Former Capitol Police chief backs up Justice Ann Walsh Bradley's security plan claim

2013-02-18T15:15:00Z Former Capitol Police chief backs up Justice Ann Walsh Bradley's security plan claimSTEVEN ELBOW | The Capital Times | selbow@madison.com madison.com

Former Capitol Police Chief Charles Tubbs issued a statement Friday backing up state Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley’s claim that police set up a security plan in the court offices.

Bradley, in a letter last week announcing her recusal from a Judicial Commission case against Prosser, said the plan was put into place two months before the well-publicized June 2011 incident during which fellow Justice David Prosser placed his hand on Bradley’s neck during a heated exchange. She said the plan was initiated to protect her from Prosser.

"The Capitol Police were contacted by a Supreme Court official in reference to safety concerns," Tubbs said in a statement Friday, reported by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "After discussing these concerns a security plan was immediately implemented. This plan did include providing all Capitol Police emergency phone numbers as well as my work and personal contact information."

The Department of Administration had previously contended that there was no evidence of the stepped-up security.

"I can’t find any evidence this ever happened. No emails, no conversations. I can’t find anything. And trust me I’ve checked this like four times now,” department spokeswoman Stephanie Marquis told the Associated Press last week.

In the letter Bradley charged that Prosser’s tantrums and aggressive behavior was a long-term pattern that created workplace safety issues. She said that she and Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson were advised by police to lock their office doors when working after hours or on the weekend. In addition, she said, police agreed to step up patrols in the Supreme Court offices, and Tubbs offered several personal and work numbers to ensure that the justices had someone to call in case of emergency.

The case against Prosser alleges that he was guilty of judicial misconduct in the incident with Bradley, as well as in an earlier incident in which he called Abrahamson a “total bitch.” Four justices have now recused themselves from the case, making it unlikely to go forward.

Bradley’s letter has emerged as a campaign issue in the re-election run of Justice Patience Roggensack, who, with Prosser, is a member of the court’s conservative majority. Roggensack recently has downplayed the tensions on the court.

Copyright 2015 madison.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(30) Comments

  1. Lowden
    Report Abuse
    Lowden - February 24, 2013 9:01 pm
    Either Stephanie Marquis LIED to the national media, or an illegal destruction of sensitive government records occurred.

    Grand jury time. Again.

  2. spooky tooth
    Report Abuse
    spooky tooth - February 19, 2013 3:52 pm
    manipulating and conniving? sounds like a person that would run for governor and never say anything about ending collective bargaining, slashing public school funds and increasing vouchers to pay back his campaign donors.
  3. spooky tooth
    Report Abuse
    spooky tooth - February 19, 2013 3:39 pm
    with this logic nobody is ever guilty in a fight, what do you need a dead body?
  4. NotleftorrightR
    Report Abuse
    NotleftorrightR - February 19, 2013 11:27 am
    For those who can set aside thier believes of what happened and are willing to take a fresh look at this issue, read the Dane County police reports. As you read those reports stop and think ....what would I have done at that point if I were "Prosser" or "Brady". Slowly step by step walk yourself through the event. Prosser claims he was rushed by Brady and raised his hands as an reaction resulting in his hands touching, not grabbing Brady's neck. Brady claims that after working in fear of Prosser, she simply had enough of his conduct and walked up to him to order him out of her office. Yes he was not in her office but he was clearly in her clerk's office. She stated that Prosser reached out and grab her by the neck with both hands in a "choke hold". Brady stated that Prosser never applied any pressure and then Roggensack stepped in and pulled Brady back away from Prosser. When you walk yourself through this incident are there things which happened or did not happened which cause you to believe in one or the other. Have someone place thier hands around your neck like Brady stated. What was your reaction, what would have you done. Did Brady do what any normal person would have done when a person who you are living in fear of puts you in a choke hold. Would you have raised your hands up like Prosser claimed if you were "rushed" by a person you thought was going to harm you. Carefully consider the words spoken by those involved and those who saw the event during and right after it happened. Those words are very revealing. Consider the statements of the witnesses. Consider what they have perfect recall of and what they did not seem to see. Would someone in thier position be able to see what they claimed but also not been able to provide observations of other things. Who only supports one side or the other and that needs to be considered in determining who is being honest and who is making things up.
    I found that I formed opinion of who is telling the truth and who is lying based on the details in the police report.
    Before you do this set aside your current opinions and let common sense guide you.
  5. David Blaska
    Report Abuse
    David Blaska - February 19, 2013 10:42 am
    BladeRunner, you are incorrect. Justice Prosser was never in Bradley's office. He stood in an outer office at the doorway to Bradley's office. He was accompanied by Roggensack, Gableman, and Ziegler -- making Prosser one of four (not three) justices. Those three witnesses support Prosser's version. Read the sheriff's department investigation here: http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/host.madison.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/4/c3/4c314d8a-cff8-11e0-b72d-001cc4c03286/4e57bc07d217d.pdf.pdf
  6. David Blaska
    Report Abuse
    David Blaska - February 19, 2013 9:10 am
    This story is dishonest. It claims: "Former Capitol Police Chief Charles Tubbs issued a statement Friday backing up state Supreme Court Justice Ann Walsh Bradley’s claim that police set up a security plan to protect her from fellow Justice David Prosser."

    There is nothing in Tubbs' statement that the "security plan" had anything to do with Justice Prosser. The original source of that story, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, does not make that claim. You may also note that the Capitol was a hubbub of protest, camp-ins, intimidation when the "security plan" was implemented.
  7. TheJudoon
    Report Abuse
    TheJudoon - February 19, 2013 6:05 am
    The primary election for Supreme Court is today.
    Time to start the process of voting at least one of them out.
  8. Barb10242
    Report Abuse
    Barb10242 - February 18, 2013 11:22 pm
    ...but that did not happen in this case. Walker and the Republicans wanted this decision, like yesterday, so there was no time to read, reflect and finalize
  9. Barb10242
    Report Abuse
    Barb10242 - February 18, 2013 11:18 pm
    So true 6!
  10. Nav
    Report Abuse
    Nav - February 18, 2013 8:16 pm
    I believe it, and judging from most of the comments, I think most people also believe it?
  11. number6
    Report Abuse
    number6 - February 18, 2013 8:08 pm
    'like 5 year olds in the back seat ln a family trip' -- thank you, the best description of this mess I have heard in months!
  12. WiscActor
    Report Abuse
    WiscActor - February 18, 2013 8:03 pm
    So in MOTR's opinion, verbal antagonism is cause for violence against women... In other words, "The b*tch made me do it!"
  13. witness2012
    Report Abuse
    witness2012 - February 18, 2013 7:58 pm
    So, you agree that you are not viewing this situation objectively then, right?
  14. witness2012
    Report Abuse
    witness2012 - February 18, 2013 7:57 pm
    MOR, that is not what happened. In fact, they were trying to riush through a very important decision, solely so the assembly would not have to revote on act 10. Chief Abrahamson had just received Prosser's revisions on Monday morning, one day earlier.

    Proper deliberation on an important decision means the justices read each other's opinions, reflect on them, and then finalize their own. They release decisions when everyone is satisfied, not on the time table of the legislature.
  15. witness2012
    Report Abuse
    witness2012 - February 18, 2013 7:53 pm
    monitor, you make a great point.

    The most humorous part of the article was the Marquis quote: "Trust me!" Hilarious to anyone who has had any dealings with this woman and her deflections and dissembling.
  16. Lionhear
    Report Abuse
    Lionhear - February 18, 2013 7:52 pm
    No where in Tubb's statement to the press does he state that security at the security was increased to protect Bradley from Prosser. What needs to be asked of Tubbs is "was security stepped up because of Prosser, or because of the security issues around the capitol at the time. This is lousy journalism; taking a statement and trying to read into it that security was stepped up just because of Prosser. When in fact, it was stepped up all over due to the protests. Cap. Times--you suck.
  17. witness2012
    Report Abuse
    witness2012 - February 18, 2013 7:50 pm
    no, MOR. He was still in the office, close to where her staff were working. He was not in the hall, or doorway to the hall. Check the police reports.
  18. BDWIRunner
    Report Abuse
    BDWIRunner - February 18, 2013 7:37 pm
    Middle - I think you are misinformed about the facts. I am on a mobile device, and I cannot provide the link but according to the official statements supporting the Judicial Review Board's decision Prosser was one of the three Justices who entered Bradley's office. After the argument escalated Bradley told Prosser to get out of her office. She claims she was pointing at the door as ahe approached him. Prosser says she had a raised fist. But from everyrhing official I have seen even Prosser admita he was in fact in Bradley's office.
  19. davea
    Report Abuse
    davea - February 18, 2013 7:35 pm
    Just like "middleoftheroad"!
  20. nan3
    Report Abuse
    nan3 - February 18, 2013 6:40 pm
    Prosser's become a joke, a bad joke. Some friend, if he has one, should tell him to stop embarrassing himself and us.
  21. Report Abuse
    - February 18, 2013 6:36 pm
    Apparently you are naive to how manipulative and conieving Shirley and Ann are. They have taken every possilbe opportunity to antagonize and take jabs at Prosser. They do indeed all hate each other and it's not like Shirley is just sitting there being a poor defenseless victim. Her intent is to drive him crazy, just like she purposely did in this case. The court had already made their decision and they were waiting for Shirley to write her disenting opinion. She had promised them she would have it ready by Friday so they could report their decision and then she didn't do it. She did these kinds of things to them all the time just to CAUSE trouble. What a great leader she isn't
  22. Report Abuse
    - February 18, 2013 6:29 pm
    Because the press and all the liberals here keep portraying this as Prosser put his hands on Bradley, when in fact She screamed at im, charged at him with her fist raised and other justices are on the record saying they thought she was going to hit him. I'm defending him because I was charged by a women like this once and I too put my hands up to protect myself and keep her away, and I ended up with my hands on her shoulders trying to hold her back. It's a woman. Where are you supposed to put your hands?? I put them straight out on her collarbones and she claimed I chocked her. I feel I know exactly what he's talking about. It was a ridiculous claim when it happened to me, but sure enough people believed her. I've got this to say. If anyone has actually been chocked they would surely know the difference. If prosser had really chocked her there would have been huge red marks and she wouldn't be able to talk, etc. Meanwhile piles of people who were not there keep pushing this story that he did choke her and you have no idea what you're talking about,
  23. Report Abuse
    - February 18, 2013 6:22 pm
    He was not inside the office. She was yelling at him to get out but he was in the doorway. There were 4-5 other SUPREME COURT JUSTICES who witnessed it and they all gave statements saying this.
  24. BDWIRunner
    Report Abuse
    BDWIRunner - February 18, 2013 5:19 pm
    For what it is worth I say vote them all out. I will not vote for Roggensack, Bradley, Abrahamson, Prosser, Gableman, or Zeigler. All of them have behaved in a manner unbecoming of their office. Ironically, the one Judge who seems to have their head on straight is the one named Crooks. But he is getting up in years and I would not be surprised if he did not run for re-election.

    MIDDLE - for the record Prosser was inside Bradley's office when the incident occurred. She wanted him to leave and he refused. That's when the two of them started acting like 5 year olds in the back seat ln a family trip (He touched my side of the seat! She's looking at me!)

    In another bit of irony supporters of the Castle Doctrine might make the argument that Bradley was defendimg her domicile when she approached Prosser with her hand/clenched fist raised. There's some food for thought.
  25. bro
    Report Abuse
    bro - February 18, 2013 5:09 pm
    How can anyone defend Prosser? Whether you are a conservative, liberal, or moderate, grabbing a woman's neck because you do not want to leave her office is really wrong. How can anyone defend the lies from the DOA? So some of you screwed up and voted for a guy who turns out to be wacked, admit it and try to not make the same mistake instead of refusing to see the truth.
  26. Monitor
    Report Abuse
    Monitor - February 18, 2013 5:06 pm
    DOA spokeswoman Stephanie Marquis obviously was not looking in the right place to find the evidence. If she can locate the computer that Scott Fitzgerald, Robin Voss, and their lawyers are illegally withholding from the scandal of district gerrymandering, it just may be there.
    Also, all evidence ever presented clearly showed Prosser was the aggressor, and a dangerous one. Even the Prosser supporters agree this Supreme Court is dysfunctional, and yet Rogensack is campaigning that all is sweet an normal behind their closed doors. Amazing there are some boneheads thinking that Abrahamson should take it upon herself to be a policeman and jack Prosser in line.and keep him from harming other judges.
  27. theotherone
    Report Abuse
    theotherone - February 18, 2013 4:40 pm
    @middleoftheroad, your post pretty much sums it up. There is more to being a Chief Justice than just the title. Where is Justice Abrahamson's leadership in this dysfunctional court? All are an embarrassment to the great state of Wisconsin!
  28. TexasBadger
    Report Abuse
    TexasBadger - February 18, 2013 4:11 pm
    Prosser is a thug.
  29. Report Abuse
    - February 18, 2013 3:59 pm
    So in other Words Bradley was planning this entire farcical incident. Remember - SHE was the one who screamed and charged at him with Her fist raised. He was outside her doorway and posed No threat to her. Ann and Shirley are very manipulative and conieving.
  30. Nav
    Report Abuse
    Nav - February 18, 2013 3:45 pm
    This news confirms the fear for her safety Justice Bradley felt from Justice Prosser. Can you imagine a Supreme Court Justice doing something like this very lightly? I can't!

    It is time for Justice Prosser to simply quit the Supreme Court and work on anger management issues he clearly has. He and other Conservative Justices are giving the court a bad name!
Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick

What's hot

Featured businesses

Get weekly ads via e-mail