Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Law enforcement endorsements continue rolling in...

The latest: Chief Rob Dahms from Greendale PD

Thursday, August 25, 2005

Wagner praises Paul

In a lengthy discussion Thursday about the John Mercure investigation into men who allegedly showed up at a house rented by Channel 4 thinking they were meeting up with teenage girls, Milwaukee talk radio show host Jeff Wagner strongly praised Paul. Paul issued felony charges against three of the men this week. The charges continue Paul's long standing practice of not shying away from tough cases when charging them is the right thing to do. Mercure had previously rented a house in Milwaukee County but no charges resulted from that County.

Wagner, a former Republican candidate for Attorney General himself and a former federal prosecutor, praised Paul as a true "law-and-order prosecutor." Wagner noted that Mercure made the right decision to rent the house in Waukesha County, saying that any person who would want to maximize the impact of charges would know to do so in Waukesha County because of Paul's strong reputation as an aggressive prosecutor who does the right thing.

Another law enforcement endorsement

"I have had the opportunity to hear you speak at several conferences that I have attended over the years and have always been impressed with your character and prosecuting abilities," said CHIEF OF POLICE DAVID D. BEAL, EMMET-LEBANON POLICE DEPT, referring to Paul. Beal became the latest in a long list of law enforcement officials statewide to endorse Paul. While Paul's primary opponent repeatedly cites the endorsement of 16 Democratic DAs in the state, Paul has received the endorsement of more than 20 REPUBLICAN DAs in the state (not to mention other law enforcement officials).

Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Mercure's investigation

Paul charged three men today for allegedly going to a house rented by Channel 4 in Milwaukee, thinking they were going to meet underage girls for sexual purposes. Investigative reporter John Mercure has publicly stated that he rented the house specifically in Waukesha County because of Paul's reputation as a tough prosecutor. Mercure previously rented a house in Milwaukee County and did a similar sting there but the Milwaukee County DA's office wouldn't issue charges against the men who showed up.

In the TV account tonight, Mercure stated:

Criminal charges were issued today. Indeed, they were serious penalties, felonies….

DA Paul Bucher said something we all agree on, hopefully this is a wake up call to parents...

Paul stated in the report that the cases will be difficult ones to prove in court (then again, Paul has never shied away from a case because it's difficult if bringing it to a jury is the right thing). But he stated that he analyzed the circumstances and the backgrounds of the individuals before making a decision on charges. Mercure pointed out that two of the men have allegedly fled the state. Said Paul, "If they flee, we'll pick them up in another jurisdiction... you can run but you will not be able to hide..."

This case is indicative of how Paul has always run his office. He holds people responsible for their misbehavior. Period. Read the story on the case in the Journal Sentinel.

Saturday, August 20, 2005

Common Sense

A photo ID for voting is common sense, writes a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel community columnist. The column is right on target.

Wednesday, August 17, 2005

The 2005 Law Enforcement Torch Run for Special Olympics

Paul, who has completed 9 marathons, ran with law enforcement officers as part of the 2005 Law Enforcement Torch Run for Special Olympics. He has participated in this event for a decade. Here are some pics.

Monday, August 15, 2005

Campaign Trail

Paul has been really busy the past few weeks. Among other events, he attended:
  • Dane County Republican picnic

  • Milwaukee County Republican picnic

  • Marinette County corn roast

  • New Berlin Police Department's girls Youth Citizens Academy (there was a nice picture of him in the New Berlin Citizen newspaper)

  • Wisconsin State Fair

  • Washington County Republican women Italian dinner night

  • Ozaukee County fair

  • Kenosha County social

  • Racine County Republican Women's picnic

  • Waukesha County picnic

  • Open Records presentation to Waukesha School Board

  • Outagamie County corn roast

  • A speech at a Waukesha high school to more than 500 people

Among other events... but you get the idea! Plus, he was in court, etc.

Tuesday, August 09, 2005

Another law enforcement endorsement

Big Bend Police Chief John Hefley said of Paul in endorsing him recently:

"You've definitely earned my respect because you've never backed away from taking on tough cases or taking a stand on issues. You're the person that we need to get the State Department of Justice back on track."

Racine County

Paul has been really busy on the campaign trail lately. Among many other campaign activities, he and wife Jessica and daughter Annie went to the Racine County Fair recently. Here they are outside the Republican campaign tent. Paul is recognized by pretty much everyone he goes up to at these events in Southeastern Wisconsin due to his longtime media exposure. The reaction has been really positive.

Monday, August 08, 2005

Open records seminar

Paul has been one of the most active District Attorneys in the State in prosecuting and reviewing Open Records and Meeting violations. But what is rarely reported is how much community educational work Paul also does in this and other areas of the law. The Waukesha Freeman recently ran a nice story on an open records seminar Paul gave to school officials to better ensure they follow the law in complying with open records requests.

Memo to Law Enforcement

Charlie Sykes made this posting on his blog, reporting on a memo that Paul sent out to all law enforcement in Waukesha County. For years, Paul has routinely sent out memos for local cops that summarize Court decisions that affect the way cops have to do business. The memo reprinted on Sykes' blog was one of three recent memos Paul sent out to County police chiefs explaining recent Court decisions that have infringed on police powers in Wisconsin.

From Sykes' blog:

FRIDAY, Aug. 5, 2005, 6:49 a.m.


While the media continues to ignore the magnitude of recent state Supreme Court decisions on crime, Waukesha County District Attorney (And AG candidate) Paul Bucher is warning local enforcement just what they mean:



Unfortunately, this is the third memo I have had to write due to the fact an activist Supreme Court has taken over in the State of Wisconsin. As I stated in my last memorandum, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has now seen fit to ignore and disregard the teaching of the United States Supreme Court and has decided that the citizens of this State wish to give criminals greater protection than those required by the United States Constitution. In doing so, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has reaffirmed its adoption of a concept called New Federalism. “New Federalism” can be described as several things, but, in this case, it’s simply designed to give criminals in the State of Wisconsin greater protections than criminals in other states and criminals who are prosecuted by the Federal government in this State.Justice Butler, of the Supreme Court, has indicated his desire to bend over backwards for individuals who violate the law and use the Wisconsin Constitution as a guise to expand his liberal judicial philosophy in giving convicted criminals greater protection under Wisconsin law, than under the United States Constitution. This should, once again, give all law enforcement officials in the State, great concern regarding where the Supreme Court is headed.

In particular, Justice Butler and Justice Crooks make it very clear they support the adoption of a radical concept that has long been opposed in this State. The central holding of the case in State of Wisconsin v. Knapp, 2005 WI 127 is that the Wisconsin Constitution will grant greater rights to a criminal defendant than the United States Constitution when it deals with use of physical evidence that was discovered or derived as a result of an intentional violation of the Miranda Rule. The initial decision of the Wisconsin Supreme Court indicated that the State could not use physical evidence it had discovered following an intentional violation of Miranda. This matter was appealed to the United States Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court reversed, telling the Wisconsin Supreme Court that they were in error when they determined that criminals deserve to have evidence suppressed when there is an intentional violation of Miranda. The well-developed law in the United States does not require that. The United States Supreme Court went to great lengths to instruct the Wisconsin Supreme Court on the requirements of the United States Constitution.

By the way, the Wisconsin Constitution and the United States Constitution are almost identical.Notwithstanding this reprimand from the United States Supreme Court following remand, the Wisconsin Supreme Court decided that they were going to grant criminals greater rights by using the Wisconsin Constitution, not the United States Constitution, as the basis to do so. This is called “New Federalism.” The bottom line of the Knapp decision is that, in Wisconsin, State law enforcement officials cannot utilize physical evidence that is a derivative of an intentional Miranda violation. This is in direct contradiction to what Federal agents may do, as well as what most other states require. Justice Butler wrote this decision, joined in by Justice Crooks, Justice Abramson and Justice Bradley to form a majority of the Court. Justice Butler indicated that he did not feel he should allow those we entrust to enforce the law to intentionally subvert a suspect’s constitutional rights. The United States Supreme Court (the highest court in the land) indicated that they did trust law enforcement to be able to use physical evidence discovered as a direct violation of the Miranda Rule. The reason for that is simple. The Miranda Rule is a prophylactic rule. It protects suspects from the use of “incriminating statements” against them when the traditional Miranda warnings did not precede them.Physical evidence, however, is an entirely different subject. It does not fall within the exclusionary rule that was carved out to deal with Miranda violations. The Wisconsin Supreme Court is definitely out of lock step. The Wisconsin Supreme Court has created its own, very narrow reading of the Wisconsin Constitution to grant criminal defendants greater rights. This is a very disturbing decision, as well as a concerning trend of the Wisconsin Supreme Court to use the Wisconsin Constitution to grand defendants greater rights than those required by the United States Constitution....