legal responses signaling the DOJ would stall Avery's exoneration by filing procedural objections

Life is cheap to Wisconsin Democrats led by Gov. Evers (D) and Attorney General Kaul (D).

No matter the evidence that has piled up since the airing of Making a Murderer shined a light on police and prosecutorial corruption, Wisconsin Democrats remain committed to keeping in prison those whom they know are innocent.

Democrats love their police, no matter how corrupt, for example, Manitowoc County and Calumet County sheriff operations are, as the midterm elections feature Republican ads showering Wisconsin Democrats as weak on crime.

For Wisconsin Democrats, it's defend police no matter how many innocent lives are destroyed.

Tony Evers rejects Brendan Dassey pardon petition

In December 2019, Tony Evers hid behind his Pardon Advisory Board, a stance the governor has continued through spokesmen in the media and administration who falsely say Evers has no choice but to take the advice of his own advisory board.

But the truth about Evers' pardon power came out two years later, last Spring, when Evers announced he would offer immediate clemency to doctors prosecuted for performing abortions under Wisconsin's nineteenth century antiabortion law. Nothing about Evers' Pardon Advisory Board and its criteria.

Tony Evers, like any Wisconsin governor, has the Constitutional power (executive clemency), to grant pardons, (grants of forgiveness restoring civil rights), sentence commutations (roughly, shortening a sentence), and reprieves, for any reason.

The gubernatorial clemency power is so broad that it is monarchical. Gov. Evers could wake up one morning and decide that only those convicted in courts presided over by judges whom we know are corrupt may be granted royal relief — perfectly within the province of his gubernatorial authority.

Evers set up his Governor's Pardon Advisory Board that advises him on whom to pardon. All clemency decisions remain Evers' and his alone. To be clear, any reporting that also suggests that Evers is bound by his Advisory Board or any other political adviser is erroneous.

Attorney General Joshua Kaul

After the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization last Spring, Joshua Kaul repeated he would not use state resources to enforce the Wisconsin anti-abortion law against convictions of women and doctors.

Going forward

Seth Waxman — a member of Brendan Dassey's legal team — said that when reviewing the outrageous interrogation of Dassey by Mark Wiegert, (current Sheriff of the Calumet County Sheriff's Office), and Tom Fassbender (Wisconsin DoJ, DCI investigator (ret)), that his "blood ran cold."

Gov Evers maintains the explicit state Constitutional authority and right to summarily reject the Board's decision and grant Mr. Dassey his immediate freedom with a stroke of a pen for any or no reason, (Rolling Stone).

This action would entail using capacities that to date Evers has not displayed — intellectual honesty, knowledge of Wisconsin law enforcement, and to the worst of Evers' personal defects, a moral backbone and sensibility to the call of social justice.

Joshua Kaul too could refuse today to oppose Steven Avery's new filing calling for a new trial. A witness, Thomas Sowinski, has come forward and swears in a statement that he saw the prosecution's key trial witness plant the murder victim's RAV4 vehicle on the property of the man, Avery, convicted of homicide in 2007.

In other words, a credible resident swears he caught conspirators red-handed in a frame-up scheme in Wisconsin's infamous murder case drawing headlines in state post-conviction litigation.

Further, Zellner brings another Brady violation to the Court's attention, showing a phone "call to dispatch from a witness claiming to see the vehicle leave the property was not provided to previous counsel. Zellner says her office [recently] received the 'previously suppressed' call that was placed on Nov. 6, 2005. The recording had never been disclosed to the trial defense," reports WBAY-Green Bay, citing another spectacular legal filing on August 16.

A worldwide community remains appalled with Wisconsin "justice." Will Wisconsin voters? November will tell.

Corrupt police worked and worked until planting evidence and character assassination gave a ridiculous local press enough for the get-Avery project in the public mind in east-central Wisconsin. Corrupt Wisconsin courts okayed everything that the prosecution and police did.

The long time common law rule was “1 warrant, 1 search. Not 8 days & 7 searches/entries to SA residence on 1 warrant. We challenged the searches pretrial & (as usual) courts created new law in WI just for SA’s case to allow it. One of many “Steven Avery exceptions” to the law. 🙄 https://t.co/GTLFyVVpdI

— Jerome Buting (@JButing) October 6, 2022

How can you allow the continued suffering of an innocent?

It is tantamount to walking past a dying man on the street, pretending not to hear his call for help. What kind of person does that? YOU?

God has given you the power to do good @Tony4WI @JoshKaulWI. HOW WILL YOU USE IT? pic.twitter.com/UlORf1COPy

— Rhonda SD (@rhonda_sd) August 22, 2022

Indeed, what else are they hiding? They’ve always had this call, and clear time stamps for all calls. MTSO officials & records clerks should give sworn deposition testimony about where & how their records are stored. Maybe someone has the personal integrity not to lie under oath. https://t.co/adRhEs9n8K

— Jerome Buting (@JButing) August 19, 2022

It’s true. They deliberately stripped the call times from the tracks provided. We spent hours trying to discern the sequence & times of calls based only on content & subjects discussed. https://t.co/sxfmcIazrY

— Jerome Buting (@JButing) August 17, 2022

It’s another Brady violation. As usual in these cases, a stroke of luck defense ever found out. A new records clerk apparently made mistake & included Sowinski’s call in new open records request in May 2022. The call was hidden from us before trial & from @ZellnerLaw until now.

— Jerome Buting (@JButing) August 17, 2022

Gov Tony Evers Can Issue New Emergency COVID-19 Order Now: Here's How

B.1.1.7 Mutation Should Be "Treated as a Separate Epidemic," Say Experts as Wisc Court Says All COVID-19 Viruses Are the Same

Updated - Madison, Wisconsin — Gov Tony Evers needs to declare a new state of emergency; use the academic resources our state has cultivated to draft justification for the new threat in the specific form of the B.1.1.7 variant [aka U.K. variant, British variant or Kent variant].

This should be done soon in such a formulation that to disagree with the executive action is to disagree with evolution and the scientific community, and the Wisconsin University System in which the population retains pride and support.

On March 31, four rightist Supreme Court of Wisconsin justices issued a sweeping decision, blocking Gov Evers' executive orders declaring an emergency and mandating masks in many circumstances (Jeré Fabick v. Tony Evers 2020AP001718-OA Case History); (Opinions, Decision text); (Executive Order #105, February 4, 2021).

The case is Supreme Court of Wisconsin, Jeré Fabick v.Tony Evers (Case No.:2020AP001718). 

 

The four-to-three decision was issued with a biting dissent authored by Justice Ann Walsh Bradley.

Evers can still declare a new state of emergency, but such a new executive order must be predicated on what the justices regard as new enabling conditions, the four Republican justices held, inventing a new reading of the power of the Wisconsin governor.

 

Jeré Fabick v.Tony Evers is what happens when rightest judges crawl under ideology; deny implications of evolution and declare uninformed views on virology and epidemiology to be judicial policy, in corrupt service to the Republican Party of Wisconsin.

Still, the COVID-19 variants' genetics have changed so radically and rapidly, and behave so differently (and destructively) that these mutated biological agents incontrovertibly constitute a new underlying cause and enabling condition for a new executive order declaring a state of emergency.

Jeré Fabick v.Tony Evers

People will die because of the Jeré Fabick v.Tony Evers holding that is, essentially, just another Republican power grab. Outside of Republicans, few believe the majority's opinion is anything beyond what the dissenting opinion describes as:

"[J]udicial immodesty, [that] goes beyond the relief requested and declares Executive Order #105 [Relating to Declaring a State of Emergency and Public Health Emergency​​​​​​] unlawful with scant analysis and without candid justification," (p. 2. Dissent, Walsh Bradley)

The seven justices agree on the authority of the governor to declare a public health emergency and issue emergency orders. 

 

Further, the Court agrees that COVID-19 as a new Coronavirus meets the statutory criteria as a public health emergency.

Beyond a profound disagreement on standing, a primary disagreement concerns the governor's power to declare subsequent multiple states of emergency for what the Republican-supported majority assert is the same "basis," the same "enabling condition," and underlying cause.

The dissent notes two relevant state statutes — Wis. Stat. §323.02(16) and 323.10 — relate to occurrences or imminent threat of public health emergencies, an argument the Republican refuse to engage, beyond a dismissive paragraph.

Gov Evers had declared four separate states of emergencies after the State Health department reported the threat of the Coronavirus and new data indicating spikes in cases and the imminent threat of increased community spread.

The state's case was briefed and argued by the Wisconsin Dept of Justice, brief filed by Hannah S. Jurss, assistant attorney general, and Joshua L. Kaul, Wisconsin attorney general. There was an oral argument by Hannah S. Jurss.

"[Plaintiff] Fabick, a single Wisconsin resident, filed suit as a taxpayer [after the third declaration of a State of Emergency and Public Health Emergency]. He brought his suit as an original action before this court, arguing that the Governor lacks the statutory authority to declare successive states of emergency 'arising from the same public health emergency,'" notes Justice Walsh Bradley (p. 4, dissent).

Gov Evers Can Declare New COVID State of Emergency

The most recent declaration of emergency is Executive Order #105 (Feb), struck down by the Court for relying on the same enabling conditions as past COVID-related declared emergencies.

Though Executive Order #105 mentions the B.1.1.7 variant — [aka U.K. variant, British variant or Kent variant], a COVID-19 virus with many gene mutations — as part of the reasoning for the Feb 2021 declared state of emergency, micro-biologists and epidemiologists note the B.1.1.7-U.K.variant is now dominant in the United States, and in Wisconsin, as noted by the Wisconsin Dept of Health Services, after first appearing here in Jan 2021.

The CDC director on April 12 called for Michigan to "to enact shutdown measures in response to its worst-in-the-nation surge of coronavirus infections," reports the NYT.

Writes Sanjay Mishra: "The coronavirus variant known as B.1.1.7, which studies show is both more deadly and more transmissible than the original version of SARS-CoV-2, is now the most common strain circulating in United States, and its growing prevalence has alarmed prominent epidemiologists (National Geographic).

Mishra continues:

Earlier in the pandemic, not many children were becoming infected with the coronavirus, and they did not appear to be major sources of virus transmission to other age groups. 'That changed with B.1.1.7' says epidemiologist Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. 'We're now seeing substantial numbers of outbreaks in schools and in school-related activities.'

Further, Mishra writes, outbreaks among children in Wisconsin and Minnesota now have experts convinced that this mutated form of the virus presents a new threat in its capacity to infect children, and its capacity to successfully bind to human cells.

A rapidly growing outbreak of COVID-19 in Carver County, Minnesota, has been linked to school-sponsored and club sports activities. In a study done by the Minnesota Department of Health, researchers produced a detailed map of COVID-19 transmission showing that the B.1.1.7 variant caused about a quarter of these cases.

A similar outbreak was reported in Wisconsin, where all the children at a Dane County childcare center who tested positive were 6 years or younger.Now, a growing number of experts want the B.1.1.7 variant treated as a new virus because of its genetically enhanced tendency to attach to human proteins.

Researchers believe the variant spreads so rapidly because B.1.1.7 accumulated a large number of genetic changes—17 in total—including eight in the virus’s hallmark spike protein. The spike protein attaches to the ACE2 receptor protein, which is found on the outer wall of 72 types of human cells. After the virus latches onto the ACE2 receptor, it can enter the host cell, make more copies of itself, and trigger infection.

By binding more tightly to the ACE2 receptors, 'these mutations provide selective advantage to B.1.1.7, so that's why now it is spreading everywhere' says Olivier Schwartz, head of the Virus and Immunity Unit of the Pasteur Institute in Paris, France. 'It's a kind of a Darwinian selection process.' ...

Some researchers believe that B.1.1.7 behaves so differently from the original strain that it can even be 'treated as a separate epidemic,' says Ravindra Gupta, a professor of clinical microbiology at the University of Cambridge.

B.1.1.7 also been causing problems in other ways. It carries a couple of genetic mutations in the spike protein called deletions, because they eliminate part of the genetic code, that help this variant escape antibodies during the body’s immune response after an infection.

So, why do Wisconsin Republican judicial policymakers and legislators want the COVID-19 virus treated the same as the radically different mutated strains?

Wisconsin Republicans need to recognize the fact of evolution and help the citizens of the state do everything in their power to slow this progression of the virus, its mutated strains and ensure the governor is not blocked by a corrupt Supreme Court and a corrupt state legislature.

Tony Evers and the Dept of Justice should be using Wisconsin's prominent research and academic resources, cultivated for over a century.  

Wisconsin has the great public research institution, the University of Wisconsin-Madison, home of pioneering public health and Zoonotic disease research. 

UW-Madison has 100s of research scientists and academics, evolutionary biologists, the Dept of Geoscience, the Genetics dept, the J.F. Crow Institute for the Study of Evolution; you get the picture.

The Wisconsin Dept of Justice needs to be prepared to argue the consensus of the scientific community at the Wisconsin Supreme Court. Yes, this new strain should be treated as a new basis for a public health emergency and here's why.

What Gov Evers and Attorney General Kaul need to do is make the legal fight against COVID-19 variants a community fight, a citizen fight enlisting young Genetics and Geoscience students and academics, for example, and make outrageous decisions against our citizenry by corrupt justices come with unacceptable political costs.

In other words, if Republicans want to be on the side of the viruses, and kill our families, they pay the costs.

Starving children is fine with Republicans, as we know by Fabick which would have killed $50 million in funding to help provide food security, without desperate U.S. and Wisconsin negotiations to save the funds.

Basing more opposition to a new state of emergency on the proposition that evolution-in-action does not make genetically mutated strains a new virus, and a threat constituting a new emergency is crazy, and is jurisprudence that can be easily overturned.

Evolution is a fact. The scientific community knows more COVID-19 variants are coming. So does the Biden administration.

Biden's American Rescue Plan signed into law in March provides critical funding "to dramatically increase our country’s sequencing, surveillance, and outbreak analytics capacity at the levels demanded by the crisis," in a nod to virus mutations and evolution, both processes as real and predictable as the misery and devastation already inflicted (White House).

Following a call from Gov Evers and Attorney General Kaul, Wisconsin needs a brilliant project manager with vast interdisciplinary knowledge who can establish that genetically altered viruses are the emergency threat this Pandemic has wrought.

Guess what? In Wisconsin there are 1,000s of such people.

Steven Avery Has Contracted COVID 19

Madison, Wisconsin — Steven Avery, featured in the Emmy-winning Making a Murderer documentary (Newsweek), has contracted COVID 19.

Avery's testing positive for COIVD-19 was announced by Avery's former attorney, Jerome Buting, and other advocates on social media.

Avery was wrongfully convicted of an attack against a jogger in 1985, and exonerated by DNA testing and released in 2003.

"Following his release in 2003, Avery filed a $36-million lawsuit against Manitowoc County, its former sheriff, and its former district attorney for wrongful conviction and imprisonment. In November 2005, with his civil suit still pending, he was arrested for the murder of Wisconsin photographer Teresa Halbach, and in 2007 was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment without possibility of parole," notes a CNN report, cited in Wikipedia.

In 2005, Avery was framed by corrupt law enforcement officials in Calumet and Manitowoc counties in retaliation for his civil suit.

Just got off the phone with Steven. His voice is strong and clear. He has no respiratory issues, no fever or muscle aches. He says he is almost well and this virus is “nothing”compared to the suffering he has endured as an innocent man behind bars. #MakingAMurderer2 @TruthWins

— Kathleen Zellner (@ZellnerLaw) June 4, 2020

He was subsequently convicted in an area notorious for corruption and crooked law enforcement such as the district attorney, Ken Kratz, who served as chief prosecutor. Kratz was later driven from office, and then forced to resign his law license.

Avery is serving a life sentence at the maximum-security Waupun Correctional Institution.

Avery's contracting the COVID 19 was feared by advocates working for his freedom.

Wisconsin Gov Tony Evers (D) and Attorney General Joshua Kaul (D) have worked against freeing Avery and another wrongfully convicted man, Brendan Dassey.

Freeing these innocent men would result in the most spectacular law enforcement scandal in Wisconsin history that could ultimately lead to the downfall of Kaul, Evers and dozens of corrupt police and prosecutors for whom the two Democratic Party officials are working.

Avery's testing positive for COIVD-19 was announced by Avery's former attorney, Jerome Buting, and other advocates on social media.

Steven Avery has tested positive for COVID-19, and is confined to his cell. But @SandyGreenman reports he only had short-lived symptoms & is in good spirits. 🙏🏼 for speedy recovery and quick justice. #FreeStevenAvery

— Jerome Buting (@JButing) June 3, 2020

Rallies in Philly, London and Manitowoc Cap Innocence Weekend for Wrongfully Convicted

UK supporter of Steven Avery and Brandan Dassey take to
the streets to demand justice for the wrongfully convicted
in London on Saturday. The naked display of corruption
in Wisocnsin law enforcement has led angry demands
from across the world to see the innocent set free.

Updated all day.

Signs reading "I am an innocent man," and "We Stand for Innocence" are to found in London, Philadelphia and Manitowoc, Wisconsin today and tonight.

A rally is scheduled for Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey at the Manitowoc County Courthouse on June 15, 2019 from 11 am to 3 pm today.

In Philadelphia on Rittenhouse Square, ralliers are working to bring awareness to judicial and prosecutorial misconduct, and the wrongfully convicted Steven Avery of Wisconsin, Brendan Dassey of Wisconsin, and Freddy Augello of New Jersey. For more information on the Augello shocking injustice, see Freddy Augello in Facebook.

Some supporters are traveling to Manitowoc from Australia.

Do fellow human beings really merit the effort and energy involved in flying overseas?

Among those for whom life is a phenomenon occurring on her watch, the answer is, yes.

This affirmative determination is the margin of survival for the many victims of American law enforcement, a state movement that has become a significant political force working for the lunatic in the White House.

Come on media, you have to report on this rally. @FoxNews @ABC @CNN @piersmorgan @AKellerLawCrime @JButing @SDrizin @LauraNirider @kirstiealley @rickygervais #WakeUpWisconsin #WeHearYouSteven

Retweets would be nice. Thank you x https://t.co/U4rq9ywC74

— Jean Palmer (@jeandpalmer) June 15, 2019

Updates coming.

Steven Avery Sends Message to Supporters after News of Stalling by Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz

Steven Avery sends public a message from Waupun
maximum security prison.

News delivered to Steven Avery that Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz is dithering on his case has not discouraged this innocent man featured in the Emmy-wining Making a Murderer.

Avery's attorney, Kathleen Zellner, posted Avery's message on Twitter this afternoon after visiting the wrongfully convicted man in a maximum security prison in Waupun, Wisconsin yesterday.

Avery has now served 34 years in prison. He was exonerated for the first frame-up after being cleared of an attack on an innocent woman in 1985.

Avery then sued Manitowoc County in a civil action that implicated several law enforcement officers.

While depositions were under way, police in the Manitowoc and Calumet sheriff offices in east-central Wisconsin framed Avery for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach.

Currently, the case has been sent back to Manitowoc County where Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz is presiding.

The sheer demented consciousness of Wisconsin law enforcement has Avery's advocates both terrorized and incensed.

Wisconsin Attorney General Joshua Kaul (D) is leading the state effort to keep the innocent man imprisoned.

Steven Avery's message is reproduced below in Ms. Zellner's Tweet, and in text form.

Visited Steven Avery yesterday. This is his message to his supporters. #NeverGiveUp ⁦@MakingAMurderer⁩ #34YearsLost pic.twitter.com/YtAJXl6Iia

— Kathleen Zellner (@ZellnerLaw) June 12, 2019

Message from Steven Avery

To my supporters,
There are times that I feel like giving up. I've been in prison 34 years as an innocent man.
THIS IS NOT JUSTICE.
I was framed by corrupt prosecutors, bad lawyers, and crooked cops. I am fighting for my life. Can you hear me?
I need all the public support you can give me. I will not give up if you do not give up on me.
Thank you for your support.
Truth wins,

Steven Avery

Wisconsin Judge Sutkiewicz Leaves Steven Avery's Legal Team Guessing

A rally is scheduled for Steven Avery and Brendan
Dassey at the Manitowoc County Courthouse
on June 15, 2019 from 11 am to 3 pm

Madison, Wisconsin—A Wisconsin circuit court judge, Sheboygan County Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz (substituting), has apparently adopted stalling and secrecy as a new tactic to sabotage the post-conviction litigation of an innocent man.

Not even litigants in the Steven Avery legal quest for exoneration know the judicial calendar, which in Sutkiewicz' court is a secret, a departure from the judicial norm in which litigants agree to or know a procedural calendar.

A tweet this morning from Avery's legal advocates, (not his attorneys) reads, "Since the 90 days has already passed, either the judge has decided to take more time OR she doesn't have a deadline at all and she'll rule on it when she feels like it."

Update: Since the 90 days has already passed, either the judge has decided to take more time OR she doesn't have a deadline at all and she'll rule on it when she feels like it. Visit https://t.co/FsGYhkRRSs for the full explanation.

— #WorkWithKZ (@workwithkz) June 12, 2019

The latest communication from Avery's legal team makes guesses, educated "conjecture" about what's next in the team's communication on its website.

Sutkiewicz' conduct has resulted in one of the most experienced wrongful conviction legal teams working without knowing the next procedural step.

The Feb 25, 2019 appellate court order mandating "any proceedings necessary to address [Avery's] claims" points to a hearing.

No such proceedings have been ordered to this date.

Steven Avery is featured in the Emmy-winning documentary, Making a Murderer.

Attorney General Joshua Kaul (D), heading Wisconsin's effort to keep an innocent man in prison, has the discretion to accede to Avery's requests for transparency and open examination of evidence and state misconduct without a judicial hearing or order.

From the June 11, 2019 communication from Steven Avery's legal team, the WorkwithKZ team:

Awaiting ruling from Circuit Court

Update June 11, 2019: The CoA [Court of Appeals] gave [attorney  Kathleen Zellner] a deadline to file but did not specify a deadline for the Circuit Court judge to rule.  Standard procedure and Supreme Court rule dictate 90 days from the completion of the filing (petition plus any responses and/or replies).  That may or may not apply in this instance.  Since the 90 days has already passed, either the judge has decided to take more time OR she doesn't have a deadline at all and she'll rule on it when she feels like it.

(I'm leaving the previous information below for everyone's reference.)

Update June 9, 2019: If we do not see a ruling filed on Monday, June 10, we're probably looking at a new deadline of Monday, September 9.

Explanation for that: The only expectation of information we can give you is mostly conjecture. A lot of this is dependent upon unknown factors like whether or not she's accepting the response and reply. It's not likely that the judge will grant the hearing at this point. We believe she would have granted it already to get it on her calendar if she was going to do that.  If she's not granting the hearing, she's probably not going to accept the response and reply.  If she tells the chief judge she's taking more time, we will have no indication of this. So, if we do not see a ruling filed on Monday, June 10, she has likely decided to take another 90 days. Since she's probably not considering the response and reply, that would put the due date at Monday, September 9. 

An excerpt of a letter from Steven Avery posted on
advocates' site on Facebook.

Advocates for Steven Avery are growing angry at the corrupt effort by Judge Sutkiewicz (substituting) who apparently reached a result adverse to Steven Avery in State v. Steven A. Avery, Appeal Number 2017AP002288 long ago.

But Sutkiewicz works backwards. Result first, then draft an order and opinion to support the position of corrupt Wisconsin law enforcement, an opinion that will, law enforcement and Sutkiewicz believe, prevail in appellate court for a time — a delaying tactic.

It's been over 90 days. So why is Judge Angela Sutkiewicz taking so long on KZ's motion over the bones? Come on, @GovEvers. It's time to end the embarrassment. #WorkWithKZ @ZellnerLaw

— TotallyScott (@ScottTotally) June 12, 2019

Wrongfully Convicted Wisconsin Man Awaits Word from Circuit Court

Multiple violations of the law committed by Wisconsin
law enforcement are part of post-conviction litigation
in Steven Avery's bid for a new trial.
[p. 10, Defendant's Motion for Leave to File Defendant's
Reply to the State's Response in Opposition to
Defendant's Motion for New Trial. April 11, 2019]

Madison, Wisconsin — Two Wisconsin Dept of Justice (DoJ) attorneys conspired to destroy exculpatory evidence in 2011 in the Steven Avery case, featured in the Emmy-winning Making a Murderer.

This evidence destruction is being litigated in Avery's post-conviction case by the same two DoJ perpetrators — Asst Attorney General and Special Prosecutor Thomas J. Fallon, and DoJ Special Prosecutor Norman Gahn. Gahn and Fallon were also part of the Special Prosecutor's trial team led by the disgraced sex offender, ex-Calumet County District Attorney Ken Kratz. (McDonell-Parry reports in Rolling Stone Magazine)

The case is State v. Steven A. Avery, Appeal Number 2017AP002288.

Fallon and Gahn argue that the evidence they helped destroy was "inexplicably released" from the Calumet County Sheriff’s Department’s evidence control unit in their March 29, 2019 legal filing, (p 13).

"Inexplicably released" is an interesting, indeed disingenuous characterization for the illegal destruction of evidence that not only implicates Fallon, Gahn and Calumet County Sheriff Mark Wiegert, but also is a part of Avery's post-conviction litigation pleading this concealment and destruction violates the Due Process Clause and is a clear Brady violation under Wisconsin judicial doctrine.

The sheer multiplicity of illegality and violations of Avery's constitutional rights by Wisconsin law enforcement is a window into Wisconsin law enforcement corruption.

A reader ought consider noting this is not ole-boy Louisiana corruption. This is demented Wisconsin police corruption, more insidious than any conduct our fellows to the South can conjure.

A co-conspirator in the evidence destruction is current Calumet County Sheriff Mark Wiegert — the same Mark Wiegert who abused a cognitively challenged 16-year-old Brendan Dassey and falsely claimed Dassey had confessed to killing a young woman with Avery in 2005. (Michele LaVigne, Sally U. Miles. Under the Hood. Brendan Dassey. Language Impairment and Judicial Ignorance.)

DoJ attorneys Fallon and Gahn are working under the authority of Wisconsin Attorney General Joshua Kahl (D).

A decision is expected before June 10, 2019. An adverse ruling for Steven Avery is expected from a Wisconsin circuit court judge, Sheboygan County Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz, (Workwith KZ legal filings).

Avery is expected by observers to prevail in state appellate court.

Wisconsin Evidence Preservation Law Fails When DoJ and Other Cops Dismiss Duties Mandated by Statute

Wisconsin's biological evidence preservation law is clear:
" ... Except as provided in sub. (3), if physical evidence
that is in the possession of a law enforcement agency
includes any biological material that was collected
in connection with a criminal investigation
that resulted in a criminal conviction, delinquency
adjudication, or commitment under s. 971.17 or 980.06
and the biological material is from a victim of the
offense that was the subject of the criminal investigation
or may reasonably be used to incriminate or exculpate
any person for the offense, the law enforcement agency
shall preserve the physical evidence until every person
in custody as a result of the conviction, adjudication,
or commitment has reached his or her discharge date."

Madison, Wisconsin—As a Wisconsin circuit court judge—Sheboygan County Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz (substituting)—works on crafting her opinion to sabotage the post-conviction litigation of an innocent man, a state law meant to preserve evidence is one focus of legal filings this year by wrongful conviction attorney, Kathleen Zellner (McDonell-Parry, Rolling Stone Magazine).

The case is State v. Steven A. Avery, Appeal Number 2017AP002288, brought by Steven Avery, featured in the Emmy-winning Making a Murderer.

The prosecution led by Wisconsin Attorney General Joshua Kaul (D) and his legal team—including Mark Williams, Asst Attorney General and Special Prosecutor Thomas J. Fallon, and Special Prosecutor Norman Gahn—have not challenged the fact that law enforcement destroyed evidence in violation of state statute.

In fact, Department of Justice Special Prosecutors Thomas J. Fallon and Norman Gahn plotted to destroy evidence in 2011, and now Attorney General Joshua Kaul has both Fallon and Gahn defending the wrongful prosecution of Avery—discredited work of the disgraced sex offender and ex-Calumet County District Attorney, Ken Kratz—who foisted a fraud upon two separate juries arguing two conflicting sets of facts to convict both Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey.

This is a bizarre development in which two DoJ attorneys break the law, represent the state in post-conviction litigation, and then refuse to engage the arguments pleading the facts and implications of their unlawful conduct.

The legal strategy of the State protecting the conviction of a man whom they know to be innocent is to present a serpentine, internally inconsistent procedural argument that does not address the merits of the willful and unlawful destruction of evidence and the Due Process implications of this lawless state action committed in 2011 (Avery legal filings).

Worse, the State DoJ is continuing its effort to obstruct attorney Zellner, while Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz continues her strategy of running legal interference on the circuit court level to whom the case was sent back by a state appellate panel on Feb 25, 2019.

This is a spectacle of lawless Wisconsin law enforcement that is largely blacked out in the Wisconsin media.

As Amelia McDonell-Parry reports in Rolling Stone Magazine in Feb 2019:

Attorney Kathleen Zellner has filed a new letter with the Wisconsin Court of Appeals on behalf of her client, Steven Avery, accusing the Attorney General’s Office of 'trying to deceive' her and the Court about the status of key forensic evidence in the Making a Murderer case. Zellner’s letter, submitted on February 13th, is actually her second letter to the court in as many days; both letters supplement a January 24th motion that accused prosecutors of violating state law and Avery’s constitutional rights by destroying evidence. Zellner tells Rolling Stone that she has since learned that a key piece of evidence—suspected human pelvic bone fragments, which could exonerate her client—may have been destroyed as well. And, she says, prosecutors are 'obstructing' her efforts to find out.

According to a newly discovered police report and updated evidence control ledgers, on September 20th, 2011, 'human bone' fragments recovered during the investigation were removed from the Calumet County Sheriff’s Department’s evidence control unit. They were transferred to a local funeral home, which then 'returned' the bones to the family of murder victim Teresa Halbach.

According to an affidavit from Avery’s former appellate attorney Suzanne Hagopian, the State never informed defense counsel of its intention to effectively 'destroy' key case evidence by giving it to the victim’s family. Wisconsin law requires law enforcement to preserve 'any biological material' and 'physical evidence' until the convicted defendant has been discharged from prison. Avery is serving a life sentence without the possibility of parole, and the Wisconsin statute protects his right to retain evidence that 'may reasonably be used to incriminate or exculpate any person' in Halbach’s murder.

Calumet County Sheriff’s Department Deputy Jeremy Hawkins states in the 2011 police report that Sgt. Investigator Mark Wiegert, and attorneys Thomas Fallon and Norm Gahn, were involved in removing the bones from evidence control. Wiegert was a lead investigator in the case, while Fallon and Gahn were on the trial prosecution team. Fallon is now an Assistant Attorney General, and he and Gahn continue to represent the case on behalf of the state of Wisconsin as Avery appeals his conviction. Rolling Stone sent Fallon and Gahn a detailed request for comment on the claims outlined in Zellner’s court filings; a spokesperson for the Attorney General’s Office replied to say that they 'cannot comment on ongoing litigation.'

The September 20th, 2011 police report, which Zellner says she received in December from an anonymous third-party, has exposed a lot more than just a violation of state law. A thorough assessment of updated evidence control ledgers and crime lab unit reports (attached as exhibits to her four most recent court filings and reviewed by Rolling Stone) indicates that the 'human bones' recovered during the investigation were more plentiful than had ever been conveyed to the defense. And many of the bones that were returned to the Halbach family in 2011 were collected from locations that prosecutors claimed had nothing to do with her murder.

According to police and prosecutors, Avery fatally shot Halbach in his garage, dismembered and then burned her body in a pit next to his trailer. Investigators recovered charred human remains, namely bone, from Avery’s burn pit and a burn barrel. However, there was also evidence of a second burn location just over half a mile from Avery’s trailer. The Manitowoc County quarry is about a quarter mile from what used to be a back entrance to the salvage yard; that’s where investigators recovered another burn pile containing possible human pelvic bone fragments.

Avery’s trial attorneys theorized that the quarry bones were evidence that Halbach’s body was burned somewhere other than the Avery property. Prosecutor Ken Kratz, on the other hand, downplayed the possibility that they were human, telling the jury, 'These bones in the quarry, I’m going to take 20 seconds to talk about, because the best anybody can say is that they are possible [sic] human.'

Zellner has wanted to get her hands on the suspected human pelvic bones since November 2016, when the Wisconsin Circuit Court ordered new scientific testing on certain items of evidence. In September 2017, Assistant Attorney General Fallon agreed to allow a 'microscopic examination' of the pelvic bone fragments to determine whether they’re human. For Zellner, this examination is just the first step toward proving a longtime defense theory that Halbach was killed, dismembered and burned at another location.

'[Avery’s trial attorney] Jerry Buting even said, if her body parts are over in the quarry, then Steven Avery’s innocent because the prosecution said she never left the property,' Zellner says. 'Plus, he’s not going to bring the bones from the quarry and plant them in his burn pit!'

However, soon after the parties agreed to examine the bones, the circuit court [Judge Angela W. Sutkiewicz] issued a seemingly hasty decision denying Avery’s petition for post-conviction relief, despite the fact that several court-ordered tests were still pending. Examining the bones has been put on hold, pending a ruling by the Court of Appeals.

State Appellate Court will make Steven Avery free, observers believe.

What is unclear at this point in litigation is how far Wisconsin law enforcement, led by Wisconsin Attorney General Joshua Kaul (D), will go to protect an unlawful and wrongful conviction.