already a subscriber? Register me
Subscribe now See my options
Proof and Hearsay

Crime, courts and legal issues in Milwaukee and throughout Wisconsin

  • We reserve the right to close commenting on specific stories.

Discussion guidelines | Privacy policy | Terms of use

Limit of 2000 characters, 2000 characters remaining

Sort by
Comment threads per page: 10 | 20 | 50
  1. This woman is a time bomb waiting to explode. Take her toys away permanently. You'll be doing society a favor!
    Hide replies
  2. Does this make sense? I am not disagreeing with the decision but this seems like a silly excuse for the Wisconsin Supreme court, could have been worded differently if nothing else.
    "We hold that while the condition that the circuit court imposed on Rowan's extended supervision 'may impinge on constitutional rights,' it does not violate them," wrote Justice N. Patrick Crooks
  3. Even the State Supreme Court is reunited after Walker's victory. Happy days are here again.
  4. Just more of the same from the state supreme court standing up in support of unions than the people. Lets get more jobs for DOC workers and not worry about who pays for it.

    Offenders with AODA issues should not just be released into society with no structure to graduate them out of the severe conditions of prisons. Guns, drugs, drinking and petty crimes of returning offenders is not the real problem. Its just the end result of a state that has lost all sense of meaningful reform.

    Why was this woman on the street able to access booze which no doubt was against probation or parole rules in the first place? If the state had a card IT id requirement for the sale of all booze with offenders required to carry ID specifically indicating there were prohibited from purchasing we'd see a drop in the situations of offenders drinking.

    Background search companies that employ and/or are run by government workers would not be necessary if card IT was in place to alert all that see offenders IDs what their status is. Short rules printed on the back would alert police if they are where they should not be. It would let employers know hay I can't hire this guy to work as a bartender. Card IT would save employers billions where they would not need background checks to find oops this applicant is a felon on active supervision.

    This court does not want to address the real issues of crime. It wants to rewrite the US Constitution to exclude all rights for citizens.

    You ain't seen nothing yet. Cohesive government programs like card IT is coming as a federal law to force corrections and the court to act to solve IT not game IT.
    Hide replies
  5. This is the problem with lenient sentencing for criminals. You put them back out on the street and then put courts in a position of having to diminish constitutional rights in order to protect the public instead of being able to hold constitutional rights steadfast and just keep a criminal in jail to protect the public. If this woman is a menace, and can't be trusted with a gun, can she be trusted with a baseball bat? Can she be trusted with a car? She drove drunk but can drive. She didn't shoot anyone but can't own a gun? Can she own a brick? A knife? A metal pipe?

    This is a bad ruling, bad precedent, and its non-sense to boot. Feel good at its best.
  6. I find certain contents of this story , and our option to "thumbs up or down" , ironic!
    Hide replies
  7. What an outrage. Crooks said it may impinge her constitutional rights but not violate them. What a joke. If it impinges rights it violates rights period, no if's and's, or but's. Anybody with common sense can realize that. I hope she appeals. It doesn't say anywhere in the Federal Constitution that Felons don't have Constitutional rights. If you don't like Felons having Constitutional rights then change the Constitution. Oh, you don't have the votes to change it, then Felons have Constitutional rights to be safe in their homes free from Gestapo entering without probable cause or a search warrant.
    Hide replies
  8. Welcome to the United States Supreme Court!!!! Now lets make spitting on the sidewalk a felony and we can invade everyones life!! The conditions imposed on this person, in regard to this issue, were extreme to allow this kind of search. Just remember you may be next? Its becoming more and more difficult to understand these kind of decisions! On the one hand social organizations are trying to reduce the punative stigma of society on criminals who have served their time and on the other hand the courts are imposing more restrictions! Society needs to be protected from criminals, but the law should not require cruel and unusual punishment!!!
    Hide replies
  9. A felon should have NO constitutional rights until they have fulfilled the complete sentence. This woman is a criminal and a danger to society.
    Hide replies
  10. Criminal actions have consequences. The trial court's ruling was both reasonable and well thought out. It is well settled that when one is on probation or parole, one will live by the rules, no matter how onerous they may appear, until such time as the period of supervison is over. Live with it!
    Hide replies



Supreme Court Tracker


See all Journal Sentinel Twitter feeds