Criminal Justice

Sexting Prosecutor Wants Immunity

|

You have to at least admire his chutzpah.

The former Wisconsin district attorney who resigned amid a sexting scandal says he's immune from a lawsuit filed by a crime victim who claims she was sexually harassed by him.

Ken Kratz says he was a public official at the time of the alleged harassment and is claiming both absolute immunity and qualified immunity.

Those are legal doctrines that shield government officials in certain cases from being sued for a violation of a person's constitutional rights.

Kratz's argument was filed Friday in a response to a federal lawsuit filed by Stephanie Van Groll.

Kratz admitted sending suggestive text messages to Van Groll while he was prosecuting her ex-boyfriend. At least four other women have said Kratz made inappropriate sexual advances toward them.

Bonus points: Kratz was prosecuting the woman's boyfriend for domestic abuse.

Even in the consequence-free world of absolute prosecutorial immunity, I don't think this is going to fly. I would think that even a group like the National District Attorneys Association would concede that sending sexual come-ons to the girlfriend of a suspect falls outside the scope of a prosecutor's official duties. Of course, under current law, manufacturing evidence in a case that results in the conviction of an innocent person does. So who knows.

Another gem from Kratz's response:

…if any injuries were suffered by the Plaintiff, all such injuries and damages were caused by her own conduct, negligence and behavior…

You can read a sampling Kratz's text messages here. He's quite charming.

(UPDATE: Link fixed.)

Advertisement

NEXT: Reason.tv Replay: 5 Rules for Coping With Tragedy

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. That last link goes to the wrong page.

    1. Good morning heller. Good morning reason.

      1. Good morning Suki.

  2. Also, this guy’s gross.

    1. Yeah. And he’s not exactly Sullivan Ballou, is he.

    2. If you can’t send sexually explicit messages to victims, what’s the point of becoming a prosecutor?

      1. No comment.

    3. I agree… I have a hard time thinking he would be successful with that kind of approach.

  3. This dog is smarter than the NDAA. At least in terms of knowing the meaning of words.

  4. Those are legal doctrines that shield government officials in certain cases from being sued for a violation of a person’s constitutional rights.

    Legal, my ass. If anyone’s not subject to the same laws as the rest of us, then the law is nothing but a charade.

    -jcr

    1. You haven’t yet noticed that the law is a charade in this country and has been for some time? It is a hard thing to face that your country is corrupt and it is only dumb luck that protects most of us from the vindictive wrath of our rulers at all levels of government.

  5. Psychopaths rule this country.

    1. I would say sociopaths rather than psychopaths. The former act solely in their self-interest, the latter do not necessarily do so.

      1. I had that very discussion with a friend and gave the example of Ted Bundy=psychopath; all politicians=sociopaths

  6. Of course, under current law, manufacturing evidence in a case that results in the conviction of an innocent person does. So who knows.

    Who knows indeed. The law enforcement caste operates under different rules than the mere citizen caste.

  7. “Ken Kratz says he was a public official at the time of the alleged harassment and is claiming both absolute immunity and qualified immunity.”

    “As a government law enforcement official, I was on duty in my capacity as an upholder of the law I swore to protect when I was breaking the law, so I am immune to prosecution.”

    They have the ball, the court, the gloves and the bat, and they make the rules… We, the STUPID ONES that continue to pay taxes like SHEEP, are there to shut up and obey, just like Tony/Chad want it.

  8. Not related, but too good to not share. From the Golden Globes (so very appropriate):

    The guard watched wide-eyed as [Christina] Hendricks pulled the bracelet out from her ample cleavage.

    1. Nancy, you look better in a dress + your tits are real

      1. But no one looks hawter than me when I’m in my Lane Bryant stretch pants & wrap! PLEASE READ MY BLOG.

        1. Hmm try again bitch-my ass is on my site

          1. It’s good I remembered to lick the inside of the plastic baggie, or I would still be coherent/not on crack.

              1. Most things are boring compared to being on crack. I wish I could ride the rainbow every second.

                  1. See, the above proves my point. Sooooo booooooooored…

                    Anyone have crack?

          2. my ass is on my site

            Linky or STFU

            1. Did I say my rctlfy site? Nope bitch! You’ll just have to jerk-off to my words little boy.

              1. Found it!

                Hang in there girl, you’ll eventually get them buttoned!

                1. WHERE DID YOU GET THAT PIC OF ME????

                  1. helle is that one of your mommies?

                    1. That’s impossible, heller is older than me. I couldn’t be his mother, even though I have suckled quite a few secret basement babies in my day. My poor children-siblings!

  9. “Generally, courts have recognized the need to protect government employees from unduly burdensome and baseless litigation that may interfere with the exercise of lawful discretion in their official functions. Under 42 U.S.C. ? 1983, any person may bring a civil action against an individual who acted under color of any law (with the exception of judges, who are generally immune such suits when concerning official action) who caused a deprivation of any Constitutional right or federal law.[i] Thus, in order to state a claim under ? 1983, a plaintiff must allege that the defendant was an employee of a state, and their action deprived him/her of a Constitutional right or other right protected by federal law .

    She wins

    1. Um, no.

      Your quoted parenthetical needs to include that prosecutors enjoy much of the same absolute immunity as the judges it already mentions. That would be the point of Balko’s post.

      In addition, as a state actor, Kratz may have 11th Amendment immunity totally separate from his immunity as a prosecutor. Is the state agency consenting to be sued in Federal court in this case? A treatise like the, “2010 Handbook of Section 1983 Litigation”, by David Lee goes into these issues in much greater detail, is partially available on Google Books and is well worth the time of anyone interested in this type of issue. But you simply can’t go to a brief summary of 42 USC 1983 and from there conclude that the plaintiff is automatically going to overcome the defendant’s assertion of absolute immunity.

      1. I understood hat a judge is always immune but not the DA, and that the law does not prevent the plaintiff from bringing the case but they need to show improper motive? I love this topic

      2. In addition, as a state actor, Kratz may have 11th Amendment immunity totally separate from his immunity as a prosecutor. Is the state agency consenting to be sued in Federal court in this case? A treatise like the, “2010 Handbook of Section 1983 Litigation”, by David Lee goes into these issues in much greater detail, is partially available on Google Books and is well worth the time of anyone interested in this type of issue. But you simply can’t go to a brief summary of 42 USC 1983 and from there conclude that the plaintiff is automatically going to overcome the defendant’s assertion of absolute immunity.

        Under Ex Parte Young , state and local officials can most definitely be sued.

        If that were not the case, the complaint against Tulsa County Clerk Sally Howe Smith (in which she is accused of violating the civil rights of Mary Bishop and Sharon Baldwin by denying them a marriage license) would have been dismissed due to Smith’s purpoted immunity.

        1. You’re right, of course; Young allows a state actor, acting in an official capacity, to be sued for injunctive relief. And in the case you cite, it sounds like Ms Bishop and Baldwin are looking for injunctive relief against the Tulsa County Clerk: e.g. ‘Quit being a bigot and give us a marriage license already.’

          That’s different from asking for an award of monetary damages from the state actor or agency, which is what I imagine the plaintiff in Kratz is asking for. I don’t know whether you can get money damages from the state agency in light of Edelman v. Jordan, or what additional factors you need to show in order to do so.

          Again, go to a treatise for more info. A good treatise will break down the factors of official capacity vs. individual capacity of the actor, scope of prosecutorial immunity, nature of the tortious acts, etc…

  10. The prosecutor’s arguments may sound crazy–may even be crazy–but he’d be crazier not to make them.

    In the early stages of a lawsuit, you often have to raise a cause of action or affirmative defense or you are deemed to waive it. Even if the argument only has a 1% chance of succeeding, or only covers 1% of the total damages, why risk losing that chance?

    Most of the texts I saw in news accounts wouldn’t be covered by immunity, but its concievable at trial that some of the texts or messages introduced into evidence will have had a dual purpose. “Yur so hawt, btw, inital hearing rescheduled for 10 am.”

    1. “Yur so hawt, btw, inital hearing rescheduled for 10 am.” Could also be used to fortify her case. The text could be construed as you need to fuck me before the 10AM case.

      1. That’s for the jury to determine in light of all the facts. If he can make an argument that he’s immune, and fails to make it in the early steps, he can lose the ability to make that argument at all.

  11. like that’s the first time the hoe’s been sexted

    1. The question is which little hoe are you?

      1. Oohhh, troll fight!

        1. don’t be an idiot; he’s a regular having fun

              1. I don’t understand why you hate Helle so much…

          1. If so, he’s having fun by trolling.

  12. You have to at least admire his chutzpah.

    No, I don’t.

    This slimy cocksucker should be in a federal prison; right out there in the general population, getting exactly as much respect as he deserves.

    1. PBrooks, some days I like you

      1. And some days I just want to fuck your brains out, like Daddy.

        READ MY BLOG PLEASE.

        1. ^spoof you are really boring me-I think I might have to insist on the banhammer just for your lack of creativity and all-around stupidity

          1. I think I might have to threaten you with my nonexistent banhammmer, just for insulting me.

            You’re probably quaking in your boots now!

            1. You’d be surprised you stupid little bitch-reminding everyone what a jackass you are is my trophy

              1. God damn, you sure do hate Helle. Do you just not like Greek mythological characters or do you have something personal against him?

                1. STFU, and play dead helle.

                  1. Helle was a half-nymph you know… I’m sure there’s some Freudian context that I’m missing here…

    2. People seem to have grown so tolerant of blatant lies, spin, and general dirty tricks that I’m not sure what constitutes chutzpah anymore.

      1. I once had a landlord send me a letter demanding money from me after I moved out because the floor collapsed. That counts, I think.

        1. Landlords are born that way.

        2. Yeah, I’m sure it was just a coincidence that the floor collapsed in the exact same spot that your monkey death cage used to occupy. Those floor beams were probably blood-rotted all to hell.

          Just pay what you owe, Warty.

          1. All the monkey death happened in the pit, idiot. You don’t know anything.

        3. Hah! I moved out of an apartment and got a notice charging me $50 to change the lock on a storage locker they never told me I had access to.

  13. Laws against sexual harassment are in place to protect the people. Noble public officials like Kratz are there to serve the people.

    So when public servants like Kratz violate laws that protect the people, you can be sure that is done in the service of the people.

    1. Serve them in the way animal husbanders service cows?

      1. There is a difference between animal husbandry and trying to be a husband to your animal.

        1. In animal husbandry you brand the ones that kick, right? I’ll have to ask some of my TAMU buddies.

          1. Why do the TAMU folks wear military uniforms, anyway?

            1. So their girls know which end to kiss? Kidding. The more important question is why do they have an all male cheerleading squad that dress like orderlies?

  14. I would say sociopaths rather than psychopaths.

    It’s a tough call; my own connotative definition puts “psychopath” on the *more evil* band of the spectrum.

  15. I wouldn’t have sent those text messages if Sarah Palin hadn’t told me to!

    1. and now ur just another palin target

  16. Back in the day when women were portrayed as delicate little flowers,
    a good slap to the face seemed to be the only remedy required. Now, in the day of assertive and empowered women, many seem to get the vapors from any inappropriate advance and want multi-million dollar settlements because some latter day Don Juan leered at them.

    1. You must get laid a-lot? Huh?

      1. Actually this asshole attitude seems to work.

  17. I bet you get this a lot!

    Kratz may be hearing that line in prison.

  18. no not really. dont over-generalize. been on the sidelines awhile?

      1. What is the sound of one hand fapping?

  19. I thought he just wanted pussy.

  20. “I would think that even a group like the National District Attorneys Association would concede that sending sexual come-ons to the girlfriend of a suspect falls outside the scope of a prosecutor’s official duties.”

    Please now….

    1. If it is within the scope of their duties, doesn’t that mean they are obligated to do so? So that a prosecutor who doesn’t sleaze up a suspect’s girlfriend is actually derelict?

  21. There is no way this dude will go to jail, BTW. He should be executed for being such a total loser.

    1. A ?1983 action is a civil suit, so prison time isn’t even on the table.

  22. And I though sexting = sending photos of your junk.

  23. and that’s why u dont get dates.

    1. ? I thought they wanted to see it.

  24. OhioOrrin will now be writing all his comments in the form of sexts.

    1. only to tommy’s mom

      1. Arrest him for child pornography!

  25. It was totally in the scope of his duties! He HAD to sext her. He had to tempt her to see if she’d take the bait. If she did, it would mean she’s a cheating ho and her boyfriend was right to beat her or whatever it was he did.

    Right?

    1. (Limey accent) RIGHT!

  26. I am such an honest guy, and straight shooter

    He’s a straight shooter!

  27. Not that the DA isn’t a sleazeball, but those are some pretty mild “sexts.” Are there more explicit ones that aren’t available to the public?

    I did love the boasting about the $350k home and the 6 figure career. Way to aim high.

    1. This is $350K in Wisconsin, which I think is quite a bit more substantial than $350K in California or New York.

  28. Useless public employees, yet another violation of our rights. Add it to the list of gov’t violations of our right:
    They violate the 1st Amendment by placing protesters in cages, banning books like “America Deceived II” and censoring the internet.
    They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns.
    They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by molesting airline passengers.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars for foreign countries.
    Impeach Obama and sweep out the Congress, except Ron Paul.
    (Last link of Banned Book):
    http://www.iuniverse.com/Books…..-000190526

  29. So, this would be really offensive, if public servants weren’t already getting immunity for out and out murder.

    1. Joe, you’re on my blog this morning

    2. JOE READ MY BLOG!

      HEY JOE, I WROTE ABOUT YOU. GO HERE AND READ IT!

      HEY JOE, YOU CAN SAVE $200 IF YOU GO READ MY BLOG.

      WANT A WAY TO LOSE WEIGHT FAST? READ MY BLOG!

    3. I’m now in heated competition with BlogWhore 2.0

        1. See? I’m going to win, Rectal! You’re gonna lose this competition!

            1. That was fast. Stalker.

  30. Public cane’g on the bottom of his
    feet,short but sweet.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.