Apparently the powers that be didn't like the discussion on today's story regarding Stalker "Rock County deputy disciplined". Sad, sad, sad....

I would hope that the sheriff's department took possession of their department issued gun when they placed Stalker on "administrative leave with pay pending the outcome of an investigation".

This should help clear up the firearm question.

813.125(4m)(cg)
(cg) If the respondent is a peace officer, an order issued under par. (a) may not require the respondent to surrender a firearm that he or she is required, as a condition of employment, to possess whether or not he or she is on duty.

What I got from that section of the state statute is that even if a judge issues an injunction stating that the police officer must surrender their firearm that does not mean that they will have to since it is a requirement of their job.

justsaynotomath - The 72-hour no contact is not an order from the Judge!!! How many times must people tell you that?

Devilsadvocate, that was just pure stupidity at its finest!

If you are accused of beating your wife and your name is "Stalker" you have two dings against you at the get go. In a domestic situation no one likes a Stalker.

He knows the 72hr no contact laws well! He explained them to me very stringently! Can say he seemed like a good guy to me! Can't say what happens at his home...

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_rea...
**********************
1117

Restrictions on the Possession of Firearms by Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence
The following is the full text of an announcement that was sent by the Criminal Division to the United States Attorneys' Offices upon the passage of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(9) (the Lautenberg Amendment) in the fall of 1996. This provision amends the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968 by banning the possession of firearms by individuals convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

GUN BAN FOR INDIVIDUALS CONVICTED OF A MISDEMEANOR CRIME OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE -- 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9)

The 1968 Gun Control Act and subsequent amendments codified at 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq. prohibit anyone convicted of a felony and anyone subject to a domestic violence protective order from possessing a firearm. The intended effect of this new legislation is to extend the firearms ban to anyone convicted of a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.".....

he knows better he`s a cop no excauses

968.075(5)(a)1.
1. Unless there is a waiver under par. (c), during the 72 hours immediately following an arrest for a domestic abuse incident, the arrested person shall avoid the residence of the alleged victim of the domestic abuse incident and, if applicable, any premises temporarily occupied by the alleged victim, and avoid contacting or causing any person, other than law enforcement officers and attorneys for the arrested person and alleged victim, to contact the alleged victim.

968.075(5)(a)2.
2. An arrested person who intentionally violates this paragraph shall be required to forfeit not more than $1,000.

he should be held for 72 hours since he can not seem to follow the judge order to stay away. this has everything to do with him being a cop. he knows all the laws and what not to do yet did it anyways. blaming the person who was not arrested is classic. you should try taking you own advice. you don't want people to make false claims and then you make them. what a bunch of B.S. !

Stalker can be arrested for domestic violence w/o touching his wife. Two of the elements of the charge are violence or the threat of violence. The arrest alone doesn't mean that he is a wife beater. WAIT FOR THE FACTS !!!!!

I hope things work out well for him. This officer has a calm and considerate demeanor and is ordinarily very hard to rattle. Divorcing spouses are usually at thier worst behavior and loud arguments wouldn't be uncommon. DC means no physical violence took place. The fact a third party was involved to me indicates that he was trying to avoid any escalation with the spouse, but had the need to get something from the house.

Totally agree with zul8ter; seems like a woman who is out to not only divorce but ruin a dedicated public servant's career of over a decade. What better way to hurt him and distract from your own actions, trying to evoke sympathy from others. The wife knows full well the conseqences of the purposeful decisions being made. Very sad for him and their son. The son is the real victim.

Right or wrong, my support goes to both of them. I know Mike and know the pickle he is in. I don't know the circumstances, but I know a cop knows there are double punishments for getting in trouble. They take a lot during a divorce, that most never would due to it effecting their employment. Most people can yell back. Most people can defend themselves. An off-duty can't. The same term is used, "They know the law and should know better". They do know the law, but everyone has a breaking point, everyone.
He violated the 72 hour no contact. We don't know why. Was his work stuff still at the house and he needed it to go to work ? Was he trying to arrange to see his child ? Was his wallet at home and he needed money to live ? We don't know, but there should be someway for anyone to get needed items. Especially to work, to make money, to survive.
Hope they resolve all their issues and RCSO understands the tight spot he was in.

I thing we all should look further into the wife's intentions. Maybe,.......... she might be covering up for the things that she may be trying to hide?

Really people..leave these two alone. Why is it always assumed that the woman is playing games, when maybe she just wants things to be civil between them. Maybe she requested the restraining order be stopped because they have a child and need to take care of him as the team they should be. There is much more to divorce than we need to know it is a private affair and the only reason it made the news is because of his profession! It doesn't make him nuts...haven't we all done something we regret later. He's a good cop, but that doesn't make him a good husband!

totally agree partarican1

Kinda like you, ljs64?!

dvlwmn13: looks like this guys wife is one of those people who unneccessarily abuse the courts with recinded restraining orders... I hope they hold her accountable for her inactions here.

Stay strong Mr. Stalker, looks like you have a lot of support in your corner! Don't let some of these blogs get you down.

Must be a new game...."Fun With Restraining Orders"..LOL

Pulled off of CCAP for your information:
07-07-2009 Letters/correspondence
Additional Text:
by FAX, dated 07/06/09 from Atty Janelle Glasbrenner to Judge Welker advising the court that her client, wishes to dismiss the restraining order & cancel the hrg set for 07/07/09

Looks like she cannot make up her mind

A lot of K-Mart cops and Dimestore lawyers in Rock County and most of you have no clue as to what your talking about.

Is this the deputy that does the bailiff duty's in court quite a bit?

I **think** while out on bond, one can not be in the posession of firearms. Not all dv convictions result in a firearms ban (probation, however, usually prohibits them). AND....folks, let's not forget what county this is in. Our DA's office just gave 2 years probation to someone who played a role in a little girl's skull being partially removed. I doubt Stalker will get more than a tap on the wrist. Not a slap--just a tap.

Yes we will..........The disposition will be posted on CCAP.

Domestic Violence classes, maybe a year or two of probation, Why not get the same thing as normal people would get, We'll probably never find out what happens to him.

Sassy: you are incorrect. The 72-hour is NOT automatic. Also, the accuser is almost always sided with and their account is often times exaggerated but still believed (and rightfully so). Watch any TV sitcom or soap opera and the majority of them would be classified as domestic violence arrestees. I hate to say it....but I agree with localboy here. We don't know if she initiated the contact or not, etc.., People do crazy, mean vindictive things in the midst of a divorce!

Wow, He's a very good, nice, professional guy! But I hate to say it, but he better voluntarily resign while he still have a chance and start looking for a new job. RCSO will string you on thinking that everything is ok and then BOOM! They'll drop you like a pound of sand. RCSO is notorious for this.

That is my question too, mayhem08. With a domestic violence charge, officers convicted are not exempt from the law regarding carrying handguns. I've not been informed if a domestic disorderly conviction carries the same consequence. It doesn't appear to, but right now, while his nerves are so raw and what he is going through personally, it would be in everyone's best interest to have him surrender all weapons (and badge) until he and his family reach a better time in their life. (IMO)

Purmaid "Kind of help? I'd say "Anger Management 101" might be an obvious choice to start with, followed by "How to Listen Effectively" so he understands what is meant when a judge decrees a "72-hour no contact" provision." The judge does not set these. another officer gives them a paper that was signed by both parties giving them 72 hours to cool down. Plus you don't know if they have kids that he was having someone check on. We really don't know everything. Making judgements on others will make them judge you

bobb1951:"rearrested within 72 hrs,to me signals a need for help.Oh i get it.contact was through a 3rd party,so he is innocent!". Per protocal he was arrested for using a third party to violate the 72 hour no contact order that is put in place after any domestic DISTURBANCE. fyi

I just hope he had to surrender his weapons, for her sake and his! I don't know of anyone who would want their stupid actions plastered all over the paper and comments, give the family a break and let the courts sort it out; just don't let him keep his weapons until then.

I wasn't sure if every domestic carried the no firearm clause...and what about the violation of the no contact? Is that not an automatic felony?

NO

Just a question...with a domestic dc does that mean he can no longer carry a gun??

Actually with a domestic it is automatic

This is news again?

First of all Yes people can go trhough a divorce and not be effected. When my husband got a divorse from his exwife he was not effected. She had pulled a lot of crap and was really bad for him while they were married. He thought long about it and filed for divorse but was not "brought to his knees over the emotional toll a woman" So no not everyone who says that is a liar.
Second, hes a cop thats why its news, also if hes a cop he knew the law, and he knew what would happen.

Meaning that she could waive the 72-hour no contact provision.

Keep in mind, cops are human also. Any man can be brought to his knees over the emotional toll a woman can bring. You are dealing with personal emotions. Should he know better? You bet. I hope the Sheriff Dept. gets him the help he needs right now (EAP etc.), so he can keep his mind on his job. Anybody who states they went through a divorce and it didn't effect their job while they were getting the divorce, is a liar. Hang in there Stalker....

The 72-hour no contact comes from the other "non-arrested" party, if she wanted it or not, it's not automatic. . .

I guess my point is if it was an "argument" that just got loud, he probably would not have been arrested and had the 72-hour no contact order. Since he was arrested, my instinct and working knowledge of the system tells me it was probably more than a loud argument. To what degree, I do not know.

someone correct me if I'm wrong, but mandatory arrest is only if there is visible damage. one party is physically injured, property damaged/strewn about, threats to do bodily harm, etc. Officers are NOT required to arrest if it is just a loud "disagreement". If there is imminent danger, etc., one party is arrested (or both). If an arrest is made, a 72-hour no contact order is automatically issued. If no arrest is made to any of the involved parties, it was the officer's decision that no injuries had occured and a strong "suggestion" is made to take some time apart to cool off, but it is not mandatory. Am I close to correct?

I'm confused. He was arrested for domestic disorderly conduct. That's an argument. He had an argument with his wife that got loud enough for a neighbor to complain about. When the cops are called for a domestic, someone has to be taken in. It's usually the guy. So how did we make the jump from a loud marital argument to anger management and mental health issues? People fight. Sometimes loudly. It doesn't make them mentally unbalanced.

Mack10, what kind of idiot are you? What does a few Milwaukee cops getting into a fight over a guy stealing a badge have to do with a local cop having a fight with his wife???? Where does it say he hit her or even touched her?

You people are unbelievable. My god the man is a human being who is going through a divorce with the woman he loves and shares a child with. I don't believe he ever touched her. Maybe, just maybe, she contacted him and he responded. Oops. Like I said earlier, she needs to grow up and be careful what she wishes for.

hmmm. I looked up the definition of mental health and according to Answers.com, (in part) "A state of emotional and psychological well-being in which an individual is able to use his or her cognitive and emotional capabilities, function in society, and meet the ordinary demands of everyday life; also, A person's overall emotional and psychological condition. Furthermore, A positive state of mind engendering a sense of well being that enables a person to function effectively within society. Individuals who have good mental health are well-adjusted to society, are able to relate well to others, and basically feel satisfied with themselves and their role in society."

My opinion is there was a breakdown somewhere in his ability to handle stress, whether due to family/marital stress, fatigue, whatever-that's not my business about his family/personal life. He's just not handling himself very well and acting rationally. Strictly my opinion, of course.

where is the proof that he used a 3rd party?

I guess I'm not sure how one would define a mental health issue? My personal opinion is that getting arrested over an argument, or an alleged violation of a 72-hour no contact provision doesn't necessarily rise to the level of having a mental health issue. Again, just my opinion. . .

Gotcha, realized that after I typed and sent it. . .

yes, I agree. I don't know of his employment record. I only know of these 2 occurances. However, given the circumstances, I would think the County would think twice before deciding to put a weapon in this man's hands...not because of his guilt or innocence at this point, but because of the slippery slope he appears to be standing on. I am attempting to see this from an EAP standpoint rather than a punishment. It appears this particular person, who happens to be an officer, may have a mental health issue. Good, bad or indifferent, it is what it is. Depression? Anxiety? Who knows. Unfortunate, yes. Understandable? certainly. Can he take the law into his own hands? no. Help is available if he seeks it. I hope he does.

the milwaukee dude who was beat up.

ms_sassy_wi - I'm not sure how to answer your question. As far as I know, one of the earlier bloggers stated that he had a clean record? I can only surmise from that comment that Deputy Stalker has not been a problem employee or had any issues when dealing with the public? If that were the case, I'm guessing we would have heard about it at some point. . .

Jude who?

no it doesn't mean you don't know how to make cars, but it does mean that you don't really know how to play nice in the sandbox. sometimes playing nice in the sandbox is the difference between a good employee and a huge liability. If you are a liability, you could be the best of whatever you do but still not make it co-existing with other players in the sandbox. Law Enforcement Officers deal with ALL sorts of people on a regular basis. If someone with a short fuse gets a little hot under the collar as a responding officer, how will he react? Can the County (or ANYONE, himself included) be confident in his actions?

sorry! what happened to jude?

truce! Thats the thing though. Cops in Janesville or rock county could easily do something to that stature. It's just kind of scary. If a cop has to rough a criminal up for resisting thats different. but what happened to jude, scary. He could've died!

Mack10 - I didn't mean for that to sound the way it came out so I apologize. I certainly am not bashing anyone with a handicap. Now the clowns over in Milwaukee certainly got what they had coming. I hope you don't compare these two incidents in a similar fashion! You are correct about the personal jibs, won't happen again. . .truce?

I don't agree with your comment however, "Don't tell me he is a good cop, actions speak louder than words." If you worked at General Motors and were the best builder of cars and trucks on the line,and this happened to you, it doesn't mean that you are no longer a good auto maker? Bottom line is we all make mistakes, we're not robots, we're human. Lets just hope that lessons are learned and move on. . .

thehedgehog, I'm sorry for calling you a pig, and your right, I shouldn't pre-judge him.

that was in reference to the Milwaukee incident.

Again! your the one who took it all personal and started cutting on people who work at kandu. I don't work there but, thats mean.

It's getting harder and harder to rely on police officers these day's. Sometimes it's almost like their in a gang. Look what them off duty cops did to that black man, that sound like a straight up gang bang.

I agree Mack10, that was well said. I'm simply saying lets not pre-judge the man before all of the facts are out in the open and it is resolved through the court system. I'm guessing if this were you or one of your family members in the same situation, you'd want the same thing. . .

well said.

perhaps a leave of absense is what this "peace officer" needs right now. there are plenty of social service agencies who may be able to provide some of the help he needs. until then, please don't tell me he's a "good cop" hedgehog. actions speak louder than words. we see this type of activity (DV/DC/RO violations) in "gangsters, lowlife scumbags and in the hood". He's a policeman, and knows better. He needs to surrender to his emotions and get them in check if he thinks he should ever be able to respond to a home where DV, DC, child abuse, etc. is in progress. In my opinion, he's a time bomb ready to go off. I have no prior knowledge of this officer, I have no grudge to bear and I understand that life and relationships are difficult sometimes. Still, it's no excuse for bad behavior whether it's "yelling" or physical contact. We are adults. Can't we try to act like adults?

Thanks Bob, I'm guessing anyone could use a little help in this kind of a situation. . .

People can say what they want about how we don't know all the facts, but the contacting her before the 72 hours was up in inexcusable
he knows the law, and knows he can not do this.. It makes you think there is something very wrong with him.

The help this "officer" needs has been rather well stated by other opinion writers.I will add I never said he was guilty,only needs help.

And I think your a PIG.

Nothing, I think you are great!

what do you have against handicapped people?

Mack10 - Again with the wife beating. Tell me where it states anyone was "beat" in either of these articles?

I think thehedgehog needs some anger management. or better yet. jail time. I see your pretty popular on the other article too. Nice to see all the support for a woman beating cop.

Kind of help? I'd say "Anger Management 101" might be an obvious choice to start with, followed by "How to Listen Effectively" so he understands what is meant when a judge decrees a "72-hour no contact" provision.

Bobb1951 - No Bob, in this country you are innocent until proven guilty, not guilty based on a Janesville Gazette news article, nor guilty simply because an arrest has been made. But who am I kidding, you seem to have all of the answers and know everything there is to know about anything! Thanks for all of your valuable insight into this situation, keep up the stellar work Champ. . .

Dub190 - You have to appear before a Judge or Court Commissioner in order to have bond conditions set, before you can be arrested for "bail jumping." You can't be arrested for "bail jumping" prior to that! Your name fits perfectly, "DUB!"

Bobb, what kind of help does he need?

rearrested within 72 hrs,to me signals a need for help.Oh i get it.contact was through a 3rd party,so he is innocent!

Bail jumping.

partarican1: It is common to have an outside agency do an investigation when it involves someone who works in the local agency.

Why is the Dane County Sheriff involved?

Wait until all of the facts come out Bob before you decide if he needs help or not. . .

Rearrested 2 plus weeks after the fact? I would of still been behind bars for the 1st offense.This man needs help.