This should freak everyone out just a little bit

It’s a line from Bice’s most recent article:

Insiders told No Quarter that he was arrested for refusing to cooperate with the long-running John Doe investigation by Milwaukee County prosecutors.

According to this, if you don’t cooperate with a secret unnamed investigation, you go behind bars in Milwaukee County. Scary.

Now I can be a careful reader when I want, and I see two things:

1) No connection in this article, other than the assumption on the first line, that the man behind bars is connected to Scott Walker except by making donations to the Walker campaign, and

2) No connection to any of the other names listed in the article as Walker staffers.

In other words, Bice didn’t have a story, he had an anonymous insider tip, which, in typical Bice form, made it to print.

An insider once told me Dan Bice was an idiot.

Yes, I think I’ll run with that.

Comments

  1. Just bizarre. Not sure where this is going. No one in Madison seems to know either.

  2. He must have some pretty damning testimony. Why else would he refuse to cooperate?

    And what does he get for throwing himself in front of the bus? How will he be rewarded for his undying loyalty?

  3. Then charge him for something. But jailing him for not cooperating? That’s spooky.

  4. I’ll preface this with the classic “I’m not a lawyer” line… but… from the very limited information I see here:

    He must be charged with refusing to testify before the grand jury. I believe he is allowed to refuse, as long as he pleads the fifth (meaning his testimony would tend to incriminate himself).

    However, the prosecutor could give him unqualified immunity (essentially a promise not to charge him with a crime), in which case, he would still be compelled to testify.

    If he refused to testify in that case, then he can be jailed for contempt of court.

    If he pleads the fifth, and they don’t give him immunity, then they can’t hold him for more than 24 hours without charging him.

    It’ll be interesting to see what goes on from now on.

  5. Thanks for walking through this, Nick. I still find it disconcerting one can be jailed for refusing to talk to someone.

  6. I thought the reason for the arrest was interesting also. Also the first line in the article about shoe being dropped. I didn’t quite get the connection.

  7. john doe investigations have very strict guidlines/procedures. many years ago i represented a witness at a john doe and as his attorney was not even allowed in the hearing room. if this is a case which Judge Nettesheim presides over then the legal procedure is correct and sound under the law.

  8. @Cindy – I find it troubling as well. This has always been an issue I’ve had when thinking… What would I do if…

    I am a firm believer in the 5th Amendment right not to incriminate yourself. If asked questions by the police, your best option is ALWAYS to refuse to answer.

    However, if you are a witness to a crime, you have a responsibility to give information, and the government can compel you to testify.

    My issue has always come from the problem that by helping the government, it is possible that they may falsely accuse you of a crime depending on lies told by other witnesses, and your answers given in good faith may then be used against you.

    Jensen may be very scared of that possibility given who is involved as both a defendant and the desire of prosecutors to nail someone. I would probably be just as careful as it sounds like he’s being, to ensure that any statements I gave would not have the possibility of blowing back on me.

    That is after all his right as a citizen of the United States… to not provided evidence that can be used against him.

  9. Why would anyone admit to something that is possibly not true that the partisan da wants them to admit to bolster his partisan agenda? A scary development in this never ending witch hunt.

  10. To answer leapin’s question… people admit to the police/DA things they didn’t do all the time, however its usually people who are ill informed of the law, and not properly represented.

    The police/DA scare the *crap* out of them and say they’ll have the book thrown at them, and then come around and say… but if you cooperate, we’ll go softly on you. To make matters worse, the police and DA are allowed to lie to you regarding evidence they have against you.

    So they basically lie about the strong case they have, and then say… you can go to trial and spend 30 years in jail… or take this plea and admit everything and only get 5 years.

    Many people make a choice that says they’d rather take the 5, then risk the 30 even though they are completely innocent.

    Happens more often than you think… but usually in a criminal probe, not something like this, though the same principles could apply here.