Friday, September 17, 2010

Prosecutors REALLY Gone Wild!

Perhaps the biggest lie today in American "justice" circles is that most cops, judges, and prosecutors really are honest, conscientious, and diligent truth-seekers and that the problem lies with "a few bad apples." From my view, the entire barrel is rotten with a few "good apples" left. However, because dishonesty reigns at all levels, the few honest people in the system over time are driven out.

Furthermore, while much of this blog in recent months has concentrated upon the crimes committed by the government "officers of the court" of the Lookout Mountain Judicial Circuit, in truth, the problem is everywhere in the USA. Here is a story from Wisconsin in which yet another "get tough" prosecutor who has concentrated on "sex crimes" has been engaging in what at very-best can be considered near-criminal behavior involving, well, sexual conduct.

Yes, this one must be read to be believed, but I will say I am not surprised. After all, people who live in the LMJC have contacted me about the sexual behavior of certain "officers of the court" in the past, and all I can say is the motto of the LMJC should be: "Sex crimes for me, but not for thee!"

In this story, the "get-tough" prosecutor, Kenneth Kratz, sent a crime victim a number of text messages in which he "seems" to be soliciting sex from her. Read on:
A Wisconsin prosecutor known for two decades as an advocate for crime victims says he is embarrassed about sending sexually suggestive text messages to a strangulation victim while he was prosecuting her ex-boyfriend, but will remain in office.

Kenneth Kratz, the district attorney for Calumet County north of Milwaukee, issued the statement Wednesday after The Associated Press reported on 30 texts he sent to a 26-year-old woman who had complained to police last year.

A police report shows he repeatedly sent Stephanie Van Groll text messages in October 2009 trying to spark an affair.

"Are you the kind of girl that likes secret contact with an older married elected DA ... the riskier the better?" Kratz, 50, wrote in one message. In another, he wrote: "I would not expect you to be the other woman. I would want you to be so hot and treat me so well that you'd be THE woman! R U that good?"
(Hey, Buzz! Contact this guy and offer him a job in the LMJC. He sounds like your kind of guy! He'd be perfect for your office, given the fact that it is populated by liars and, frankly, sexual perverts, if Len Gregor's "thong" fixation at the Tonya Craft trial is any indication of the mindset of your office.)

The story is shocking -- yes, shocking -- and I can guarantee you that any of us who did the same thing in Kratz's district would be prosecuted, convicted, and put into prison for many years. Kratz, however, has the very best kind of immunity: he is the law.

Apparently, someone did report him to the Wisconsin State Bar, and while I doubt that the people were told (like I was told by a spokesperson from the Georgia State Bar about "Alberto-Facebook" and "The Man"), "He's just doing his job," nonetheless, it is plain that NOTHING was done about this sexual predator:
In a combative interview in his office, Kratz did not deny sending the messages and expressed concern their publication would unfairly embarrass him personally and professionally. He said the Office of Lawyer Regulation found in March he did not violate any rules governing attorney misconduct, but refused to provide a copy of what he said was the report clearing him. That office cannot comment on investigations.
Oh, it gets even better:
Hours later, Kratz issued a statement acknowledging sending the messages and saying he "was embarrassed at this lapse of judgment."

"I have never been the subject of attorney discipline during my entire 25-year career, and until today, have enjoyed a spotless reputation as a vigorous advocate for crime victims," he said.
Does anyone for even a second believe that he would buy that "lapse in judgment" argument if he were charging someone else with a crime similar to what he did? Right. Look at what happened to Tonya Craft. We were told to believe that a woman with a good reputation around children all of a sudden decided to molest three girls, including her own daughter, while not touching numerous other girls who were at her house every day. Yeah, right. All of a sudden, Tonya Craft turned into someone who sexually preyed on children, and when the jurors saw through those lies, Buzz Franklin and his little minions went around the LMJC crying "O.J. Verdict! O.J. Verdict!"

No, my sense is that this prosecutor did not engage in a "sudden lapse of judgment." He certainly would not hold other people to such standards, but he is permitted to apply them to himself? And get away with it?

So, if readers want to get a sense of the REAL "justice" system in the USA, look no farther than Wisconsin, where prosecutors are permitted to moonlight as sexual predators and get away with it. THAT is the "justice" in the United States; there is none other.


Rob said...

Dr. Anderson, I'm a bit confused. Is it actually illegal in Wisconsin (or anywhere else) to send sexually explicit text messages to adults? Granted, the DA's behavior may be seem as inappropriate, but I can't imagine it being "against the law". How could any mere "mundane" get railroaded into prison for doing the same thing, even in modern-day Amerika?

Anonymous said...


It was a prosecutor handling a case where he send text messages to the victim of a criminal case he was handling. In context, would you want a prosecutor handling YOUR case, strongly suggesting that he would like a date with your daughter? Wouldnt you feel like the prosecutor was asking for a favor for doing his or her job?

In other news of the "Why would they make this us?" the lady whose face was destroyed by acid has admitted that she did it as a HOAX! Thank goodness she wasn't in Catoosa County where "victims" don't lie. There would be another innocent soul in jail. Instead she was in a jurisdiction where someone had the "audacity" to question the veracity of her claim when certain details didnt add up. E.g. she had no burns where her sunglasses were. The problem? She claimed it happened at night. LOL. Those investigators were trained to ask "Is it possible?" unlike some people we know.

Anonymous said...

should be "Why would they make this up?"

John Washburn said...

He was the prosecutor for HER case. As she made clear to the police, it was her understanding that if she did not acquiesce to Kratz then Kratz would not prosecute the man (her ex-boyfriend) who nearly choked her to death.

While it might not be illegal to send such text messages, it is shocking the Office of Lawyer Regulation of the Wisconsin State Supreme court did not find the behavior unethical.

From my past experience with the Wisconsin OLR though I am not surprised by the finding. My complaint involved the suborning of perjury by a federal prosecutor.

My opinion of the WI OLR is that it is lawyers protecting lawyers with secret "investigations" which never seem to find anything amiss.

The OLR is exempt from Wisconsin's open records law. Only a recommendation to prosecute is public. Everything else is secret in order to protect the "reputation" of the accused attorney.

KC Sprayberry said...

So now Kratz's worried about personal and professional embarrassment? Get real! He got caught and now he's worried if he'll have a job much longer. His actions have just nullified any juries hearing cases where he's the DA's rep. Foremost in their minds will be how he got away with harassing a young woman attacked by an ex-boyfriend and leading her to believe she could only find justice by engaging in sexual acts. Men like Kratz deserve prison far more than the true criminals who are in prison. Put him with his kind fast before we hear more about his behavior over the last 25 years.

Doc Ellis said...


Thank you for writing this

Doc Ellis 124

liberranter said...

My opinion of the WI OLR is that it is lawyers protecting lawyers with secret "investigations" which never seem to find anything amiss.

That's exactly what it is, and this just serves as yet another example proving that NO professional organization is capable of policing itself objectively. This is true whether we're talking about attorneys (the ABA), doctors (the AMA), cops (Internal Affairs bureaus or the FOP), or educators (the NEA and various school boards). The ONLY way that any professional standards organization can be brought to heel is by oversight from disinterested third-party organizations whose members have no personal stake in the communities they police and whose decisions are legally binding. True, this would induce torrents of outrage from the membership of these organizations, but this simply reflects the innate human tendency to avoid accountability for one's actions at all costs.

Anonymous said...

Just to put a fine point on your post liberanter, the legal profession does an exceptional job of policing itself in Tennessee and Georgia. It deals swiftly and sometimes overly harshly with attorneys who violate the rules of professional conduct. However, the attorneys who get disciplined though are the defense bar and those in civil practice. Rarely is the prosecution taken to task. it usually takes an egregious case to get the attention of the disciplinary folks. How the TC persecutors have escaped inquiry so far is beyond me because that case was beyond egregious.

William L. Anderson said...

To make matters worse, I spoke to one of Carmen Rafter's assistants at the Georgia State Bar, and she told me that she had no problem with Chris Arnt's Facebook stuff, and that Arnt and Len Gregor were "just doing their jobs."

When I asked her if "doing their jobs" involved lying and suborning perjury and forging documents, she got mad and hung up. No, the prosecutors basically run the entire legal system of Georgia, from what I can see. They are absolutely immune to ANY discipline whatsoever.

KC Sprayberry said...

Just a point, from information given to me by someone afraid to come forward, LMJC has a presence on one of the disciplinary committees, either judicial or for lawyers. Those men, Larry Stagg and Chris Townley, have been associated with the judges and might be involved with the prosecutors even though both have private law offices. I'm trying to verify this information now. All I can say is that Townley and Stagg are on a committee attached to the bar association and do represent individuals involved with the Craft civil case. Stagg also represents von Pelt on his re-election group. Beyond that, there is other information still unverified that I'm working on. However, with those two local boys having their fingers on the pulse of bar association doings, there might be a reason for the lack of concern there.
Bill, isn't there a way to bring this in front of the American Bar Association if the Georgia Bar Association refuses to look into the prosecutors conduct during the trial, brushing it off to 'just doing their jobs'? It certainly seems to me that the ABA would be very interested in a state bar association not disciplining prosecutors and letting them run the asylum.

Lookout Spy said...

The ABA is a voluntary membership, non profit association which would have no legal standing to sue a State Bar Association, a State regulatory board, or an Attorney Disclipine Board... or offer anything more than "recommendations" for "professional practice". The average lawyer doesn't join the ABA as the membership fees buy a lot of groceries and only a little respect. As above, self policing is ineffective, that is why time clocks were invented.

William L. Anderson said...

Lookout Spy is correct. What we have here is another rendition of "capture theory" in which the entity regulated (prosecutors) captures the regulatory apparatus (Georgia State Bar).

This is common all over the country. These people are incapable of policing themselves, just as "Internal Affairs" always seems to support rogue cops and go after the honest people.

Anonymous said...

It says in this article, when Tonya Craft was fired from her job, that Lawrence Stag (sic) was the counsel for Sandra Lamb.

MikeZPurdue said...

The article below details emails between Kratz and Wisconsin DOJ officials where Kratz clearly lied about the contents of the text msgs. Isn't it a crime to lie the DOJ officials?

The complaint was referred to the Wisconsin Department of Justice. E-mail exchanges between Justice officials and Kratz, obtained by the AP through the open records law, show Kratz repeatedly downplayed the nature of the messages and sought to keep them from the public.

Kratz said they were "a series of respectful messages" that were not sexual at all.

Kevin Potter, administrator of DOJ's division of legal services, rejected the claim and said they could be construed as sexual harassment.

"Telling her several times she is 'hot' or referring to her as 'tall, young hot nymph' certainly has sexual overtones as do your comments that 'You are beautiful and would make a great young partner one day' or 'I would want you to be so hot and treat me so well that you'd be THE woman! R U that good?'" he wrote to Kratz.

john lichtenstein said...

Of course the real problem is the timing. The nature of the relationship was such that any overture would have had an element of extortion to it. If he was struck by love and compelled to act, he should have gotten the case transferred to someone else *first*.

Still, his proposals themselves are so bizarre that they deserve ridicule. Why not ask her to a Brewers game? Then he would have three hours to chat about this and that.

KC Sprayberry said...

Anon 9:44. The travel expenses claimed owed SL were a load of bunk. She was at the school on a daily basis, according to witness reports at the time. So, from what I know of Chickamauga's layout, SL was close to the school board all the time. Truth of the matter was, SL had already accused TC of the crimes but was too much of a coward to openly admit it at the time. Lawrence Stagg, like Chris Arnt, seems to be a pull it out of the hat attorney. Stagg represents Ralph von Pelt in his campaign headquarters. Stagg also represents DFACS, I believe. Have to go through my notes later about that one, but he does represent one of the so-called children's agencies involved in this mess. LMJC is so crooked many of the defense attorneys around here are as much a part of the corruption as the prosecutors and judges and cops. A fair trial with a local defense attorney is a huge joke, and most people pay huge amounts of money, money they don't have and must mortgage everything they own, just to arrange a plea deal. There are a lot of people like Mr. Echols, awaiting a trial that keeps getting continued. However, I believe Mr. Echols probably has an attorney who won't put up with the dead docketing that had families paying for years for cases going nowhere.

William L. Anderson said...


You have nailed it. The LMJC is corrupt, utterly corrupt. Giving these people the power to "administer" a "system of justice" is like giving Ted Bundy the keys to the women's dormitory.

These people are both incapable and unwilling to do anything but what is wrong. The local attorneys have one job to do in criminal cases: plead out the defendant, even if he or she is innocent. The prosecutors are so egotistical that any local attorney who actually takes a case to trial will be punished in some other way.

The judges are in on the scam, too. Outhouse repeatedly attacked Tonya's defense in part, I believe, because it was not locally-based. In fact, he was caught on camera lambasting the defense in a conversation with a bailiff, and the only reason it was not reported on television was that technically one cannot use a judge's off-the-record conversation during a trial. It's a court rule and Outhouse could have taken legal action and won.

Nonetheless, the LMJC is the product of the worst characteristics of small-time, small-town people. Ironically, it also is a district full of "evangelical" churches that really have absolutely no influence in areas that count. Most of the worst offenders are "pillars" of their churches, so the churches give them cover for lying, committing perjury, forging documents, and generally making a mockery of the law.

As far as I know, only one pastor has spoken out against this perfidy. From everyone else, there is nothing but silence.

I will tell you that in my own church, if I were to lie under oath, have a crime and utterance of a racial slur on television, forge documents, make false accusations, and behave as we saw the entire LMJC apparatus (and its witnesses) do in Tonya's trial (and in other trials), I would be disciplined. Moreover, if I were not willing to make things right, my church would excommunicate me.

Has anyone in Northwest Georgia who has done what we observed in Tonya's trial ever faced church discipline for it? Somehow, I doubt it. As an old Russian proverb says, "A fish rots from the head down." If the churches are willing to support perjury and other lies, then they no longer are Christian churches.

So, for all of its religious veneer, from what I can see, most of Northwest Georgia is utterly rotten. Having lived there for most of my life, I now understand fully what I only partially understood before.

William L. Anderson said...

I need to add that there really are good people in Northwest Georgia. However, the institutions there are run by dishonest and corrupt people, and they also have the guns.

Does anyone really trust ANY law enforcement officer in Northwest Georgia to do what is right? Does anyone really think that Kristina Graham is going to give anyone a fair trial, or that "judge" Brian Outhouse is anything but a hack who got a raise when he became a judge?

As I see it, there are good people, but they are shouted down or just overpowered by those who are venal and dishonest. My parents, who live in that district, ask me what they can do, and I am not sure. We can speak out, but that is about it.

Doc Ellis said...

Dr Anderson,

Re your parents enquiry:
As Xtians, nothing. They have no stake in temporal issues. Their homeland is elsewhere.
As folks, they can take a hint from Solzhenistyn in The Gulag Archipelago where he wondered what would have happened if folks had ambushed government employees instead of hiding.

KC Sprayberry said...


We are speaking out and it, amazingly, has made a difference. That of the DA didn't appreciate having to run from tiny Callie Starnes. Now, folks around here are treated to watching the folks from the DA's office escort their boss to lunch at noon while driving along Main Street. It's almost funny to see this gaggle of geese marching across the street deep in conversation, giving the impression they are discussing something important. Elected officials are striking out by vehemently defending their fiscal decisions, another item under fire from one local = both on his blog and FB page. L.U. LaFayette hides his true identity but has a biting way of exposing the antics of both the county commissioner and city mayor/city council. Their pandering to the few while ignoring the needs of most of this area had people taking notice. We've even begun discussing ways to transport people to the polls, so they can vote in the upcoming elections. Incumbents, even those who've done their jobs right but ignored the discrepancies of others, are worried about serving another term. That's the first step. Our next step is to keep these people in the spotlight. A roach can't operate in sunlight and we plan to make sure the sun always shines in LMJC.

Anonymous said...

K.C. I could not have said it better,They are going down one way or another. Mr Anderson, another great job.Keep it coming...

Anonymous said...

One popular trick of DA's (though I am not familiar if CC does it) is to refuse to plea bargain with any defense attorney who insists on trying a case. I am sure there are other ways of retaliation to insure compliance with the local "way." In a large part of cases, the defendant actually prefers a plea deal. So, if an attorney doesn't play ball, he is cut off from his/her way of living as the client won't hire him/her. It's an insidious denial of due process for the defendant that needs representation.

My personal opinion? There are SO many people who are in the know down there in the LMJC, that if one person squeals, the exposure of corruption will start a domino effect and bring down a large part of the economy. That is why everyone is being tight lipped.

below said...

Mr. Anderson said,"the entire barrel is rotten with a few "good apples" left." could not one say this about

KC Sprayberry said...

Below, judges, the district attorney, and sheriffs in LMJC are all politicians. They run for their office every four years just like every other politician. And most of those working for them also are politicians. They would supplant their boss in a New York minute if they thought they had the community's backing. Scary thought but true.

Victoria said...

This is off-topic - Is there an update on Tonya's custody case? It sure is dragging on to be a long time to have her kids in the dubious care of the Henkes.

Anonymous said...

As KC said, we just need to keep shining the light. All we really need is one person, just one, to come forward & tell all. That's why I wonder about the fellow who was recently replaced. He's probably scared to death & more than likely has been threatened. I would like to know more about this guy.

I think as long as we keep the coals burning, they will be sweating. Tonya with her new show, WGOW not letting down, Dennis Norwood keeping the pressure, Callie & Melydia keeping their fingers in it & most of all, Bill writing this blog & not backing down.

The change is going to come & we have to be patient. It is an awful feeling to know that I can run to McDonalds & grab a burger in a few minutes, but the evil people get to stay evil for the time being. We just can't lose sight of what needs to happen & I think locally, KC is doing an awesome job. I know it has cut into yours & Bill's "real jobs", but you have no idea what it means to many of us.

Just please keep up the good, no, awesome work & we will do everything we can.

Rob said...

Anonymous on 9/17/10 9:19 AM wrote:


It was a prosecutor handling a case where he send text messages to the victim of a criminal case he was handling. In context, would you want a prosecutor handling YOUR case, strongly suggesting that he would like a date with your daughter? Wouldnt you feel like the prosecutor was asking for a favor for doing his or her job?"

Yes, I understand that's what he was doing. Of course I don't condone it. I was just confused by Dr. Anderson's wording in his blog post. He seemed to imply (correct me if I'm wrong here) that sending such messages was illegal per se. I simply can't see how that could be the case, even with all of the nonsense going on today.

Not sure if anyone will read this, since I replied so late, but here it is regardless.

Anonymous said...