Saturday, March 17, 2012

Prosser Charged With Judicial Ethics Violations

David Prosser demonstrating
his one-handed choke hold.
About a year ago, during the elections season (the first one), news came out that the intemperate David Prosser  had acted most unprofessionally, calling Wisconsin Supreme Court Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson "a bitch" and threatening to "destroy her."

Later in the year, anxious to get busy rubber stamping illegally passed laws, Prosser again lost his temper and physically assaulted Justice Ann Walsh Bradley, by putting a choke hold on her.

In the Republican's War on Women, he must be a general or something.

After the news of Prosser's boorish behavior broke, right wing propagandists got busy and tried to do whatever they could to cast doubt on the course of events.  They went from claiming that the Dane County Sheriff, who was investigating the case, was a lackey to the Democrats and to Abrahamson to actually accusing Bradley of assaulting to the disreputable Michael Gableman, a charge that was later shown to be a complete fabrication.  They even tried to weave a whole new tale out of whole cloth stating that Walsh Bradley was the aggressor.

After it was decided that no criminal charges would be issued, the right wing crowed that this vindicated Prosser and that it was all that much garbage.

Except it wasn't.

On Friday, the Wisconsin Judicial Commission leveled three charges against the Madison Strangler:
Prosser is accused of violating three provisions of the ethics code. One says judges must be "patient, dignified and courteous" to those involved in the court system; another says judges must cooperate with one another; and the third says judges should maintain high standards of conduct to ensure the integrity of the judiciary.
Before anyone gets too excited, it should be noted that it will be the Supreme Court who will ultimately decide Prosser's fate, based on the findings of either a three-judge panel or a jury.  That means the Annette Ziegler, who was already found unethical by the Commission, and the lying Gableman would be involved in the decision making.  And both of them have a history of not recusing themselves when they should.

Until we do a complete housecleaning, the state will continue to have these embarrassing and outrageous scenarios play out.


  1. I am old enough to remember when there were conservative Judges with a sense of justice, decorum and fairness. You know, Judges who actually ruled on points of law with precidence.

    I guess that makes me pretty old.

    1. Prosser was at a low point for me with his behavior.

      What lowered his standing in my eyes was his mocking of the Rev. Jesse Jackson in a party fund-raising rally moment.

      That's right, Prosser, "...brothers and sisters..." are watching you.

  2. When I look at the facts of the case, I feel fear for the folks that Prosser disagrees with. I worry that the next time, someone is really going to get hurt. Threatening to "destroy" someone and putting someone in a chokehold is usually prelude to actual violence. Is Prosser in control of his impulses? Should he be found innocent of any misconduct, can someone still take steps to protect the justices from each other next time?

  3. Shirley started it!

    1. Sure, she did, Anonymous 7:55. She made Prosser call her a bitch! He didn't want to do it. He begged her not to make him do it. He really wanted to call her a hawtie. But she made him do it!

  4. Recuse? What’s that? Hey, I can imagine a political-theater-of-the-absurd scenario where Prosser’s censure comes before the State Supreme Court (on which he sits) and Prosser doesn’t even recuse himself from that!