Judge, cops run from error-filled trial

My Obstruction Ticket

By Geoff Davidian

     Prosecutor:  City Judge boosts security after critical news story, then runs away on hurried "vacation"

MILWAUKEE, WIS. (August 11, 2012) – Philip Chavez is a city judge who apparently agrees with police that there should be no record of how government employees perform their jobs or use city resources. What is extraordinary about Chavez is the lengths to which the judge went to ensure no one could hold him or police accountable as he stumbled his way through a minor case, "Obstruction of Issuance of a Citation."

Judge Phillip Chavez

 I received the obstruction citation on April 5, 2011, for video recording several police officers who were milling around an accident on North Fourth Street, where Police Officer Christina Roesken was involved in a traffic accident as she entered North Fourth Street eastbound from the alley north of West St. Paul Avenue.  Failing to yield, Roesken broad sided a southbound Honda Civic. I arrived an hour after the accident and was recording the aftermath with a small camera when Police officer Joseph Anderer approached, put his hand over the lens and broke my camera. In a report filed August 8, 2011, Police Sergeant Daniel Wesolowski described the Roesken accident as

"minor," and stated that Roesken "stopped before emerging from the alley" and after "looking both ways for cross traffic, and seeing none, she drove forward and collided with a southbound compact car." Wesolowski went on to report "minor damage was observed on the passenger side of the second vehicle. The plastic bumper cover on officer Roesken's squad car sustained minor damage."

Click for full-size MPD image

On April 5, 2011, Milwaukee Police Officer Christina Roesken, Wisconsin Driver's license N. R2501136463003, failed to yield as she sped out of an alley and plowed into a 2001 Honda Civic driven by unlicensed 20-year-old Maricela Aguilar, in an unregistered car belonging to her mother.

Click for full-size Milwaukee Police photo

 But the official police photographs tell a different story. Roesken broadsided a 2011 Honda Civic as she entered North Fourth Street from the alley south of West Clybourn Street with enough speed to gouge the passenger side of the Honda driven by 19-year-old Maricela Aguilar and  thrust the rear of the struck vehicle into the oncoming traffic lane. The bumper was torn off the car and lay in street. An hour later officers milled around the squad trying to fix it. Although the accident report claims "minor" damage to the police property, according to Work Order LGT-2011-2470, obtained through the Wisconsin public records law, Roesken caused "moderate" damage to the squad.

The damage to the police car cost the city about $2,500 in repairs to the front end of the 2007 Ford Crown Victoria, and took the unit out of service for a week.

While two officers were citing the victim for driving an unregistered car while unlicensed, Police Officer Joseph Anderer and another officer were chatting with Roesken. Then Anderer put his hand over my camera as I was recording, broke the lens, and cited me for obstructing the issuance of a citation. In my view, I had a constitutional right to record police on a public street and was not intentionally obstructing the police.

To prepare for my day in court, I consulted with six attorneys, subscribed for a year to Westlaw (costing more than $1,200) and went to the municipal court repeatedly because the court forces an appearance on  matters that could just as easily be handled by mail or telephone.

During the 16 months the case was alive, Judge Chavez refused to allow audio or video recording of hearings even through he had previously wrongfully entered a default judgment against me for not appearing for a docket item although I was told I need not attend.

What got the case reinstated was the irrefutable recording I made of the hearing in which the court told me I could file a motion by mail and did not need to appear. Despite the court's incorrect record that had resulted in an erroneous guilty judgment, Chavez demanded that no other recording be made. The court requires defendants to file a motion for discovery to see the contents of their own court files, but when I did, Chavez denied it despite Supreme Court opinions reaffirming the right to access court documents.

Chavez refused to hear a motion to allow an out-of-state civil rights attorney to represent me, set a trial date on which the attorney was not available and then ran away on the day of the trial. In fact, even the police witnesses did not show up.

Milwaukee police officers Joseph Anderer, left, and  and Christina Roesken, kneeling, try to reattach bumper to squad after crash.
Officer Christina Roesken chatted with other police during their investigation of the accident she caused when she failed to yield
Maricela Aguilar. left, was ordered to stand on the sidewalk for more than an hour while police milled around and chatted with Officer Christina Roesken, who caused the damage by failing to yield. Aguilar was cited for driving without a licensed. Roesken was not cited.

Instead,  on July 17, the city produced for trial a  substitute "judge," Patrick Moczynski, an ex-cop billed as an attorney on-line although he is not licensed in Wisconsin. This fill-in "judge" ordered a professional court reporter to not make a record, refused to allow Shorewood Attorney Edward David to assist me, and refused to allow me to speak or object to his presence before dismissing the case as directed by the prosecutor, although I had the right to ask for a different judge.

When a July 13 item linked to the journalism blog JimRomanesko.com described  Chavez' bench behavior, the judge ordered increased police security for the trial, according to prosecutor Peter Block. The judge then failed to show up July 17 for the trial. Instead, the city court produced the black-robed, unlicensed  Patrick Moczynski, who dismissed the case. When I objected and wanted to have the judge order the witnesses to appear, Moczynski bluntly cut me off by saying there was no longer a case to object to.

Noting that the court reporter was taking handwritten notes on a legal pad, Moczynski demanded she tell him what she was writing. Although Moczynski was not approved as a substitute "judge" beforehand by Chief Judge Jeffrey Kremers as required by state law, Chavez two weeks later denied my attempt to appeal the case, ensuring the police officer who charged me with Obstruction will not have to testify under oath. However, a "dismissal without prejudice," means the city can bring the case again if it chooses.

I had no right to confront the accusers who had cost me time and money, broke my camera and interfered with my work as a journalist as I was recording the scene where a police officer ignored traffic law and caused damage to private property.

 

If your rights have been abused by Judge Chavez, or if you have been denied the opportunity to speak in court, or if you have been denied an attorney, or if you are found guilty on a date you were not ordered to appear, or if you are denied access to your court records, or if you are denied the opportunity to take notes or have someone take notes for you during your court hearing, please contact stop-chavez-tyranny@milwaukeepress.net or call (414) 324-7233. You can also file a complaint with the Wisconsin Judicial Commission 110 East Main St. Suite 700 Madison WI 53703 (608) 266-7637

Didn't the "judge" want to hear that? Wasn't I entitled to prove that I was innocent and not have it dismissed because the police couldn't be bothered to show up? Can police break a reporter's camera while on public property, then blow off court? Is it enough that the case was dismissed?

According to state law, "any party" is entitled to appeal a verdict from municipal court. So, I appealed the dismissal. But guess what. Judge Chavez denied my motion to appeal, although it was filed within 20 days of the verdict as required by law. (Wis. Stat. § 800.14).

That was my day in court.

Kristen Rasmussen, a McCormick Legal Fellow at the Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press, is watching the case.

The video showing the incident in which I was cited and my camera broken is online at www.meanjosephanderer.info.

800.14 Appeal from municipal court decision.
800.14(1)(1) Appeals from judgments, decisions on motions brought under s. 800.115, or determinations regarding whether the defendant is unable to pay the judgment because of poverty, as that term is used in s. 814.29 (1) (d), may be taken by either party to the circuit court of the county where the offense occurred. The appellant shall appeal by giving the municipal judge and other party written notice of appeal within 20 days after the judgment or decision. No appeals may be taken from default judgments.