Members of SEIU and Voces de la Frontera arrive at the Capitol Tuesday | Wisconsin Examiner photo

Online rumors warning of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) patrols around polling places in Milwaukee and Madison appear to be unfounded. The reports circulated on social media claiming that there would be “more than 5,000 ICE agents patrolling the areas” in the two cities, as voters went to the polls to cast ballots in the April 1 election for candidates running for  Wisconsin Supreme Court, state superintendent, and referendum questions focusing on voter ID. 

Anxieties about ICE activities have been heightened under the Trump Administration. Recent weeks have seen videos showing plain-clothes, masked ICE agents detaining people on the street. Some of the detainees had been arrested after participating in activist activities, such as protests calling for an end to the war in Gaza. Fears of ICE raids have increased  in Milwaukee and Madison, as in other cities. 

Spokespersons for Milwaukee and Madison city government told Wisconsin Examiner that they have not heard any reports, complaints, or notifications about ICE agents at polling places. A spokesperson for the ICE office in Milwaukee said, “due to our operational tempo and the increased interest in our agency, we are not able to research and respond to rumors or specifics of routine daily operations for ICE.”

Meanwhile, turnout in Milwaukee has been so high that local news outlets are reporting that polling sites across the city have run out of ballots. The city’s Election’s Commission is arranging for fresh ballots to be sent to polling stations. In Tuesday’s election Republican-backed Supreme Court candidate and former Wisconsin attorney general Brad Schimel is facing off  against Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, who has the backing of state Democrats. In the  state superintendent’s race, incumbent Jill Underly is facing challenger Brittany y Kinser. Wisconsinites will also get to decide whether the state’s constitution should be amended to codify a voter ID requirement.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Melissa Beson photo courtesy LDF Police Department

On Tuesday, April 1, the Lac du Flambeau (LDF) Tribal Police Department said in a press release that it is continuing a search for Melissa Beson, 37, who has been missing since March 17 from the Lac du Flambeau Reservation in Vilas County.

Chief of Police T.J. Bill said there had been ground, air and water searches using drones and dogs, and images from over 300 reservation surveillance cameras have been reviewed for clues.

Beson, a member of the Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, was last seen in the vicinity of Indian Village Road and Chequamegon Forest Trail in Lac du Flambeau.

She was last seen wearing red sweatpants, a black sleeveless shirt, and a gray sweatshirt.

Beson is a Native American female, 5’7”, with a medium build, brown hair and brown eyes. She has numerous tattoos, including on her neck, arms and leg.

Beson’s family reported her missing on March 23, six days after she was last seen.

“Finding her has been the number one priority of the LDF Police Department,” Bill in a statement. “We have conducted extensive ground searches on foot, even in severe weather conditions. Our officers have even come in on their days off to search for her. The dedicated members of Newbold Search and Rescue have once again come to our aid and have assisted us by searching with their specially trained canines.The dogs have shown interest and appeared to pick up Melissa’s scent in the area of her last known sighting.”

The LDF Police Department has used two high-quality drones to search a portion of the Bear River’s open water and plans to use an underwater drone to dive under ice.

“Although we are expending monumental efforts in searching the area in which Mellisa was last seen, we are in no way ignoring the possibility that she may be elsewhere,” said Bill. “Our officers are working non-stop, during every shift, to follow up on every lead and tip that we receive. We have combed through countless hours of surveillance footage, have interviewed dozens of people, and have reached out to law enforcement agencies in various areas of the State of Wisconsin, who have assisted us by contacting persons with possible information and even conducting searches of residences in their jurisdictions.”

Bill told the Examiner that the LDF Police Department has reviewed surveillance footage from over 300 cameras monitored around the reservation.

“So nothing’s been revealed on them, on the surveillance of the cameras, where she was last seen,” he said. Where Beson was last seen is “in more of a desolate area,” he added, “so we don’t have cameras that go out that far.”

He also noted that the ground searches using dogs had been hampered by recent weather, including snow.

“We would like to extend our sincere appreciation to LDF Emergency Management, LDF Tribal Roads Department, LDF Economic Support Department, Newbold Search and Rescue, the Vilas County Sheriff’s Department, and Vilas County Dispatch for their vital assistance to our investigative and search efforts,” he said.

He added, “We would also like to thank everyone in the community who has provided assistance to our Department and been supportive to Melisa’s family during this difficult time.”

Anyone with information is encouraged to call the Lac du Flambeau Tribal Police Department. at (715) 588-7717 or the Vilas County Sheriff’s Office at (715) 479-4441.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Prisoners look out of their cell as Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem tours the Terrorist Confinement Center  or CECOT, on March 26, 2025, in Tecoluca, El Salvador. (Photo by Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The White House Tuesday defended the deportation of a national from El Salvador to a notorious mega-prison in that country, despite Trump administration officials admitting in court filings that the removal was a mistake.

Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia of Beltsville, Maryland, was ordered in 2019 to be removed from the United States by an immigration judge, but was granted protection from removal because it was more “likely than not that he would be persecuted by gangs in El Salvador” if he were returned, according to court documents.

Yet on March 15 he was placed on one of three deportation flights to El Salvador. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Justice admitted in separate court filings that his deportation to the brutal prison, Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo, or CECOT, was an “administrative error.”

“This was an oversight, and the removal was carried out in good faith based on the existence of a final order of removal and Abrego-Garcia’s purported membership in MS-13,” ICE Acting Field Office Director of Enforcement and Removal Operations Robert L. Cerna wrote in a Monday court filing.

Simon Y. Sandoval-Moshenberg, the attorney for Abrego Garcia, is requesting a preliminary injunction from the U.S. District Court of Maryland, which would require the Trump administration to make a request to the government of El Salvador for Abrego Garcia to be returned to U.S. custody.

The lawyer also wants a halt to U.S. payments to the government of El Salvador for detaining his client at the “notorious CECOT torture prison.”

A hearing is set for 1 p.m. Eastern Friday before U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis. She was appointed by former President Barack Obama in 2016.

Press secretary defends decision

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt Tuesday said that Abrego Garcia was a leader of the MS-13 gang, despite his deportation being “a clerical error.”

“The administration maintains the position that this individual who was deported to El Salvador and will not be returning to our country was a member of the brutal and vicious MS-13 gang,” she said.

She said the U.S. Department of Homeland Security has evidence of his gang activity that she has seen and she also alleged that Abrego Garcia was involved in human trafficking.

Sandoval-Moshenberg, the attorney for Abrego Garcia, has denied his involvement in any gangs, noting he has no criminal charges or convictions in the United States, El Salvador or any other country.

“Abrego Garcia is not a member of or has no affiliation with Tren de Aragua, MS-13, or any other criminal or street gang. Although he has been accused of general ‘gang affiliation,’ the U.S. government has never produced an iota of evidence to support this unfounded accusation,” according to court filings.

Leavitt also dismissed the 2019 order from an immigration judge granting Abrego Garcia protections from removal.

Federal law bars the removal of an individual if they will face persecution, known as a “withholding of removal.” Because of this condition, Abrego Garcia was required to check in with ICE each year, which he has complied with since 2019, according to court filings.

“Who does that judge work for? It was an immigration judge who works for the Department of Justice at the direction of the attorney general of the United States, whose name is Pam Bondi, who has committed to eradicating MS-13 from our nation’s interior,” Leavitt said.

Leavitt said that 17 more men were deported to CECOT Monday. The U.S. is paying El Salvador’s government $6 million to detain all those deported there.

Identified from news story

Abrego Garcia, who is married to a U.S. citizen with whom he has a child, was detained by ICE on March 12 while driving with his 5-year-old son near Baltimore, Maryland. He was informed by ICE officials that his “status had changed,” according to court filings.

Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, “was called and instructed to appear at their location within ten minutes to get her five-year old son, A.A.V.; otherwise, the ICE officers threatened that the child would be handed over to Child Protective Services.”

Vasquez Sura tried to call the ICE facility that her husband was transferred to and inform officials that he could not be sent back to El Salvador.

“Her attempts to protest by saying that he had won protection from being removed to El Salvador fell on deaf ears,” according to court filings.

Within three days, he would become one of the 261 men on one of three deportation flights to CECOT in El Salvador, despite a temporary restraining order in place from a district court judge from the District of Columbia that applied generally to all the deportations.

Vasquez Sura was able to identify him from a news article when a photo showed men sent to the prison with their heads shaved and arms over their necks. She recognized her husband’s scar on his head and his tattoo.

DOJ arguments

Department of Justice attorneys, on behalf of the Trump administration, argued that the district court in Maryland lacks jurisdiction because Abrego Garcia is no longer in U.S. custody and his lawyers have not shown it is likely he could be returned.

“There is no showing that any payment made to El Salvador is yet to occur; no showing that El Salvador is likely to release CECOT detainees but for any such payment; no showing that El Salvador is even inclined to consider a request to release a detainee at the United States’ request,” according to the DOJ filing.

The Department of Justice also argues that his attorney has “not clearly shown a likelihood that Abrego Garcia will be tortured or killed in CECOT.”

“While there may be allegations of abuses in other Salvadoran prisons—very few in relation to the large number of detainees—there is no clear showing that Abrego Garcia himself is likely to be tortured or killed in CECOT,” according to DOJ.

The Department of Justice said the district court should defer to the Trump administration’s determination “that Abrego Garcia will not likely be tortured or killed in El Salvador.”

“Although the government erred in removing Abrego Garcia specifically to El Salvador, the government would not have removed any alien to El Salvador for detention in CECOT if it believed that doing so would violate the United States’ obligations under the Convention (Against Torture),” according to DOJ.

Micah Laureano with his mother, Phyllis, who filed a lawsuit after Micah's death | Photo courtesy Phyllis Laureno

Jackson Vogel allegedly told a corrections officer that he killed his cellmate, Micah Laureano, because Laureano was Black and gay. A case report the Examiner received from the Brown County Sheriff’s Office shows Vogel had  a history of racist and threatening behavior.

After Laureano died in late August at Green Bay Correctional Institution (GBCI), Vogel was charged with homicide with hate crime and repeat offender penalties, the Examiner reported. 

Micah Laureano’s mother, Phyllis Laureano, has sued Secretary Jared Hoy and GBCI warden Christopher Stevens of the Wisconsin Department of Corrections. The federal civil rights lawsuit alleges “defendants’ willful and deliberate indifference to Mr. Laureano’s safety” resulted in the murder. 

The sheriff’s office said the suspect and victim had occupied the same cell for only hours before the incident. The statement said the medical examiner’s findings confirmed Laureano died of strangulation/suffocation by manner of homicide. 

Beth Hardtke, communications director for the Wisconsin Department of Corrections, said both individuals involved in the incident were in temporary lockup status. 

Before Laureano’s death, Vogel, 25, had been found guilty of attempted first-degree intentional homicide, the Examiner reported in late August. Laureano, 19, had been found guilty of taking and driving a vehicle without consent and as party to a crime for substantial battery intending bodily harm, robbery with use of force and first-degree recklessly endangering safety.

Conduct reports

A narrative in a Brown County Sheriff’s Office case report described information from a few conduct reports Vogel received. The Examiner received the report last year through an open records request.

Sergeant Justin Raska reviewed conduct reports for Laureano and Vogel, according to the case report. He found nothing relevant in Laureano’s reports but wrote about three of Vogel’s infractions. 

The first report Raska described was dated March 5, 2024, and was completed by a staff member at the Racine Youthful Offender Correctional Facility (RYOCF). The staff had received inmate complaint forms filed by Vogel that “contained obscene, profane, abusive and threatening language,” some of which was written in German, according to the description of the incident. 

The complaints included swastika symbols. According to the report, Vogel’s writing included the words “you all need and deserve Death!” and “White Power (WLM).” He voiced support for Adolf Hitler and the Aryan Brotherhood, a white supremacist gang.

A second conduct report was dated March 6, 2024, according to Raska. A lieutenant received interview request forms from Vogel, which were written to several staff members at RYOCF and made “numerous disrespectful racial remarks.” 

The request forms included “several inappropriate remarks and symbols,” such as SS Bolts and “das Endlosung.” This referenced Hitler’s “Final Solution” of mass murder of Jewish people, according to the report. 

The third conduct report described by Raska was completed by a sergeant at GBCI and dated August 27, 2024, the day of Laureano’s death.

Incarcerated people were removed from a cell so that maintenance could fix a clogged sink, according to the report. Unit staff discovered the wooden bulletin board was broken, and the sergeant heard from unit staff that Vogel admitted to breaking the board because he was bored.

The bulletin board had jagged edges and it was unsafe to house incarcerated people in the cell, according to the report. This might have led to Vogel being housed in a different cell, with Laureano.

Laureano and Vogel’s cell was in a “segregated Treatment Center area,” according to a narrative in the case report by Raska.

Raska said he was told “the Treatment Center block” serves as a “step unit” to bridge the gap between restricted housing and general population housing. Restricted housing includes disciplinary separation — which occurs when an incarcerated person commits a violation. 

Raska said the treatment center serves as an alternative to single cell segregation in the restricted housing unit. He said incarcerated people could be housed in the treatment center due to clinical observation or because of a pending investigation. 

Lawsuit alleges ‘deliberate indifference’

Laureano’s lawsuit contains three Eighth Amendment counts. It alleges deliberate indifference to Laureano’s safety, failure to protect Laureano and failure to train subordinates. The lawsuit does not mention Vogel’s conduct reports or the racist statements mentioned in them.

The lawsuit alleges that the defendants didn’t consider and/or willfully ignored Vogel’s “substantial history of violent assault, mental health issues, and multi-decade length of sentence when assessing his compatibility with Mr. Laureano,” who was serving a lesser sentence of three years.

It also alleges that defendants failed to “adequately train, monitor and supervise GBCI staff” to make sure administrative requirements and protocols were being followed during housing decisions. 

Phyllis Laureano is represented by attorney Lonnie Story, who said he has spoken to incarcerated people who might be deposed prior to a trial. 

“It was very apparent to the inmates, as well as what — from what they communicate to me about staff, it would be kind of hard to deny by anyone… to say there was no knowledge of Mr. Vogel being a racist, and expressing other very negative opinions and ideas outside of just the race factor,” Story said, adding that this applied to sexual orientation.  

On Sept. 10, the Examiner made an open records request to the DOC, requesting reports regarding incidents involving Vogel and/or Laureano. The request’s status is “in progress” in the DOC’s open records request portal. 

Beth Hardtke, the communications director for the DOC, said it’s the DOC’s practice not to comment on cases where there is ongoing litigation. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Wauwatosa Police Department (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

Since 2022, the Wauwatosa Police Department (WPD) has operated under new, very specific guidelines on how intelligence is collected and shared. Developing a policy involved reflection, clarification and modernization for the police department. Prior to its creation, a spokesperson wrote in an emailed statement to Wisconsin Examiner, no formal intelligence gathering policy existed at Tosa PD. 

By establishing clear standards, WPD aims to “bring about an equitable balance between the civil rights and liberties of citizens and the needs of law enforcement to collect and disseminate Criminal Intelligence on the conduct of persons and groups who may be planning, engaged in, or about to be engaged in criminal activity,” the policy states. Versions of the policy, as well as emails detailing its creation, were obtained by Wisconsin Examiner through open records requests.

The eight-page policy defines the difference between “information” and “criminal intelligence,” outlines appropriate channels for sharing that information, and establishes clear boundaries protecting individuals and groups. “Information” is defined as “raw unprocessed data that is unverified and unevaluated,” and only becomes “intelligence” once it’s been “systematically planned, collected, analyzed, and disseminated in an effort to anticipate, prevent, or monitor potential criminal activity for public safety purposes,” according to the policy. 

It stresses that such efforts must meet the threshold of “reasonable suspicion,” where a sworn law enforcement officer or investigator believes there is a “reasonable possibility” that a person or group is involved in “a definable criminal activity or enterprise.” Individuals or groups which become the focus of WPD’s intel-gathering activities must be those suspected of being involved in the planning, financing or organization of criminal acts, those suspected of being involved in criminal acts with “known or suspected crime figures,” or be the victims of those acts. 

The policy highlights that intelligence may not be gathered on individuals or groups based solely on:

• An individual or group’s support of “unpopular causes”
• Any membership of a protected class including race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, gender, pregnancy status, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, physical or mental disabilities, veteran status, genetic information or citizenship
• Political affiliations
• “Non-criminal personal habits” 

Any information gathered from confidential sources or electronic surveillance devices “shall be performed in a legally acceptable manner and in accordance with procedures,” the policy states. The policy also requires periodic review of intelligence by appropriate WPD staff to ensure the information is accurate, current, and remains relevant to the department’s goals. If it’s not, the policy states, the information should be purged. 

Lessons learned, and a new day

The intelligence policy was created with input from several key personnel within WPD including Lt. Joseph Roy, crime analyst Dominick Ratkowski, and Capt. Shane Wrucke. WPD Chief James MacGillis — who was formerly a Milwaukee PD drug intelligence and High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) officer — also had input in crafting the policy.

A WPD spokesperson wrote in an email statement that the city’s Police and Fire Commission, which oversees appointments, promotions and discipline of police and fire personnel, was not involved in establishing the policy. In April 2024, Ratkowski shared a final draft of the policy with Robert Bechtold, from the Madison Police Department. “Thanks for the SOP [Standard Operating Procedure],” emailed Bechtold, who was apparently looking for guidance on how to create such a policy. “I’m not looking forward to us building one,” he added. The Madison Police Department didn’t respond to a request for comment. 

Roy, Ratkowski, and Wrucke all have ties to WPD’s investigative division. Roy supervised the division’s dayshift and also serves as commander of the Milwaukee Area Investigative Team (MAIT), which focuses on officer-involved shootings and deaths. Ratkowski has worked at WPD since 2018, and was hired as the department’s first ever civilian crime analyst. Wrucke, like Roy, has past ties to both MAIT and WPD’s Special Operations Group (SOG), which focuses on covert surveillance, accessing phones, and drug investigations.

A WPD spokesperson explained in an email statement that the intel policy was created “to incorporate lessons learned, enhance transparency, and provide clear guidelines for intelligence gathering.” Those lessons likely stemmed from the protests of 2020, and the decisions made by investigators when WPD was still headed by former Chief Barry Weber. 

Following the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officers, marches against police abuse began in Milwaukee and Wauwatosa, where a former police officer had killed three people over a five-year period. Wauwatosa experienced months of daily non-violent protests which occasionally ended in standoffs with officers. In October 2020, Wauwatosa declared a curfew after the district attorney’s office announced that officer Joseph Mensah wouldn’t be charged in his third fatal shooting. Protesters were confronted by riot police, the National Guard and militarized federal law enforcement during the curfew. 

Journalists, protesters and lawyers later learned that WPD had created a list of nearly 200 people during the summer of protest. Ratkowski had called it a “target list” in an email to assisting agencies. WPD publicly stated that the list — which included dozens of protesters, members of the Cole family, their attorneys, elected officials, and the author of this story — included  witnesses, victims and  suspects in possible crimes that occurred at the protests. 

 

5.3.4 Criminal Intelligence Collection Analysis Distribution Policy – 24-18 (2)

 

Civil lawsuits revealed more about use of the list under Weber, who retired in 2021. Ratkowski in depositions explained that he began creating the list around June 2020, after Capt. Luke Vetter asked him to begin identifying active participants in the protests. Ratkowski gathered information from confidential law enforcement databases with access to drivers license information, home addresses, arrest records, and more. He combed social media accounts on Facebook and Tinder, sometimes using fake Facebook accounts registered as “confidential informants.”

Simply being tagged in a protest-related social media post could get someone on the list, Ratkowski said in a deposition. He agreed with attorneys when asked whether “mere affiliation with a protest” was enough, and confirmed that threatening violence or committing a crime was not required. Ratkowski said that if a superior asked him to make a list of every member of the Socialist Party he would, “because I would assume that he [Capt. Vetter] would have asked me to do something that wasn’t useless.” The attorney questioning Ratkowski responded, “I’m not asking whether it’s useful or useless, I’m asking whether it’s constitutional or not,” to which Ratkowski replied, “I can’t make that determination.” 

The federal lawsuit eventually went to trial, where a jury ruled that WPD had not violated specific privacy laws related to obtaining and sharing drivers license information. 

In an emailed statement, WPD said that “a key objective” of the new intelligence policy “was to clearly define the distinction between information and intelligence, ensuring officers understand when data becomes actionable. It applies to all WPD staff involved in intelligence creation and upholds protections against intelligence gathering based on legally protected characteristics.” The department added that, “though journalists are not explicitly mentioned, the department remains committed to safeguarding First Amendment rights for all individuals. Above all, the Wauwatosa Police Department prioritizes transparency and strengthening trust within the community.” 

American Civil Liberties Union lead attorney Lee Gelernt holds a press conference outside the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after a March 21, 2025, hearing on deportation flights that occurred despite a court’s restraining order in place. (Photo by Ariana Figueroa/States Newsroom) 

WASHINGTON — A federal judge Friday probed the U.S. Department of Justice about whether the Trump administration knowingly defied his court order to return deportation flights to the United States and questioned the president’s authority to invoke a wartime law during peacetime.

The case, which is likely to head to the U.S. Supreme Court, will test President Donald Trump’s authority to invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 and apply it to any Venezuelan nationals ages 14 and up who are suspected members of the Tren de Aragua gang amid his mass deportation plans.

Three deportation flights containing some Venezuelans subject to the proclamation that Trump signed last Friday were in transit when U.S. District Court Judge James Emanuel Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order to block the removals. But the administration continued sending the men to a notorious mega-prison in El Salvador.

The Trump administration published a highly produced video detailing the operation, but has not been forthright with answers to questions Boasberg posed about it.

“The government’s not being terribly cooperative at this point, but I will get to the bottom of whether they violated my order, who ordered this and what the consequences will be,” Boasberg said Friday.

Wartime law

Boasberg also pressed the Department of Justice attorney Drew Ensign on whether the Trump administration can deport people under the Alien Enemies Act without allowing the deportees to prove they are not members or associated with the Tren de Aragua gang.

“How do they challenge that removal?” Boasberg asked.

The Alien Enemies Act allows nationals of a country deemed an enemy of the U.S. to be detained and deported without due process of law regardless of immigration status.

Boasberg also raised concerns of using the proclamation when the U.S. is not at war.

“The policy ramifications for this are incredibly troublesome,” Boasberg said of the Alien Enemies Act. “This is a long way from the heartland of the act.”

A panel of judges in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will hear oral arguments Monday afternoon on the Trump administration seeking an emergency stay on the restraining order. 

Restraining order

Boasberg asked DOJ attorney Ensign to clarify how he interpreted the oral temporary restraining order issued on March 15.

He asked Ensign if he relayed to the Trump administration that his order included returning any Venezuelans back to the U.S. who were deported under the wartime authority.

“I understood your intent, that you meant that to be effective at that time,”  Ensign said of the oral temporary restraining order.

In filings, the Department of Justice has argued that Boasberg’s oral argument was not binding because it was not written.

For nearly a week, the Department of Justice has evaded pointed questions from Boasberg about the timing of the deportation flights on March 15.

Boasberg said Thursday he would give the Trump administration until Tuesday to submit a declaration on whether the government was invoking the state-secrets privilege and a brief “showing cause why they did not violate the Court’s Temporary Restraining Orders by failing to return class members removed from the United States on the two earliest planes that departed on March 15, 2025.”

In Friday filings, Trump officials said they are currently having Cabinet-level conversations about using that privilege to block Boasberg from obtaining details about the timing of the deportation flights.

Flight location an issue

The Department of Justice has also argued that because the flights were no longer in U.S. airspace or territory when Boasberg issued the restraining order, they were not under U.S. courts’ jurisdiction.

Lead attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union Lee Gelernt pushed back on that claim. He told Boasberg that some immigrants on those deportation flights to El Salvador were returned to the U.S. because of mistakes and that the El Salvadoran “government would not take them.”

He said that included someone who was not a Venezuelan national, and a woman because the mega-prison is for men only.

He said the ACLU will submit an affidavit late Friday with more details.

Gelernt said the ACLU is also questioning the type of removal for people on the third flight, even though the Trump administration said those on that flight had final orders of removal and were not subject to the Alien Enemies Act.

Gelernt argued that in immigration law, those with final orders are required to be notified what country they are being deported to. He said that was not the case with the immigrants on the third flight, which originally went to Honduras before heading to El Salvador.

“We asked the judge to clarify that with the government, because it seems very doubtful that Venezuelans had a final order that said you could be removed to El Salvador,” Gelernt said to reporters after Friday’s hearing.

The White House earlier this week said of the men on the deportation flights, 137 were alleged Tren de Aragua members and deported under the Alien Enemies Act.

Attorneys for several of the 238 Venezuelan men deported argue their clients are not members of the gang and were only targeted by immigration officials because they had tattoos and were Venezuelan nationals.  

El Salvador prison

Gelernt said that because the Trump administration is paying the government of El Salvador $6 million to imprison the men, he believes those men who were deported under the wartime law can be returned, although it would be a lengthy process.

“I think we very much think the federal court can order the U.S. to get them out, since they’re constructively in U.S. custody,” he said outside the courtroom. “The U.S. is apparently paying for it all. (El Salvador is) doing it at the behest of the United States.”

Human Rights Watch, a nonprofit that monitors human rights conditions around the world, has raised major concerns with the conditions of the prison and has noted that the group “is not aware of any detainees who have been released from that prison.”

Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s authoritarian president, called this week for the men taken to the mega prison to be returned to Venezuela, calling on El Salvador president to “not be an accomplice to this kidnapping, because our boys did not commit any crime in the United States, none,” according to CNN.

“They were not brought to trial, they were not given the right to a defense, the right to due process, they were deceived, handcuffed, put on a plane, kidnapped, and sent to a concentration camp in El Salvador,” Maduro said.

Several of the men who were transferred to El Salvador’s prison initially fled Venezuela because they experienced violence from officials after they partook in political protests against the Maduro regime, according to court filings. 

A Texas National Guardsman observes as Border Patrol agents pat down migrants who have surrendered themselves for processing, May 10, 2023. (Photo by Corrie Boudreaux for Source NM)

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is gearing up to militarize a stretch of the southern border, according to a Washington Post report Thursday, raising concerns from experts that the move would put U.S. military members in direct contact with migrants, a possible violation of federal law.

The White House is mulling the creation of a military satellite installation across the 60-foot-deep strip of federal land known as the Roosevelt Reservation, according to the report.

The move would create a military buffer zone stretching across the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona, California and New Mexico, and mean any migrant crossing into the United States would be trespassing on a military base, allowing active-duty troops to hold them until border patrol agents arrive.

Nearly 10,000 military personnel have already been deployed to the southern border, but creating the military buffer zone would be an escalation of the Trump administration’s ramp-up of the use of the U.S. military in its plans for mass deportation of immigrants without permanent legal status, which experts say would be illegal.

“The use of active-duty military for what clearly amounts to law enforcement on the border is absolutely, plainly illegal,” Stephen Dycus, a professor in national security law at the Vermont Law School, said during a Thursday interview. “It’s a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.”

The 1878 law generally prohibits the military from being used in domestic law enforcement.

Adam Isacson, director of defense oversight at the Washington Office of Latin America, a research and advocacy group that aims to advance human rights in North and South America, said the escalation of military presence at the border is new.

He added that the military being used to operate deportation flights has “involved an uncomfortable amount of contact between soldiers and migrants.”

“Most of the military that have been sent (to the border) over the years have been a couple thousand National Guard members at a time — a pretty low-level mission,” Isacson said. “So that chance of contact between the soldiers and civilians on U.S. soil (was) very, very, very, very slim. That’s all changing now.”

A Pentagon spokesperson told States Newsroom in an email Thursday that the department has “nothing to announce at this time” regarding the establishment of a base along stretches of the border.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

The scenario could spark further legal challenges against the Trump administration, which is already in hot water for potentially defying a federal judge’s order to halt deportation flights of Venezuelans under the wartime Alien Enemies Act.

Transformation of military role

While sending activity duty to the southern border has occurred for more than 20 years in intelligence and logistics roles, military members do not engage in immigration enforcement.

During a visit to the border Feb. 3, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters “guys and gals of my generation have spent decades in foreign countries guarding other people’s borders. It’s about time we secure our own border.”

“All options are on the table,” Hegseth said.

Joseph Nunn, liberty and national security counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice, said during a Thursday interview he would expect the Trump administration to face lawsuits for essentially using the military for civilian law enforcement.

“This is a transparent ruse to try to evade the Posse Comitatus Act by taking advantage of something called the military purpose doctrine,” Nunn said.

Under that doctrine, Nunn said, the military can maintain order or take action to further other military purposes, even if the action does have incidental benefits to civilian law enforcement. For example, if a drunken driver attempts to drive onto a base, military police can detain them before handing them over to civilian law enforcement.

But Nunn said specifically installing a base along the border as a way for the military to detain migrants as trespassers has not been tried before.

“It’s an abuse of the doctrine and one that the courts should reject because in that circumstance the military installation will have been created and the soldiers will have been stationed there for the purpose of assisting with a civilian law enforcement operation,” Nunn said. “That is immigration enforcement.”

Migrant encounters down

Transferring federal land to the Department of Defense, which because it’s fewer than 5,000 acres doesn’t need congressional approval, comes at a time when border encounters are relatively low.

Apprehensions at the southern border have plummeted to their lowest level in 25 years, with 8,347 encounters reported in February, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection data.

The trend started in February of last year due to Mexico increasing immigration enforcement and policies under the Biden administration that limited asylum claims between ports of entry, said Colleen Putzel-Kavanaugh of the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan immigration think tank.

“As with any change in administration, and this was true of the first Trump administration, because of the general rhetoric around immigration, we did see kind of an initial decrease, so it’s not altogether surprising to see that decrease,” Putzel-Kavanaugh, who studies migration trends along the border, said.

“There’s kind of a general wait-and-see period of people trying to figure out what makes the most sense in terms of their own needs and in their journey,” she added.

The sections along the southern border that the Trump administration is eyeing – U.S. Border Patrol sectors based in San Diego; Tucson, Arizona; and El Paso, Texas – are “consistently the busiest,” she said.

Putzel-Kavanaugh added that it’s typical for migration patterns between sectors to change.

“I think it’s certainly plausible to assume that, if they have this militarization campaign across sort of the western side of the border, it’s likely that flows will then start going east,” she said.

Reaction from New Mexico lawmakers

Democrats slammed the idea, questioning why defense funding should be used at the border as global conflict increases.

U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján, a New Mexico Democrat, expressed skepticism about relying on defense resources to solve migration issues.

“Securing our border and protecting the safety of New Mexicans is a top priority, which is why I supported the bipartisan border security agreement — an effort that was ultimately killed by then-candidate Donald Trump,” Luján said in a statement.

“Diverting military resources for this purpose would weaken our military readiness. There is broad bipartisan consensus that we need comprehensive immigration reform and stronger border security, but not at the expense of existing defense missions.”

Rep. Gabe Vasquez, also a New Mexico Democrat, said in a statement the reported plan is “yet another reckless and wasteful proposal that does nothing to fix our broken immigration system.”

“In a time of global uncertainty, our military resources are best used to combat serious international threats abroad,” Vasquez said.

The offices for the Republican-led Senate and House committees on the Armed Forces did not respond to requests for comment.

Source New Mexico editor Julia Goldberg contributed to this report.

Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) said she thought there were “worthy” projects in the proposal but criticized the $3.85 billion in bonding to pay for the projects. Gov. Tony Evers delivers his seventh State of the State address while standing in front of Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Felzkowski. Photo by Baylor Spears/Wisconsin Examiner

The State Building Commission is not recommending Gov. Tony Evers’ $4.1 billion capital projects proposal to the budget committee after Republican lawmakers voted against doing so saying that it wasn’t realistic and wasn’t created in a bipartisan manner.

The State Building Commission is made up of eight members including Evers, four Republican lawmakers, two Democratic lawmakers and one citizen member appointed to the body by Evers. The votes on each section of the capital projects budget was split down the middle, with Republicans all opposed. The outcome was expected as Republicans have said they plan to create their own proposal. 

Evers’ proposal includes nearly $1.6 billion in projects for the University of Wisconsin System, $634 million to the Department of Corrections, $195 million for health facilities, $170 million for Department of Veterans Affairs’ projects, $164 million in projects requested for the Department of Natural Resources and investments in other areas. 

Sen. Mary Felzkowski (R-Tomahawk) said she thought there were “worthy” projects in the proposal but criticized the $3.85 billion in bonding to pay for the projects.

“This is more new bonding in this capital budget than the last five capital budgets combined, and I think to get to a more appropriate level, further discussion is needed,” Felzkowski said. “We need to hear from stakeholders and the public and that just hasn’t happened.” 

Sen. Andre Jacque (R-New Franken) said that he thinks lawmakers and Evers will be able to find some agreement, but argued that “shoehorning” money at the moment for projects will “limit the ability to have some of those discussions, or in some cases might prejudice the [Joint Finance] Committee against whatever we might do here.” 

Evers’ ambitious proposal for reforming the state’s prisons would include infrastructure upgrades and capital improvements to Waupun Correctional Institution, Lincoln Hills School, Stanley Correctional Institution, Sanger B. Powers Correctional Center and John C. Burke Correctional Center. The projects are planned to be carried out one after the other and culminate in the closing of the Green Bay Correctional Institution.

Felzkowski said she was “very saddened” about the corrections proposal and called it a “missed opportunity” for a bipartisan solution. 

“There’s quite a few of us in this Legislature who have worked diligently for corrections reform, and so much of the DOC capital budget rests on the changes to policy around corrections reform,” Felzkowski told Evers. Republican lawmakers have expressed opposition to proposals in the corrections budget that would increase early release. 

“We could have been brought in earlier to discuss the changes or even when you had brought in a consultant around corrections, I would have loved to have been able to work with them and to help bring my side of the aisle into the reform process,” Felzkowski said. 

The Joint Finance Committee, which is responsible for writing the budget, will kick off its work next week with briefings from the University of Wisconsin System and the Department of Corrections. Public listening sessions will then take place starting next week with lawmakers traveling to Kaukauna on April 2 and West Allis on April 4.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Melissa Beson photo courtesy LDF Police Department

On Sunday, March 23, the Lac du Flambeau (LDF) Tribal Police Department in Vilas County reported an LDF tribal member, Melissa Beson, 37, has been missing since Monday, March 17.

The LDF Police Department said Beson’s family reported her missing.

A preliminary investigation revealed that Beson was last seen late Monday, March 17, walking on Village Road near Wayman Lane toward state Highway 47 on the Lac du Flambeau Reservation in Vilas County.

Beson was last seen wearing red sweatpants, a black sleeveless shirt and a gray sweatshirt.

Beson is a Native American female, 5’7”, with a medium build, brown hair, and brown eyes. She has numerous tattoos, including on her neck, arms and legs.

Melissa Beson – PD Poster (1)

The LDF Police Department reports that Beson’s family is extremely worried about her and joins the LDF Tribal Police Department in seeking the public’s help in locating her.

The Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa — Waaswaaganing in the Ojibwe language — is a federally recognized Ojibwe Native American tribe.

Anyone with any information regarding Beson’s whereabouts should call the  Lac du Flambeau Tribal Police Department at (715) 588-7717 or the Vilas County Sheriff’s Office at (715) 479-4441.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Kelly O'Keefe Boettcher holds a photo of Brittany Doescher at a vigil near Taycheedah Correctional Institution in Fond du Lac on March 22, 2025 | Photo by Andrew Kennard/Wisconsin Examiner

At a vigil across the road from Taycheedah Correctional Institution in Fond du Lac, Wis., advocates sought to increase attention on the women’s prison.

“There’s been a lot of publicity with what goes on in the men’s prisons in the last couple of years, but that is something that is not just within those prisons, it is at the women’s prisons too,” Juli Bliefnick, who was once incarcerated at Taycheedah, said at the vigil on Saturday. 

The small group of advocates met in a neighborhood near the prison and walked up to the facility, carrying signs bearing photos of two women. 

Wisconsin Watch and Wisconsin Public Radio published an article on March 11 that reported the deaths of Shawnee Reed, 36, on Feb. 23, and Brittany Doescher, 33, on March 6, following hospital stays. The women were incarcerated at Taycheedah Correctional. 

Bliefnick is the operations coordinator for FREE, a nonprofit addressing the gender-specific issues of women’s incarceration and reentry to society. She spoke about getting “some visibility for these women and honor[ing] their memory” and showing support for women currently incarcerated at the facility. 

The official causes of the deaths are still not public, according to the article. Family members said hospital staff linked the deaths to pneumonia. Following discussions with doctors, an unnamed family member of Doescher believes earlier treatment could have prevented her death. Family members said both women started mentioning health issues over the phone around a month before the article’s publication on March 11.

Pneumonia fatality

The obituary for Doescher says that she “suffered and died from complications from pneumonia left untreated.”

In a statement to Wisconsin Watch and WPR, Department of Corrections communications director Beth Hardtke said the agency was taking steps to prevent the spread of respiratory illnesses to staff and incarcerated people in a time of reportedly high numbers of respiratory illness cases in Wisconsin, the article said. She detailed actions taken by the department and said people incarcerated at Wisconsin prisons, including Taycheedah, recently received testing and treatment for Influenza A. 

Another advocate at the vigil, Melissa Ludin, said she is a member of FREE’s board. 

“And I think if anything, I think there’s things that really need to be looked into with that,” she said, referring to Doescher’s family saying the cause of her death was untreated pneumonia. “…Are there other women that are sick?”

Cellmate homicide

In July 2023, Cindy Schulz-Juedes, 68, died at Taycheedah Correctional. Taylor Sanchez, 29 and also incarcerated at Taycheedah, was charged with first-degree intentional homicide of her cellmate. A jury trial is scheduled for  July and early August. 

In early March, the Examiner sent a records request for any reports produced by the Fond du Lac Police Department’s investigation into Schulz-Juedes’s death. The department denied the request on the grounds that disclosure could interfere with an ongoing prosecution or investigation.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Attorney Steve Hurley with documents of the type Wisconsin prisons are shredding. | Photo by Erik Gunn/Wisconsin Examiner

The Office of the Wisconsin State Public Defender and other attorneys are expressing concerns over attorney-client confidentiality and the timely and accurate delivery of legal mail for clients incarcerated in state prisons. 

On Sept. 10, the Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC) adopted a new policy for external paperwork sent to prisons. The protocol calls for incarcerated residents to watch the copying of their legal mail and allows them to review the copies; then the original mail is shredded. 

Mail covered under the policy includes letters from an attorney, law office, clerk or judge of any state or federal court, court staff or tribal court. It also covers correspondence with federal and state elected or appointed officials including the governor, Wisconsin legislators, the secretary of the DOC and others. 

The process of opening and photocopying the mail, providing the copy to the incarcerated person and shredding the original mail is documented with the facility’s camera system, the DOC policy states. 

The policy’s general guidelines allow staff to inspect legal documents “to the extent necessary to determine if the documents contain contraband or if the purpose is misrepresented.” If staff have reason to believe a letter is not a legal document “and the safety and security of the institution is implicated,” the policy allows them to read legal documents. 

The DOC’s protocol has garnered criticism from the Wisconsin public defender’s office. Public defenders’ primary concerns are timely delivery of information to clients, the accuracy of the copying and protecting attorney-client confidentiality.

“Unfortunately, with DOC’s new mail policy we have experienced significant delays with mail delivery, compromised confidentiality, and in some cases legal documents have been lost,” said Deputy State Public Defender Katie York. “This has impacted our ability to develop trusting attorney/client relationships and has caused unnecessary delays for our clients and others impacted by the legal system. However, in our continuous efforts to provide the highest quality defense for our clients, we will keep doing everything we can to maintain communication with our clients.”

The Wisconsin American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has also raised concerns about how the DOC’s handling of legal mail is affecting incarcerated people and the legal process.

“Alarmingly, the DOC continues to introduce new restrictions that have made it increasingly difficult for people in DOC custody to receive legal mail and books,” Emma Shakeshaft, senior attorney for the ACLU of Wisconsin said in an October statement, “and we are very concerned about how these policy changes are negatively impacting those in custody. Legal mail is essential to incarcerated individuals’ ability to access the courts and to communicate confidentially with their legal counsel.”

Beth Hardtke, director of communications for the DOC, said the department was not aware of any recent concerns from the Office of the State Public Defender about the DOC’s legal mail policy, and that the DOC would follow up with them to learn more. 

Hardtke said the public defenders’ office had input into the development of the policy, and that the policy was revised based on the office’s feedback before it went into effect in September 2024. The DOC is not aware of any significant delays regarding legal mail, she said. 

She said the postal service delivers legal mail directly to facilities, “where it is promptly processed in front of the individual to whom the mail is addressed.” 

“The policy also details a number of steps that are taken to protect the confidentiality of the process including having the process take place in front of cameras placed so that writing is illegible, special copiers just for this purpose and ensuring that the person in our care is part of the process,” Hardtke said. 

Drug concerns 

DOC’s goal with the legal mail policy was to prevent intoxicating substances from entering facilities through legal mail, Hardtke said. 

In November2021, the DOC announced that it would start partnering with a company to photocopy the personal mail of all incarcerated adults in an attempt to keep drug-laden mail out of prisons. The department began giving residents photocopies of their mail instead of original letters. 

In a 2021 press release about the new policy, the DOC said that despite its previous efforts, in September 2021 alone there were 182 drug incidents within Wisconsin prisons, with 16 people needing emergency medical treatment. 

The department said it had seen an increase of drug incidents among incarcerated people. This included the use of synthetic cannabinoids, which can cause violent behavior or a need for emergency medical treatment, the department said. The DOC said paper and envelopes could be sprayed with or soaked in the drugs and sent into prisons through the mail.

In August 2022, the agency said it had seen a decrease in the total number of drug incidents at adult facilities between November 2021 and February 2022. The agency attributed the decrease to its new policy of photocopying mail. The DOC also said it saw a decrease in overdoses requiring transport to a medical facility. 

After receiving inquiries about the department’s controversial ban on used books, the department sent data to reporters in late September. DOC staff reviewed contraband incident reports that facility staff had flagged as drug-related between 2019 and Sept. 18, 2024. 

The department said some drug-related incidents recorded through a medical record or conduct report may not be reflected in their numbers. The DOC also said not all incident reports flagged as drug related turn out to actually be drug-related.

The DOC said legal mail tested positive in five incidents in 2021, and in 2022, there were 10 instances of material “purporting to be legal mail” that tested positive for drugs. 

Six incidents in 2023 involved legal mail, the department said. The DOC said legal mail tested positive for drugs in at least seven incidents in 2024, as of Sept. 18. 

When it comes to mail or donations that tested positive for drugs, the department said it is “often unable to say” whether they are from a legitimate entity, or from someone impersonating another person or organization. 

In an email to the nonprofit Wisconsin Books to Prisoners in August, then-Administrator of the Division of Adult Institutions Sarah Cooper spoke about impersonation. She said “bad actors” impersonated agencies to send drugs into prisons. 

“To provide some examples, there have been many instances of drugs coming in via mail (and publications/books) which appear to be sent from the Child Support Agency, the IRS, the State Public Defender’s Office, the Department of Justice and individual attorneys,” Cooper said.

In the August email, Cooper said the DOC had had to “implement a whole new process” for handling mail from the entities she mentioned. 

The number of drug incidents involving legal mail has fallen to zero, according to a review of contraband incident reports that facility staff flagged as drug-related, Hardtke said. She said between Sept. 19 and Feb. 28, there were no incidents documented in those reports of legal mail testing positive for intoxicants.

She said these records may not include all incidents, since some incidents may be documented in conduct reports, other types of incident reports or medical records. 

“The most important thing to know about the legal mail policy is that it works,” Hardtke said. 

But York said she also knows there have been instances of false positive tests. 

“I know it has happened because I’ve talked to both staff and private bar attorneys where the institution has sent back materials because they tested positive,” York said. Transcripts that were not drug-laced have been returned after positive tests, she said. She could not provide a number of such incidents and said she also believed some documents that were confiscated after positive tests were not sent back.

Hardtke said the DOC uses the IONSCAN 600 testing technology to test books, packages and other materials coming into DOC facilities. She said the technology was chosen in consultation with the Wisconsin Department of Justice and the Wisconsin State Crime Laboratories “in part because its results have held up to court scrutiny.” 

Some family members of incarcerated people in Canada expressed concern that ion scanners yielded false positive test results, and some experts have raised questions about ion scanners’ ability to distinguish between banned drugs and everyday chemicals. 

Steve Hurley, a defense attorney at Hurley Burish, S.C. in Madison, told the Examiner about a case a few years ago in which his firm represented a lawyer who was accused of sending drugs to a client. 

He said their investigation used the test used by the DOC and got a false positive, and that the department relied on a presumptive test that was not intended to give a conclusive result.

This test was not the IONSCAN 600. The DOC did not say whether it currently uses other tests as well as the IONSCAN 600. 

“They didn’t charge him criminally because I think they knew that they had misused the [drug] test,” Hurley said. “So when I called them on it, eventually, they just dropped the whole thing and reinstated his ability to communicate with his client.” 

Attorneys suggest creating a verification method for legal mail 

Shakeshaft said attorneys attempting to communicate with their clients are not the source of drugs in prison. She thinks there should be an alternative method of getting legal mail to clients without having all the documents copied and the originals shredded.  

“To the extent that third parties are attempting to disguise contraband as legal mail, there’s a lot of less restrictive ways to address that, to ensure that legal mail is coming from licensed attorneys… [Methods that] are not nearly as much of a threat to attorney-client confidential communications,” she said. 

York said her office asked about creating a process that would certify the mail was from the assigned attorney and not from an impersonator. 

“We asked if there was some sort of system, if it was like, some sort of changing numbering system, or something that we could put on the envelopes that would ensure that they knew that it was coming from our office,” she said.

York said her office also made an offer to reach out to a facility beforehand when they’re sending a client their file. The public defender’s office would let them know how many boxes they would be sending with a client file, so the facility would know in advance that the documents were coming from their office. She said the offer was not accepted. 

York said her office used to receive calls seeking to verify that her office had sent mail to a resident. She didn’t think this was consistent across all facilities. 

“They would call our office and ask, ‘Did you send mail to this person?’ when they got letters,” said York. “I used to get those calls when I was the appellate division director. So that was another way that they used to try to kind of validate the fact that it came from an attorney.”

Confidentiality concerns 

Hurley said that as a defense lawyer, it’s his job to not trust the government when it comes to his clients. He believes his clients should receive their legal mail unopened.

“The minute you open a lawyer’s mail, somebody is going to look at it,” Hurley said. “I don’t care what they say about their policies, somebody’s going to look at it. And you can’t do that.”

If others know what someone is convicted of, it could lead to a more difficult time in prison, Hurley said. He also said information in an incarcerated person’s legal mail isn’t necessarily about their criminal record.

“If you were getting divorced, do you want your neighbor to know what you’re arguing with your spouse over about what the extent of your property is?” Hurley said. “No, and you don’t want a guard to know that either.” 

Nicole Masnica, an attorney with Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown LLP in Milwaukee, said prison staff reviewing privileged communications and legal mail from counsel creates a concern about the safety and security of incarcerated people in the DOC.

Legal correspondence and materials “may very well contain” information detailing a person’s cooperation with authorities against other incarcerated people “and even sometimes staff employed by the Department of Corrections,” she said in a statement emailed to the Examiner.

“I have represented individuals who have expressed concerns about confidential information from legal correspondence getting into the wrong hands at the prisons, and policies like those currently in place with the DOC that permit the reviewing of confidential information by DOC staff only amplifies those risks to individuals assisting law enforcement investigations,” Masnica said. 

Shakeshaft said there are opportunities during the copying and shredding of legal mail for someone to view the documents. She also raised the question of how the process would be filmed without the camera viewing information in the legal mail. 

“There’s a number of different parts of the policy where confidentiality is threatened overall,” she said. 

Attorney Lonnie Story sent the Examiner a conduct report from when an incarcerated man, Justin Welch, was written up by a DOC staff member in February 2024. The report indicates a staff member read a letter from Welch that was “addressed to Story Law Firm Attorney Lonnie Story.”

According to the report, in the letter, Welch referenced a recent assault he was involved in with another person. Welch said that he was going to be placed by this person and “will have no choice but to fight him again. This is what the WCI does this time I will hurt him.” The staff member wrote the conduct report, saying Welch was making direct physical threats to the other person. 

Story said he contacted Department of Justice attorneys, who called the warden. Story sent the Examiner a letter from the warden on which Welch was copied, dated March 25, 2024. The letter said the warden had initiated a review of the incident, and the hearing officer’s decision and the punishment of 30 days in restrictive housing were reversed. 

Welch sent the Examiner a complaint he made to the DOC about a prison denying three of his emails, preventing them from reaching the intended recipients. (Electronic correspondence is not treated as legal mail under DOC policy.) 

Two emails were intended for a reporter, while the third was sent to Story. According to Welch’s complaint, a staff member told him that emails were not for legal communication and an attorney call should be set up instead. Welch’s complaint was successful, leading to a ruling that his emails should not have been denied. 

Devin Skrzypchak, a resident of Oshkosh Correctional Facility, said he has concerns that the prison staff have had access to his legal mail for up to three days while the prison was setting up a time for the copying and shredding when he could be present. He has concerns that his legal mail could have been read during that wait time.

Not all legal mail involves physical documents, according to Masnica. If there are large files, it’s cheaper to send a hard drive or USB. In one case, Masnica said she sent documents related to potential jurors and received an email from the prison. 

The person from the prison who contacted Masnica didn’t necessarily think the documents were related to litigation, she said. To her, it was clear that the prison had reviewed the mail in detail. 

“They had made remarks that it was not just the jurors in the case, but all jurors potentially that were going to be called that week, or that month,” Masnica said. 

Masnica said she complained and was sent a policy. DOC policy says that when a facility receives new digitally formatted legal material, it shall assign staff to review the content with the incarcerated person present to make sure it is “legal in nature.”

The policy states that “if any file is found to contain contraband, the data storage device may be subject to disposal” in accordance with the DOC’s contraband policy after consultation with the Office of Legal Counsel. 

Timeliness concerns 

“We’ve heard of attorneys having to push back court deadlines and delays because they can’t continue that communication [with clients],” said Shakeshaft. “They can’t get the legal documents to clients in time, or clients aren’t getting the correct legal documents.”

The Examiner asked York about specific situations that make it critical for the incarcerated person to have the legal mail for the case to proceed in court.

“There is not a super clean answer to this, but there are some situations, for example, we need clients to sign documents,” said York. “One example of that is notice of intent to appeal in a termination of parental rights case; we have to have a wet signature from the client on the notice before we file it, and it’s a pretty tight turnaround. It’s 30 days.”

York said there’s also a problem when clients don’t accept their mail due to the policy of copying and shredding. This leaves the attorney with the option of meeting in person to get a signature on a form, which can be time consuming. 

Lost in the mail

Masnica recalled her firm having to send mail multiple times because a client didn’t receive it. 

“If we’re sending something to a client on the street who is living in their home, we never really have issues,” Masnica said. 

Story said he’s had an issue with not receiving mail that a client said they sent to him. 

“Most disturbing is when my clients have part of their case record from their legal materials disappear,” Story said. “Their file doesn’t follow them to the next institution, or part of it is mailed to me and not the whole of it.”

Dorin Ferguson, who is incarcerated at the Wisconsin Secure Program Facility in Boscobel, said he has sent mail to Story that didn’t arrive, including mail that was returned to Ferguson.

DOC policy allows the resident to check the copied legal documents and request two rescans. York said sending large files poses a risk of miscopying.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Attorneys Nate Cade (far left) and Kimberley Motley (center) stand with the mother of Alvin Cole, Tracy (far right), and other members of Cole's family. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

A civil trial in Milwaukee’s federal courthouse over the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Alvin Cole by former Wauwatosa police officer Joseph Mensah ended in a hung jury on Thursday. After four days of hearing testimony and evidence, the eight-member jury was unable to come to a unanimous decision about whether Mensah used excessive and unreasonable force when he shot Cole on Feb. 2, 2020. 

A new trial has been set for September of this year, with pretrial preparations expected in August. The day began with closing arguments from attorney Nate Cade, who told the mostly white jury of seven women and one man to “remember who’s involved.” Cade showed a picture of Cole to the jury, saying, “He’s a kid, just a kid.”

Cade recounted the four days of testimony, starting with Cole’s father, Albert, who said he will be haunted by the memory of dropping off his son, the last time he saw him, “for the rest of his life.” Cade pointed to conflicting testimony about the shooting among the police officers who were there, and emphasized the testimony of David Shamsi, a combat veteran and FBI agent, who said Cole did not move or point a gun at Mensah before he fired.  

Another officer, Jeffrey Johnson, also testified that he did not see a weapon pointed at Mensah at the time of the shooting, and that Cole was on his hands and knees. Cade said that if Mensah had “paused a moment, Alvin Cole would still be alive.”

Plaintiffs’ attorneys also reminded the jury that after the shooting, Evan Olson, Mensah’s friend on the force, went off with Mensah in a squad car where they had an unrecorded conversation, in violation of polices stating officers should be kept separate after a shooting to avoid statement contamination. 

Cade stressed to the jury that in order for Mensah to be right, “everybody else has to be wrong,” and that Mensah had never apologized on the stand for the shooting.

Attorney Joseph Wirth, representing Mensah, said that night consisted of split second decisions. “Alvin Cole made catastrophically bad decisions,” said Wirth, arguing that Cole brought a gun to the mall, got into a fight, fled from and fired upon police, and then tried to fire again before Mensah killed him. “You can’t bring 20-20 hindsight,” said Wirth, urging the jurors to put themselves in Mensah’s shoes that night. Wirth refuted plaintiffs’ attorneys who said Mensah was bored in his own sector, and wanted some action. Wirth stressed that when an officer perceives danger, he has a duty to act and “it is not necessary [to prove] if this danger actually existed.” 

Wirth argued that Shamsi, who said the gun didn’t move at all, was still prepared to shoot Cole, and that the teen never stopped running, or indicated he wanted to surrender. 

Wirth also said that Cole pointed a gun both at Mensah and Olson, suggesting that the two officers are not contradicting each other. Plaintiffs’ attorneys asked for $22 million in damages, which Wirth called outrageous. 

The jury went into deliberations shortly after noon, and returned around 4:30 p.m. saying they were  unable to come to a decision. They were told by the judge to go back into deliberations until 5 p.m. When they were called back, they had still been unable to reach a unanimous decision. Judge Lynn Adelman said one main issue was the quality of squad car videos. The jury was excused, and a new trial was set for Sept. 8, at 9 a.m.

The day ends with armed marshals, and words from the family 

At the end of the day as the jury returned, at least five U.S. marshals, several of them armed, entered the court room. The arrival of the armed marshals caused a stir  in the courtroom from the gallery to the plaintiffs’ bench and attracted the attention of  Judge Adelman himself. “I don’t want marshals here,” Adelman said. It’s unclear why the marshals were there, but attorney Cade told media and the judge that it was inappropriate, and could send the wrong message to a jury. “People get screened coming into this courthouse,” said Cade. “The family has not shown out…They have not done anything dangerous, they have not made any threats.” 

Tracy Cole, Alvin’s mother, said she was satisfied with the presentation of her family’s case. “I can’t complain,” she said, “they showed the evidence, everything on the table. We ain’t gave up, we’re not going to give up.” Undiscouraged by the hung jury she said, “it just make us fight more.” Cole did say that she was hurt when she wasn’t allowed to testify during the trial. “I thought that if I would’ve spoke on it, I thought it will let some of the relief off of me, but now it haven’t because I still have that pain inside,” said Cole. “It hurts, but I’m dealing with it.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Attorney General Josh Kaul speaks with reporters outside the Wisconsin Supreme Court in February 2023. (Wisconsin Examiner photo)

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul spoke Tuesday to the Attorney General’s Sexual Assault Response Team about cuts to the federal Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) that reduced Wisconsin payments from $40 million to $13 million a year. The Wisconsin Department of Justice (DOJ) has requested an additional $66 million in the 2025-27 state budget to make up for the reduction.

Kaul also discussed lawsuits by his office and other state AGs around the country against the Trump administration to try to ensure funds designated to states continue to be issued.

“My office works closely with a number of other AGs around the country, and we have been in regular communication both about what’s happening and about potential litigation strategies to address policies that would be harmful to the people of our states and that can be challenged on legal grounds,” he said.  

He recounted how Wisconsin and 22 other states challenged an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) freeze on funds (grants and loans) resulting in a Jan. 31 temporary restraining order and the release of funds.

“The Trump administration’s attempts to withhold federal funding from Wisconsin hurts kids, families, seniors and communities across our state,” Gov. Evers said in response to the January order. “This was a bad idea from the beginning, and I will continue to fight these efforts every step of the way.”

Kaul told the sexual assault response team members the freeze would have affected such programs as Meals on Wheels, Head Start, VOCA, the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant, which supports law enforcement and multi-jurisdictional enforcement efforts as well as programs funded under the Violence Against Women Act. He expressed concern about other efforts to freeze “categories of funding or to essentially shut down agencies.”

Kaul said, there are two questions he has to answer in deciding if Wisconsin has legal standing to challenge a Trump administration policy:

1. Is it harmful to Wisconsinites?
2. Is there a strong legal basis for bringing a challenge?

“Different people have different opinions about what’s harmful to Wisconsinites, but it’s helpful to us to hear about the impacts that these policies are having so that we can assess them as fully as possible and share that information with our colleagues,” he said. “On the legal basis for a lot of the actions that have been being taken recently, we have had strong legal bases for the challenge because they either were made in contradiction to existing contracts, or they weren’t done consistent with the way that policies need to be adopted by the federal government.”

Kaul asked the sexual assault response team attendees to communicate with the DOJ about effects they are experiencing to the agencies they represent.  

“Please let us know if you’re seeing impacts on programs because we’re committed to stepping up,” he said.

“We want to make sure that people in policy-making roles in Washington are aware of the impacts that some of these changes are having,” said Kaul. “Because while litigation is one approach, it’s not the only thing that can be done to respond to these things.”

Kaul was also asked whether the Trump administration was respecting the orders of the courts.

“In terms of ensuring compliance with court orders, that’s something that we’ve monitored closely in the case involving the federal funding freeze,” he said. “For example, we initially saw that there were areas where we believed the federal government was not fully in compliance with the court’s order, so the states went back to court and filed what’s called a motion to enforce; we identified areas where funding had remained frozen, and we asked the court to follow up. In response to that, the federal government did follow up. They worked to address issues.”

He also talked about the “disconnect” between the federal government complying with court orders and Trump administration statements.

“In court, the federal government has been clear that they’re trying to comply with court orders, and they’re trying to meet those obligations,” he said. “I know there have been some incidents in just the past few days where that’s been in dispute, but generally speaking, that’s what we’ve seen so far. The rhetoric we’ve seen has been somewhat different.”

However, on Feb. 7 Kaul and 22 other AGs filed a motion that the Trump Administration was blocking dollars to states under the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure, Investment, and Jobs Act, that should have been unfrozen after the January temporary restraining order was issued.

Kaul said that if the Trump administration defies court orders, Democratic AGs will sue to seek relief in cases they are involved in.

“We have three co-equal branches of government, and for hundreds of years, the principle that the courts get to say what the law is has been respected by different administrations,” Kaul said. “So it’s vital that we uphold that principle.”

State asked to fill the gap after big cut 

In 2024 approximately $40 million Wisconsin had been receiving annually under the Victims of Crimes Act (VOCA), collected from federal prosecution of crimes with the fees and penalties distributed to states, dropped to $13 million.

Kaul noted that the decrease in VOCA funding began as a result of policies implemented during the first Trump administration, but the funding hadn’t “rebounded” under President Biden.

VOCA dollars are the largest funding source for Wisconsin’s  victim service organizations.

Kaul said his office has tried to “smooth” the distribution of grant funds by not having big swings in the amount awarded to agencies year to year and by using American Rescue Plane Act (ARPA) dollars to supplement funding during the Biden Administration.

“As many of you who work with victim advocacy organizations know, there has been a significant cutback in funding to organizations around the state,” said Kaul. “I’ve had a chance to talk to many organizations and hear from people about the impacts of those cutbacks, and we’re hearing everything you expect. There have been places where they’ve had to lay off staff. There have been places where programs have been cut. There are places where essential services can no longer be provided. That is a travesty for crime victims who aren’t getting the same level of services they used to, and it’s also damaging to public safety because enforcement often relies on the critical work that victim advocates do in supporting victims who subsequently feel empowered to work with law enforcement.”

Kaul said that for the 2025-27 state budget, the DOJ had requested “significant additional investment in victim services,” $66 million, which was supported by the governor’s office and Badger State Sheriffs Association to fund victim service organizations.

“So now the funding proposal is at the Legislature, and legislators are going to make a decision as to whether to provide additional funding for victim services and if so, at what level,” Kaul said. “We’re hoping to find legislators who will champion victim service funding, and I know that others have been involved in talking to legislators to make sure that they’re familiar with the importance of this issue as well.”

Kaul encouraged the sexual assault response team members to participate in hearings of the Joint Finance Committee (the Legislature’s budgeting committee) which will be holding listening sessions around the state.

“They’re interested in public input, and so I encourage those of you who have seen the impacts of these funding cuts to reach out and let legislators, and in particular, members of the Joint Finance Committee, to let them know what the impacts have been from these reductions in funding and why it’s so important that we keep victim service funding in Wisconsin,” Kaul said.

The Milwaukee County Jail. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

A 49 year-old Shorewood man who had been in custody at the Milwaukee County Jail died in a hospital Tuesday, the Milwaukee County Sheriff said in a statement. The Waukesha County Sheriff is investigating.

Shorewood Police brought the man to be booked on three criminal charges, according to the sheriff’s statement. He had been in the custody of the jail since Friday. 

On Monday evening, a nurse with Wellpath, the jail’s health care provider, observed the man experiencing a health crisis and initiated emergency protocols, the sheriff’s office said. Efforts to stabilize the man, including the use of NARCAN, were unsuccessful. 

The man, who had a pulse and was breathing, was brought to an area hospital and then a second area hospital, where he died. 

The Milwaukee County Sheriff is not investigating itself, in accordance with Wisconsin law, the statement said. It directed all inquiries to the Waukesha County Sheriff. 

An audit of the jail found “systemic issues ranging from dangerous suicide watch practices and a mental health challenge to critical staffing shortages and occupant overcrowding,” the Examiner has reported. During a 14-month period from 2022 to 2023, the jail saw six deaths in custody. 

The Waukesha County Sheriff did not immediately respond to a call seeking comment. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Detective Joseph Mensah (right) testifies before the Senate Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety earlier this year. (Photo by Isiah Holmes/Wisconsin Examiner)

The third day of the federal civil trial into the death of 17-year-old Alvin Cole featured testimony from Joseph Mensah, the officer who fatally shot Cole in 2020. Now a detective for the Waukesha County Sheriff’s Department, Mensah was an  officer in the  Wauwatosa Police Department for five years, during which time he  killed Cole after a foot pursuit. 

Mensah testified about the shooting on Feb  2, 2020, at the Mayfair Mall, where he responded to a call about a disturbance involving a gun. Mensah visited the mall twice, leaving the area he was assigned to patrol to investigate the disturbance and then returning a second time when he heard on his radio that there was a foot chase underway. He arrived both times in an unmarked squad car and did not announce his presence on the police radio, something his colleagues described as a best practice but which he testified was unnecessary.

Mensah disagreed with the testimony of Wauwatosa officer David Shamsi, who testified that he was closest to Cole when he was shot, and that Cole was on the ground and had not moved when Mensah fired. Mensah said Shamsi was mistaken. The contradictory statements between Shamsi, Mensah (who claimed Cole turned to aim a gun at Mensah, either over or under his own shoulder) and other officers on scene including Evan Olson (who said Cole pointed the gun in a completely different direction from Mensah) created the issue that opened the door to this week’s jury trial in Milwaukee’s federal courthouse.

While Shamsi holds the rank of major in the U.S. military and is now an FBI agent, Mensah asserted that he was a new officer at the time of the shooting. Mensah said that since he had five years of experience at Wauwatosa and was SWAT trained, he had more extensive and relevant tactical knowledge and experience than Shamsi. In his deposition, referenced on the stand, Mensah said that besides Olson, none of the officers on scene during the Cole shooting — including Shamsi — had the level of training and experience that he had. Shamsi’s military combat experience “doesn’t mean anything,” he testified, “especially in a situation like this.” 

On the stand, Mensah described how he arrived at the Mayfair Mall on Feb. 2, 2020, and helped officers and mall security chase the fleeing teenagers. As they ran, a single gunshot went off — later determined to be fired by Cole and resulting in a self-inflicted gunshot wound which broke bones in Cole’s arm. When Mensah heard the shot, he pulled out his own weapon. Mensah said at that point he couldn’t recall how far he was from Cole, despite having replayed the shooting in his head repeatedly and viewed video and other reports from the shooting over the last five years. Mensah said that when the first shot went off, he didn’t see a muzzle or knew who fired. Cole fell to the ground and then 10 seconds later Mensah fired five shots. Later, he said Cole had pointed his gun in Mensah’s direction. 

Mensah said that the entire situation was “very fluid” and quick, and repeatedly said “I don’t remember” or “I don’t recall” throughout questioning from the Cole family’s  attorneys. Attorney Nate Cade referred to Mensah’s deposition testimony in 2023, in which he said he saw Cole fall to his hands and knees, and then crawl a short distance towards a concrete construction barrier in the Cheesecake Factory restaurant parking lot. Mensah said on the stand that although Cole turned towards him, he didn’t know if would  use the term “tucked” to describe his posture, as his colleague officer Olson did in testimony Tuesday. When asked if Cole reached under or over his shoulder, as he had previously testified, on the stand Mensah said, “I don’t recall.” 

Mensah testified that he only “vaguely” recalls his interview with detectives who investigated Cole’s shooting as part of the Milwaukee Area Investigative Team (MAIT). During his deposition, Mensah said that he saw a flash of light as he chased Cole, which he acknowledged could have been flashlights from officers and mall security. During his initial interview with detectives after the shooting in 2020, Mensah said he had not seen any muzzle flash, and on the stand Wednesday he said he couldn’t account for what MAIT detectives did or did not put in their report. Mensah said that once Cole was on the ground, he paused to assess his surroundings before he fired. When he saw a gun in Cole’s hand and felt it was being pointed at him, Mensah said he began to “prepare” his body to be shot, acquired his “target,” which was Cole, and then fired.

While questioning Mensah, Cade noted that several things that Mensah said he yelled to officers such as “the gun is out” — meaning he sees a firearm — are not in the police investigative report, nor does MAIT’s report mention that Mensah yelled “drop the gun” at Cole, as Mensah said he had done. Mensah said that the situation was “incredibly traumatic” to him and that when it comes to what he does and does not remember, “the brain works in mysterious ways.” 

Video and audio from Olson’s squad car captured after the shooting, played during the trial, captured someone yelling curse words, and then saying, “I can’t believe I just shot somebody.” Mensah said he could hear the curse words and acknowledged that it was him, but said that he couldn’t understand the words after that. Still, he argued that the recording did not show him saying what attorneys claimed, and that it was “random” radio chatter from other people. Cade argued that if it was Mensah saying those words, that suggests that he did not intend to shoot Cole, which he said showed that it was an instance of excessive use of force. The Cole family’s lawyers also highlighted Mensah’s statement after the shooting that “I was overwhelmed with emotions,” suggesting it showed that he had lost control. Mensah said some of his microphone equipment may have been malfunctioning, distorting the record of what he said at the time, but acknowledged that he was “amped up.” 

Cole family attorneys also brought up that Olson and Mensah had not separated themselves that night, which is required by MAIT protocols and is done to avoid contamination of statements. Mensah denied that he and Olson actually discussed anything about the shooting, and both officers said on the stand that they were friends then and remain friends today outside of work. When attorney Jasmyne Baynard, representing Mensah, questioned the officer, he said he grew up in the Wauwatosa area, and that he became an officer after seeing a friend get in trouble, and that he wanted to help people “truly in need.” He graduated from the police academy in 2012, and was hired by Wauwatosa in 2015, though he’d been an unarmed reserve officer since 2009. 

Answering questions about his actions on the night of Feb 2, 2020, Mensah said that police officers are not required to stay in their patrol sector, and that he went back to the mall after the foot pursuit was called out, because such pursuits can be unpredictable and dangerous. When he approached Cole on the ground, Mensah said he didn’t know the teen was hurt or that he’d shot himself. 

Mensah said that Cole didn’t do a “drastic turn around” to aim his gun, and that the motion he saw was “over the shoulder,” which contradicted his prior testimony. Mensah said that he couldn’t second-guess himself in the heat of the moment. “I don’t get that luxury in the fraction of a fraction of a second,” he said. 

“I’m not focusing on the gun anymore,” Mensah said, describing the moment as he prepared to fire. Instead, he said, he was focused on stopping a threat, and that he kept firing his weapon until he felt the threat was stopped. Mensah said he did not see a gun pointed at Olson, which Olson told MAIT in 2020 and testified to during the trial. During questioning, Mensah became emotional, and said, “I didn’t want to do it.” 

On the stand, Mensah was asked whether he felt either Shamsi (who didn’t see the gun or Cole move at all and was closest to Cole) or Olson (who was further away and said the gun was pointed at him, which would mean away from Mensah) were liars. Mensah said that he believes Shamsi was “mistaken” and then suggested the same about his friend Olson. Mensah said that he does not believe that he could have been wrong when he killed Cole. 

Once Mensah’s testimony concluded, Milwaukee police detective Lori Rom was called to the stand. Rom was one of the MAIT investigators initially assigned to interview officers involved in Cole’s death. Rom said that her department typically does not record officer interviews after shootings, and that had Mensah told them things like calling out that he saw the gun, or if he saw a muzzle flash, that it would have been documented as important information. Attorney Joseph Wirth, representing Mensah, noted that MAIT statements are not court statements made under oath. 

Tracy Cole, Alvin’s mother, was expected to testify, but this was not allowed after a chamber conversation between the judge and attorneys. Mensah’s defense attorneys called Sarah Hopkins, a civilian witness to the shooting to the stand next. Hopkins said she was outside the Cheesecake Factory when she saw the chase and shooting. Hopkins said she never saw Cole surrender or throw his hands up, but instead that he stopped running and turned towards officers in a shooter’s stance she recognized from taking concealed carry classes — something none of the other witnesses,  including Mensah,  said had happened. She’d initially claimed to be about 40 feet from the shooting, but later questioning determined that it had to have been at least 200 feet. Cole family attorney Cade highlighted that “we’re now in day three of trial” without anyone else having claimed to have seen what Hopkins said she saw. 

A mall security guard was also called to the stand, who helped chase after Cole and his friends. The guard said he heard a shot, saw a flash of light, and dropped to the ground. Like other witnesses, the guard said that Cole was on his hands and knees at one point, but that when he heard the first shot he got down to the ground for safety. The guard said he never saw Cole point a gun at anyone. Defense attorneys called former Green Bay police officer and Waukesha Area Technical College instructor Mike Knetzger, a certified instructor in defense and arrest tactics. Defense attorneys questioned Knetzger about use of force, noting that officers don’t need to go through each level of force before deadly force, especially if a situation happens quickly. Knetzger said that “special circumstances” such as the suspect’s behavior, could escalate the use of force. He later acknowledged, however, that shooting someone facing away from an officer without a gun pointed in their direction may not be an appropriate use of force. Knetzger said that use of force has to be considered from the perspective of a hypothetical “reasonable officer” and not specifically from the perspective of Mensah, who was the only officer on scene to fire his weapon at Cole. 

Closing arguments are expected on  Thursday, after which the jury will begin deliberations.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The federal courthouse in Milwaukee.

The second day of the  civil trial in the fatal police shooting of Alvin Cole began Tuesday morning with testimony from Evan Olson, one of the officers  on the scene when Cole was shot  on the night of  Feb 2,  2020. Olson was one of three Wauwatosa officers whose contradictory statements about the shooting formed the basis for the civil suit . Attorneys on both sides grilled witnesses for hours.

Olson, like other current Wauwatosa officers called to the stand, arrived at Milwaukee’s federal courthouse in full uniform. For part of the morning Wauwatosa Chief James MacGillis sat in the gallery. 

Olson said he was friends with officer Joseph Mensah, who has been accused by the Cole family of using excessive force when he shot Alvin Cole. 

On Feb 2, 2020, Olson was one of several officers who responded to Mayfair Mall after reports went out about a disturbance involving a group of boys, one of whom had a gun. When Olson arrived on the scene, Cole and his friends were  leaving the mall and  running from police. Olson approached the mall from the west, cutting off the fleeing teens. After pulling up and getting out of his squad car, Olson approached two boys and told them to “get the [expletive] on the ground”, drew his service weapon and used a flashlight to illuminate the area. 

From his position, Olson could see Cole being pursued in the distance. Unlike other witness officers, Olson claimed that he didn’t see Cole fall to his hands and knees. Instead, Olson said Cole was in a “low, ready” position, which he compared to a sprinter’s stance, or a lineman’s stance in football. Attorney Nate Cade, one of the lawyers representing the Cole family, pressed Olson on what he saw, noting that his testimony was inconsistent with that of other officers. Squad car video of the shooting was played repeatedly in the courtroom on both the first and second day of the trial. Judge Lynn Adelman said that re-watching the video “is quite oppressive, actually,” and asked attorneys to limit how often they played it. 

Olson said Cole, in his “low, ready” position, also had his arm “tucked” similar to a “hug yourself gesture.” He also testified that while Cole was on the ground, he extended a black handgun in Olson’s direction. When Mensah fired five shots at Cole, the teen went flat and prone on the ground, Olson said. 

The officer said he never saw Cole crawling, a detail mentioned by Joseph Wirth, one of the attorneys representing Mensah, during Monday’s opening statements. Olson’s statement to Milwaukee police investigators in 2020 that Cole pointed a gun at him contradicts former Wauwatosa officer David Shamsi, who now works for the FBI. In depositions and on the stand, Shamsi said that he never saw Cole move once he fell to the ground. Shamsi was the closest officer to the teen with just a few feet between them. Mensah — who’s expected to testify on Wednesday — said that the gun was pointed only at him. Mensah was facing Cole from a different position than Olson, who also said the gun was pointed in his direction. 

Attorneys also noted that after the shooting, Olson and Mensah went off alone together for an undetermined amount of time. This interaction violated policies for investigating officer-involved shootings in the Milwaukee area, which state that involved officers should be separated from other witnesses in order to avoid contamination of statements. This line of questioning, however, stopped after a sidebar between attorneys and the judge. 

Video from inside one of the squad cars captured a voice (presumably Mensah’s) yelling after the shooting, “[expletive], I can’t believe I just shot somebody.” Olson, however, said he couldn’t understand what the voice was saying when the video was played back. 

Olson was interviewed once by police investigators after the shooting, and then again months later in the summer of 2020 by the district attorney about what happened, and never mentioned the twisting, tucking, or rolling maneuvers he mentioned on the stand. Under questioning he conceded it was a significant detail to omit. 

After the shooting, Olson said he saw Mensah was distraught, and appeared to get emotional himself as he recalled it. He also testified that Cole didn’t appear to be surrendering, and that once the teen was shot he walked up and kicked the handgun out of Cole’s hand, then handcuffed him as he struggled to breath before he began life saving measures. 

During his time at Wauwatosa PD, Olson attracted controversy to the department after punching a teenager in the face at Mayfair Mall several times. Fox6 News found that prior to the incident, Olson had been suspended for violating department policies such as by speeding, after which former Chief Barry Weber advised Olson that he was on his “very last warning.” In 2021, both Olson and officer Dexter Schleis — who testified in court on Monday —- were also involved in a non-fatal shooting of a teenager who ran from officers with a firearm.

After Olson, the court heard testimony from Sean Kaefer, a filmmaker and director of UW-Milwaukee’s documentary film program. Kaefer testified about squad car video he helped edit and enhance, which was to be shown later that day in the trial. Kaefer said he attempted to lighten the dark video, boost colors, zoom in, remove background noise, and add circles and arrows to point out things in the video such as Cole on the ground and Mensah firing and walking away. “What I do is very little,” said Kaefer. However, he said the video from Wauwatosa’s squad cars was poor quality, and the department didn’t have body cameras prior to the Cole shooting.

Shenora Jordan, principal at Messmer High School in Milwaukee witnessed the foot pursuit and shooting of Cole from her car. Jordan said she heard a shot, saw a boy fall to the ground, and then heard multiple shots which would’ve come from Mensah. Jordan said she saw Cole laying flat on ground after he shot, with his legs in the air kicking as if he was still running, before they slowly lowered.

“I was in disbelief, still in disbelief,” said Jordan, who said Cole never pointed a gun, and that she never saw him with anything in his hands. Later, Jordan said she made a social media post about what she saw, and was contacted by community organizers who advised her to contact the district attorney’s office. Jordan said she spoke with now-District Attorney Kent Lovern, and later was invited to meet Greenfield police investigators at a library in their jurisdiction. Although she told them what happened, and the conversation was recorded, Jordan said she felt the investigators didn’t really care about what she had to say.

Jordan said that neither her husband nor her children, who were in the car with her during the shooting, were ever interviewed by investigators. During her meeting with officers, Jordan drew a map to show  what she saw. When attorney Wirth for Mensah’s defense questioned Jordan, he suggested that she was never in a position to witness the shooting. Wirth played video from two squad cars, which only shows a vehicle matching Jordan’s passing by with others moments after the shooting was over. Jordan took issue with Wirth’s framing. “This is very serious,” she said. “I don’t want to be confused, and I don’t want you to twist my words,” she said.

Dr. Wieslaw Tlomak, chief medical examiner for Milwaukee County, gave lengthy testimony on  Cole’s autopsy, placing stickers on a mannequin to show where Cole was shot. Cole also had blunt force injuries and abrasions to his head. 

Later in the day, Chief James MacGillis returned to watch from the gallery alongside Wauwatosa PD Capt. Luke Vetter. The two sat across the courtroom from Cole’s mother, brother, and sister, Taleavia, whom Vetter has said police monitored for her protest activities after her brother was killed.

By the end of the day, once the jury was dismissed for the day, attorney Wirth attempted to call for a mistrial. Wirth pointed to Jordan’s testimony, accusing her of misrepresenting what she saw and asked the judge either for a mistrial, or to strike her testimony. Attorney Cade countered that Olson directly contradicted testimony from other officers including Shamsi and Johnson while on the stand, arguing that if anyone was manipulating their testimony, it was Olson. Judge Adelman denied the defense’s requests, saying that the jury will get to decide who they believe. “It’s really their call, not mine,” Adelman said. 

This article has been edited to correct the name Shenora Jordan, who was called Shenora Jones in an earlier version. We regret the error. 

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The Wisconsin Assembly voted along party lines Tuesday to pass legislation penalizing counties with sheriff's departments that don't cooperate with ICE, the federal Immigration Customers and Enforcement agency. (Photo via ICE)

Legislation passed the Assembly Tuesday that would claw back state aid from counties where the sheriff doesn’t cooperate with the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement service (ICE).

The legislation would require sheriffs to check the citizenship status of people being held in jail on felony charges and notify federal immigration enforcement officials if citizenship cannot be verified.

The state Senate, meanwhile, approved a bill that would block a judicial investigation of a police officer involved in the death of a person unless there’s new evidence or evidence that has not been previously addressed in court.

The immigration-related bill, AB 24, passed the Assembly on a straight party-line vote.

In addition to requiring citizenship checks, the bill would also require sheriffs to comply with detainers and administrative warrants received from the federal Department of Homeland Security for people in jail. Counties would be required to certify annually that they were following the law and would lose 15% of their shared revenue payments from the state if they were not.

Proponents described the measure as enhancing safety.

“We have the opportunity to emulate in many ways the best practices that are already happening across our country,” Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester), the bill’s author, said at a news conference before the floor session. “We have seen since [President] Donald Trump took office that we have had a dramatic reduction in the number of illegal crossings that are happening at the southern border.”

Opponents said the bill would divert local law enforcement resources while driving up mistrust and fear among immigrants, regardless of their legal status.

Rep. Ryan Clancy (D-Milwaukee) said the legislation was “big government” and interferes with local counties’ policy decisions. It also undermines the presumption of innocence for a person charged with a crime, potentially strains resources for local jails, and could lead to holding people “longer than is necessary,” he said.

But he added that those weren’t his top reasons for opposing the bill.

“I’m voting against this because it’s wrong, because this legislation rips people from our communities and families based on the mere accusation of a crime, because our Republicans colleagues’ eagerness to make themselves tools in Trump’s attacks on immigrants, refugees, visitors and those who oppose him is vile,” Clancy said.

On the floor, Vos replied that he agreed with Clancy about the presumption of innocence, and that he also agreed with other lawmakers who said the vast majority of immigrants are not guilty of any crime.

“But I would also say that there is a burden of proof on both sides,” Vos said. “It’s not entirely on just the side of the government to ensure that you follow the law.”

Claiming broad bipartisan support for the measure, Vos said Democratic opposition was “clearly out of step, even with your base.”

Rep. Christian Phelps (D-Eau Claire) responded that  he hasn’t heard constituents ask for the legislation or anything like it.

“They are asking us explicitly to make life tangibly easier for working class Wisconsinites,” he said, “and they have not been asking me to engage in redundant acts of political theater to satisfy the whims of a rogue president engaging in a campaign of intimidation and mass deportation that includes constituents in western Wisconsin.”

Senate approves John Doe exemption

The state Senate voted Tuesday to pass a bill that makes an exemption to the state’s John Doe law for police officers involved in a civilian’s death.

In Wisconsin, if a district attorney chooses not  to file criminal charges,  a judge may hold a hearing — known as a John Doe investigation — on the matter and file a complaint based on the findings of that hearing.

The legislation, SB 25, “simply says, if that case goes before a DA, and then the DA  justifies their actions and they are deemed to be innocent of any wrongdoing … that case is closed and it is in a file never to be seen again,” said the bill’s  author, Sen. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield), on the Senate floor.

Hutton said the legislation allows a judicial investigation to proceed, however, “if a new piece of evidence is presented that wasn’t known before, or an unused piece of evidence is found.”

But Sen. Dora Drake (D-Milwaukee) questioned carving out an exemption to the state’s John Doe law. “This bill does not apply to any other crime in Wisconsin,” she said.

Lawmakers, Drake added, should do more to address “the environment and the situations” that have led to officer-involved deaths. 

Sen. LaTonya Johnson (D-Milwaukee), said testimony at the bill’s public hearing discussed only two attempts to invoke the John Doe proceeding after a prosecutor declined to file charges in an officer-involved death — and one of them involved former Wauwatosa police officer Joseph Mensah, who killed three people in five years.

Allowing for a John Doe investigation in an officer-involved death “protects the public,” Johnson said. “What it does is put a second eye on those cases that deserve a second look.”

The Senate passed the bill 19-13. Two Democrats, Sens. Kristin Dassler-Alfheim (D-Appleton) and Sarah Keyeski (D-Lodi), voted in favor along with 17 Republicans. Sen. Eric Wimberger (R-Oconto), who also opposed the bill in committee, joined the remaining Democrats who voted against the measure.

Reversing DPI testing standards: On a vote of 18-14 along party lines, the Senate concurred in an Assembly bill that would reverse a change that the Department of Public Instruction (DPI) made last year to testing standards.

AB 1 would revert the state’s testing standards to what they were in 2019 and link standards to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Republicans voting for the bill said that the DPI change “lowered” standards — a claim DPI and Democrats rejected.

Direct primary care passes — but Democrats object: The Senate also voted 18-14 on party lines to pass SB 4, legislation that would clear the way for health care providers who participate in direct primary care arrangements. Under direct primary care, doctors treat patients who subscribe to their services for a monthly fee as an alternative to health insurance for primary care.

An amendment Democrats offered would have added a list of enumerated civil rights protections for direct primary care patients. That list was in a direct primary care bill in the 2023-24 legislative session that passed the Assembly but stalled in the Senate when two organizations protested language protecting “gender identity.”

After the amendment was rejected, also on a party-line vote, Democrats voted against the final bill.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Tracy Cole, the mother of Alvin Cole, surrounded by her family. (Photo by Isiah Holmes)

A federal civil trial into the killing of 17-year-old Alvin Cole by then-Wauwatosa officer Joseph Mensah five years ago began on Monday, bringing Cole’s family, Mensah, a cast of current and former Wauwatosa officers, and other witnesses into the U.S. district court building in Milwaukee. The lawsuit accuses Mensah of using excessive force when he fired five shots at Cole in 2020, killing him after a foot chase in a darkened mall parking lot. 

During opening statements, attorney Kimberly Motley said police officers receive  extensive training in use of force under Wisconsin’s  Defense and Arrest Tactics (DAAT) standards. Motley said that when officers fire their weapons they must “articulate each shot” and that Mensah “did not exercise restraint” when he shot Cole. Cole’s case  was  Mensah’s third shooting over a five year period, although attorneys agreed to not bring up that fact during the trial. “We believe that Joseph Mensah did not have the right to shoot and kill Alvin Cole,” said Motley. 

The mostly white jury of seven women and one man listened intently to statements from both Motley and attorney Joseph Wirth who represents Mensah. They recounted the events of  Feb. 2 2020, a Super Bowl Sunday, when  Cole and a group of his friends  got into a verbal altercation with another group of boys at the Mayfair mall. Police were called and the boys fled. Officers later testified that a  single gun shot was heard as the police were  chasing Cole, though they did not see who fired the gun. While Cole was on his hands and knees, surrounded by officers, Mensah fired five shots, later claiming that Cole pointed a gun at him. Wirth said footchases are dangerous and unpredictable and  stressed that the events leading up to the shooting took place over less time than it took the attorney to introduce himself to the jury. He appealed to the jurors saying  they could be sympathetic to the Cole family, while also ruling that Mensah’s use of force was reasonable. “Put yourself in the officer’s shoes,” Wirth told the jury. 

Motley said that Cole accidentally shot himself in the forearm before he fell, breaking his arm in the process. The broken arm would have made it hard for him to aim his gun at Mensah, as Mensah claimed, Motley said.  Also, an officer who was closer to Cole than Mensah said that Cole hadn’t moved at all before Mensah fired. 

That officer, David Shamsi, who’s now an FBI agent, was called as a witness on Monday. Another officer, Evan Olson, who said the gun was pointed in a completely different direction than Mensah claims, is also expected to testify later in the week. The  contradictory statements from officers Mensah, Olson, and Shamsi persuaded U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman that the lawsuit should go to trial. 

On Monday, Alvin’s father, Albert Cole,  recalled dropping his son off with his friends the last  time he would see him.  After Alvin died, Albert became “anti-social,” he testified, Crying on the witness stand, he said  Alvin’s death left a hole in his life and that of Tracy Cole,  his wife of over 30 years. “That hurt was inside me,” he said.

Shamsi testified that he was “tunnel visioned” on Cole’s gun, which he said remained on the ground and didn’t move after Cole fell to his hands and knees in the dark parking lot. Shamsi hadn’t considered whether Cole was wounded and, in fact, was prepared to fire his own weapon if the boy moved again. “I did not see him point a gun at me,” said Shamsi.

During questioning, attorneys noted that Shamsi changed his story when he was re-interviewed about the shooting months after it occurred. It was during that interview that Shamsi said that he saw Cole’s arm extended towards officers. When he was deposed for the civil lawsuit and then on the stand Monday, Shamsi reverted to his original statements that he did not see Cole move after he was on the ground. 

Cole family attorney Nate Cade told Wisconsin Examiner that he suspects Shamsi changed his story after meeting  with Mensah’s attorneys, because  “no one wants to turn around and say that a fellow officer did something wrong.” He said  Shamsi’s testimony that the gun never moved “is the most damning thing.” Cole’s shooting was initially investigated by the Milwaukee Area Investigative Team (MAIT), before the Milwaukee County district attorney decided Mensah wouldn’t be charged for killing Cole in 2020. A recent investigation by Wisconsin Examiner in partnership with Type Investigations found a pattern of MAIT policies protecting officers and contradictory statements left unchallenged. 

Cade said  “the district attorney looked the other way” and that there were things that investigators “should have done” but neglected,  such as measuring the distance between Cole’s body and bullet casings. “There are no measurements,” said Cade. “None of the officers identified exactly where they were standing.” 

Attorneys also called a civilian witness who’d seen Cole’s group running from police and witnessed the shooting. The witness said that he did not see Cole running with anything in his hands, suggesting that he had not turned his body to point a gun at officers as he ran. Wauwatosa officer Dexter Schleis agreed with Cade that deadly force is allowed if an armed person turns towards an officer, he would not answer directly when asked if deadly force is appropriate when an armed person has their back to an officer, is on the ground and isn’t moving. Schleis repeatedly asked for the question to be repeated, that he didn’t understand, or couldn’t say whether the shooting complied with police protocol.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

A Milwaukee police squad in front of the Municipal Court downtown. (Photo | Isiah Holmes)

Activists in Milwaukee are calling for more community control of police as the public learns about a Milwaukee Police Department (MPD) officer arrested by federal authorities last week. Juwon Madlock, who had 10 years of service at MPD, is accused of a variety of crimes stemming from his alleged relationship with a local gang. 

A federal complaint accuses Madlock — among other things — of possessing a machine gun, selling guns and ammunition to local gang members and using police databases to furnish intelligence to those gangs about rivals and informants. The complaint alleges that Madlock worked with “a violent street gang in Milwaukee” identified by federal authorities as the “Burleigh Zoo Family.” It’s unclear whether the gang chose the name or whether it was bestowed on the group by law enforcement investigators. 

The Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression, a local group which has called for accountability and community oversight of law enforcement, released a statement noting that Madlock appears on Milwaukee County’s Brady List of  officers with problematic histories. A searchable database compiled by TMJ4 states that at the time Madlock was placed on the Brady List, he was still employed at MPD. 

Records related to Madlock’s disciplinary history maintained by the Fire and Police Commission (FPC) mention that Madlock and another officer, Benjamin Bender, violated integrity standards for failing to investigate a reported shooting from a victim who came into MPD’s District 7 in 2021. Representatives from the FPC didn’t respond to a request for comment.

The Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression questions why an officer with Madlock’s history was allowed to remain on MPD, and whether other officers who have violated police standards continue to serve on MPD. “We need these questions answered now, and we need concrete steps from Chief Jeffrey Norman to rectify this situation,” the group said in a statement.

A press release from MPD states that Chief Norman “expects all members, sworn and civilian, to demonstrate the highest ethical standards in the performance of their duties and was extremely disappointed to learn about the misconduct in this case. Chief Norman wants to remind the public that everyone is afforded the right of due process under the law, and as such, are innocent until proven guilty.”

Madlock was arrested on March 12, after agents from the FBI office of Milwaukee and MPD’s Internal Affairs division “made contact” with him, according to the department’s press release. The trail to Madlock’s door began on Feb 13, when MPD’s Special Investigations Division, tactical units, and federal task force officers of the FBI’s “Milwaukee Area Safe Streets Task Force” executed a search warrant of a home in the Milwaukee suburb of Greenfield. Their target, 29-year-old Cobie Hannah Jr., was wanted by the Milwaukee County sheriff according to the federal complaint. Although Hannah was ordered not to have weapons, when officers searched his  home, they allegedly found firearms, stolen license plates and false vehicle registrations. 

After seizing and searching an iPhone and laptops, investigators found a text message chain from a number they later linked to Madlock using “law enforcement and open-source databases,” the complaint states. The text messages reveal conversations in which Madlock discusses selling guns and ammunition to members of the “Burleigh Zoo Family” according to the complaint. The messages also discuss what investigators believe are plans to steal cars. 

In separate instances, Madlock appeared to be providing gang members with information about police movements and patrols, so that alleged gang members who were wanted could avoid law enforcement. Some of the messages suggested Madlock used law enforcement databases to renew plates which were also used by gang members to avoid law enforcement. One of the more damning messages suggests that Madlock used law enforcement information databases to identify informants and find addresses to arrange shootings among rival gangs. The unchecked use of such databases by law enforcement, particularly when it comes to surveillance of citizens without a clear public safety reason, is a growing concern among privacy and civil liberties groups.

After Madlock was brought into custody, he allegedly spoke with investigators about the text messages and what they meant. A federal search warrant was served on Madlock’s North Side Milwaukee home. A handgun “affixed with a machinegun conversion device’ was found in the basement. When asked about the various guns he allegedly offered for sale, the complaint states, Madlock claimed the weapons were owned by his parents and brother. Madlock’s father allegedly told law enforcement later that the guns were indeed his, but that his son did not have permission to sell them, and that he didn’t know about the machine pistol.

The complaint also mentions that Madlock claimed that Hannah was “a source of information for him, in his capacity as a police officer.” Madlock did not sign Hannah up as an official confidential source, however, and had not taken the required training to use informants. Nor could he show investigators instances — such as through text messages —- of times when Hannah served as an informant or source of information. Instead, the federal complaint states, “the situation was reversed: MADLOCK, the police officer, is providing information to HANNAH, the wanted fugitive. MADLOCK did not have a cogent response.” 

The Milwaukee Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression says the case points to a need for greater community oversight of the police. Although Madlock was arrested over the course of the federal investigation, he remained on the force for years after being flagged on the Brady List as an officer with integrity issues. The fact that the integrity concern was raised over Madlock’s lack of investigating a reported shooting raises further red flags in the eyes of community members. “If the Chief of Police will not hold his own police officers accountable, we need a mechanism through which the people of Milwaukee, the people who are policed, can hold them accountable,” the Alliance said in a statement.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Rep. Brent Jacobson (R-Mosinee) said extended supervision, probation and parole are tools that give people a second chance with the expectation that they will not commit other crimes. Screenshot via WisEye.

The Wisconsin Assembly passed a slate of criminal justice related bills Thursday, including a requirement to revoke probation or parole for people charged with crimes and implementing financial penalties if Milwaukee Public Schools doesn’t return police officers to school buildings.  

Republican lawmakers said the bills were necessary to improve public safety in Wisconsin. 

“Wisconsinites in almost every part of our state have seen that there are areas of our state that have sincere and real concerns,” Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R-Rochester) said during a press conference.

Assembly Minority Leader Greta Neubauer (D-Racine) said during floor debate that lawmakers should be crafting “smart” legislation to ensure people are safe across the state, but that the bills fall short of that goal. She said lawmakers should be focused on investing in safety.

“We can use evidence based, data driven practices to lower recidivism, to save taxpayer dollars and invest in rehabilitation and treatment to keep our communities safe,” Neubauer said. “Democrats are serious about safety, but the majority of bills in front of us today are not.”

Rep. Ryan Clancy said in a statement after the session that lawmakers spent the day on “considering badly written, badly conceived bills that will harm people and waste public resources” and said Republicans were refusing to acknowledge that mass incarceration and prison overcrowding are problems for the state. 

“It’s wildly irresponsible to even consider increasing penalties and interfering with the very few tools of leniency we have with a prison system holding 5,000 more people than intended,” Clancy said. “But here we are.”  

A couple of the bills would implement stricter requirements for dealing with criminal charges for people released from prison. 

AB 85 would require supervising corrections officials to recommend revoking extended supervision, parole or probation for formerly incarcerated people who are charged with a new crime after their release. It passed 53-43.

The Department of Corrections found in a fiscal estimate that the bill would result in approximately 6,280 additional revocation cases each year. It also found that there would be an increase in operations costs by $85 million in the first year of enactment and a permanent increased operations cost of about $245 million after the population is annualized in the second year.

Vos said that the bill should be simple. He said that people who are out on parole have been given the “privilege” of being released from prison. 

“Do you stand with the victim and the public or do you stand with the criminal who has reoffended and given up the privilege that he was briefly granted?” Vos rhetorically asked. “I think the price is worth it — $300 million to keep the people safe.” 

Jacobson said the bill is necessary to address the “revolving door” in the prison system and ensure criminals don’t have the opportunity to victimize people. He said that extended supervision, probation and parole are tools that give people a second chance with the expectation that they will not commit other crimes. 

“In far too many cases, a person released under state supervision continues the behavior that resulted in them going to prison in the first place,” Jacobson said. “It seems like common sense that someone who’s been convicted of a crime, is released under state supervision and returns to committing crimes, should have their release revoked. Far too often that is not the case.” 

Clancy said in his statement that Republicans were “openly misleading the public and their colleagues about the contents and impacts of those bills.” He noted that the bill would be “triggered when someone is merely charged with a crime” but not found guilty.

AB 66 would require prosecutors to get a court’s approval to dismiss certain criminal charges. It passed 53-44.

Rep. Alex Joers (D-Middleton) said the bill would “remove prosecutorial discretion” and impose limits on those trying to uphold the law. 

Jacobson, who authored the bill, argued it would support law enforcement and protect Wisconsinites from being victimized. He noted that Wisconsin law allows prosecutors to dismiss or amend charges or enter into deferred prosecution agreements. 

“In the Legislature, we can pass all the penalties we like. It won’t matter if the justice system won’t apply those penalties,” Jacobson said. The bill, he said, would add an additional layer of oversight and transparency by requiring prosecutors to get court approval to dismiss or amend charges in cases involving one of seven serious crimes. Those include sexual assault, crimes against a child, theft of an automobile, reckless driving resulting in great bodily harm and illegal possession of a firearm by a felon. 

“These crimes leave lasting impacts and it’s our job as officials to take these seriously,” Jacobson said. 

Lawmakers also passed a couple of bills that would increase penalties for certain crimes.

AB 61, which would increase penalties for injuring or killing an animal used by police or firefighters, passed in a voice vote. 

Specifically, the bill would increase injuring an animal to a Class H felony, which is punishable by a fine of up to $10,000 or imprisonment for up to six years. Killing an animal would be increased to a Class G felony, which is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 or imprisonment for up to 10 years.

AB 86 passed in a voice vote. The bill would increase the penalty for child sex trafficking if the crime involved at least three victims who were children at the time the crime was committed from a Class C felony to a Class A felony. As a Class A felony, the crime could be punished with life imprisonment.

AB 89 would allow multiple acts of theft or retail theft committed by the same person to be prosecuted as a single crime, and the value of the thefts to be combined in determining the penalty. It passed 71-26, with 18 Democrats joining Republicans in support. 

School resource officers in MPS 

Lawmakers also passed AB 91, which would implement financial penalties for Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS) and the city of Milwaukee if either stop complying with a state law that requires police officers in schools.

Wisconsin Act 12, which passed in 2023, provided increased state funding for local governments and also implemented requirements that MPS place 25 officers in its schools by Jan. 1, 2024. The district was late to begin following the law, and a judge recently ordered the district and city to comply with the state law and instructed the district and the city to split the cost for the officers evenly. The Milwaukee Common Council and MPS Board both approved an agreement to make this happen earlier this month. 

The bill was introduced, its sponsors said, to ensure the district complies both now and in the future. 

An amendment to the bill changed the cost-sharing from 25% for the city of Milwaukee and 75% for the district to an even split between the two entities. 

If there is noncompliance, 10% of the city’s shared revenue payment will be withheld by the state and 25% of the school district’s state aid payments would be withheld. 

MPS has not had officers in schools since 2016, and the district ended its contract with the Milwaukee Police Department in 2020 in response to student and community opposition to the practice, a point that Rep. Darrin Madison (D-Milwaukee) pointed out during floor debate. 

Madison said that when he was a student at a school staffed with officers a friend of his had an encounter that left him in the hospital. 

“Two students were fighting. School safety officers came in and de-escalated the situation. As a friend of mine went to go check on his sister, who had been involved in the incident, I got to see school resource officers grab him, lift him in the air and body-slam him on the concrete of our lunchroom floor,” Madison said. “His shoulder was dislocated and his lip was busted, and he had to undergo surgery to navigate that situation. That wasn’t the only time that this happened in our school, where students were harmed by school resource officers.”

Madison said police officers in schools are a “failed approach.” 

“Thanks to Act 12, and thanks to this bill. We’ll continue to create harms for our students… Our schools shouldn’t look like prisons. They shouldn’t work like prisons, and we shouldn’t treat students like prisoners in a space of learning, creativity and exploration. This takes Milwaukee schools in a bad direction.”

Clancy pointed out that MPS is not the only school district without officers in schools. Some other districts are Madison Metropolitan School District, Sherwood, Nicolet, Glendale River Hills.

“This is an attack on Milwaukee, and this is an attack specifically on the Black, brown, and Indigenous young people,” Clancy said. 

Bill author Rep. Bob Donovan (R-Greenfield) said that the bill is needed because Milwaukee schools continue to call the police to deal with incidents. He cited a recent Milwaukee Journal Sentinel report that found MPS averaged 3,700 police calls each year over 11 years. 

“If MPS doesn’t want cops in their schools, why do they keep calling them?” Donovan said. 

“Some say that this legislation or the penalties are not necessary. What is the alternative? The state just allow open defiance of state law? It took an MPS parent to sue the district before any movement was made,” Donovan said. “This legislation ensures this never happens again… There must be consequences for breaking the law, and how can we expect MPS to teach our children respect for authority and the rule of law when they apparently have none themselves.” 

Other bills passed include

• AB 75 to require the state Department of Justice to collect and report a list of facts about each criminal case filed in Wisconsin. It passed 54-43. Rep. Russell Goodwin (D-Milwaukee) joined the Republicans in voting for the bill. 
• AB 87 to require a person convicted of child trafficking to pay restitution immediately, and would authorize the seizure of their assets in lieu of payment. It also would require that anyone convicted of a felony must pay all outstanding financial obligations from their conviction before their right to vote is restored. It passed 53-44.

• AB 74 to require public school boards, private school governing bodies and charter school operators to notify the parent or guardian of a student who is an alleged victim or target of a school employee’s sexual misconduct. It passed in a voice vote.
• AB 78 to allow municipalities to impound a reckless driver’s vehicle whether or not it belongs to the driver. It also requires police to determine if the vehicle has been reported stolen, and if it has been, to release it to the original owner at no cost. It passed in a voice vote.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE