WI Supreme Court: Resignation?

The Wisconsin Supreme Court is an embarrassment.

The fact that Justice Ann Walsh Bradley and Justice David Prosser are duking it out over a physical assault incident involving them is nuts.

Calling the Court dysfunctional is being far too kind.

It's a disgrace.

The relationships between its members are toxic, and that's probably understating it.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Two agencies are investigating a claim by Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley that Justice David Prosser put her in a chokehold earlier this month - an allegation Gov. Scott Walker on Monday called extremely serious.

Asked if the reports about Prosser's behavior, if true, merited his resignation, Walker said: "I don't even want to go down that path . . . other than to say that just based on the allegations that were made, I can't overemphasize how serious I think the situation is there. Until we know what happened, I don't think it's best for anybody for me to comment on what the next step is."

Was Walker asked if the reports about Bradley's behavior, if true, merited her resignation?

That doesn't appear to be the case from the Journal Sentinel's online account.

Why wonder about Prosser resigning and not consider the possibility of Bradley resigning?

Bias? What bias?

The separate investigations are being run by the Dane County Sheriff's Office and the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, which oversees the state's judicial ethics code. The sheriff's investigation was launched Monday; the commission's was authorized Friday and publicly acknowledged Monday.

"After consulting with members of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, I have turned over the investigation into an alleged incident in the court's offices on June 13, 2011, to Dane County Sheriff Dave Mahoney," Capitol Police Chief Charles Tubbs said in a statement.

The sheriff's office in a statement acknowledged it was taking over the case, but declined further comment.

It was not clear why Tubbs would consult with members of the court on who should investigate the matter.

This is so bizarre.

Law enforcement shouldn't be meeting with the Court to determine how to go about investigating an alleged physical assault.

...Walker told Journal Sentinel reporters, editors and members of the newspaper's Editorial Board on Monday that the current court was the most dysfunctional in his memory, and that the judiciary is supposed to be the most dispassionate of the three branches of government.

"I think, again, beyond the particulars of this case . . . the fact that there appears to be an ongoing friction among justices in the court is something that has to be resolved," Walker said. "I don't know what the right answer is."

Walker raised the possibility of providing a mediator, but was cautious about any involvement from either the executive or legislative branches of government.

Walker also said "long-term, it's worth looking at" an appointed Supreme Court, instead of an elected one, in Wisconsin.

Such a change would require a change in the state constitution.

If Prosser resigned, Walker would appoint his successor.

Here we go again!

Why just talk about Prosser resigning?

If BRADLEY resigned, Walker would appoint her successor.

The anti-Prosser slant of the Journal Sentinel article continues:

The court for years has been split by ideological and personal differences.

"Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this stunning development is how, given all that we have learned about the court in recent years, how untroubling many (people) are likely to find this," said Marquette Law School professor Peter Rofes. "Entirely apart from the obvious violent nature of this act - and the fear it engendered in a female member of the court - as each day passes the people of Wisconsin have less reason to believe that there is very much legitimacy left in this incredibly important institution."

"Entirely apart from the obvious violent nature of this act - and the fear it engendered in a female member of the court"?

So, according to Marquette Law School professor Peter Rofes, Bradley is the victim here? It's a given that she was attacked by Prosser, that terrifying brute?

It certainly appears that Rofes thinks he knows what happened.

Why the assumption that Bradley's version of events is accurate?

Rofes should know better than to make such statements.

...Nationally known police practices expert Melvin L. Tucker said he couldn't figure out why the Capitol police would confer with the justices about the direction of the investigation rather than simply presenting a case to the district attorney.

"There may be justifiable reasons for it, but it doesn't sound like it's normal," said Tucker, a former FBI agent who has served as a police chief in three states and is now based in North Carolina.

"If there was probable cause that a choking actually did take place, if the victim did give a statement to that effect, you go to the prosecutor's office and proceed from there," he said.

NO KIDDING!

What's with the strange consultations? Police shouldn't be conferring with the justices about a choking. That's not how they normally handle a violent act. They should do their jobs, no special treatment or additional discussions.

This is all so weird.

Of course, what's completely normal is the Journal Sentinel serving as a mouthpiece for liberals.
__________________

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's Crocker Stephenson discussed the insanity with Greta Van Susteren.