Quantcast
Channel: The Shawano Leader - News
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 5341

Evidence storage an issue in sheriff's race

$
0
0
Bieber urges cooperation with Shawano PD

Editor’s note: This is the third in a series of stories drawn from recent interviews with Shawano County sheriff candidates Randy Wright and Adam Bieber.

An evidence storage room called “grossly inadequate” by a consultant in 2005 is still an issue nine years later in the race for Shawano County sheriff.

Incumbent Randy Wright, who has pushed for an evidence storage building since taking office in 2007, is seeking another four-year term. He is being challenged in the Aug. 12 Republican primary by Shawano police officer Adam Bieber, who has questioned the need for expanded storage space.

Ron Lefebre of consulting firm Virchow, Krause and Co. delivered a report to the County Board in October 2005 in which he raised alarms over potential liability issues for the county because criminal evidence could be compromised by the space limitations.

The most recent attempt to address the problem was last year, when the County Board approved a $710,000 evidence storage facility that was to be constructed next to the Huber Work Release Center.

“Everyone on the board acknowledged that building was needed,” Wright said. “The building was approved. The funding wasn’t.”

The project was expected to impact the tax rate by 3 to 3½ cents per $1,000 of equalized valuation. However, the county had made its last payment on the Shawano County Fairgrounds grandstand and the Huber Work Release Center, so the tax rate was expected to drop as much as 11 cents before any new borrowing.

Borrowing was approved by the Public Property Committee and rejected by the Finance Committee.

The County Board in April 2013 failed to get the required three-fourths supermajority of 21 supervisors, and borrowing was rejected by a vote of 13-13.

Wright said the department is doing what it can to work with what it has until evidence storage needs are addressed.

“The evidence technician is in daily contact with the court and DA to make whatever room we can,” he said. “We’re purging when possible to make a little space.”

Wright said the department has no discretion over how long it has to hold evidence. He said it’s dependent on state statutes and the status of cases that have been referred to the district attorney’s office for prosecution.

“We have to keep evidence till the DA tells you what’s going to happen with that,” he said.

Though the Sheriff’s Department collects a wide range of evidence, rules dictating the amount of marijuana plants needed for prosecution in grow cases has been perhaps the greatest burden on evidence storage space.

State statutes require at least four plants for a Class I or Class H felony, 20 plants for a Class G felony, 50 plants for Class F and 200 or more for a Class E.

“At any time a defense attorney can walk in and say, ‘I want to see that,’” Wright said.

Evidence also has to be stored until the appeal process has been resolved.

The statute of limitations allows for six years to begin a prosecution of most felonies in the event a suspect is ever identified. Sometimes prosecutions can be started even without an identified suspect.

“If you find DNA on an item that’s been used by a suspect, you can process and enter a John Doe warrant on a DNA profile,” Wright said. “It will sit there in the system until somebody gets entered into the system matches that DNA.”

Evidence storage needs were exacerbated in 2009, with the discovery of 15 separate marijuana grows in the Navarino Wildlife Area. More than 200 plants were put into storage for each grow, along with other items from the operations, including sheeting material and heating/cooling systems.

“I don’t think we need to store all that,” Bieber said, “especially when you don’t have people in custody, no suspects. We don’t have anyone in custody for those grows that we have.”

The Navarino grows were part of a federal case and were linked to other grows found in Oconto County. Multiple parties were prosecuted in federal court in connection with the Oconto County grows.

Wright said it was up to federal authorities to decide how long the Navarino plants should be stored because of the link to the Oconto County cases.

Wright said federal authorities informed the Sheriff’s Department early this spring that the plants were no longer needed. They have since been destroyed.

Wright also said there was no DNA evidence collected from the Navarino grow due to the limited space the department has for drying and processing.

“We were using a shower stall to dry it piece by piece,” he said. “We couldn’t get it dried in time.”

Wright said there are misunderstandings that persist about evidence storage needs. Among them is the handling of vehicles involved in criminal cases such as vehicular homicide, which, Wright said, need to be stored out of the elements.

“We hear a lot of supervisors say, ‘Just park them outside,’” Wright said. “You can’t.”

Wright said an evidence building would need to have a structure that will withstand such things as tornadoes and fires.

“That’s evidence you can’t lose,” he said.

Wright also said the debate over evidence storage and processing has been too focused on marijuana plants.

Bieber said he has been told marijuana storage and processing are the main reasons for the facility.

“I think we have to look into the future and see if this is really wise that we’re going to build a big building just for marijuana plants,” Bieber said. “It is very likely marijuana may be legalized. Not that I’m for that, but you have to look into the future, whether you agree with it or not.”

Bieber said he has not seen the evidence storage area and doesn’t know whether the storage space is adequate.

“I’d have to make a decision on that once I get in there,” he said. “I really can’t say right now whether it’s adequate or not. I think all options should be looked at. Maybe Randy’s right, maybe we do need an evidence storage building.”

Bieber said he isn’t totally against the evidence storage building.

“But if we’re going to do it, we better be sure we’re cooperating with at least the Shawano Police Department,” he said. “Can we talk to them first and say, ‘Hey, what needs do you have? Let’s do something together.’”

According to Wright, there were discussions with former Shawano Police Chief Ed Whealon about the city’s possible participation in an evidence storage building, but the idea never moved forward at the city level.

Rate this article: 
Average: 3(4 votes)

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 5341

Trending Articles



<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>