From the Capital Times
By By Todd Richmond Associated Press
Former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson endorsed Republican attorney general hopeful J.B. Van Hollen on Thursday, choosing to throw his support behind the former U.S. attorney rather than GOP rival Paul Bucher.
Thompson appointed Bucher as district attorney in Waukesha County in 1998 but gave his endorsement to Van Hollen instead. Thompson appointed Van Hollen as district attorney in Ashland County and Bayfield County.
"I am impressed with J.B. Van Hollen's track record and I'm not alone. Based on a record of excellence as a local prosecutor, the president appointed him U.S. attorney," Thompson, a Republican, said in a statement released by the Van Hollen campaign. "We're lucky to have him running for attorney general and I'm confident J.B. will help get Wisconsin back in the right direction. I'm happy to endorse and support him."
Van Hollen faces Bucher in a Sept. 12 Republican primary.
Whoever wins will face the winner of a Democratic primary between incumbent Peg Lautenschlager and Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk in the November general election.
Thompson's endorsement is a big win for Van Hollen, who said he was honored to have the support of the "most popular Republican political figure in the state's history."
His campaign said Thompson, the state's longest serving governor and President Bush's former secretary of Health and Human Services, plans to hold a fundraiser for Van Hollen within the next few weeks.
Campaign finance reports show Van Hollen with a substantial lead over Bucher in cash on hand -- $417,254 to $85,397. About $350,000 of Van Hollen's cash came from loans, however, including a $175,000 mortgage he took out on his house.
Bucher campaign spokesman R.J. Johnson said Bucher has the endorsement of former Republican Gov. Lee Dreyfus. Dreyfus served one term as governor, from 1979 until 1983.
"We believe the issues will determine this race," Johnson said. "We look forward to his (Thompson's) support when the primary is over."
Friday, February 29, 2008
CHMURA CASE DIMS BUCHER PROSPECTS
From the Capital Times
By John Nichols
It is no secret that Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucherwould liketo make the leap from his sleepy suburban perch to a higher rung onWisconsin's political ladder. But the veteran prosecutor, who has longnurtured speculationabout his prospects as a Republican contender for attorneygeneral, may well have hustled himself out of the running last week.
When jurors voted unanimously to acquit former Green Bay Packers tight endMark Chmura Saturday night, they also voted against Bucher, who had parlayedhis position of public trust into a role as Chmura's chief prosecutor. Andthose votes are likely to count more heavily against Bucher than any cast bydelegates to state Republican Party conventions.Like many a district attorney before him, Bucher saw a high-profileprosecution as his ticket to the political big time.
When a 17-year-old high school girl said Chmura raped her at a post-promparty, Bucher did not merely move to charge Chmura with sexual assault andchild enticement - as was entirely appropriate. He also moved to put himselfat the center of the prosecution, taking personal charge of the case andplacing himself - rather than an assistant district attorney with specializedexperience in prosecuting rape cases - in front of the Court TV cameras, whichturned the Chmura trial into a nationwide spectacle.
Indeed, Chmura's flamboyant lawyer, Gerald Boyle, closed his successfuldefense of the former Packers star by pointing to Bucher and declaring, "Theone person who caused us to be here is him. He didn't come to you (the jurors)with proof. He came to you with vindictiveness."
Boyle's defense style was theatrical, to be sure. But it would not haveworked if Bucher had not seemed to be more interested in television time thanmounting an effective prosecution.
In his final statement to the jury, Bucher spent much of his time whiningabout Boyle's criticism and then announcing that he could "take it." Bucher's"bring-it-on" style actually lent credibility to what would otherwise havebeen a shaky charge by Boyle that the district attorney had manipulated theprocess with an eye toward buffing his own reputation - rather than achievingjustice.
Boyle would have gotten far less traction if the prosecutor he was facingwas an experienced assistant district attorney who knew how to manage theunique demands of a sexual assault prosecution. That's one of the primaryreasons why smart district attorneys so frequently hand off theirhighest-profile cases to assistants who have spent years, even decades,learning the intricacies of demanding areas of the law.
If Boyle had faced any other elected prosecutor, it is doubtful he couldhave prevailed as dramatically as he did against the swaggering, dangerouslyself-absorbed Bucher.
How different would this trial have been if a steady hand like MilwaukeeCounty District Attorney E. Michael McCann or Wisconsin Attorney General JimDoyle had been in that courtroom to calmly, judiciously and effectivelychallenge Boyle? In the unlikely circumstance that Bucher decides to pursuehis political ambitions in 2002, that is a question a lot of Wisconsiniteswill be asking.
By John Nichols
It is no secret that Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucherwould liketo make the leap from his sleepy suburban perch to a higher rung onWisconsin's political ladder. But the veteran prosecutor, who has longnurtured speculationabout his prospects as a Republican contender for attorneygeneral, may well have hustled himself out of the running last week.
When jurors voted unanimously to acquit former Green Bay Packers tight endMark Chmura Saturday night, they also voted against Bucher, who had parlayedhis position of public trust into a role as Chmura's chief prosecutor. Andthose votes are likely to count more heavily against Bucher than any cast bydelegates to state Republican Party conventions.Like many a district attorney before him, Bucher saw a high-profileprosecution as his ticket to the political big time.
When a 17-year-old high school girl said Chmura raped her at a post-promparty, Bucher did not merely move to charge Chmura with sexual assault andchild enticement - as was entirely appropriate. He also moved to put himselfat the center of the prosecution, taking personal charge of the case andplacing himself - rather than an assistant district attorney with specializedexperience in prosecuting rape cases - in front of the Court TV cameras, whichturned the Chmura trial into a nationwide spectacle.
Indeed, Chmura's flamboyant lawyer, Gerald Boyle, closed his successfuldefense of the former Packers star by pointing to Bucher and declaring, "Theone person who caused us to be here is him. He didn't come to you (the jurors)with proof. He came to you with vindictiveness."
Boyle's defense style was theatrical, to be sure. But it would not haveworked if Bucher had not seemed to be more interested in television time thanmounting an effective prosecution.
In his final statement to the jury, Bucher spent much of his time whiningabout Boyle's criticism and then announcing that he could "take it." Bucher's"bring-it-on" style actually lent credibility to what would otherwise havebeen a shaky charge by Boyle that the district attorney had manipulated theprocess with an eye toward buffing his own reputation - rather than achievingjustice.
Boyle would have gotten far less traction if the prosecutor he was facingwas an experienced assistant district attorney who knew how to manage theunique demands of a sexual assault prosecution. That's one of the primaryreasons why smart district attorneys so frequently hand off theirhighest-profile cases to assistants who have spent years, even decades,learning the intricacies of demanding areas of the law.
If Boyle had faced any other elected prosecutor, it is doubtful he couldhave prevailed as dramatically as he did against the swaggering, dangerouslyself-absorbed Bucher.
How different would this trial have been if a steady hand like MilwaukeeCounty District Attorney E. Michael McCann or Wisconsin Attorney General JimDoyle had been in that courtroom to calmly, judiciously and effectivelychallenge Boyle? In the unlikely circumstance that Bucher decides to pursuehis political ambitions in 2002, that is a question a lot of Wisconsiniteswill be asking.
CHMURA JUDGE SAYS ASSISTANT DA IS OUT
From the Capital Times
A judge has disqualified an assistant district attorney from thesexual assault case against former Green Bay Packer Mark Chmura.
Judge Mark Gempeler ruled Wednesday that Waukesha County Assistant DistrictAttorney Dennis Krueger cannot participate in Chmura's trial because of adefense request to have him answer questions about possible coercion of awitness to change his story.Chmura's attorney, Gerald Boyle, asked that District Attorney Paul Bucherand Krueger be discharged from the case because they could be called aswitnesses.
But Gempeler allowed Bucher to continue prosecuting the case.
Boyle argued that both prosecutors should be disqualified because theyallegedly coerced a key witness into changing his testimony. Boyle said hewanted the opportunity to question the two in court about the interview. Buthe would not be able to do so if Bucher and Krueger were also prosecuting thecase.
Chmura, 31, is charged with third-degree sexual assault and childenticement. Prosecutors said he had nonconsensual sex with a 17-year-old girlduring a high school post-prom party at his friend Robert Gessert's Hartlandhome in April. The girl was a baby sitter for Chmura's children.
The Packers later cut the tight end from their roster.
Last week, Gempeler refused to delay Chmura's trial, which is scheduled tobegin Jan. 23. Boyle had asked for either the case's dismissal or a trialdelay in a motion that accused Bucher of ``prosecutorial misconduct.''
Bucher has defended his actions, saying he hits hard but plays fair.
``For whatever reason, they don't want this office to try this case. Thisis just another way they're trying to sidetrack this trial,'' Bucher saidWednesday.
Krueger was in court, but did not speak on the disqualification motion.Gempeler earlier ordered the attorneys not to discuss the case with the media.None of the attorneys commented after the hearing.
Boyle filed the motion to remove Bucher from the case Dec. 22. According tothe motion, Bucher coerced a Waukesha Catholic Memorial High School footballplayer who attended the party to change his testimony.
``Bucher set this up. Mr. Krueger was there. They played heavy-handed withthis boy, 16 years old and all worried about his future,'' Boyle saidWednesday.
In a Nov. 6 Sports Illustrated story, sources described as close to thedefense said the youth will stick to his original statement that he warned thegirl not to enter the bathroom where the sexual assault allegedly took place,but she went in anyway.
She testified during a preliminary hearing this summer that Chmura led herinside and locked the door.
The boy's father told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel the Sports Illustratedstory wasn't entirely accurate but would not elaborate.
Boyle said in the motion that Bucher used ``belligerent interrogationtechniques'' and threats of prosecution to force the youth to change his storyso Chmura would get convicted.
In a Nov. 28 letter to the youth, Bucher said he never threatened orcoerced him and was only interested in the truth.
The high school athlete's attorney, Gerald Boisits, said in another letterthat the youth changed his statement out of fear. He said Bucher told theyouth he could be charged with underage drinking, false swearing orobstruction of justice.
A judge has disqualified an assistant district attorney from thesexual assault case against former Green Bay Packer Mark Chmura.
Judge Mark Gempeler ruled Wednesday that Waukesha County Assistant DistrictAttorney Dennis Krueger cannot participate in Chmura's trial because of adefense request to have him answer questions about possible coercion of awitness to change his story.Chmura's attorney, Gerald Boyle, asked that District Attorney Paul Bucherand Krueger be discharged from the case because they could be called aswitnesses.
But Gempeler allowed Bucher to continue prosecuting the case.
Boyle argued that both prosecutors should be disqualified because theyallegedly coerced a key witness into changing his testimony. Boyle said hewanted the opportunity to question the two in court about the interview. Buthe would not be able to do so if Bucher and Krueger were also prosecuting thecase.
Chmura, 31, is charged with third-degree sexual assault and childenticement. Prosecutors said he had nonconsensual sex with a 17-year-old girlduring a high school post-prom party at his friend Robert Gessert's Hartlandhome in April. The girl was a baby sitter for Chmura's children.
The Packers later cut the tight end from their roster.
Last week, Gempeler refused to delay Chmura's trial, which is scheduled tobegin Jan. 23. Boyle had asked for either the case's dismissal or a trialdelay in a motion that accused Bucher of ``prosecutorial misconduct.''
Bucher has defended his actions, saying he hits hard but plays fair.
``For whatever reason, they don't want this office to try this case. Thisis just another way they're trying to sidetrack this trial,'' Bucher saidWednesday.
Krueger was in court, but did not speak on the disqualification motion.Gempeler earlier ordered the attorneys not to discuss the case with the media.None of the attorneys commented after the hearing.
Boyle filed the motion to remove Bucher from the case Dec. 22. According tothe motion, Bucher coerced a Waukesha Catholic Memorial High School footballplayer who attended the party to change his testimony.
``Bucher set this up. Mr. Krueger was there. They played heavy-handed withthis boy, 16 years old and all worried about his future,'' Boyle saidWednesday.
In a Nov. 6 Sports Illustrated story, sources described as close to thedefense said the youth will stick to his original statement that he warned thegirl not to enter the bathroom where the sexual assault allegedly took place,but she went in anyway.
She testified during a preliminary hearing this summer that Chmura led herinside and locked the door.
The boy's father told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel the Sports Illustratedstory wasn't entirely accurate but would not elaborate.
Boyle said in the motion that Bucher used ``belligerent interrogationtechniques'' and threats of prosecution to force the youth to change his storyso Chmura would get convicted.
In a Nov. 28 letter to the youth, Bucher said he never threatened orcoerced him and was only interested in the truth.
The high school athlete's attorney, Gerald Boisits, said in another letterthat the youth changed his statement out of fear. He said Bucher told theyouth he could be charged with underage drinking, false swearing orobstruction of justice.
BUCHER BLOWS UP
From the Capital Times
No one is ever going to try to suggest that Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucher is the ablest prosecutor in the state - memories of the Mark Chmura trial will forever foreclose that prospect.
But, as he campaigns for the Republican nomination for state attorney general, Bucher has taken steps that raise serious questions about whether he is capable of separating his political ambitions from his prosecutorial duties.
Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager recently sent Bucher a routine offer of assistance in a case involving alleged illegal campaigning in Waukesha County by an aide to state Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills, whose district includes part of Waukesha County. In response, Bucher freaked out.
Never mind that a case involving charges of illegal campaigning on the part of a state legislative aide merits investigation by the state Department of Justice's Public Integrity Unit, rather than by the office of a district attorney who frequently complains about lacking adequate resources to pursue such matters.
Never mind that, after press reports detailed concerns regarding the prospect that the Republican legislative aide was campaigning while working at his state job, the Republican prosecutor seemed to suggest that he was disinclined to conduct a serious review of the allegations.
Never mind that prosecutors usually respect offers of assistance from the state's top law enforcement officer.
Bucher responded to Lautenchlager's entirely professional letter suggesting that the Public Integrity Unit was "prepared to commit investigative resources upon a proper referral" with a bitter, rambling screed that featured a ham-handed suggestion that Lautenschlager was unconcerned about "violence and murders."
What made Bucher's letter so bizarre was that it was sent to Lautenschlager - and, of course, the media - just days after the attorney general had completed the successful prosecution of the highest-profile murder case in the state's recent history.
Then again, Bucher also tried to intimate that Lautenschlager was neglecting "the methamphetamine epidemic in western Wisconsin" and instances of election fraud.
No one who has been paying attention to public affairs in Wisconsin can possibly have missed the attorney general's repeated efforts to focus attention on the fight to stop the production and sale of methamphetamines, nor could anyone suggest that Lautenschlager - who has tangled with powerful figures in both her own Democratic Party and the Republican Party - is unwilling to tackle political wrongdoing.
An honest read of the letter from Lautenschlager and the response from Bucher reveals everything that Wisconsinites need to know about the incumbent attorney general and the man who seeks to replace her.
While Lautenschlager is professional, collegial and concerned about prosecuting instances of political wrongdoing, Bucher comes off as bitter, uncooperative and determined to try to score partisan points even in instances where it is clearly necessary to rise above politics.
No one is ever going to try to suggest that Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucher is the ablest prosecutor in the state - memories of the Mark Chmura trial will forever foreclose that prospect.
But, as he campaigns for the Republican nomination for state attorney general, Bucher has taken steps that raise serious questions about whether he is capable of separating his political ambitions from his prosecutorial duties.
Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager recently sent Bucher a routine offer of assistance in a case involving alleged illegal campaigning in Waukesha County by an aide to state Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills, whose district includes part of Waukesha County. In response, Bucher freaked out.
Never mind that a case involving charges of illegal campaigning on the part of a state legislative aide merits investigation by the state Department of Justice's Public Integrity Unit, rather than by the office of a district attorney who frequently complains about lacking adequate resources to pursue such matters.
Never mind that, after press reports detailed concerns regarding the prospect that the Republican legislative aide was campaigning while working at his state job, the Republican prosecutor seemed to suggest that he was disinclined to conduct a serious review of the allegations.
Never mind that prosecutors usually respect offers of assistance from the state's top law enforcement officer.
Bucher responded to Lautenchlager's entirely professional letter suggesting that the Public Integrity Unit was "prepared to commit investigative resources upon a proper referral" with a bitter, rambling screed that featured a ham-handed suggestion that Lautenschlager was unconcerned about "violence and murders."
What made Bucher's letter so bizarre was that it was sent to Lautenschlager - and, of course, the media - just days after the attorney general had completed the successful prosecution of the highest-profile murder case in the state's recent history.
Then again, Bucher also tried to intimate that Lautenschlager was neglecting "the methamphetamine epidemic in western Wisconsin" and instances of election fraud.
No one who has been paying attention to public affairs in Wisconsin can possibly have missed the attorney general's repeated efforts to focus attention on the fight to stop the production and sale of methamphetamines, nor could anyone suggest that Lautenschlager - who has tangled with powerful figures in both her own Democratic Party and the Republican Party - is unwilling to tackle political wrongdoing.
An honest read of the letter from Lautenschlager and the response from Bucher reveals everything that Wisconsinites need to know about the incumbent attorney general and the man who seeks to replace her.
While Lautenschlager is professional, collegial and concerned about prosecuting instances of political wrongdoing, Bucher comes off as bitter, uncooperative and determined to try to score partisan points even in instances where it is clearly necessary to rise above politics.
BUCHER'S ANTI-FALK PAGE VILE, DISHONEST AND WRONG
From the Capital times
By Joel McNally
Remember Willie Horton, previously the all-time low in vicious political advertising employing the criminal mug shot of a scary black man to stir up racial fears among the voters to elect a totally shameless candidate?
Now imagine Willie Horton multiplied over and over. Imagine a glowering rogues' gallery of a dozen menacing black men, a couple of sinister-looking Latinos and a few sullen white guys looking as if they are about to snatch innocent children off the streets.
Line up all these mug shots next to a smiling picture of Kathleen Falk, Democratic candidate for Wisconsin attorney general, emblazoned with the nickname, "Catch and Release Kate." For the final touch, stamp "Release" under the picture of every blood-chilling bogeyman.
Waukesha District Attorney Paul Bucher, a Republican candidate for attorney general, wants anyone viewing this vile collage to believe Falk was somehow responsible for releasing this blood-chilling -- and, oh, so African-American -- pack of murderers, rapists and child predators onto our streets.
In fact, Falk has absolutely no connection to any of the double- and triple-murderers and other degenerates whom Bucher dishonestly pictures on his campaign Web site.
Falk did not "release" any of the criminals Bucher wants voters to believe she set free. As Dane county executive, Falk has no power to release anyone from the criminal justice system.
Even if the state were to grant such extraordinary power of clemency to a Dane county executive, why in the world would it extend to Milwaukee, the home of most of the heinous criminals pictured by Bucher?
Either Bucher couldn't find scary enough looking criminals from Dane County, or, more likely, he preferred the heavy black and brown color scheme he achieved by drawing his villains from Milwaukee.
What is the point of a Web site attacking Falk as "Catch and Release Kate" by picturing her next to a lineup of black and Latino criminals whom she has neither caught nor released?
The question answers itself. The whole point is simply to stir racial fears and to make frightened white voters focus those racial fears on Falk. It is a vile and dishonest political tactic.
Bucher's political cover story is that he is attacking Falk because she supports diverting nonviolent, first-time drug offenders into treatment instead of sending them to prison.
But, if that's the point, why doesn't Bucher picture Falk next to a string of mug shots of nonviolent, first-time drug offenders? Apparently, nonviolent offenders weren't scary enough, so Bucher decided to go with double- and triple-murderers instead.
The most bizarre thing about the Web site is that it doesn't demonstrate anything at all about the diversion program advocated by Falk. But it does demonstrate the utter failure of Bucher's approach of relying on incarceration to combat crime.
Those violent criminals are not examples of offenders diverted into drug and alcohol treatment run amok. There is no evidence presented that any of them ever received any treatment.
But Bucher proudly points to the fact that in every single case a judge sentenced them to prison. Then Bucher misses the point he accidentally makes. Guess what happened, in every case, when those offenders returned to the community after prison?
That is when those scary people committed their double and triple murders, rapes, child molestations and all the other heinous crimes Bucher can't possibly tie to Falk.
Prison, advocated by Bucher, was a total failure in protecting public safety. People came out worse than they went in and committed horrible crimes.
A treatment program that failed so miserably would be shut down. When prison fails, advocates like Bucher call for even more incarceration. Let's see if we can produce some quadruple-murderers next time.
If race baiting and totally dishonest campaign tactics weren't reason enough to vote against Bucher, throw in the fact that he's totally wrong about the drug offenders who are filling our prisons.
On the Web site, Bucher claims it's a "myth" that harmless drug offenders are clogging our prisons. "The crime usually doesn't result in a prison term unless you have a long record, are a habitual criminal or used a firearm, or there were other aggravated circumstances."
A recent study by Justice Strategies -- requested by two Republican legislators -- says Bucher doesn't know what he's talking about.
The research report identified 2,900 low-level, nonviolent drug offenders with very limited criminal backgrounds who are currently incarcerated in Wisconsin prisons.
The bill taxpayers are paying to lock up these nonviolent drug offenders -- prime candidates for the kind of diversion to treatment advocated by Falk -- is a whopping $83 million a year.
* Falk's approach makes conservative financial sense. The average cost of incarcerating someone in Wisconsin is $28,622 a year compared to $6,100 a year for high-quality, community-based treatment.
Bucher repeats totally erroneous information from some completely disreputable source, probably his own Web site.
\ Joel McNally of Milwaukee writes a weekly column for The Capital Times. E-mail: jmcnally@wi.rr.com
By Joel McNally
Remember Willie Horton, previously the all-time low in vicious political advertising employing the criminal mug shot of a scary black man to stir up racial fears among the voters to elect a totally shameless candidate?
Now imagine Willie Horton multiplied over and over. Imagine a glowering rogues' gallery of a dozen menacing black men, a couple of sinister-looking Latinos and a few sullen white guys looking as if they are about to snatch innocent children off the streets.
Line up all these mug shots next to a smiling picture of Kathleen Falk, Democratic candidate for Wisconsin attorney general, emblazoned with the nickname, "Catch and Release Kate." For the final touch, stamp "Release" under the picture of every blood-chilling bogeyman.
Waukesha District Attorney Paul Bucher, a Republican candidate for attorney general, wants anyone viewing this vile collage to believe Falk was somehow responsible for releasing this blood-chilling -- and, oh, so African-American -- pack of murderers, rapists and child predators onto our streets.
In fact, Falk has absolutely no connection to any of the double- and triple-murderers and other degenerates whom Bucher dishonestly pictures on his campaign Web site.
Falk did not "release" any of the criminals Bucher wants voters to believe she set free. As Dane county executive, Falk has no power to release anyone from the criminal justice system.
Even if the state were to grant such extraordinary power of clemency to a Dane county executive, why in the world would it extend to Milwaukee, the home of most of the heinous criminals pictured by Bucher?
Either Bucher couldn't find scary enough looking criminals from Dane County, or, more likely, he preferred the heavy black and brown color scheme he achieved by drawing his villains from Milwaukee.
What is the point of a Web site attacking Falk as "Catch and Release Kate" by picturing her next to a lineup of black and Latino criminals whom she has neither caught nor released?
The question answers itself. The whole point is simply to stir racial fears and to make frightened white voters focus those racial fears on Falk. It is a vile and dishonest political tactic.
Bucher's political cover story is that he is attacking Falk because she supports diverting nonviolent, first-time drug offenders into treatment instead of sending them to prison.
But, if that's the point, why doesn't Bucher picture Falk next to a string of mug shots of nonviolent, first-time drug offenders? Apparently, nonviolent offenders weren't scary enough, so Bucher decided to go with double- and triple-murderers instead.
The most bizarre thing about the Web site is that it doesn't demonstrate anything at all about the diversion program advocated by Falk. But it does demonstrate the utter failure of Bucher's approach of relying on incarceration to combat crime.
Those violent criminals are not examples of offenders diverted into drug and alcohol treatment run amok. There is no evidence presented that any of them ever received any treatment.
But Bucher proudly points to the fact that in every single case a judge sentenced them to prison. Then Bucher misses the point he accidentally makes. Guess what happened, in every case, when those offenders returned to the community after prison?
That is when those scary people committed their double and triple murders, rapes, child molestations and all the other heinous crimes Bucher can't possibly tie to Falk.
Prison, advocated by Bucher, was a total failure in protecting public safety. People came out worse than they went in and committed horrible crimes.
A treatment program that failed so miserably would be shut down. When prison fails, advocates like Bucher call for even more incarceration. Let's see if we can produce some quadruple-murderers next time.
If race baiting and totally dishonest campaign tactics weren't reason enough to vote against Bucher, throw in the fact that he's totally wrong about the drug offenders who are filling our prisons.
On the Web site, Bucher claims it's a "myth" that harmless drug offenders are clogging our prisons. "The crime usually doesn't result in a prison term unless you have a long record, are a habitual criminal or used a firearm, or there were other aggravated circumstances."
A recent study by Justice Strategies -- requested by two Republican legislators -- says Bucher doesn't know what he's talking about.
The research report identified 2,900 low-level, nonviolent drug offenders with very limited criminal backgrounds who are currently incarcerated in Wisconsin prisons.
The bill taxpayers are paying to lock up these nonviolent drug offenders -- prime candidates for the kind of diversion to treatment advocated by Falk -- is a whopping $83 million a year.
* Falk's approach makes conservative financial sense. The average cost of incarcerating someone in Wisconsin is $28,622 a year compared to $6,100 a year for high-quality, community-based treatment.
Bucher repeats totally erroneous information from some completely disreputable source, probably his own Web site.
\ Joel McNally of Milwaukee writes a weekly column for The Capital Times. E-mail: jmcnally@wi.rr.com
BUCHER IS BAD NEWS; SUPPORT ANYONE ELSE
From the Capital Times
By Chris Durski Pewaukee
Dear Editor: In the upcoming election you will find the name of Paul Bucher on the ballot for attorney general.
Paul Bucher is the district attorney in Waukesha County. I am a resident of Waukesha County, and I would like to share my view of this candidate.
He is pompous and arrogant, cares little about justice and individual freedoms, but is very concerned about the press he gets. He is not a champion of the people -- unless it happens to reflect well on his political aspirations.
If you are considering voting for this man, I urge you to reconsider and find another candidate to support.
By Chris Durski Pewaukee
Dear Editor: In the upcoming election you will find the name of Paul Bucher on the ballot for attorney general.
Paul Bucher is the district attorney in Waukesha County. I am a resident of Waukesha County, and I would like to share my view of this candidate.
He is pompous and arrogant, cares little about justice and individual freedoms, but is very concerned about the press he gets. He is not a champion of the people -- unless it happens to reflect well on his political aspirations.
If you are considering voting for this man, I urge you to reconsider and find another candidate to support.
BUCHER BENDS THE TRUTH
From the Capital Times
Fresh from his defeat in the Republican primary for state attorney general last year, former Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucher says he is contemplating running for the state Supreme Court next April.
Bucher's bitter concession statement after losing last year's primary to J.B. Van Hollen was one of the more remarkable political swan songs in a career that has not been lacking in bizarre behavior.
Bucher says he is thinking about running because he believes incumbent Justice Louis Butler is "an activist."
That's an amusing statement coming from Bucher, who has made no secret of his ideological and personal passions and who has never hesitated to allow them to guide his legal determinations.
Yet the man who mounted a comically inept prosecution of troubled Green Bay Packer Mark Chmura says with a straight face, "There's only one item that's worth focusing on in this race, and that is judicial philosophy. (Butler's) an activist, and he's proud of it."
Bucher is, as usual, bending the truth to the breaking point.
Butler, who has gotten high marks for working across political and ideological lines on the court, is not generally seen as a judicial activist. And he certainly has not gone around declaring that he is proud of putting ideology ahead of the law.
If Butler was the sort of "activist" Bucher describes, it is unlikely that he would have gained the strong endorsement this week of the association representing city of Milwaukee police officers as "a strong leader (who) understands the needs of our citizens and the needs of our law enforcement officers."
The group says, "Wisconsin is safer with Justice Louis Butler on our Supreme Court."
The police union's sentiments have been echoed by an astounding array of community and legal groups that have honored and endorsed Justice Butler as an outstanding jurist. It raises the question: What is Paul Bucher thinking?
Then again, no one has ever accused Bucher of thinking very hard about anything but his own political advancement.
Fresh from his defeat in the Republican primary for state attorney general last year, former Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucher says he is contemplating running for the state Supreme Court next April.
Bucher's bitter concession statement after losing last year's primary to J.B. Van Hollen was one of the more remarkable political swan songs in a career that has not been lacking in bizarre behavior.
Bucher says he is thinking about running because he believes incumbent Justice Louis Butler is "an activist."
That's an amusing statement coming from Bucher, who has made no secret of his ideological and personal passions and who has never hesitated to allow them to guide his legal determinations.
Yet the man who mounted a comically inept prosecution of troubled Green Bay Packer Mark Chmura says with a straight face, "There's only one item that's worth focusing on in this race, and that is judicial philosophy. (Butler's) an activist, and he's proud of it."
Bucher is, as usual, bending the truth to the breaking point.
Butler, who has gotten high marks for working across political and ideological lines on the court, is not generally seen as a judicial activist. And he certainly has not gone around declaring that he is proud of putting ideology ahead of the law.
If Butler was the sort of "activist" Bucher describes, it is unlikely that he would have gained the strong endorsement this week of the association representing city of Milwaukee police officers as "a strong leader (who) understands the needs of our citizens and the needs of our law enforcement officers."
The group says, "Wisconsin is safer with Justice Louis Butler on our Supreme Court."
The police union's sentiments have been echoed by an astounding array of community and legal groups that have honored and endorsed Justice Butler as an outstanding jurist. It raises the question: What is Paul Bucher thinking?
Then again, no one has ever accused Bucher of thinking very hard about anything but his own political advancement.
Thank God for the intelligence of Wisconsin Voters
And special thanks to the voters of Merton, Wisconsin who knew better than others could who was the better choice for Attorney General.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Wonder if he ever caught the offender. Hope it wasn't the journalisim professional
Open Letter to Waukesha County D.A. Paul Bucher:
September 2005 - Christoper A. Micklos
Dear District Attorney Bucher:
I am writing to alert you to a serious matter that deserves your immediate attention!
It appears as though an intern in your office has written a letter in your name to Wisconsin Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager and released it to the media. I can only assume that this was done without your knowledge or consent, because the letter reads more like the testy diary entry of a petulant teenager than it does a serious communication from an elected official.
In case you are somehow unaware of the offensive nasty-gram that was released in your name, you should read the offending letter for yourself.
Surely, a man of your stature - the duly elected District Attorney of Waukesha County and candidate for the highest law enforcement post in the state - would never write such an infantile and unprofessional missive as the one attributed to you and dated September 26, 2005. Between the sarcastic tone, the condescending language, and the use of such childish phrases like "just so you know", the letter - had it actually been written by you or with your consent - would indicate an individual without the personal maturity or professional integrity to drive an ice cream truck, much less serve as District Attorney of one of Wisconsin's largest counties.
I bring this matter to your attention for a number of reasons.
First and foremost, you must surely be concerned about your public image. After all, the author of this ridiculous letter not only wrote it but also distributed it to the press. As a result, it could find its way onto the front pages or - even worse! - onto the editorial pages of newspapers throughout the state. Can you imagine what the press and the public would think if they read this letter and actually thought you had written it? It could be a serious blow to your political ambitions.
Of even greater concern, though, is the fact that you apparently have someone working in your office without the requisite maturity or professionalism to be working there. Clearly, the author of that letter has no place in a District Attorney's office...or any office, for that matter, that requires the confidence or trust of the voters. Assuming that it is indeed an intern, I would suggest that you give him/her a stern talking to and send him/her back to the junior high school classroom where you found him/her. Clearly, this individual needs a little more seasoning and education before trying to tackle professional responsibilities again.
Mr. District Attorney, I know that this is probably a trying time for you. Not only do you have to identify the offending member of your office staff, but you also have to deal with the fallout of all this nonsense.
As soon as you identify the author of the letter, I'm sure that you will want that individual to offer a full and unconditional apology not only to Attorney General Lautenschlager, but also to each and every one of the Waukesha County constituents whom you are supposed to represent.
Best wishes,
Chris Micklos (really me, not an intern)
P.S.: On a somewhat related matter, I am hoping that you can clarify something for me. Having read the offensive letter in question on the political web site www.wispolitics.com, I was unable to determine whether it was written on official government letterhead or on campaign letterhead? Obviously, if it was written on official government letterhead, you might have a real problem, considering the blatantly political nature of the letter. Similarly, if it was written on campaign letterhead, it begs the question of why on earth the author would choose to engage in official business of the District Attorney's office by using campaign resources? Obviously, you will want to get to the bottom of this, as well, because that could have serious implications for your future.
P.P.S: Considering the question raised in the P.S. above, it's funny that the original issue that prompted your intern's letter involved the blurring of the line between government responsibilities and campaign activity. Ironic, isn't it?
September 2005 - Christoper A. Micklos
Dear District Attorney Bucher:
I am writing to alert you to a serious matter that deserves your immediate attention!
It appears as though an intern in your office has written a letter in your name to Wisconsin Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager and released it to the media. I can only assume that this was done without your knowledge or consent, because the letter reads more like the testy diary entry of a petulant teenager than it does a serious communication from an elected official.
In case you are somehow unaware of the offensive nasty-gram that was released in your name, you should read the offending letter for yourself.
Surely, a man of your stature - the duly elected District Attorney of Waukesha County and candidate for the highest law enforcement post in the state - would never write such an infantile and unprofessional missive as the one attributed to you and dated September 26, 2005. Between the sarcastic tone, the condescending language, and the use of such childish phrases like "just so you know", the letter - had it actually been written by you or with your consent - would indicate an individual without the personal maturity or professional integrity to drive an ice cream truck, much less serve as District Attorney of one of Wisconsin's largest counties.
I bring this matter to your attention for a number of reasons.
First and foremost, you must surely be concerned about your public image. After all, the author of this ridiculous letter not only wrote it but also distributed it to the press. As a result, it could find its way onto the front pages or - even worse! - onto the editorial pages of newspapers throughout the state. Can you imagine what the press and the public would think if they read this letter and actually thought you had written it? It could be a serious blow to your political ambitions.
Of even greater concern, though, is the fact that you apparently have someone working in your office without the requisite maturity or professionalism to be working there. Clearly, the author of that letter has no place in a District Attorney's office...or any office, for that matter, that requires the confidence or trust of the voters. Assuming that it is indeed an intern, I would suggest that you give him/her a stern talking to and send him/her back to the junior high school classroom where you found him/her. Clearly, this individual needs a little more seasoning and education before trying to tackle professional responsibilities again.
Mr. District Attorney, I know that this is probably a trying time for you. Not only do you have to identify the offending member of your office staff, but you also have to deal with the fallout of all this nonsense.
As soon as you identify the author of the letter, I'm sure that you will want that individual to offer a full and unconditional apology not only to Attorney General Lautenschlager, but also to each and every one of the Waukesha County constituents whom you are supposed to represent.
Best wishes,
Chris Micklos (really me, not an intern)
P.S.: On a somewhat related matter, I am hoping that you can clarify something for me. Having read the offensive letter in question on the political web site www.wispolitics.com, I was unable to determine whether it was written on official government letterhead or on campaign letterhead? Obviously, if it was written on official government letterhead, you might have a real problem, considering the blatantly political nature of the letter. Similarly, if it was written on campaign letterhead, it begs the question of why on earth the author would choose to engage in official business of the District Attorney's office by using campaign resources? Obviously, you will want to get to the bottom of this, as well, because that could have serious implications for your future.
P.P.S: Considering the question raised in the P.S. above, it's funny that the original issue that prompted your intern's letter involved the blurring of the line between government responsibilities and campaign activity. Ironic, isn't it?
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Bucher Blasts Back to the Past
Just the Facts
Just the Facts H/T to Jenna from Right Off The Shore. She got "just the facts" concerning immigration and the AG race. Here is her entry in its entirety. Who is really credible when it comes to illegal immigrants?Paul Bucher likes to pretend he is. Check out his latest angry pressrelease (and, I swear to God, if he uses the phrase "Bucher Blasts" onemore time, I'm going to scream. There are other verbs out there, buddy,use 'em):Attorney General Candidate Paul Bucher demanded Wednesday that J.B. VanHollen and Peg Lautenschlager explain to the public why they believe thestate should do absolutely nothing about criminal aliens, and specificallycalled on Van Hollen to retract his campaign's outrageous, misleadingcomments the past few days about Bucher'’s plan to make Wisconsin aleader by seeking federal immigration enforcement authority."We've introduced an innovative plan to work with federal authorities soillegal aliens who commit criminal offenses in Wisconsin are sent packingthe first time they offend," said Bucher.Sounds all well and good, right?Turns out, Paul is all talk and no action.A very telling MJS article revealed how he failed to "send illegal alienspacking" after their first offense.Fernando Juarez Decion, 30, was charged with three felonies ofsecond-degree sexual assault by use of force, robbery with use of forceand substantial battery for an attack on a woman he met Sunday at FiestaWaukesha in Frame Park, a criminal complaint says.He was also charged with misdemeanor battery in an attack June 15 on awoman on the west side of the Fox River just across from the park,according to a complaint.Juarez Decion was released on a signature bond on June 20 following hisarrest on suspicion of the first attack. He was in the Waukesha CountyJail on Wednesday in lieu of $150,000 bail, and is scheduled to be back inWaukesha County Circuit Court today.The man, who was later identified as Juarez Decion, followed her afterwardeven after she told him not to, the complaint says.When they reached the floral gardens, the woman told police, the manpulled her into the bushes and, using profane language, demanded that shehave sexual intercourse with him, the complaint says. She refused, and hepunched her in the head and neck, then squeezed her neck, and shetemporarily lost consciousness, according to the complaint.When she regained consciousness, he threatened to kill her and repeatedlysexually assaulted her, according to the complaint, which says he alsoripped a gold necklace with a cross from her neck and stole her cellphone.On June 15, Decion committed his first offense. On June 20, Bucherreleased him on "signature bond," and put him back on the streets.On June 25, thanks to Bucher's actions, he raped a woman.Bucher had this to say, even after this event:Bucher added, "“Kicking illegal aliens out of the country the firsttime they offend will free taxpayers from having to pay for their publicdefenders, interpreters, prosecutors, police investigations, treatment,court and incarceration costs down the road."Here's a question for Bucher: why don't you practice what you preach? Whydidn't you "kick out" Decion? Why did you put this criminal back on thestreets, free to rape a woman?Frankly, we don't need another AG who can't live up to his or her emptypromises.
Just the Facts H/T to Jenna from Right Off The Shore. She got "just the facts" concerning immigration and the AG race. Here is her entry in its entirety. Who is really credible when it comes to illegal immigrants?Paul Bucher likes to pretend he is. Check out his latest angry pressrelease (and, I swear to God, if he uses the phrase "Bucher Blasts" onemore time, I'm going to scream. There are other verbs out there, buddy,use 'em):Attorney General Candidate Paul Bucher demanded Wednesday that J.B. VanHollen and Peg Lautenschlager explain to the public why they believe thestate should do absolutely nothing about criminal aliens, and specificallycalled on Van Hollen to retract his campaign's outrageous, misleadingcomments the past few days about Bucher'’s plan to make Wisconsin aleader by seeking federal immigration enforcement authority."We've introduced an innovative plan to work with federal authorities soillegal aliens who commit criminal offenses in Wisconsin are sent packingthe first time they offend," said Bucher.Sounds all well and good, right?Turns out, Paul is all talk and no action.A very telling MJS article revealed how he failed to "send illegal alienspacking" after their first offense.Fernando Juarez Decion, 30, was charged with three felonies ofsecond-degree sexual assault by use of force, robbery with use of forceand substantial battery for an attack on a woman he met Sunday at FiestaWaukesha in Frame Park, a criminal complaint says.He was also charged with misdemeanor battery in an attack June 15 on awoman on the west side of the Fox River just across from the park,according to a complaint.Juarez Decion was released on a signature bond on June 20 following hisarrest on suspicion of the first attack. He was in the Waukesha CountyJail on Wednesday in lieu of $150,000 bail, and is scheduled to be back inWaukesha County Circuit Court today.The man, who was later identified as Juarez Decion, followed her afterwardeven after she told him not to, the complaint says.When they reached the floral gardens, the woman told police, the manpulled her into the bushes and, using profane language, demanded that shehave sexual intercourse with him, the complaint says. She refused, and hepunched her in the head and neck, then squeezed her neck, and shetemporarily lost consciousness, according to the complaint.When she regained consciousness, he threatened to kill her and repeatedlysexually assaulted her, according to the complaint, which says he alsoripped a gold necklace with a cross from her neck and stole her cellphone.On June 15, Decion committed his first offense. On June 20, Bucherreleased him on "signature bond," and put him back on the streets.On June 25, thanks to Bucher's actions, he raped a woman.Bucher had this to say, even after this event:Bucher added, "“Kicking illegal aliens out of the country the firsttime they offend will free taxpayers from having to pay for their publicdefenders, interpreters, prosecutors, police investigations, treatment,court and incarceration costs down the road."Here's a question for Bucher: why don't you practice what you preach? Whydidn't you "kick out" Decion? Why did you put this criminal back on thestreets, free to rape a woman?Frankly, we don't need another AG who can't live up to his or her emptypromises.
Blasts from the Past
- BUCHER BLOWS UP
By
No one is ever going to try to suggest that Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucher is the ablest prosecutor in the state - memories of the Mark Chmura trial will forever foreclose that prospect.
But, as he campaigns for the Republican nomination for state attorney general, Bucher has taken steps that raise serious questions about whether he is capable of separating his political ambitions from his prosecutorial duties.
Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager recently sent Bucher a routine offer of assistance in a case involving alleged illegal campaigning in Waukesha County by an aide to state Sen. Alberta Darling, R-River Hills, whose district includes part of Waukesha County. In response, Bucher freaked out.
Never mind that a case involving charges of illegal campaigning on the part of a state legislative aide merits investigation by the state Department of Justice's Public Integrity Unit, rather than by the office of a district attorney who frequently complains about lacking adequate resources to pursue such matters.
Never mind that, after press reports detailed concerns regarding the prospect that the Republican legislative aide was campaigning while working at his state job, the Republican prosecutor seemed to suggest that he was disinclined to conduct a serious review of the allegations.
Never mind that prosecutors usually respect offers of assistance from the state's top law enforcement officer.
Bucher responded to Lautenchlager's entirely professional letter suggesting that the Public Integrity Unit was "prepared to commit investigative resources upon a proper referral" with a bitter, rambling screed that featured a ham-handed suggestion that Lautenschlager was unconcerned about "violence and murders."
What made Bucher's letter so bizarre was that it was sent to Lautenschlager - and, of course, the media - just days after the attorney general had completed the successful prosecution of the highest-profile murder case in the state's recent history.
Then again, Bucher also tried to intimate that Lautenschlager was neglecting "the methamphetamine epidemic in western Wisconsin" and instances of election fraud.
No one who has been paying attention to public affairs in Wisconsin can possibly have missed the attorney general's repeated efforts to focus attention on the fight to stop the production and sale of methamphetamines, nor could anyone suggest that Lautenschlager - who has tangled with powerful figures in both her own Democratic Party and the Republican Party - is unwilling to tackle political wrongdoing.
An honest read of the letter from Lautenschlager and the response from Bucher reveals everything that Wisconsinites need to know about the incumbent attorney general and the man who seeks to replace her.
While Lautenschlager is professional, collegial and concerned about prosecuting instances of political wrongdoing, Bucher comes off as bitter, uncooperative and determined to try to score partisan points even in instances where it is clearly necessary to rise above politics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)