This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
There is a controversy at the University of Wisconsin this week after the Dane County District Attorney’s Office in Wisconsin filed misdemeanor battery charges against three teens suspected in the brutal assault of a UW-Madison Chinese PhD student. The reason, however, appears a key distinction in the Wisconsincriminal code.
Viterbo University in Wisconsin has been the scene of protests for months over alleged hate crimes committed on campus. What interested me about the case was the curious combination of criminal charges. 1) Whoever handles burning material in a highly negligent manner is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. (2)
In covering the motions hearing last week in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse, I noted a surprising comment from Judge Bruce Schroeder that he had “spent hours” with the Wisconsin gun law and could not state with certainty what it means in this case. Criminallaws are supposed to be interpreted narrowly.
I recently wrote a column stating that the sixth count appeared to be based on a factually and legally inapplicable provision of Wisconsinlaw. This is the loss of the least serious charge, but prosecutors lost more than just a misdemeanor conviction in the decision.
In coverage of this trial, one would think that there were parallel trials occurring in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Rittenhouse is facing six charges that range from first-degree homicide to a misdemeanor of being a minor in possession of a dangerous weapon. At this stage, the prosecution may celebrate even a misdemeanor conviction.
I recently wrote a column stating that the sixth count appeared to be based on a factually and legally inapplicable provision of Wisconsinlaw. “The Wisconsin Department of Justice honors concealed carry permits issued in Illinois. ” However, it was legal in the sense of not being a criminal act.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 99,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content