OFFERS ALTERNATIVE TO JAIL TIMES
UNDER THE CONDITION THE JUDGE
COULD CHANGE FOR A PERIOD OF
TIME TO KEEP THE CASE OPEN.
THIS IS WHAT INVEES GOOD INGAITIVE REPORTER,
PHOEBE PETROVIC.
UPON HEARING STORIES OF ONE
COUNTY JUDGE, IT WAS DEFERRED
JUSTICE, AND SHE'S HERE TO
EXPLAIN MORE, THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR JOINING US.
>>> WELCOME TO "NOON WEDNESDAY,"
AND TODAY IS JULY 28.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WAY JUDGE
OFFERS A DEFENDANT
ALTERNATIVINGS ALTERNATIVES
TO JAIL TIME AND THE JUDGE COULD
KEEP THE CASE OPEN INDEFINITELY?
THIS IS WHAT INVESTIGATIVE
REPORTER, PHOEBE PETROVIC, SET
OUT TO ANSWER AS WELL AS A TEAM
OF WISCONSIN WATCH REPORTERS
AFTER HEARING A NUMBER OF THESE
CASES HAPPENING OUT OF ONE
OUTAGAMIE JUDGE OUT OF A SERIES
CALLED "DEFERRED JUSTICE," AND
SHE'S HERE TO EXPLAIN MORE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING
US.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
>> I WANT TO JUST START WITH HOW
DID YOU COME UPON THIS STORY,
AND WHY DID IT STAND OUT TO YOU
AS IMPORTANT TO REPORT ON?
>> YEAH.
SO I WAS POKING AROUND IN
OUTAGAMIE COUNTY SEVERAL MONTHS
AGO TALKING TO DEFENSE ATTORNEYS
UP THERE ASKING WHAT IT WAS LIKE
TO REPRESENT CLIENTS IN FRONT OF
VARIOUS JUDGES, BECAUSE EVERY
JUDGE HAS A PARTICULAR STYLE,
AND I KEPT HEARING THE SAME
THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN, WHICH
WAS THAT JUDGE VINCENT BISKUPIC
LIKED TO BRING PEOPLE BACK TO
REVIEW HEARINGS OR BACK FOR
REVIEW HEARINGS OVER AND OVER
AGAIN AFTER THE CASE SHOULD HAVE
ENDED, AND A BUNCH OF THEM SAID,
YEAH, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S LEGAL
OR NOT.
IT'S A LITTLE FUZZY, BUT I
DIDN'T DO THE RESEARCH ON IT.
FIRST THOUGHT WAS, WELL, I CAN
DO THAT RESEARCH AND SEE, YOU
KNOW, IF THERE'S ANY ISSUES OF
LEGALITY OR FAIRNESS HERE, AND
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY
STOOD OUT IS JUDGES DO, IN FACT,
HAVE SOME OF THE WIDEST LATITUDE
IN WISCONSIN, AMONG STATE AND
COUNTY JUDGES IN THE U.S., BUT
THAT'S MAINLY IN TERMS OF, LIKE,
NOT BEING BOUND BY SENTENCING
GUIDELINES FOR PARTICULAR
CRIMES, NOT NECESSARILY CREATING
THEIR OWN SORT OF PATHWAY TO THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM WHERE
SOMEONE CAN GO TO JAIL, GET OUT
OF JAIL, GO BACK TO JAIL AGAIN,
OUT AGAIN FOR THE SAME CRIME.
>> SUPER INTERESTING.
SO LET'S BREAK DOWN WHAT'S
HAPPENING A LITTLE BIT HERE.
FIRST, A PERSON IS CONVICTED,
AND THEN THEY ARE SENTENCED,
THEN THEY GO BEFORE THE JUDGE,
THIS JUDGE, VINCENT BISKUPIC, HE
STAYS THEIR SENTENCE SO KIND OF
PUTS IT ON HOLD, AND INSTEAD OF
THEM GOING TO JAIL, THEY AGREE
TO OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS
DETERMINED BY THIS JUDGE, AND
THEN THEY HAVE TO KIND OF
CONTINUALLY APPEAR BEFORE THE
COURT FOR THESE REVIEW HEARINGS.
IS THAT ABOUT RIGHT?
>> YEAH, THAT'S DEFINITELY THE
BASIC FRAMEWORK, SO WE FOUND
THAT WE WERE ULTIMATELY LOOKING
AT 50 CASES AFTER GETTING THIS
DOWN FROM THOUSANDS OF CASES.
HALF OF THESE FOLLOWED THE
FRAMEWORK YOU DESCRIBED.
SOMEONE IS CONVICTED OF A CRIME,
OR THEY PLEAD GUILTY, SHOW UP TO
GET SENTENCED IN FRONT OF THE
JUDGE, AND IN ALL BUT ONE, I
WANT TO SAY, OF THE CASES WE
LOOKED AT IN THIS CATEGORY,
PEOPLE INITIALLY WERE PLACED ON
PROBATION WITH THE STATE
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, AND
THEN THAT WAS REVOKED FOR
WHATEVER REASON, AND SO THEY
VIOLATED A RULE, THEY GOT
ANOTHER -- THEY COMMITTED
ANOTHER CRIME, SOMETHING LIKE
THAT, AND THEY GO BEFORE THE
JUDGE, LIKE IN ANY SCENARIO, TO
BE SENTENCED FOR THEIR ORIGINAL
CRIME THAT PUT THEM ON PROBATION
IN THE FIRST PLACE, AND THIS IS
WHERE IT SORT OF DIVERGED FROM
THE NORMAL PROCESS.
SO JUDGE VINCENT BISKUPIC OFTEN
SAID, YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO
GIVE YOU, LET'S SAY A YEAR IN
JAIL, BUT IF YOU COME BACK TO ME
IN A FEW MONTHS OR A FEW WEEKS
AND YOU TELL ME YOU HAVE BEEN
DOING WELL ON WORK RELEASE,
WORKING AS MUCH AS YOU CAN, BEEN
ATTENDING COUNSELING, YOU GOT
YOUR ACT TOGETHER IN WHATEVER
WAY, I MIGHT CONSIDER STAYING
THAT SENTENCE, AND SO OFTEN,
THERE'S A REVIEW HEARING SEVERAL
MONTHS OR WEEKS DOWN THE ROAD,
THEY APPEAR, AND THE JUDGE
ISSUES A STAY OR A FURLOUGH,
WHICH PAUSES EXPWRAIL PAUSES JAIL TIME, LETS
SOMEONE OUT, AND THEY ARE FREE
TO LIVE AT THEIR HOMES, NOT ON
GPS MONITORS OR WORK RELEASE,
AND, RIGHT, THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW
THE RULES HE SAID, AND IN ONE OF
THE CASES WE LOOKED AT, THAT WAS
GOING TO COUNSELING, MAINTAINING
FULL SOBRIETY, WORKING
FULL-TIME, GETTING A GED, AND
FOLLOWING LANDLORD'S RULES WAS
BROUGHT UP IN THE REVIEW
HEARINGS.
AT ANY POINT, IF THEY MISSED A
REVIEW HEARING, THEY COULD BE
SUBJECT TO ARREST.
>> AND SO AS YOU MENTIONED, YOU
REVIEWED QUITE A FEW OF THESE
CASES, BUT SO FAR, YOU PUBLISHED
TWO STORIES THAT SPECIFICALLY
PROFILED TWO INDIVIDUALS WHO
WISHED THEY HAD NEVER AGREED TO
THIS JUDGE'S TERMS.
WHAT HAPPENED IN THEIR CASES?
>> RIGHT.
SO THE FIRST ONE PROFILED WAS A
MAN NAMED CHRISTOPHER
KARTSOUNES.
HE WAS ON PROBATION.
HIS PROBATION GOT REVOKED, AND
AS I DESCRIBED EARLIER, YOU
KNOW, HE SHOWED UP BEFORE THE
JUDGE FOR SENTENCING, AND HE WAS
INITIALLY GIVEN 12 MONTHS IN
JAIL, A FEW -- EXCUSE ME, A FEW
MOVANTS LATER, HE WAS BROUGHT
BACK TO COURT AND RECEIVED
FURLOUGH SO HE COULD ATTEND
TREATMENT.
A LOT OF HIS CRIMINAL RECORD
STEMMED FROM STRUGGLES WITH WITH
ADDICTION, AND, YOU KNOW,
DISORDERLY CONDUCT OR FELONY
BAIL JUMPING, THINGS THAT WERE
DEFINITELY THE ROOT OF THAT WAS
AN ADDICTION HE WAS DEALING
WITH, AND SO HE WENT TO
TREATMENT, HE COMPLETED THE
TREATMENT PROGRAM, AND HE STAYED
FOR A FEW MONTHS AT THAT
TREATMENT FACILITY, EVEN AFTER
HE ALREADY COMPLETED IT FOR
AFTER CARE, AND OVER THAT TIME,
HE HAD TO KEEP CHECKING IN WITH
THE JUDGE SOMEWHERE AROUND SIX
REVIEW HEARINGS, WHERE THE JUDGE
PROBED HIM ABOUT HIS HEALTH,
LIVING ARRANGEMENTS, AND,
EVENTUALLY, CHRISTOPHER
KARTSOUNES GOT ANGRY WITH THE
JUDGE AND THIS ORDEAL, AND HE
ACCUSED THE JUDGE OF HARASSING
HIM, FIRED PROFANITIES, AND HE
WAS SENT BACK TO JAIL TO SERVE
THE REMAINDER OF THE SENTENCE
AND ULTIMATELY WROTE A LETTER TO
THE JUDGE FROM JAIL SAYING,
QUOTE, IF I HAD KNOWN YOU WANTED
ME TO BE ON INDEFINITE TERM OF
COURT ORDERED SUPERVISION RATHER
THAN THE AGREEMENT TO DISMISS MY
SENTENCE ONCE I GRADUATED FROM
TREATMENT SUCCESSFULLY, I WOULD
NOT HAVE AGREED.
THE SECOND PERSON WE LOOKED AT
WAS A MAN NAMED BEAU JAMMES.
SAME STORY.
ON PROBATION, REVOKED, SENTENCED
TO A YEAR IN JAIL, AND A FEW
MONTHS LATER, HIS ATTORNEY FILES
AN ORDER FOR SENTENCE
MODIFICATION FOR JUST TIME
SERVED, SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT,
HE WAS REVOKED ON AN ALLEGED
CRIME THAT ULTIMATELY HAD NO
SUBSTANCE.
THE DA'S OFFICE DROPPED THE
CHARGES.
HE SHOULD GET OUT.
INSTEAD, THE JUDGE SAID, YOU'RE
NOT WHERE I WANT YOU TO BE ON
STABILITY, AND SO I'M GOING TO
LET YOU OUT WHILE HOLDING THE
JAIL SENTENCE OVER YOUR HEAD,
AND YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE
FIVE RULES I SET FOR YOU, AND
YOU HAVE TO KEEP COMING IN AND
CHECKING IN WITH ME.
JAMMES WAS IN LEGAL PURGATORY
FOR 19 MONTHS UNTIL HE SAID HE
GAVE UP FOLLOWING THE RULES.
HE WAS SENT BACK TO JAIL, AND
THEN HE ULTIMATELY TRIED TO
APPEAL HIS CASE AND SUE IN
FEDERAL COURT, WHICH WAS
UNSUCCESSFUL, BECAUSE HE FELT
THAT HE WAS PLACED ON AN ILLEGAL
DE FACTO PROBATION.
>> WOW.
LOTS THERE.
VERY COMPLICATED LAYERS.
SO THERE ARE A FEW DIFFERENT
TERMS THAT THIS JUDGE USES FOR A
PRACTICE LIKE THIS.
SO PROBATION TO THE COURT, OR AS
YOU JUST SAID, FROM BEAU JAMMES,
DE FACTO PROBATION.
THE JUDGE CALLS IT "FURLOUGHS,"
AND SO HOW IS THIS DIFFERENT
FROM WHAT WE THINK OF AS REGULAR
PROBATION?
>> SO PROBATION IS ONE OF THE
MOST COMMON WAYS THAT A
SENTENCE, A CRIMINAL SENTENCE OR
CRIMINAL CASE IS HANDLED IN
WISCONSIN, AND WHAT HAPPENS
THERE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, A JUDGE
PLACES SOMEONE ON PROBATION WITH
THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
AND THEY ARE FREE TO LIVE IN
THEIR COMMUNITY, BUT THEY HAVE
TO ABIDE BY RULES SET BY THE
DOC, BUY THEIR INDIVIDUAL
PROBATION AGENT, AND BY THE
JUDGE, AND IF ALL GOES WELL, YOU
KNOW, THIS PERSON COMPLIES WITH
THOSE RULES, THEY CHECK IN WITH
THE PROBATION AGENT REGULARLY,
AND THEN THEY CAN SERVE THAT
TIME WITHOUT EVER HAVING TO STEP
FOOT IN JAIL OR PRISON.
THERE ARE LOTS OF RULES AND LAWS
THAT LAY OUT HOW PROBATION IS
SUPPOSED TO GO.
IT LIMITS HOW LONG IT SHOULD BE
UNLESS YOU GET EXTENDED FOR VERY
PARTICULAR REASONS.
THERE'S A VERY MULTI-- INVOLVED
MULTILEVEL STEP PROJECT FOR
GETTING REVOKED AND GOING TO
JAIL.
THIS IS THE FRAMEWORK IN THE WAY
THIS HAPPENS.
JUDGE VINCENT BISKUPIC'S
SUPERVIOLATION ON IMPOSED STAY
OR IMPOSED FURLOUGH SENTENCES
LACKED CHECKS AND BALANCES.
THERE'S NO STATE LAWS OUTLINING
HOW THIS CAN HAPPEN.
THERE ARE SOME COURT CASES THAT
INDICATE IT SHOULDN'T HAPPEN,
BUT THEY ARE NOT BINDING, AND SO
THERE IS REALLY NO SORT OF
OUTSIDE LEGAL FRAMEWORK OR
GUARDRAILS TO GO BY SO THE
JUDGE, ALONE, SETS HOW LONG
SOMEONE IS GOING TO BE ON THIS
STAY OR FURLOUGH, AND FOR WHAT
REASON THEY GET SENT BACK TO
JAIL.
THERE'S NO MULTILEVEL PROCESS
WITH APPEALS BAKED INTO IT.
IF HE SAYS, YOU KNOW, WE TRIED
THIS, IT DIDN'T WORK, AND THE
BIGGEST OTHER THING IS THAT
THERE'S NO SUPERVISION BY A
STATE AGENCY LIKE THE DOC.
>> SO AS YOU MENTIONED, YOU SAID
THE WORD "INDEFINITE," SO THIS
COULD POTENTIALLY GO PAST THE
AMOUNT OF TIME OF A PERSON'S
ORIGINAL SENTENCING, AND IN SOME
CASES, LIKE, HOW LONG PAST THEIR
ORIGINAL SENTENCE?
HAVE WE SEEN OTHER JUDGES DO
THIS?
IS THIS VERY UNIQUE TO THIS
JUDGE?
>> SO WE WORKED WITH COURT DATA
TECHNOLOGIES, WHICH IS A FIRM IN
WISCONSIN IN MADISON THAT HOLDS
DATA IN ALL COURT CASES AND ALL
JUDGES IN WISCONSIN, AND FROM
THE STATEWIDE ANALYSIS, WE
ULTIMATELY DETERMINED THAT IT
DOES HAPPEN FROM TIME TO TIME
POTENTIALLY, BUT NOWHERE NEAR
THE EXTENT THAT IT HAPPENS WITH
THIS JUDGE, AND SO FOR CASES
WHERE PROBATION WAS REVOKED, AND
THEN HE WAS HOLDING REVIEW
HEARINGS AFTERWARDS IN THE CASES
DESCRIBED WITH BEAU JAMMES AND
CHRISTOPHER KARTSOUNES, WE SAW
HE WAS HOLDING TWICE AS MANY
REVIEW HEARINGS AS THE NEXT
HIGHEST JUDGE FROM 2014 TO 2020,
AND SO IT CERTAINLY DOESN'T
HAPPEN TO THE EXTREME EXTENT
THAT WE COULD FIND, AND, YEAH,
THIS SORT OF PROCESS CAN
ENTANGLE PEOPLE IN THE JUSTICE
SYSTEM FOR A VERY LONG TIME
BECAUSE IF YOU ARE NOT
SUCCESSFUL, THEN YOU HAVE TO GO
BACK TO JAIL.
IN THE SAME WAY THAT IF YOU ARE
NOT SUCCESSFUL IN PROBATION YOU
MIGHT END UP HAVING TO GO TO
JAIL.
WE TALKED TO SOMEONE NAMED
CHARLES JOE WRIGHTER IV GIVEN
NINE MONTHS IN JAIL IN SEPTEMBER
OF 2015, AND HE WAS LED OUT TO
ATTEND TREATMENT, AND HE WAS
SENT BACK TO JAIL IN EARLY 2018.
HE WOULD HAVE BEEN FINISHED WITH
HIS SENTENCE.
HE WOULD HAVE BEEN FREE HAD HE
JUST SERVED THE STRAIGHT JAIL
SENTENCE ABOUT TWO YEARS
EARLIER.
HIS CASE STRETCHED ON FOR TWO
EXTRA YEARS.
AND CHRISTOPHER KARTSOUNES MIGHT
HAVE BEEN OUT, YOU KNOW, SIX
MONTHS EARLIER IF HE JUST SAT
THE STRAIGHT JAIL SENTENCE, AND
SO ON AND SO ON.
>> SO IT FEELS LIKE YOU ARE JUST
AT THE WHIM OF THE JUDGE, AND IT
IS HARD TO KNOW.
DID NOBODY INTERVENE ON BEHALF
OF THESE DEFENDANTS?
DID THEY HAVE ATTORNEYS?
DID ANYONE ELSE SEE THAT THIS IS
SOMETHING TO LOOK INTO?
>> SO ONE THING I WILL SAY IS
THAT IT WASN'T WELL-KNOWN IN
OUTAGAMIE COUNTY THIS WAS
HAPPENING IN JUDGE VINCENT
BISKUPIC'S COURTROOM.
THERE WAS PEOPLE IN THE
OUTAGAMIE COUNTY CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEM WHO HAD NO IDEA
THAT THIS WAS HAPPENING, AND
MOST OF THESE PEOPLE, EVERYONE
HAD AN ATTORNEY WHEN THEY WERE
GOING THROUGH THE INITIAL
CONVICTION AND SENTENCING
PROCESS.
MOST OFTEN, THE PUBLIC
DEFENDER'S OFFICE STOPS
REPRESENTING PEOPLE, YOU KNOW,
AFTER THEY GET SENTENCED.
YOU KNOW, THEY STAY ON FOR A
PARTICULAR PERIOD OF TIME, BUT
IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING LIKE 20
DAYS, AND THEN THE CASE SHOULD
BE OVER BECAUSE THE PERSON
SHOULD BE SERVING THEIR SENTENCE
AND THERE'S NO NEED FOR AN
ATTORNEY PRESUMABLY, AND SO IN
SOME CASES, PEOPLE WERE JUST
LEFT WITHOUT ATTORNEYS TO DEAL
WITH THIS ON THEIR OWN, AND
THERE WERE A FEW INSTANCES WE
FOUND IN WHICH A PUBLIC DEFENDER
OR A DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
OR THE DEFENDANT, THEMSELVES,
DID OBJECT TO THIS ONGOING
SUPERVISION OR OBJECT TO THE
JURISDICTION AT THE BEGINNING
OUTRIGHT, BUT THOSE WEREN'T
PARTICULARLY EFFECTIVE, AND IT
STILL CONTINUED IN THOSE CASES
FOR THE MOST PART.
WE ONLY FOUND ONE PERSON WHO
TRIED TO APPEAL THE ACTUAL STAY,
AND THAT WAS BEAU JAMMES AFTER
HE WAS SENT BACK TO JAIL.
HIS ATTORNEY BELIEVED THAT THE
SUPERVISION OR THAT RATHER
DURING THAT 19-MONTH PERIOD OF
SUPERVISION, THE JUDGE'S
JURISDICTION OR OFFICIAL
AUTHORITY OVER THE CASE HAD
EXPIRED, BUT IN THAT CASE, THE
DEFENSE ATTORNEY SAID HE HAD NO
IDEA HOW LONG THE CASE WAS GOING
TO RUN FOR, AND SO IT MIGHT HAVE
BEEN SORT OF A WASTED EFFORT TO
APPEAL TO THE COURT OF APPEALS
BECAUSE BY THE TIME THEY SAW THE
CASE, HE WAS OUT OF JAIL.
>> IN KIND OF THE LARGEST
NATIONAL CONTEXT, THERE'S BEEN A
LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT CRIMINAL
JUSTICE REFORM AND REFORMING THE
SYSTEM IN GENERAL, YOU KNOW, NOT
PUTTING PEOPLE IN JAIL AND JUST
THROWING AWAY THE KEY, BUT
TRYING TO ACTUALLY YOU KNOW,
MAKE PEOPLE BETTER, RESTORATIVE
JUSTICE, THINGS LIKE THAT.
DOES ANYONE SEE WHAT THE JUDGE
IS DOING AS A GOOD THING?
THIS IS AN ALTERNATIVE TO JAIL
TIME.
HE'S TRYING TO HELP THEM GET
OVER ADDICTIONS.
HE'S TRYING TO HELP THEM FIND
JOBS, GET EDUCATION.
ARE THERE PEOPLE WHO DEFEND WHAT
HE'S DOING?
>> YEAH.
SO WE SPOKE TO A COUPLE OF
PEOPLE WHO WERE SUBJECTED TO THE
ARRANGEMENTS, A WOMAN IN
PARTICULAR NAMED KRISTIN
GURHOLT, WHO APPRECIATED WHAT
THE JUDGE DID AND THAT WAS
UNUSUAL, BUT SHE FELT IT HELPED
HER.
SHE HAD TO WRITE A LETTER TO HER
SON IN THIS CASE, AND ANOTHER
CASE, WE HEARD, I WAS GRATEFUL
FOR THE CHANCE TO GO TO
ADDICTION TREATMENT BECAUSE
YOU'RE SOBER IN JAIL, BUT YOU'RE
NOT ACTUALLY GOING THROUGH
THERAPY TO TREATMENT.
ONE OF THE BIG DIFFERENCES,
THOUGH, IS THAT IN A FORMAL
TREATMENT COURT, THEY USE A
MEDICAL MODEL, THERE'S NATIONAL
STANDARDS TO ADHERE TO AS WELL
AS STATE STANDARDS, AND EVERY
PERSON WHO GOES THROUGH
TREATMENT COURT HAS, YOU KNOW,
AT LEAST A THREE-PERSON TEAM OF
A PROJECT COORDINATOR, A PROGRAM
COORDINATOR, THE JUDGE, A
PROBATION AGENT, PERHAPS, AND
THEIR TREATMENT PROVIDER WHO IS
HELPING THAT PERSON ALONG,
WHEREAS THIS WAS JUST THE JUDGE
SAYING, YOU'RE IN JAIL, GO FIND
TREATMENT, AND I'LL LET YOU OUT.
SO THERE ARE NOT AS MANY
SUPPORTS, BUT I TALKED TO A
JUDGE IN BROWN COUNTY WHO SAID
HE WAS FAMILIAR WITH SO-CALLED
PROBATION TO THE COURT FROM AS
EARLY AS 50 YEARS AGO, WHO SAID,
YOU KNOW, I USE THEM IN A
LIMITED FASHION WHEN SOMEONE WAS
CONVICTED OF DRIVING OF A
REVOKED LICENSE, AND RATHER THAN
TELLING THEM TO GO TO JAIL, I
STAY THE JAIL TIME AND LET THEM
GET A DRIVER'S LICENSE, AND COME
BACK TO ME IN SIX MONTHS, SHOW
ME YOU HAVE YOUR LICENSE, AND
WE'LL CONSIDER THE CASE CLOSED.
THAT WAS SORT OF -- PEOPLE SAW
THAT AS AN EFFECTIVE WAY TO
HANDLE SOMETHING THAT PERHAPS
DIDN'T NEED TO BE IN THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AT ALL.
THE BIG THING IS THAT YOU NEED
GUARDRAILS AND SUPERVISION IN
ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT, YOU
KNOW, THAT THIS TACTIC IS BEING
USED IN A CONSTRUCTIVE WAY WAS
THE CRITICISM THAT WAS RAISED.
>> AND IT IS INTERESTING YOU
SPOKE WITH A LOT OF LEGAL
EXPERTS, JUDGES, TO GET THEIR
OPINION ON, YOU KNOW, HAVE YOU
USED THIS, IS THIS LEGAL, AND
SOME DEFENDED IT, AND TWO QUOTES
THAT STOOD OUT TO ME WERE ONE
SAID THIS IS PART OF HIS
INHERENT POWER OF THE COURT, AND
ANOTHER JUDGE SAID THAT HE HAS
ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY WHEN
PERFORMING OFFICIAL DUTIES.
DO CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES HAVE
THIS MUCH AUTHORITY, AND AS YOU
SAID, THERE ARE NOT CHECKS ON
IT, SO IS IT TECH ANY --
TECHNICALLY LEGAL THE AMOUNT OF
AUTHORITY HE'S ADMITTING IN HIS
COURTROOM?
>> WE TALKED TO SOMETHING LIKE
26, 28 LEGAL EXPERTS, AND THE
OPINIONS WERE SUPER MIXED, AND
SO I CAN'T WEIGH IN ON WHETHER
OR NOT IT'S TRULY LEGAL, BUT,
YOU KNOW, SO IN TERMS OF
INHERENT POWER OF THE COURT,
THAT'S A TERM THAT KEPT COMING
UP, PARTICULARLY FROM JUDGES
WHOM I SPOKE TO, WHO WERE IN
FAVOR OF THIS SORT OF
DISPOSITION, AND THEY SAID, YOU
KNOW, COURTS HAVE TO BE ABLE TO
DO WHAT THEY NEED TO DO TO, YOU
KNOW, RESOLVE A SITUATION,
PARTICULARLY IF THE LEGISLATURE
HAS NOT MAPPED OUT EXACTLY WHAT
NEEDS TO HAPPEN SO THE
LEGISLATURE IS NOT, YOU KNOW,
HOLDING THE JUDGE'S HAND WHILE
THEY ARE WRITING, SO TO SPEAK,
AND THE JUDGES DO HAVE SOME
CONTROL OVER WHAT SENTENCES THEY
CHOOSE.
OTHER PEOPLE SAID, YOU KNOW,
INHERENT AUTHORITY, WHATEVER YOU
MAY HAVE AS A JUDGE, IS STILL
BOUND BY THE PARAMETERS OF STATE
STATUTE AND CASE LAW THAT IS SAT
DOWN BY THE SUPREME COURT AND
THE COURT OF APPEALS.
FOR INSTANCE, THERE SHOULD BE
SORT OF LIKE MAXIMUM PENALTIES
FOR CRIMES, AND YOU CAN'T GO
OVER THAT FOR, YOU KNOW, JUST
BECAUSE YOU WANT TO DO THAT, AND
SO IT IS SORT OF LIMITED.
THE ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY, WHEN
PERFORMING OFFICIAL DUTIES
QUOTES COMES FROM A MAGISTRATE
JUDGE WHO THREW OUT BEAU JAMMES'
FEDERAL LAWSUIT.
THAT MEANS SIMILAR TO THE WAY
THAT POLICE OFFICERS OFTEN HAVE
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY AND ARE
BASICALLY IMMUNE FROM
PROSECUTION WHILE ACTING AS
POLICE OFFICERS, JUDGES HAVE THE
SAME THING, SO IN THAT CASE,
BECAUSE BEAU JAMMES DIDN'T ARGUE
HE WAS -- THAT THE JUDGE WAS
ACTING EXTRA JUDICIOUSLY OR
OUTSIDE THE BOUNDS OF WHAT A
NORMAL JUDGE WOULD DO, THE CASE
GOT THROWN OUT, AND SO, YOU
KNOW, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER,
THE SUPREME COURT, OR, EXCUSE
ME, THE COURT OF APPEALS DID
HAVE A CASE IN 2000 THAT WAS
LOOKING AT SOMETHING VERY
SIMILAR TO THIS, A COUNTY JUDGE
STAYED A SENTENCE SO A PERSON
COULD GET ADDICTION TREATMENT,
AND IN THAT CASE, THE COURT OF
APPEALS SAID, ACTUALLY, THE CASE
LAW AND STATUTES DO NOT SUPPORT
THIS, THAT, YOU KNOW, A JUDGE
CAN'T ACT ON HIS OWN AUTHORITY
TO CREATE DE FACTO PROBATION.
THAT WAS THE QUOTE IN THAT CASE,
AND THAT DOING SO IS MORE AKIN
TO THE POWER OF THE GOVERNOR TO,
YOU KNOW, ISSUE PARDONS, AND SO,
YOU KNOW, THAT'S A QUESTION OF
SORT OF SEPARATION OF POWERS,
BUT THAT CASE WAS NOT PUBLISHED,
AND SO IT IS NONBINDING, AND,
YOU KNOW, IT DOESN'T REQUIRE
JUDGES TO ABIDE BY THAT WAY, AND
THE RULE OF APPEALS IS IF NO ONE
APPEALS THE CASE, THAT'S SORT OF -- IT STANDS IN THAT CASE,
AND AS I SAID, NONE OF THESE
CASES HAVE BEEN APPEALED SO THE
RULINGS STAND.
>> HUH.
WHAT IS JUDGE VINCENT BISKUPIC'S
RESPONSE TO ALL OF THIS?
IS HE STILL DOING THIS IN HIS
COURTROOM?
HOW DOES HE DEFEND HIMSELF?
>> SO WE DIDN'T GET TO TALK TO
THE JUDGE DIRECTLY.
WE WERE COMMUNICATING THROUGH
HIS PRIVATE ATTORNEY FOR THE
MAJORITY OF THE CASE.
HE PROVIDED A STATEMENT IN WHICH
HE SAID, YOU KNOW, I HAVE
PRESIDED OVER CLOSE TO 1,000 OR
MAYBE MORE THAN A THOUSAND
CASES, I FORGET THE EXACT NUMBER -- COULD BE 10,000 --
PRESIDED OVER THOUSANDS OF
CASES, WE LOOKED AT 50.
HE SAID THEY MOSTLY RESOLVE
BETWEEN 2015 AND 2018.
WE DID FIND SOME REVIEW HEARINGS
HAPPENING INTO 2020 DURING THE
PANDEMIC, BUT IT'S UNCLEAR
WHETHER OR NOT HE'S CONTINUING
THIS PRACTICE BECAUSE HE WOULD
NOT ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
THE JUDGE SAID THAT NONE OF HIS
CASES HAVE BEEN OVERTURNED IN
THE APPELLATE COURT, WHICH IS
TRUE, AND SAID THAT HE CONSIDERS
ALL METHODS AVAILABLE FOR
SENTENCING, INCLUDING OPTIONS OF
GETTING PEOPLE INTO TREATMENT.
>> SO UNDERSTANDING ALL SIDES OF
THIS, SOME ARE IN FAVOR OF IT.
SOME ARE NOT, IT'S A LEGAL GRAY
AREA, DID YOU SPEAK TO ANY LEGAL
EXPERTS, OR DID ANY IDEAS ABOUT
WHAT KIND OF REFORMS MIGHT BE
NEEDED IN LIGHT OF WHAT'S
HAPPENING IN THIS OUTAGAMIE
COURTROOM?
>> SO SOME PEOPLE WHO SAW A
POTENTIAL BENEFIT TO THIS
PARTICULAR SOLUTION OR THIS
PARTICULAR ARRANGEMENT SUGGESTED
THAT, YOU KNOW, THE STATE
LEGISLATURE TAKE A LOOK AT
CODIFYING THIS BECAUSE BY
CODIFYING IT YOU'RE NOT
NECESSARILY ENDORSING THE
PRACTICE, BUT RATHER PROVIDING
THOSE GUARDRAILS IN CASE IT
HAPPENS IN THE FUTURE.
ONE DEFENSE ATTORNEY HAD A
BEAUTIFUL METAPHOR TALKING ABOUT
WHAT THE JUDGE AND ATTORNEYS WHO
ARE AGREEING TO THIS
ARRANGEMENT, WHAT THEY ARE DOING
IS CREATING THEIR OWN PATHS
THROUGH A PARKING MAYBE GOING
OFF OF THE PAVED SIDEWALK AND
TRAMPLING ON THE FLOWERS RIGHT
NOW, AND IF THE LEGISLATURE
LOOKS INTO SORT OF PAVING THAT
NEW PATH, THAT DESIRE LINE
THROUGH THE PARK, YOU KNOW, IT
MIGHT WORK OUT FOR EVERYBODY.
THERE COULD BE PEOPLE WHO GET TO
AVOID JAIL TIME, BUT WHO ARE NOT
NECESSARILY SUBJECTED TO
POTENTIALLY YEARS OF SUPERVISION
WITHOUT CLEAR ANSWER AS TO WHEN
IT'LL END SO THAT WAS THE
BIGGEST THING WAS POTENTIALLY
THE STATE LEGISLATURE COULD LOOK
INTO EXAMINING AND THEN LAYING
OUT WHAT THE ACTUAL PARAMETERS
SHOULD BE JUST LIKE WE HAVE THAT
FOR PROBATION.
>> A LOT OF EXCELLENT REPORTING
SO FAR.
ARE THERE MORE STORIES TO COME
IN THIS SERIES?
>> YEAH.
SO WE'LL BE COVERING TWO OF THE
MAJOR THEMES FROM OUR REPORTING
IN THE UPCOMING SERIES.
SO ONE OF THEM IS HOW JUDGE
VINCENT BISKUPIC USED REVIEW
HEARINGS TO MONITOR PAYMENTS OF
COSTS, FUNDS, FEES, AND
RESTITUTION.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
ORDINARILY THE CLERK OF COURTS
HANDLES, A CIVIL AUTHORITY THAT
DOESN'T HAVE THE POWER TO JAIL
YOU OR ARREST YOU, AND THE
SECOND PART THAT'S COMING OUT IN
THE NEXT FEW WEEKS IS LOOKING AT
HOW THE JUDGE OFTEN ORDERED
PEOPLE TO GO TO ADDICTION
TREATMENT AND HOW THAT COMPARES
WITH THE ESTABLISHED TREATMENT
PORTS.
>> WE'LL KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR
THOSE.
PHOEBE PETROVIC OF WISCONSIN
WATCH, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR
JOINING US.
>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.
>> FOR MORE OF HER REPORTING,
VISIT WISCONSINWATCH.ORG, AND
FOR MORE FROM "HERE & NOW" AND
PBS WISCONSIN, VISIT
PBSWISCONSIN.ORG/NEWS AND THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US TODAY
ON "NOON WEDNESDAY."