Seven police officers and a supervisor from District 5 have been placed on desk duty while they are the subject of a secret John Doe investigation, the likes of which are only used to keep the details from the public and press. The allegations aren’t completely clear, though it seems that the officers may be accused of improperly conducting strip and body cavity searches.

John Doe investigations are not that common. According to the Journal Sentinel, such an investigation is, “a secret inquiry in which prosecutors can compel testimony and subpoena records and other documents without public knowledge.” They are used in cases where the information is of a particularly sensitive nature.

Police Chief Edward Flynn did go so far as to say the investigation is being conducted to determine whether officers violated departmental policy or state law in regards to searches.

Though the Sentinel report doesn’t mention it, according to FightBackNews.org, one woman claims she was illegally strip searched at least three times, even claiming to have been subjected to a vaginal and anal body cavity search in public. This wouldn’t only violate policy, but would likely constitute a sexual assault if true.

Body cavity searches can only be conducted by medical personnel and with a search warrant. Officers are never authorized to conduct such searches, especially in public.

Even strip searches are only allowed in certain circumstances, specifically when there is sufficient reason to believe a suspect has concealed a weapon about their person. Even then the search must be conducted by an officer of the same gender as the suspect and in private.

Details are not being made public because of the nature of the investigation. However, it seems some victims are not keeping quiet and any others who have not yet spoken up are being asked to come forward. The Mayor has requested that any others’ claiming to have been victimized by the officers to come forward and assist with the investigation.

Police searches are bound by very specific laws, originating with the 4^th Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. But we more commonly see pat-downs or vehicle searches rather than body cavity and strip searches. If the officers in this investigation are found to be in violation, one would hope the details become public and that they are handled with a very heavy hand.

You are protected against unreasonable searches and seizures. This doesn’t stop them from happening, however. Problems with the legalities of a search are often what leads to evidence being thrown out of criminal courts.

If you are facing criminal charges and you believe the police violated your rights, call for a legal consultation.

Called “evidence-based decision making,” the new method of determining who gets released from jail on bail and who is held isn’t too popular among law enforcement and victims. But supporters of the program call it both necessary and effective. In essence, the program takes the emotions out of such decisions and, instead, leaves the decision up to hard evidence.

Justice 2000 is the name of the agency contracted to provide this evidence-based information to judges. Using a variety of factors and data, they determine the risk of someone being released pending future court dates. Often, as in the case of 21-year old felony murder suspect Derrick Byrd, people accused of violent offenses are released because they pose little future risk, according to Justice 2000.

As the Journal Sentinel points out, the decision to grant someone bail is based largely on two factors: whether or not the person will return to court when required, and whether they will commit another crime if released. Except in extreme cases, the specifics of the case are not being considered in the new program.

Justice 2000 uses several factors in making their recommendation, including: the crime charged, any failure to appears in the past, criminal background, employment, living arrangements, drug and alcohol issues, and support systems. The offender is interviewed and others are to substantiate what the offender has stated. Using this information, the group is able to make a recommendation on whether or not the suspect will return to court and whether or not they will commit another offense while waiting.

The reason for this new program, which began on January 17, is money. In the past, judges used their best judgment in determining who was a “good risk.” And while judges can make decisions that are more popular with victims, it often led to people being housed in jail who really didn’t need to be there.

By reducing the number of defendants detained pretrial, the county can save a significant amount of money, and using this “evidence-based system” will help ensure mistakes are not made in evaluating the risks vs. rewards of a release.

What does this mean for the average defendant? While the Justice 2000 company makes recommendations, judges can rule outside of their recommendation. In Byrd’s case, for example, the state appealed the decision to release him on his own recognizance, and the appeal’s court judge ruled in their favor, calling him back to jail and ordering him held on $50,000 bail. Byrd, true to the evaluation from Justice 2000, returned to court as directed and is now being held in jail.

If you are facing criminal charges, no matter how serious, you could be entitled to bail. You do have options. Whether you are charged with drug possession or a serious assault, call for help.

Sixty-one inmates who had previously been approved for electronic monitoring rather than jail time were returned to the jail to serve sentences on a policy decision made by Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. They include people convicted of robbery and sexual assault, but the majority is serving time for drug offenses and drunk driving charges.

Why the change of heart? Sheriff Clarke realized that whether or not an offender gets electronic monitoring was actually his choice, and not the decision of a judge. The judge merely makes a recommendation at sentencing and it’s up to the Sheriff whether or not to release someone.

This fact is no surprise to the judges. One of whom stated that Clarke is only changing his own policy, being more stringent with the electronic monitoring program.

Clarke says he believes the people he selected to come back to jail are risks to public safety and need to be incarcerated as electronic monitoring is a privilege.

But just how dangerous are these offenders and is the transition cost effective?

As stated, the majority of these sixty-one offenders are convicted of a drug offense or a multiple-time OWI conviction. It doesn’t seem that any had violated the conditions of their supervision. Many of those being supervised for DUI were likely wearing bracelets that also monitored their alcohol consumption, ensuring they wouldn’t reoffend while out in the community.

According to Clarke, his way may actually reduce costs, however. The electronic monitoring program now only has 95 inmates, requiring less staff time. Also, those brought into the jail are being housed in unoccupied beds that were vacant, requiring no extra facilities or personnel, according to the Journal-Sentinel. Seven staff members who worked with electronic monitoring will now be working at the jail.

Judges are questioning Clarke’s move and the motivation behind it. One attorney says the decision is purely political and does nothing for public safety.

Often, politics drives criminal justice policy. In an effort to appeal to the general public, district attorneys, sheriffs, and sometimes even judges will want to appear extra tough on crime, regardless of the effectiveness of their policies. This usually gives them short term publicity gains at the detriment of those accused or convicted of crimes.

If you are charged with a crime, you want to feel secure that you will be treated fairly regardless of the politics. Having an experienced defense lawyer on your side can help ensure your rights are protected at every stage. Contact us today to discuss the details of your case and how we might be able to help.

To tell a black person in Milwaukee that they are more likely to be stopped by police than a white, would come as no surprise to them. But now there are statistics to back it up. Not only are black drivers more likely to be stopped than their white counterparts, they are seven times more likely to be stopped, according to a study by the Journal Sentinel involving 46,000 traffic stops.

Such disparities are not unusual in large cities. But Milwaukee’s disparities are greater than many other large metro areas that track the data, including Kansas City, Charlotte, Raleigh, and St. Louis.

The disparities were present in all seven police districts, though they were most pronounced in Districts 1 and 6, where the population is predominantly white and crime is low.

Hispanic drivers are also subject to traffic stop disparities, being twice as likely to be stopped as whites. Blacks are also searched at a rate more than twice the rate of whites, even though those searches didn’t lead to higher rates of seized weapons, drugs, or stolen property among blacks.

In other large metro areas, blacks are stopped at a rate between 1.6 and 2.2 times that of whites, a far cry from the 7 times found in Milwaukee.

This was the first such study in the city. While some are saying the study shows what has always been known but never spoke about—that biased policing is alive and well, others like Police Chief Edward Flynn say the resulting numbers are simply a result of high-crime areas being more predominantly minorities.

Of course Flynn approves of the numbers, having instituted an increase in traffic stops as part of his drive to reduce crime. The number of stops conducted by Milwaukee police has quadrupled over the past four years with almost 200,000 made in 2010. Flynn believes that by targeting high crime areas with traffic stops, he can reduce overall crime.

In the first four months of 2011, Milwaukee police stopped 45,703 residents; 69% of which were black. Only 16% of all traffic stops during this period were for white drivers. Though blacks were searched more often, about twice as much, police recovered contraband at about the same rate no matter what the race of the driver was (in about 22% of searches).

Whites were let off with warnings more often than black and Hispanic drivers and were ticketed less often. Minorities were also arrested at twice the rate of their white counterparts.

Giving meaning to all of these numbers can be tricky, as everyone seems to have an opinion and these opinions vary widely depending on who you are, where your priorities lie, and what your agenda is. But if you are a black or Hispanic Milwaukeean, they likely come at little surprise.

When you are stopped for a traffic violation you rarely expect a criminal charge will follow. When one does, the results can be extremely stressful and life changing. Call us today if you are accused of a crime. We can help.

Most people who end up in Milwaukee’s gun court are there because they are charged with a crime. But not everyone. Some are there to petition the court to return their weapon, seized by police. Some were arrested on unrelated charges and the weapon was taken then. Others were never connected to a crime at all. But all of them must prove they own the weapon and plead their case to a judge before being awarded their property.

Last month, about 20 such people came before the court in an effort to reclaim their weapon. Circuit Court Judge Charles F. Kahn Jr. would rather not give any of the weapons back; he’d like to see them all destroyed. But, he knows that people have a right to own firearms and is bound by the laws of the land.

“It’s not a good idea, and absolutely not necessary to have a gun,” he tells people in his courtroom. “The guns cause people’s deaths and disability…I see it over and over.”

Some gun owners are spared going to court as the police willingly return their weapons. But according to police Captain Jason Smith, those related to a crime, those involved in a suspected straw purchase, or those that the police aren’t sure how they came to possess—those are the ones who have to see the judge.

Gun rights advocates say no one should have to go through this procedure to get back their own property. This is especially true when the rightful owner did not commit a criminal offense.

Many of the petitioners in court will be denied their weapon. The president of Wisconsin Carry, Inc. says this amounts to a de facto prosecution, a case in which a citizen is deprived of their right to bear arms and their right to personal property “on a whim.”

Some people are given their guns and others are asked to return with more proof of ownership. When asked to return more than once, many will just give up, allowing the city to destroy their weapon rather than dealing with the trouble of getting it back through the gun court.

Some guns are kept away from their owners when it can be determined that they used drugs. A little known federal regulation that prohibits the court from turning over weapons to drug users can be the downfall for anyone ever charged with a drug offense, even something as small as marijuana possession.

Though some people go to court to get their weapons back, most are never returned to their rightful owner, having been involved in a gun crime or belonging to a now-convicted felon. These are all destroyed.

When you are charged with a crime, things change. Your rights change as you are labeled a convicted criminal as well. Discussing your case with a criminal defense lawyer before it gets to that point is one way of potentially mitigating the impact such charges have on your life.

According to an in depth report by the Journal Sentinel, police officers with the Milwaukee police department are less likely to face criminal charges than the people they are tasked with serving and protecting. Ninety-three officers have been disciplined for violating laws but some of them suffered no legal consequences at all.

Six officers suffered no legal consequences for their actions, including one officer who was accused of sexually assaulting two women while on duty and another who was accused of holding a gun to a woman driver’s head in a “drunken road-rage incident”.

Some of the other officers were given lenient plea agreements, 23 to be exact. They avoided convictions and charges as long as they didn’t commit new offenses. Only 9 of the 93 police officers were convicted of crimes. These particular numbers are not surprising as very few criminal cases, regardless of the defendant, make it to trial; most are instead resolved in a plea agreement.

But one has to wonder if the plea agreements were slightly cushier for those employed by the department. One officer was originally charged with felony assault for beating his wife so badly that she was admitted to the hospital and blood was “in every room of the house”. He was ultimately given two tickets for disorderly conduct and maintained his employment on the force.

One officer was serving time in the jail, released during work hours to act as a police sergeant on work release. He was originally convicted of driving drunk with his 13 year old daughter in the car. She had been driving him home from a bar when she got lost and he took the wheel.

The Journal Sentinel’s report is scathing, stating “The department tolerates misconduct. Prosecutors give cops career-saving deals. The commission reduces punishments when officers break the rules. As a result, police who have crossed to the other side of the law keep the power that comes with the badge.”

They go on to question the logistics that sends a potential domestic abuser to respond to a domestic abuse call, or the intelligence of having a convicted drunk driver arrest others for similar offenses.

No one keeps a list of police officers and the laws they have broken. There’s no such file at the Department.

Sheriff David A. Clarke, who worked for the department for 24 years says cops who break the law should be fired. “There should be a higher standard for (an)…employee who enforces the law than for a worker who cuts the grass.”

The criminal justice system sometimes isn’t fair. Part of the purpose of having a defense lawyer on your side is to make sure your rights are protected and you are treated fairly under the law, regardless of your profession or social standing. If you’ve been accused of a crime, contact us today to discuss your case.

The murder rate in Wisconsin fell last year, from 67 killings in 2009 to 58 in 2010. Alarmingly, however, there was an average one murder per week in the state related to domestic violence, this according to the Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

The Coalition released their annual report this week at a press conference. “Domestic violence is the most urgent public safety concern in Milwaukee today,” said the Milwaukee County Chief Deputy District Attorney who was present at the conference, calling on everyone to work together on the issue.

One in four women will experience domestic violence in their lifetime. And the women aren’t the only ones affected. Children are often witnesses or victims themselves. It’s estimated that 3 million children witness domestic violence every single year. And girls who see domestic violence as children are more likely to grow up and become victims themselves.

In an effort to curtail rising numbers, police began working with the Sojourner Family Peace Center last year and prosecutors were stationed at each of the police districts to help families dealing with domestic violence issues. This year they are expected to do more.

The city is looking at a variety of new initiatives to get a handle on the problem and prevent further killings. The Homicide Review Commission is looking at what can be done to assist families before the situations prove deadly. A summit is also being planned to address the problems encountered by teens involved in violent relationships, particularly in regards to teenage girls and older men.

Mayor Tom Barrett says the city must begin engaging the men in the issue because (although there are exceptions), “this is a man’s problem primarily.”

It’s believed poverty and unemployment play a role in the domestic violence killings and this is why, according to the Journal Sentinel, African Americans represent a larger percentage of the victims and perpetrators. The troubled economy could be playing a role in some of these killings.

Domestic violence cases are often the most difficult of any criminal cases. Not only because it’s hard for people in such close relationships to become adversaries in a court of law, but because it’s difficult to convince a victim to come forward in the first place. Once they do come forward, however, the system is designed to protect them and any children that may be involved.

If you are accused of a domestic violence crime, it’s completely normal to feel like the entire criminal justice system is against you—in many ways they are. Call for a Wisconsin criminal defense consultation on your case to see how we might be able to help.

The Public Policy Forum released a report this week showing the number of people incarcerated in Milwaukee County has dropped significantly over the past few years. Daily adult and juvenile incarceration rates have fallen a combined 16% according to the Journal Sentinel. But, not everyone is happy about it.

The falling jail numbers have resulted in a savings of $11 million to the taxpayers. The biggest drop is seen in juvenile populations where the number sentenced to state facilities fell 35% and those in local detention fell 17%. Adult populations in the county jail and County Correctional Facility-South fell 14.4%.

There are several possible reasons for the decrease and the crime rate is no doubt part of the equation. But better diversion programs definitely play a role. Chief Judge Jeffrey Kremers pointed to programs like drug treatment court, jail alternative programs, and more thorough needs assessments of inmates as playing a part in the drop.

But Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. doesn’t see all of these diversion programs as positive. He refers to them as “unwise social engineering” and says they hide and potentially worsen a public safety problem, particularly in low income and minority neighborhoods.

Both those who applaud the new programs and the Sheriff know that more research needs to be done on their effectiveness, in an effort to see what’s driving the falling jail populations and if the drop can truly be seen as positive.

In regards to juvenile incarceration, the trend to lock up kids is fading across the country. Studies have shown that incarceration of the youth can negatively impact their life indefinitely and put them at a greater risk for criminality as an adult. As a result, the legal community has begun more readily embracing alternatives to youth detention.

Done correctly, jail diversion programs are a benefit to all. The offender can remain in the community, among family, and be provided with the legal support system needed to make changes and pay their dues for the crime they were convicted of. Jail programming is often far less intensive than the programming offered to probationers and other offenders within the community.

Millions in savings is definitely a positive change. Also, with jail numbers lower, those who are sentenced to incarceration are more likely to find programming options because they jail isn’t overcrowded and attempting to serve far too many people.

There are many jail diversion and other options available to those people accused of crimes. When you are charged with a crime, even a felony, it doesn’t always mean you will definitely serve time—there are other options.

If you are charged with a crime and are curious what options are available to you, contact me today.

Twenty years ago it was far more common to hear about an arson case. But now the number of fires being ruled as intentionally set has fallen dramatically. According to the Wisconsin State Journal, this drop has accompanied growing knowledge about the science of fires and less of a dependence on “folklorish” methods of days gone by.

While scientific advances have actually increased the number of violent crimes solved, it seems similar advances in the science of fires has thrown a curve ball at arson investigators, decreasing the number of intentional fires. According to a test by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, investigators were asked to pinpoint the origin of a fire. Of 53 investigators, only three were correct and every time the test was conducted, it was a different three investigators that got it right.

About 30 years ago, 20% of fires were ruled as being intentionally set. Now that number sits at around 8%. In Wisconsin, arson arrests have subsequently dropped, with185 arrested in 2009 compared with 363 in 2000.

Advancements in the science have also led to overturned convictions as the courts see people who were convicted on unsound expert testimony and investigation decades ago.

Part of the problem is insurance companies have often provided “independent” investigations to bolster law enforcement’s investigation in criminal arson cases. As this report reveals, insurance companies have an interest in targeting a defendant as it allows them to not pay thousands and potentially millions of dollars on a fire that isn’t intentionally set.

Another issue is that the science of fires has historically been handed down by word of mouth on the job. In no other scientific field is there such a lack of regulations and procedures. This has become a rallying point for many organizations who wish to see a federal forensic oversight organization, regulating all of the forensic sciences including arson investigation.

The National Fire Protection Associations Guide for Fire and Explosion investigation currently serves as the “gold standard” on instruction into arson investigations. One issue seen across the country is investigators ruling a fire as intentionally set when they cannot find another accidental cause. The NFPA’s guide, however, demands such fires be ruled as “undetermined” in such cases. Unfortunately, not all departments use this guide as a standard.

Arson is a serious crime with life changing consequences. Arson of a building carries a potential 40 year prison sentence, and this is only if no one is hurt.

Though arson cases are rare, they are perhaps the most severe charges that can be levied against someone for what is considered a “property crime”. If you are charged with arson or another property crime and need someone looking out for your best interests, contact our offices today.

Illinois and Wisconsin are the only two states that do not allow citizens to carry concealed weapons. If lawmakers in Wisconsin get their way, they will join the other states in passing legislation allowing for concealed guns and other weapons by their citizens. This week two bills were introduced and there’s a good chance one of them will eventually be adopted.

Similar bills passed the Legislature in 2003 and 2005 by were both vetoed by the then-governor, Democrat Jim Doyle. However, with Republicans now in control of the Legislature and the governor’s offices, it’s believed this year such legislation has a better chance.

The bills were written by the same two lawmakers, Representative Jeff Mursau and Senator Pam Galloway. Both are markedly different, however.

The first would require citizens to register for a permit. Citizens over the age of 21 would undergo a background check and pay $65 for a five year permit. The state would “have” to issue the permit unless the applicant was legally barred (as a convicted felon). This same bills would allow businesses to prohibit guns on their property and cities could ban them in their buildings as well.

The other bill would require no permit and no training requirements. It would lift the current law that requires guns in vehicles to be unloaded and secured in a case.

You can probably guess which of the two is the most popular. The latter bill, with no permits, has many critics.

Both bills aren’t without problems though. Some lawmakers are concerned that the lack of training requirements in either bill is setting people up for problems down the road. Even hunters must take courses, they argue. Some also say the bills don’t go far enough in banning where such concealed weapons can be carried, pushing for bans in domestic violence shelters and other similar properties.

Both bills will be considered at hearings on May 12. There is a good chance that the state will see some version of concealed carry legislation pass this year, though it’s most likely to include slightly more regulation written in than the current proposed bills have.

Until any legislation passes, however, carrying a concealed weapon is a Class A misdemeanor under Wisconsin law. You could face nine months in jail and fines for such an offense. If you are charged with this or another weapons crime in Wisconsin, contact my offices today to see how I may be able to help.