“I do not know how to rebuild trust with someone who believes he can lie to me and has no interest in changing illegal practices.”

By Trey Foerster

One of the issues in the current Waupaca County Sheriff race is the relationship between the Sheriff and the District Attorney’s office.

You can read the third part of this series on relationship with the District Attorney’s Office here.

District Attorney Veronica Isherwood has responded to questions asked by HeadspringIS.com.

Is the relationship between the DA’s Office and the Waupaca County Sheriff’s Department damaged? If so, how has that affected public safety?

The relationship between our offices is damaged. The District Attorney files criminal complaints against individuals that put their liberty at risk. The only way we will file a complaint is when we believe, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the alleged behavior occurred and that we can prove all the elements of the crime charged. We file these complaints based solely upon the reports and evidence provided by the various law enforcement agencies. It is absolutely critical that those reports be truthful and reliable. Every move we make is in reliance upon those reports.

Historically, we have never had a problem relying on reports. The men and women who serve Waupaca County are good people. But recently we learned that we can no longer rely on the reports of the Waupaca County Sheriff’s Office. It wasn’t an investigating officer who falsified a report, it was a member of the Sheriff’s administrative staff. The administrator changed a road deputy’s report to indicate that an illegal search appeared to be a legal search. And the altered report was changed contrary to the Sheriff’s own policy on report writing. The altered report was submitted to the District Attorney’s Office and charges were filed. Instead of taking corrective measures, the Sheriff has instead decided to defend the actions of the administrator. He claims it is within his constitutional right to “correct” reports and that the District Attorney’s office cannot tell him he has to follow his written policies. He has stated that the District Attorney is “sticking her nose in where it doesn’t belong.“ By taking this stance, the Sheriff has jeopardized every past, present and future prosecutions that come from his office.

Is the Sheriff undercutting the DA Office’s ability to prosecute crimes?

There have been struggles in filing criminal complaints but the District Attorney’s Office has been taking steps to verify that the reports we rely on are true and correct. There has been some pushback but at this time we are filing charges on all referrals. Each complaint takes considerably longer than it should, but the DA staff are committed to maintaining community safety through prosecution of criminal behavior. And most recently, some officers are reporting they are unavailable to sign needed affidavits for weeks at a time. Those complaints can’t be filed.

Is there a breakdown of professional communication between the Sheriff and defense attorneys? If so, why?

I am unaware of this issue. It would be very rare for a defense attorney to have communication with the Sheriff.

Is it the role of the Sheriff to decide which laws to enforce or is that up to the Waupaca County District Attorney and the Wisconsin Attorney General? Explain your office’s position.

The Sheriff took an oath to defend the constitution and uphold the laws of the State of Wisconsin. It is not his role or the role of any law enforcement officer to second guess the legislative body who makes those laws. While precious resources may need to be allocated to prioritize investigations, those decisions should be based on community safety, not on political motives.

What steps are needed to repair the bond of trust between the Sheriff and the DA’s Office?

The Sheriff wants to meet but is only interested in looking forward – not backward. The Sheriff has disclosed practices by his office that the District Attorney believes are not legal and impinge on the due process rights of defendants and jeopardize criminal convictions. He has given no indication that he has any intention to correct the behavior.  The Sheriff testified in court that he has lied to the District Attorney stating, “I guess I can say what I want to Isherwood”. I do not know how to rebuild trust with someone who believes he can lie to me and has no interest in changing illegal practices.