No Evidence Needed for Wisconsin Prosecutions

In Dodge County, WI, a man was charged with having sex with a sleeping woman. Joshua Beske appeared in Dodge County Court on 24 March, 2008 to face charges of third‑degree sexual assault. A conviction carries a maximum of ten years in prison and yet another addition to the seemingly endless Wisconsin sex offender list.

The problem is that when the parties have been drinking, as they were here, they can be in a blackout and still have sex. One or both will not remember. And to be fair about that kind situation, no one should be charged. It is difficult to reconstruct the history of the acts.

Yet, there is a presumption that males are completely in charge of responsible behavior, but females are only responsible when it suits the prosecution. Even if there is no evidence to support an allegation of sexual assault, police and prosecutors are still willing to seek convictions.

Several years ago, Philip Morris was running supposedly public service advertisements claiming than males only got females drunk to have sex. This bit of gender feminist propaganda made assumptions that females would not get drunk except for males and that males apparently drank mineral water while plying their quarry with drink. The corporate Philip Morris could claim that there was a problem other than smoking and it was those young men who were deflowering the virgins by getting them drunk.

Recently in State v. Ricardo R. Gonzalez, Jr., the Wisconsin District III Court of Appeals remanded a sleeping sex case. In Ricardo, there was no physical evidence to demonstrate that sexual intercourse had even occurred. Marathon County District Attorney Jill N. Falstad proceeded to charge Gonzalez with second‑degree sexual assault causing bodily injury and second‑degree sexual assault while the victim was unconscious. The jury convicted on both counts.

The complainant, Ann Grizzle, and others had celebrated her birthday with a night of drinking. She returned home with her parents. Her boyfriend came later and slept with Grizzle in her bedroom. Two other friends were also present, sleeping in a room on the main floor. Later, Grizzle, moved to sit on a sofa in the living room.

Gonzalez stopped by later. Gonzalez, Grizzle, and her parents conversed. Then the parents went to bed and Grizzle fell asleep on the sofa.

The following day, Grizzle noted that she had some rectal pain and bleeding. She asked Gonzalez if the two had consensual sex and received a negative. She did not observe any disturbance in her clothing when she awoke. She later went to the emergency room perhaps still suspecting Gonzalez. But, there was no evidence.

Grizzle spoke with the police who then recommended that the charges be filed. This is scary when police recommend charges when nothing suggests that a crime occurred.

On the basis of this non‑evidence, Falstad had Gonzalez charged with the two sexual assault charges.

At the trial, the prosecution had Gonzalez’s ex‑wife testify that he had sex with her while she was sleeping. The defense attorney did not do much to defend his client. He did not address that sleeping couples do engage in sexual intercourse. That is, both are asleep when the action starts. The defense attorney also not address Amanda Gonzalez’s history of perjury. Apparently, the defense ignored the complete lack of evidence that would support claims of the crimes.

Rectal pain and bleeding can be due to a multitude of reasons. Not knowing what reason does not mean a guess is sufficient for criminal charges.

At trial, judge Gregory E. Grau, allowed the testimony of the ex‑wife. The judge also told the jury that any pain can be used to define bodily injury. That is quite a stretch. This was a judge who wanted the defendant convicted in the face of no evidence.

The jury did a poor job as well. The higher courts do not address jury performance issues. The question is, how can a jury convict when all the evidence is contrary to crime being committed? The clothing on the complainant was not disturbed thus did not demonstrate removal. There was no evidence of injury due to sexual intercourse. There was no semen present in the complainant’s vagina or rectum. There was some blood present in the complainant’s vagina, but she also thought that she might be menstruating. The complainant was unsure that anything had occurred and had gone to the hospital to determine the facts.

State v. Gonzalez demonstrates the complete lack of ethics of both the police and District Attorney Falstad in bringing these charges. The result was a waste of resources and the time lost by a man who was the victim of a flawed prosecution. His defense attorney was part of this as well.

Returning to Beske, I hope he has a competent defense attorney. The rush to charge is again evidence of how corrupt the justice system is in Wisconsin. Were these two drinking together, it is very possible that when sex occurred, the behaviors of both were consensual. Even if a person is in a blackout, they can appear functional.

The complainant here stated she went to bed fully clothed and woke unclothed and engaged in sex. There is a reasonable possibility that she removed those clothes herself.

It is too bad that the Juneau County District Attorney has rushed to prosecute. Wisconsin does not need any more falsely accused to add to the bloated sexual offender list. Wisconsin taxpayers do not need to fund the incarceration of the innocent.