Category Archives: Monfils Case

And Justice for Whom…Exactly?

                                        Sketch of Tom Monfils by Artist Jared Manninen

I was contacted recently by Kelli Arseneau; a reporter with the Green Bay Press Gazette/Post Crescent in Appleton, WI. She explained that with the 30th anniversary of Tom Monfils’ death approaching, they were putting together an article that would include a “summary of events that occurred, the trial, and its aftermath.” She asked if I’d be interested in speaking with her to share some of the things I’ve learned through my research.

I declined. Given the focus of the article, it made more sense for me to step aside. Besides, it was too unclear to me the value my opinion might bring to her piece. I explained that I did not have anything more to say other than what had already been printed in my book. I suggested that she review it and use its content. I then offered to send her a copy. I cannot know how much content was pulled from the book, but the book itself was mentioned in the article.

Aside from a few misstated details, the article was very well researched and written. It is the most comprehensive and yes, objective article about this case that I have seen to date.

It was refreshing to see, laid out in amazing detail, exactly how the police had failed the victim, Tom Monfils first. In turn, I feel that it illustrates how the courts then failed the six men.

                             Pictured (LtoR) Tom Monfils, Dale Basten, Michael Johnson,                                                  Michael Hirn, Reynold Moore, Keith Kutska, and Michael Piaskowski

Toward the end, this online version* includes a powerful statement by exoneree Michael Piaskowski.

After the article was posted on social media sites, I did as I always do. I monitored the comment sections. It broke my heart to see this exchange, which illustrates exactly how there has been absolutely no justice for either side:

Comment: “Put it to rest.”

Response by someone who was personally affected by this case: “—, we would all like to put it to rest but some of us care about the truth. I’m not being mean and I understand your view.”

There are too many cases with flaws similar to this one. We all must do better if we want to achieve a more “just” system for ALL!

*Note that all online versions have much more content than any of the printed versions.

Heated Words…Heavy Hearts…

 

Met Keith for the first time during a visit on 4-12-2016

A recent posting of an article regarding an upcoming parole hearing for Keith Kutska—the last of the six men convicted in the Tom Monfils case—appeared on the Green Bay Crime Reports Facebook page.

The article’s headline: Parole hearing set for man convicted in 1992 Tom Monfils murder

I like to monitor these comments to get a sense of the current atmosphere regarding this case, so I was pleased when a friend, Tricia, alerted me to the Facebook posting.

Front page article on October 29, 1995:

The following comments are taken verbatim. All are entrenched in the past. Note that some contain strong language:

“How in the world do you parole a murderer with a clean conscience? Life should mean life, it shouldn’t mean until I change my mind.”

“Best place for this evil monster is PRISON, or whatever happen to Tom, same for this evil monster.”

“Green Bay if you let this guy go your putting a murder on the streets. Let’s see how long it is before he kills again. Y’all are stupid asf for letting him have parole.”

“Only way he should be leaving prison is in a body bag. No parole for any reason.”

“SCUM BAG”

The comments become increasingly vicious:

“Let him rot!!! They killed that poor man over bs… fuck all them!!!!”

“So did Tom get a refund when he was killed I don’t think so that fucker should rot in prison.”

“This f*cker deserves to rot. And the whole lot of em. All guilty.”

As an author, I always expect this response:

“Books don’t matter. That is someone trying to make some money. All that MATTERS is the jury’s outcome in court. It is how the law works. Don’t like it, use the legal system to change the law. A “book” means nothing except to the writers.”

Brown County Courtroom during evidentiary hearing in 2015

In this final comment, a plea to look at real evidence is applicable to both sides of the issue and all any of us who support the men have ever asked for:

“Guilty. Let him rot. the others shouldn’t have gotten out either but this guy was the big bully. And anyone who wants to defend them needs to look at real evidence, not anecdotal, or… but you can’t be sure, or… but they were decent guys. The alternative is that Monfils committed the worst suicide ever and I cannot buy that scenario given the evidence. The bragging, the fear, the good ol boys club nonsense, no…just no.”

Tricia shared her thoughts with me over the obvious misinformation and hateful rhetoric still rampant in this case.

“It’s so frustrating. I want to explain to people but they’re all so set on what they believe.”

The initial reaction from Keith’s niece, Jenn, whose heart breaks every time she dares to read comments like these, is to protect and defend the family she knows and loves. She also respectfully points out that we must keep an open mind and understand that we all have a right to our own opinion. However, the difficulty of having a respectful discussion arises when opinion is just that, and not grounded in truth.

Thus begets the frustration in regard to the Monfils case. Given the tone of the above comments, I must admit that my first inclination as soon as I read them was to fire back. To defend. To set people straight with the facts and to push back!

I did not engage in the conversation. I did, however, engage in a second posting the following day. A new article was posted on the same site regarding the postponement of Keith’s hearing due to a COVID outbreak within the prison.

That article headline: Kutska’s parole hearing delayed in Monfils case

The engagement went well. New friendships were forged. New perspectives were shared.

4-21-2018 presentation at the Neville Museum in Green Bay, Wisconsin during the UntitledTown Book Festival

Life teaches us that we must respect others’ opinions regardless of whether or not they align with ours. We must choose our words wisely and avoid speaking out of anger. Once words are spoken, they are with us…forever. They can never be withdrawn. Not really. Sure, we can back track, clarify, or apologize until we are blue in the face. But those initial words will never leave the hearts of those for which they were intended.

In the end, words, truth, all feelings have meaning. Divisive actions and intentions have consequences. Time and again we learn that heated, unfounded words only leave in their wake, lasting wounds and heavy hearts…

And my response to Tricia on how we can choose to view the vicious nature of comments? “They can talk all they want on those sites. We win in the end!!!”

Raising the Bar: Continued Commitment toward Justice!

When I discuss this case with others which, to be honest, happens quite often, I get asked if there was ever a moment (during this 13-year journey) when I wondered if the six men convicted of a heinous murder could be guilty. My response is always the same. “Absolutely not!”

On the contrary, I have never seen or heard anything that has convinced me that they are guilty or that a crime was even committed. There is always the concern that I could be jaded, that maybe I’ve held this belief for so long that nothing could possibly sway my opinion now. But I also know that I’m not the only one who explicitly believes that all of these men are innocent. Former law enforcement officials, seasoned lawyers, and other professionals who know better than I who have pursued justice in this case also hold this belief. My concern then becomes; maybe I haven’t done my part in conveying the damning evidence of innocence in this case. Well, this is certainly not due to a lack of trying.

I’d like to take this opportunity to introduce my latest endeavor—a second edition of Reclaiming Lives. This book is the (almost) complete story from the day I became involved through to events and exciting new developments of the most recent years. I call it my Pandemic Project which helped me to stay sane during the past year.

Those of you who have read my first book know how this story began for me:

“In a phone conversation with my sister, Clare, during the summer of 2009 prior to meeting John, she had described someone she’d met recently. “He’s an author and researcher named John Gaie,” she said. “We met at a place called The Lorelei. And get this—he told me I look like his mother.”

Our laughter faded as Clare described her relationship with John. Both of them, longtime residents of Green Bay, had been dating a few weeks when Clare suggested bringing John to Minnesota to meet Mike and me. She was anxious for us to learn about a project that he was working on. “John is researching a true-crime story I’m familiar with,” she said. “He’s collaborating with two other people on a book about six men who were convicted of murder in 1995, right here in Green Bay. John says it will be published soon.”

This 2017 version ends on the final day of the 2015 evidentiary hearing for Keith Kutska. And what happened after that was anyone’s guess.

My newest book-a revised version-begins in the same way as the first book, but then continues on at the exact moment where that story ends, to create a more complete story. I feel this new version is superior to the first with better writing/editing, added details, and finally, a deeper insight into who the six men are.

Below are a few new passages to summon your curiosity:

“A cloud of doom lingered as we slowly filed out of the courtroom on that last day. In contrast, hastening past us toward the exit, tightly clutching his briefcase as though he was late for his next appointment, was the current DA, David Lasee. It reminded me of the similar manner in which his father, Larry Lasee, who incidentally had been the assistant DA during the Monfils case, had exited the courtroom following Mario Victoria Vasquez’s exoneration hearing. As I watched, I supposed his unwillingness to undermine his father’s position on the original outcome of this case took precedence over allowing the truth to guide his conscience.”

“Although our legal team had followed the rule of law and had presented considerable facts supportive of the suicide theory, this post-conviction phase had ultimately failed. It was indicative of why our courts have also failed the many innocent people who dare to file petitions in an effort to gain their own deserved freedom. However, in many respects, we were not exactly hurled back to square one. While we had done our absolute best, and as justice continued to elude us in the months and years that followed, we remained steadfast in our refusal to succumb to absolute defeat. We would never give up hope completely. And we were certainly not about to allow this chapter to dictate the ending of an ardent journey. We would regroup and carry on with the same tenacity and shrewdness as before. A newly completed project of mine was about to take center stage and exacerbate an already contentious situation. At least I hoped it would.”

My publisher is also new. This slightly different design was created by Kirk House Publishers in Burnsville, Minnesota. The overall experience of working with them was top notch.

As always, I appreciate your continued interest and support in this mission. And I still agree with The Monfils Conspiracy author, Denis Gullickson’s, tenacious analysis, “Let’s see where this takes us.”

Please note that the original edition of Reclaiming Lives is no longer available for purchase on many retail sites.

For those who have already purchased a copy of this new edition, thank you! It would be greatly appreciated if you’d kindly consider posting a review on Amazon which promotes additional readership.

Second edition is now available. Ways to order:

Purchase one or more signed copies directly from this author on this website by clicking on the book image in the upper right corner. Thanks!