Butler’s Supporters Want to Rewrite History
March 15th, 2008
The Butler supporters are all up in arms about Gableman’s new commercial.
Fact is, folks, Louis Butler WAS, by choice, a public defender for many years and it looks like he did help a few scumbags get off.
But, somehow, we’re not supposed to discuss his background?
Even Butler admitted (at one point at least) that records are ‘fair game.’
From the inbox:
[Burnett County, Wisc….] Judge Michael Gableman’s campaign for Supreme Court today announced the launch of television advertising.
Judge Gableman has called on third party groups to withdraw from the race, but unfortunately Louis Butler’s ally, the Greater Wisconsin Committee, continues to smear the Burnett County Judge with misleading advertising. Judge Gableman has served as a front-line prosecutor in three counties and has been the Burnett County Judge since 2002.
Darrin Schmitz, Gableman for Supreme Court campaign consultant, said Judge Gableman prosecuted and presided over thousands of cases and has worked hard to hold sex offenders accountable.“Mike Gableman has worked to put sex offenders behind bars for more than 100 years, while Louis Butler worked put them back on the streets,” said Schmitz. “Butler fought to get sex offenders like Reuben Lee Mitchell off for rape. Mitchell raped an 11-year old girl with learning disabilities who was delivering newspapers. Butler argued against allowing the court to know the young girl was a virgin. And Mitchell went on to molest again.”
Judge Gableman enjoys the endorsement of a bi-partisan majority of district attorneys and sheriffs in the state, as well as the Wisconsin Sheriffs and Deputy Sheriffs Association. Judge Gableman is endorsed by 50 police chiefs, and has more 10 times as many sheriffs’ endorsements as his opponent and nearly twice as many district attorney endorsements.
Judge Gableman is the only candidate for the Supreme Court with prosecutorial experience. Butler was a long-time criminal defense lawyer who ran for the Court in 2000 and lost by a 2-1 margin. Butler was appointed to the Court in 2004.In the 2000 campaign for the Supreme Court, Louis Butler referred to candidate’s records as “fair game” and stated in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:
“The people of this state have a right to know who they are electing to the high court,” Butler said.“At the same time, our record is fair game. What we’ve done up to this point is subject to question. People have a right to know what we do,” he added. “After all, they’ve got to decide who to put on that court.” Jan. 5, 2000
So be it.
March 15th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
And Mitchell went on to molest again
AFTER he was released after serving the FULL PRISON TERM imposed upon him by the court that ultimately upheld his conviction.
To suggest that Butler is the reason that Mitchell re-offended is a BALD-FACED LIE. Shame on you, Brian.
March 15th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Finally, one of the right-wing bloggers — an official Republican consultant, no less — comes out of their hole to see if they can pass the ultimate test. Will they side with the racist or with the other side?
Fraley fails.
March 15th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
To criticize Butler is to be a racist, Mike? Nice try.
March 15th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
And the fact is, Jay, that Butler voluntarily chose to be a public defender. He defended Mitchell to try to get him off. The guy offended again. This is the background Butler is running on. It deserves a fair examination.
March 15th, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Don’t play dumb, Fraley. You know the reason that the Mitchell case was chosen and why his mug shot runs next to a photo of Butler. It is not racist to criticize Butler, but it is racist to run a racist ad against him. This is a historic new low, even for you slugs. I’m glad you’ve come out so strongly in favor of this wonderful ad — that’s one less voice on the right that anyone with any sense will ever take seriously again.
March 16th, 2008 at 7:18 am
You’re right, Brian, we should just chuck the adversarial system and throw everyone who gets arrested in jail for the rest of their lives. And Goldberg has the balls to call us fascists? Please.
And the ad is a lie, period, and you know it.
March 16th, 2008 at 8:01 am
So, using mugshots of African American convicts is what? Taboo? Illegal? Immoral?
Funny thing about crime, Mike, when you are a victim or potential victim of it, you really don’t give a damn what the racial, religious, or other census-related demographics of the perpetrator are. The mugshot was the actual picture of the person referred to in the commercial. If it were mocked up or modified (and if it I let me know and this take will be altered a bit) that would be a different story. Hillary CLinton Darkening Barack in a commercial or Newsweek darkening OJ on the cover in order to make them seem somehow more menacing, that is unseemly. If the Gableman campaign merely used the actual mugshot then it is not.
The ad is not a lie, Jay. Did Butler voluntarily serve as a public defender for years? Yes? He he defend Mitchell and try to get him off? Yes. Did Mitchell later molest again? Yes.
Butler worked for an alleged rapist. Tried to get him off. The guy later went on to molest again.
And you guys are right. I’m POSITIVE this is not the only case out there wherein Butler tried to get guys like Mitchell off.
Looking forward to seeing more. The public has a right to know about Louis Butler’s record/penchant of siding with criminals and the accused both as PD and as a judge.
March 16th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Yeah, just a coincidence…right. Do you type with a straight face or are you and Schmitz actually deluded into thinking anyone would believe that kind of BS? Spin can only go so far — one look at the ad puts the lie to you, Schmitz, and anyone else who will dare to defend this outrage.
So, the obviously racist ad that you have now attached yourself to aside, what are you saying, Brian? That someone with a background in criminal defense should never be on the Supreme Court? Not that a win-at-all-costs political flack like you would care (not that Gableman would either, obviously), but there is this small matter of the Supreme Court rules governing judicial elections. “A candidate for judicial office should not knowingly make representations that, although true, are misleading, or knowingly make statements that are likely to confuse the public with respect to the proper role of judges and lawyers in the American adversary system.” The “proper role” of a defense attorney being to provide an effective defense, it seems that Gableman (and you) are trying to smear Butler for doing his job and performing his legitimate and necessary role in the criminal justice system and attacking the role of the defense bar itself. If we compare the two, Butler was pretty good at his job and Gableman was pretty bad in his temporary prosecutor role (losing the arson case he brags about on his ads, etc.).
Yeah, I know, Brian — rules like these are for suckers, right? Not to mention common decency in not playing the race card in a contest involving the first African-American on the Supreme Court. Just keep talking, Brian. The more you do, the deeper you get.
March 16th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Fraley- Even Sykes called this ad despicable. The ad clearly is implying that Butler got a child molester off and then that person went out and harmed another child. So why did Gableman’s campaign not say that the person was convicted, served his full sentence, and then went out an molested a child? That would have been accurate.
This is just disgusting Fraley, just disgusting.
March 17th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Why does it matter what race Butler is? I will not vote or vote for him because of it. I really do not care if he is or is not the first African-American on the Supreme Court. My only concern is if he is biased, will he take the side of the criminal because he was a public defender? As I would be concerned if someone came from law inforcement, would they always side with the police. I am not sure who I will be voting for yet, I am not impressed with either. Butler appears to be an activist judge, but I have to learn more about him and Gableman. People like Mike Plaisted, with his ranting and raving do not help Butlers cause with us undecided.
March 17th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
This ad - and the defenses of it by folks on the right - shows conclusively just how far the right is willing to go to get one of their own onto the bench. The ad in question blatantly distorts the truth in order to help Gableman score cheap political points, which is pathetic considering Gableman promised in writing to run a clean campaign.
March 17th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Abolish public defenders! Summary judgment, I say!!!
Maybe Gableman is on to something. Hey, it works in Saudi Arabia.
March 17th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Gee, Mike Plaisted calling conservatives “racist”. Holy Moley, Stop The Presses!!
All the outrage from the same fellows who had no problem at all with the Butler front group, the WJCIC, smearing Gableman. Funny.
March 18th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Good grief.
Fraley, your argument is clearly the result of your thinking, “hey, I’ve gotta find a way to make my side’s argument make sense”, because it cannot possibly be the result of critical, intellectually honest thought.
Let’s see. Butler volunteered to be a public defender. Oh noes! Public defenders are a requirement in our criminal justice system. We have to have them, do we not? Otherwise we’d have to force people to serve, which you’d probably decry as communist. Maybe he chose to be a public defender because he loves criminals, or maybe he feels some defendants are railroaded (and not just Republicans who are victims are partisan witch hunts - I’ve heard those kind of defendants exist). We cannot tell from the commercial. So a guy he had to defend because he had the audacity to choose to be a public defender gets convicted ANYWAY, spends time in jail ANYWAY, and then goes and commits another crime.
And somehow it’s Butler’s fault?
I was under the impression conservatives had some kind of belief in “personal responsibility”. If I understand correctly, that would suggest responsibility for the subsequent crime lies with the defendant, and perhaps the sentencing judge if the sentence were light. I find it difficult to come up with how a public defender who LOST in his attempt to overturn the prior conviction has any responsibility.
You also understand that if we’re going to stretch responsibility that far, then we may as well blame absolutely everything wrong that ever happened in this country on President Bush, since he volunteered for his job and has at least a minor role in nearly every governmental policy in the United States.
But somehow I bet that’s different, isn’t it.
And please don’t take this to mean I support plaisted. At least you’re just a partisan hack. Plaisted is a partisan hack who stopped maturing emotionally in the 5th grade. Frankly both of you should have your voting rights revoked for the negative effect you both have on our public policy discourse.
March 18th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
I made no comment in my original post about the appropriateness of the role of the public defender in criminal cases.
My point was and is that Butler’s campaign and his supporters prefer not to discuss his record as a defense attorney. They’d prefer an examination of his public record begin when he was on the bench.
March 18th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Seriously, Fraley? I suggest you read your post again. Watch Gableman’s ad again. Then come and tell us how the ad is not the most disgusting piece of garbage ever aired in a judicial race in Wisconsin. It is clearly misleading the voters with this case.
March 19th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
My point was and is that Butler’s campaign and his supporters prefer not to discuss his record as a defense attorney.
Why should we “discuss”? You’ve set it up as lose-lose for us. If we say Butler was bad at his job, you will criticize Butler as unqualified and demand his defeat. If we say Butler was good at his job, you will criticize him as “Loophole Louie” who likes to get rapists and murderers off to rape and kill again.
That hardly makes me inclined to “discuss” it with someone like you.
March 19th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Fraley sure does seem to dislike public defenders, which strikes me as odd considering he’s directly benefited from the services of defense attorneys paid for on the public’s dime.
March 19th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
I guess it’s the old adage of hating lawyers until you need one. Scooter put Fraley in the cross-hairs and now Fraley would not allow the same expert defense for anyone else. I wonder what he would think if his “loophole” attorney was running for the Supremes. Probably cut him a check. Or two.
Come on, Fraley, let’s hear about how you were just caught in a dragnet and it wasn’t your fault that you were running Scooter’s political agenda on state time and blah, blah, blah. Yeah, that’s what they all say.
March 19th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Plaisted,
I am not sure what’s more pathetic, your juvenile approach toward political discourse or your inability to get your facts straight.
If by Scooter, you mean Scott Jensen, here’s a news flash for you. I never worked for him.
Nice try.
As for my work for the legislature, I did retain counsel during the Capitol investigations which was, according to the law, paid by the Senate clerk’s office. Not only was I never indicted, Mike, I was never charged, in fact, I did not even testify before any jury and was not a part of the courtroom proceedings or any grand juries that were convened. (All that info would have been available in the same Google search it took you 30 seconds to do earlier, by the way).
As much as appreciated the work of my attorney, I wouldn’t vote for him for Supreme Court either. I prefer someone with a background both on the bench (as Butler and Gableman both have)and as a prosecutor.
Back to the point, hard as it may be for you to focus on that…
I understand the adversarial component of our court system, and the importance of counsel for the defense, yes even for the guilty. And I understand why there is a public defender program.
But given the choice between a candidate with a background as a prosecutor and one as a public defender, I prefer the prosecutor.
But I’m not alone in recognizing this. Even Butler’s campaign knows it’s not much of an asset for the campaign. They don’t focus on his PD work.
But they also acknowledge, or have in the past, that his record is fair game.
Since I know this little tirade of yours has been good for your blog’s traffic, I’m sure there will be more rants. Feel free to answer the question: Why isn’t the Butler campaign running a TV commercial about his vast record as a public defender?
March 19th, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Well, bully for you, Brian. I’m sure, as Caucus Director, you never even met Scott Jensen. Hardly knew him. Barely recognize him from his mug shot. No doubt.
Maybe the reason Butler doesn’t focus on his public defender work is that it ended 2o years ago and he’s been a judge and justice longer than he did that. That’s the record he’s running on.
Gableman has job-hopped so much, it’s hard to tell what he is running on. Can’t be as a prosecutor - how can you lose an arson case? - those things are investigated to death. As an unemployment ALJ? As a McCallum fundraiser? As a traffic ticket judge in a far-flung county who doesn’t know the first thing about the Supreme Court rules in a judicial race? As the candidate for office in Wisconsin who ran the most offensive, racist ad ever? That’s how he’ll be remembered, anyway.
Well, I hope you enjoyed your lawyer on my tax dollar, Brian. Maybe we have to pay up again for Gableman’s bill when he gets before the Judicial Commission. You guys just can’t keep your hands out of our pockets, can you?