And the Supreme Court of Wisconsin Speaks...

Confession thrown out in sexual assault case

11:08 PM, Apr. 29, 2011 

 The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Friday threw out a confession given by a Whitefish Bay man accused of trying to rape an 18-year-old woman at his Town of Holland vacation home.

The court ruled statements made by Brad B. Forbush, 50, are inadmissible in court because he previously retained an attorney. Police say Forbush confessed after being tracked down in Michigan, but he has claimed the interrogation violated his constitutional rights because he did not have an attorney present.
The case, from a May 2008 incident, now returns to the courtroom of Sheboygan County Circuit Court Judge Terence Bourke, who originally suppressed the confession in November 2008. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals in Waukesha overturned Bourke in December 2009, but Forbush then appealed to the state's highest court.

Forbush is charged with attempted second-degree sexual assault and false imprisonment, facing up to 15 years in prison, if convicted. He is free on a $25,000 cash bond.
During the interrogation in question, Forbush waived his right to have his lawyer present. He argued later, though, that he can't waive that right after it's been invoked and his statements must be suppressed. A divided Supreme Court agreed, saying the interrogation was improper.

A spokesman for the state Justice Department, which handled Forbush's appeal for prosecutors, called the ruling disappointing.

A criminal complaint says Forbush asked the woman — a neighbor who sometimes babysat Forbush's children — to come into his home and watch a video of his triplets. He instead played a pornographic DVD and told the woman that's what they were going to do, the complaint said.

Forbush then allegedly blocked the woman's path and grabbed her as she tried to leave the home, but she was able to drag him outside and escape. Forbush fled but was arrested the next day when police spotted his SUV in a motel parking lot in Saginaw, Mich.

Sheboygan County District Attorney Joe DeCecco called the ruling "disappointing" and said it would establish no precedent, or give clear guidance to law enforcement, for future similar cases because the justices in the majority cited different reasons for their ruling.

"So we'll see. It will take another case similar to this" to clarify the issues involved, DeCecco said. "It's very disappointing. But we'll do what we have to do and bring the guy back to trial."

A precedent set here in the State of Wisconsin, the interrogation tactics in some Law Enforcement Offices is not being held to the highest standards and this case has shown that.