Which is strange because the state high court will probably never rule on such cases.
Just one day after the February 21 primary election, state Supreme Court candidate Janet Protasiewicz released her first ad for the general election, an attack on her opponent Dan Kelly entitled “Predator.”
“Dan Kelly won’t keep our communities safe,” the ever-ominous voice of such ads informed us.
“As a lawyer Kelly defended child sex predators who posed as ministers in order to prey on vulnerable young girls.”
The ad goes on, adding more lurid detail, leaving us to conclude that if Kelly is elected to the court, he’ll be letting villainous predators loose to prey on our children.
Which is nonsense. The Supreme Court isn’t a trial court that decides the sentences for child predators or any criminals. Nor is it likely to review sentences by lower courts for sexual offenders.
“The Wisconsin Supreme Court rarely reviews sentences. Such cases also always end with a court of appeals decision,” notes Madison attorney Lester Pines, who has handled more than 15 cases before the high court going back to the 1980s.
Pines, a liberal who supports Protasiewicz, adds that “The sexual assault statutes in Wisconsin are well-established and unlikely to be subject to interpretation by the Supreme Court in the future.”
And yet you’d swear it was the most important issue the court will face.
The liberal group Better Wisconsin Together spent $829,000 during the primary on ads bashing conservative Jennifer Dorow as soft on crime. “We depend on judges to keep our families safe,” one ad warned, “But Jennifer Dorow has a long history of keeping criminals, even sexual predators out of jail.”
Meanwhile the ad shows us a picture of the Waukesha County Judge and a list of court cases with the statement “HISTORY OF KEEPING PREDATORS OUT OF PRISON.”
During her years as a defense attorney Dorow handled some 180 cases, defending clients charged with many different crimes, including some for sexual assault or sex with a child age 16 or older.
Had she gotten through the primary instead of Kelly it’s a safe bet Protasiewicz would have targeted Dorow with an ad entitled “Predators.” Indeed the Protasiewicz campaign team clearly expected this to be an issue, and released an ad during the primary telling us how tough she was on crime: with her declaring that “I’ve locked up murderers, rapists, and child sex predators.”
Protasiewicz soon got attacked on the same issue, with Dan Bice reporting on three cases where the Milwaukee County Circuit Court judge gave no prison time to three defendants, including one accused of sexual assault and a case involving a 17-year-old accused of sexual contact with young girls.
The story included a comment from state Republican Party spokesperson Rachel Reisner that sounded just like those attack ads. “Judge Protasiewicz’ unwillingness to give even a day in prison to violent child rapists shows just how radical she is and why she is unfit to sit on Wisconsin’s highest court…Wisconsin families can’t trust Judge Janet to keep us safe.”
The theme was amplified in an attack ad against Protasiewicz by the Wisconsin Manufactures and Commerce, telling us she sentenced a child rapist to time already served in jail awaiting trial and probation. “Probation for a child rapist?” the horrified voice over by a woman asks.
Yesterday a variant of that ad was released by Fair Courts America PAC funded by Republican fat cat Richard Uihlein that is spending millions to elect Kelly. Judge Protasiewicz PUT CHILD RAPIST BACK ON OUR STREETS, the ad’s text tells us, while the voiceover warns she “puts our families at risk.”
continue reading at the source
The reason ads like this exist is because the groups that push it know that the general public is ignorant of the court system and the Registry so it’s easy to push out lies. Public ignorance is a politician’s advantage in manipulating others to support them.
So I guess all this means that these people think that people accused of crimes are not deserving of representation in court. Or, they just hope to scare off any attorney willing to take a sex offender as a client if they ever hope to achieve higher office.
Such a crock – the people pushing these ads all know that defending a criminal client is not the same as supporting the crime. Politics is a dirty business, for sure.
How prevalent are such ads ( those descriptions of soft of sex offenders) in Wisconsin? They’re in every election cycle and on both sides! That is the heart of modern socialism from both the left and right, with each claiming the moral high ground as applied to the child rearing environment. If you want to start a fight start telling others what’s ” good” for their children. I cringe every time I hear State politicians claiming or policy advertising about child rearing positions are a manifest government responsibility. I believe child rearing must be left to parents to decide.
Why don’t these people running for office just discuss the Sex Offender laws head on ? This is the discussion that needs to be made – How else can we address the fairness/unfairness of these Laws ? One thing I always think about is the sentence…it is given in court but is irrelevant because the arbitrary laws give discretion to the Judge as to whether it continues or ends. An offender is already left with little representation, due to Atty’s that require so-o much money to represent them or Atty’s that don’t want to help the offender, as to not be pegged ” the Atty that helps Sex Offenders “. At least in a book, every sentence has a period at the end, right ? Why isn’t there a period at the end of a “sentence ” in these court cases ? How can an accused be told they have a ” sentence ” and then find out that their ” sentence ” can change – depending on the Judge’s discretion ?! So…there is no light at the end of the tunnel then ? Sentence is like a made up word ? What do they want the accused to do ? There doesn’t even seem to be a requirement in place for an offender, to give to the court, to satisfy their case. Its ” up to the Judge ” – arbitrarily. It feels like money is the factor because there are some offenders that ” get out of it “…isn’t that the real tragedy ? ! Many of those type of scenarios are family members that assault their wives and children…doesn’t it seem like there should be more analysis of, or categorizing of, the cases ? Its grouping them all together, like apples and oranges, and we all know there is a difference – right ? Then there is the unfair practice of plea bargains, and the pressure to convict a person with the backroom deals being made. The accused is at the mercy of an Atty ( usually appointed ) that is hurried and wanting to ” decrease the damages ” – interpreted as ” i want to get this over with “. Its not the Atty’s life being thrown away, right ? Meanwhile the accused is maintaining his innocence but that doesn’t matter. Why is that ? Because his Juvenile Adjudication ( record ) is being allowed in as evidence, interpreted as ” thats all the State had “. A Juvenile adjudication should never be allowed in an Adult charge – ever ! Why ? Because when the State can’t make a solid case in Adult court, they use a Juvenile record as ” evidence “… it’s like resentencing the accused again… even when there is D & A evidence involving someone else in that Adult case ! First there is a plea bargain because the old record is brought in – the accused is scared out of his mind and advised to ” decrease the damages “. Then the D&A is presented but the Judge states that there are many ways for sexual contact to take place…therefore this is not going to deter the sentence, just reduce the counts ( but still read in ?). How in the world can an accused, get convicted with someone else’s D & A evidence ? When that happened to my loved one, I felt like we were in some Twilight Zone – the Atty just said ” sorry – nothing I can do “. Yeah… No money and several years later, he still has to register – now for life because they counted a Juvenile case, along with an Adult case, as a reason to keep him on a registry that he also has to pay for – every year !? No, that Law wasn’t in place at the time of conviction either, along with a 10 year sentence for nothing ! I wonder whos’ D&A evidence convicted my loved one ? Yeah… Why not a discussion about these unfair laws ?! Lets hear them talk about unfair court practices with cases involving people with no money to fight ! That will get them my Vote – Republican or Democrat !
Why don’t these people running for office just discuss the Sex Offender laws head on ? This is the discussion that needs to be made – How else can we address the fairness/unfairness of these Laws ? One thing I always think about is the sentence…it is given in court but is irrelevant because the arbitrary laws give discretion to the Judge as to whether it continues or ends. An offender is already left with little representation, due to Atty’s that require so-o much money to represent them or Atty’s that don’t want to help the offender, as to not be pegged ” the Atty that helps Sex Offenders “. At least in a book, every sentence has a period at the end, right ? Why isn’t there a period at the end of a “sentence ” in these court cases ? How can an accused be told they have a ” sentence ” and then find out that their ” sentence ” can change – depending on the Judge’s discretion ?! So…there is no light at the end of the tunnel then ? Sentence is like a made up word ? What do they want the accused to do ? There doesn’t even seem to be a requirement in place for an offender, to give to the court, to satisfy their case. Its ” up to the Judge ” – arbitrarily. It feels like money is the factor because there are some offenders that ” get out of it “…isn’t that the real tragedy ? ! Many of those type of scenarios are family members that assault their wives and children…doesn’t it seem like there should be more analysis of, or categorizing of, the cases ? Its grouping them all together, like apples and oranges, and we all know there is a difference – right ? Then there is the unfair practice of plea bargains, and the pressure to convict a person with the backroom deals being made. The accused is at the mercy of an Atty ( usually appointed ) that is hurried and wanting to ” decrease the damages ” – interpreted as ” i want to get this over with “. Its not the Atty’s life being thrown away, right ? Meanwhile the accused is maintaining his innocence but that doesn’t matter. Why is that ? Because his Juvenile Adjudication ( record ) is being allowed in as evidence, interpreted as ” that’s all the State had “. A Juvenile adjudication should never be allowed in an Adult charge – ever ! Why ? Because when the State can’t make a solid case in Adult court, they use a Juvenile record as ” evidence “… it’s like resentencing the accused again… even when there is D & A evidence involving someone else in that Adult case ! First there is a plea bargain because the old record is brought in – the accused is scared out of his mind and advised to ” decrease the damages “. Then the D&A is presented but the Judge states that there are many ways for sexual contact to take place…therefore this is not going to deter the sentence, just reduce the counts ( but still read in ?). How in the world can an accused, get convicted with someone else’s D & A evidence ? When that happened to my loved one, I felt like we were in some Twilight Zone – the Atty just said ” sorry – nothing I can do “. Yeah… No money and several years later, he still has to register – now for life because they counted a Juvenile case, along with an Adult case, as a reason to keep him on a registry that he also has to pay for – every year !? No, that Law wasn’t in place at the time of conviction either, along with a 10 year sentence for nothing ! I wonder whos’ D&A evidence convicted my loved one ? Yeah… Why not a discussion about these unfair laws ?! Lets hear them talk about unfair court practices with cases involving people with no money to fight ! That will get them my Vote – Republican or Democrat !
Wisconsin is a swing state where you have so-called “liberal” candidates like Protasiewicz catering to the “lock up the sex offender” hysteria. And if conservative Dorow had made it through the primary, quite honestly, I think she would have been the better candidate because she defended the most hated people of American society—those that commit sex crimes against children. But now that Dorow’s out of the race, it’s back to your typical fire breathing law & order conservative versus a liberal victim’s rights advocate judge who wants to toughen sex crime laws. The most important issue facing the Wisconsin Supreme Court is settling the question—does being convicted on multiple counts makes one a repeat offender? When the WI Supreme Court discussed the issue back in October, at least one conservative thought the DOC interpretation was ridiculous. So we don’t how this will turn out. Obviously, the judges are waiting until after the election to make their ruling- but it’s hard to predict which way they’ll bend.