Tag Archives: Six Innocent Men

Tales of Despair and Injustice at UntitledTown…

It’s been an exciting and fulfilling year since the June 27, 2017 release of my book Reclaiming Lives: Pursuing Justice for Six Innocent Men. This book recounts how those of us armed with a compassionate disposition and deep sense of duty, began a necessary campaign for justice on behalf of the six Wisconsin blue collar workers convicted of murdering fellow paper mill worker, Tom Monfils.

Book has won three national book awards since it was published in 2017

2009 book signing with (LtoR) John Gaie, Clare Martinson, Michael Piaskowski, Joan Treppa, and Denis Gullickson

This all began with another publication that details the case in a 487-page book titled The Monfils Conspiracy: The Conviction of Six Innocent Men. This book was published in 2009 by three Green Bay area residents; author Denis Gullickson and researcher John Gaie with the help of mill worker and exoneree in the case, Michael Piaskowski. Together they sifted through and documented laundry baskets full of information; a project that took eight years to complete. 

The book questions the guilt of all six men and proposes a possibility that the victim, Tom Monfils, may have committed suicide; an idea that should have been but was never explored during the 1995 trial.

The years since 2009 prior to publishing my book prompted many trips back and forth from Green Bay, Wisconsin to Minneapolis, Minnesota for collaborative purposes. Those trips have not slowed one bit. The miles have, in fact, increased since I published because of the generous reception my book has received from the literary community in Brown County—the same county (with Green Bay being the county seat) where the trial took place. Good fortune has surfaced through soliciting book fests and fairs and being picked up by libraries that are embracing the premise of my book which is much more focused on the everyday folks working behind the scenes and the untold stories of the families of the convicted men.

However, although I do not claim to be an expert on either the Monfils case or on the topic of wrongful convictions, this article from the July 1, 2018 Green Bay Press-Gazette deems me as a less than qualified social justice advocate on a mission to help these men gain their deserved freedom. It quite possibly goes as far as to suggest that any and all folks calling themselves social justice advocates are inept or simply bored with nothing better to do to occupy their time. But it doesn’t take rocket science to recognize common deficiencies in all wrongful convictions. Government misconduct, Brady Rule violations, the use of jailhouse informants, and the prevalence of ineffective assistance of counsel are all aspects that make significant and unfortunate impacts on people’s lives. Because of how prevalent these deficiencies are in the Monfils case, I feel confident that all of the men in question are completely innocent. I also strongly believe that an actual crime never even occurred.

I’m not usually timid or shy but the introvert in me experiences apprehension when I’m asked to speak in front of groups—large or small—which comes with the territory of being an author. But the benefits outweigh the negatives and provide great satisfaction in knowing that I’m doing my best to make a difference for others. Going beyond what feels comfortable is necessary because real justice was never achieved for those who lost a beloved family member and because of the pain and anguish that is still plaguing the families and close friends of the six men. Being aware of how uneducated the general public is about this case and about how the criminal justice system completely failed an entire community, is another motivating factor to get the correct facts out into the open.

As a participating author for the UntitledTown Book and Author Festival in Green Bay on April 21, 2017, I was given an amazing opportunity to share more recent developments of this case right in the heart of where it happened between 1992-5. My hour-long presentation took place at the Neville Public Museum in Downtown Green Bay.

Highlighted in my presentation were the most egregious flaws of the case and exceedingly plausible evidence discovered during a more recent re-investigation of the case by a well-respected Minneapolis law firm now working on the case Pro Bono. I explained that by omitting this crucial evidence, damaging biases were directed at six men; Keith Kutska, Dale Basten, Michael Johnson, Reynold Moore, Michael Hirn, and Michael Piaskowski that ultimately sent them to prison for life. The audience heard how their rights were trampled upon when none were given the option of having their own individual trial. They learned how powerless these men were to avoid becoming pawns in an unfair game that would drastically alter the course of their lives and the lives of their families. I shared a belief that the strategy of a joint trial was designed to confuse the jury and that the State knew they had insufficient evidence to support their so-called murder theory. I stressed the State’s inability to come up with exclusive charges that proved each of the men had specific roles in a fabricated “bubbler” (water fountain) confrontation. It is the belief of many who study this case that the State banked on throwing what evidence they could come up with at the jury to see what would stick.

Unfortunately that strategy worked, as is apparent in this admission by one of those jurors years later: “It was too much to process and too easy to just make the same decision for all of the defendants.”

Much of what I shared originated as new evidence at an evidentiary hearing in 2015. Its purpose was to request a new trial for Keith Kutska; the State’s main suspect. However, this new evidence was not convincing enough for the State of Wisconsin which concluded in one of its reply briefs that “The mere fact that twenty years after this conviction Kutska has dredged up evidence that was not presented at his trial, is not a reason to give him a new trial.” They said overall, the evidence provides no real proof that a jury would have reached a different conclusion had they heard it back then. And so far, higher courts have agreed with them as all appeals that have been filed in succession since then have, so far, been denied.

Brown County courtroom during 2015 evidentiary hearing 

But I and others respectfully disagree. When considering the new evidence—especially in regard to the specific knots on the rope and weight that were found on the victim—it’s easy to conclude that this death resulted in suicide.

To illustrate my point I invite you to compare the two images below. The top one is a diagram of a two half-hitch knot used in Coast Guard training. The bottom photo is of the actual rope and weight found on Tom Monfils’ body. The similarities of the knots cannot be dismissed. Furthermore, Retired Coast Guard Seaman George Jansen identified the actual knot as a two half-hitch knot during the 2015 hearing. This detail becomes very significant when we learn that Tom Monfils had been in the Coast Guard but none of the six men had. Another factor never mentioned during the 1995 trial is that when Lead Detective Randy Winkler sent the knots to the crime lab, they recommended he send them to the Coast Guard because they determined that the knots were nautical ones. Detective Winkler failed to adhere to this recommendation and the information was cast aside as irrelevant. I find it difficult to believe that the jurors would not have thought there was reasonable enough doubt to reach a different conclusion had they heard these specific pieces of information.

 

Photo courtesy of John Johnson

A large part of my slideshow was dedicated to analyzing the so-called confrontation near the “bubbler” and pointing out what a logistical nightmare it would have been to carry out. I stressed how unlikely it would have been to then keep this evil deed under wraps even though it supposedly happened in a very visible and well-traveled area within the mill. And to believe that all of these men and fellow mill workers alike stay silent about it to this day…is simply ludicrous and goes against the wisdom of Benjamin Franklin who said it best: “Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead.”

At the museum, my designated space—a small room located down a long hallway—quickly filled to capacity. Equipped with 40 chairs, more were brought in to accommodate attendees that continued to arrive even after the program began. A cameraperson from the local news outlet WBAY Channel 2 in Green Bay arrived with mere minutes to spare before I was scheduled to begin, to do a quick interview. My sister, Clare, handed out flyers to the audience during that time.

This very brief news story was featured on the 10:00 news later that evening.

As is typical of my presentations, interviews, etc., the first minute or so is a struggle until I get my bearings. But the audience was kind. Respectful. And though many of the faces were familiar, many were not. I felt acceptance as all eyes focused on the large screen in front of them which projected photos and information carefully chosen for this local crowd that was very familiar with the case. They listened intently…like I had done on a memorable day back in 2009 when John Gaie first shared his tragic and horrific tale of injustice in my living room.

The room was quiet save for the sound of my voice and heavy sighs as a dismal tale of despair and injustice unfolded. Until the very end, no one indicated an urgency to leave. The audience continued to ask questions until it was absolutely necessary for me to pack up and make room for the next presenter.

I was grateful for this opportunity to explain to these folks why we cannot allow this injustice to continue, why we cannot forget about these men, and why it is imperative that they be granted immediate release.

Watch a 20-minute segment of my presentation on YouTube.

Order a signed copy of my book via this website or from Amazon.

An Unearthing of Ghosts…

Greeting card drawn and sent from an innocent man held captive by the Wisconsin prison system                                      

A fitting day to share this chapter from my book; triumph that instilled an uncommon but short lived dose of hope and possibilities…

Chapter 33

Legal Woes for the Opposition

Halloween, October 31, 2014. A fitting day to illustrate an unearthing of ghosts still lurking through the halls of the Brown County Courthouse. Finally, twenty-one months of effort put forth by a dedicated legal defense team came to fruition when they filed a 152-page motion, more than one hundred exhibits, and several affidavits in Brown County requesting an evidentiary hearing for Keith Kutska. Close to twenty years later, this small Midwest town was thrust back into legal upheaval.

There was a flurry of news reports on local TV stations and in print. One Green Bay Press-Gazette headline read:

“Defense: Monfils Death a Suicide. New Legal Team Seeks to Have Conspiracy Conviction Thrown Out.”

When this motion was filed, Johnny and I took great satisfaction in knowing we had played a monumental role in its inception. The families were hopeful. We all felt great about it because there was real progress being made. And our miracle was a kick in the legal shins for Brown County. They most likely never expected we’d get this far or that this case would actually make it back into the courts. But there it was. I imagined the clambering behind closed doors to keep their wits about them because the further this moved forward, the more media attention they’d receive. There’d be no escaping public scrutiny or the tough questions that followed. And it’d be a cold day in hell before those questions stopped. This was no longer merely a movement of family members, close friends, and two crusaders from Minnesota. This motion was spearheaded by a respectable law firm armed with an unrelenting dedication and ability to keep on keeping on.

(Photo courtesy of the Green Bay Press-Gazette) 

The main points listed are directly from the original 152-page brief and are as follows:

  • Defense counsel provided ineffective assistance by conceding the State’s homicide theory without consulting an independent forensic pathologist and investigating the evidence of suicide.
  • The State denied Mr. Kutska due process by relying on erroneous forensic pathology, and perjured fact witness testimony.
  • Mr. Kutska has presented “sufficient reason” for this motion.
  • The court should vacate this conviction in the interests of justice.

These excerpts taken from this same document reveal major aspects of a failed investigation in a massively flawed case:

At approximately 7:42 a.m. on November 21, 1992, Tom Monfils—despondent, shamed, and angry—left his work area at the James River Paper Mill and walked toward an entrance of a nearby airlock passageway. As he neared the airlock, he picked up a 49 lb. weight and proceeded through the airlock. He then entered a storage area where his jump rope was hanging on a railing. With both the rope and weight in hand, Monfils walked to a large vat containing approximately 20,000 gallons of liquid. There, he climbed the steps to the top of the vat, tied one end of the rope around his neck and the other end to the weight, and entered the vat where he suffered traumatic injuries and died from drowning in the liquid.

After a 2 1/2 year investigation, Kutska, and five other mill workers were convicted of first-degree intentional homicide and sentenced to life in prison for Monfils’ death. The prosecution’s theory was that after Kutska had learned that Monfils had reported him to the police for stealing a piece of electrical cord from the mill, Kutska fomented “an angry mob” of his “union brothers” that viciously beat Monfils at a water bubbler (water fountain) at approximately 7:45 a.m. and then disposed of his body in the vat at approximately 7:50 a.m. on November 21, 1992. That theory embraced the conclusions of the medical examiner Dr. Helen Young, who concluded that Monfils had been beaten and then placed in the vat where he died.

Dr. Young’s homicide determination was, however, erroneous and rested on a series of provably false assumptions, as well as her ignorance regarding the engineering design and operating factors impacting the movement of Monfils’ body in the vat. As forensic pathologist, Dr. Mary Ann Sens states in her report, Dr. Young also lacked any scientific or medical basis for reliably and accurately determining that Monfils’ death was the result of a homicide and not a suicide. Indeed, there is ample and compelling evidence that Monfils had taken his own life.

Unfortunately, residents and law enforcement officials in Green Bay remained unwilling to appreciate the implications surrounding the firm’s findings that support a possible suicide. This first round of filings caused the county to push back…hard. They resisted the notion the case had been mismanaged. They remained as steadfast as ever in a dying effort to uphold all of these convictions, including Mike Piaskowski’s, in spite of his exoneration in a federal court. At every opportunity, former District Attorney, John Zakowski, defends the biggest case of his career with toxic statements that still fuel a vengeful public. Afterward and in present day, his most vicious attacks are aimed directly at his worst nightmare come true. In reference to the release of Michael Piaskowski he flatly states, Michael Piaskowski “was not exonerated,” rather, he was “mistakenly let go” due to a poor appeals argument by the attorney general’s office. And in a recent interview he did for a documentary about the Monfils case, Zakowski stated, “People tend to say, ‘Well, it’s only circumstantial evidence.’ Circumstantial evidence is many times stronger.”

Euphoria diminished as we waited and waited for a reply from the State. When the State did finally respond, it was as expected. In their response, they argued against every measure of the firm’s brief. However, it was again the defense team’s turn to have one last say in the matter before a final decision was to be reached. The firm was ready, filing their reply brief earlier than the allotted time…

Order a copy of my book on Amazon.

Order a signed copy through this website (via paypal).

Deferential Observations…   

I recently reconnected with a former classmate, Brian Berghefer. Brian and I were friends throughout grade school even though I was the fraidy-cat introvert and he was the good-humored extrovert. Brian was always respectful to me, unlike many of the other kids.

Soon after we connected on social media and he learned about my book Reclaiming Lives: Pursuing Justice For Six Innocent Men, Brian was kind enough to purchase a copy. I received an email from him shortly after he finished reading it. I felt Brian’s words needed to be shared because not only do they speak volumes about the steadfast nature of Brain’s character but they also convey the public outrage I hoped to rouse as a result of writing this book.

Thanks Brian, for these encouraging and deferential words. It’s feeling like old times, my friend…

Hi Joan,

I just finished your book. It’s the first book I have read in probably 17 years and my first impression is WOW!!

First of all, I cannot believe the raw deal these six men got. I know our system is flawed but not as totally corruptible as what was allowed to happen in GB.

What is it with mid-Wisconsin with these cases where people are railroaded by the system, i.e. The Monfils case and the Avery case? Does this happen elsewhere with such frequency?

Tom Monfils, Dale Basten, Michael Johnson, Michael Hirn, Reynold Moore, Keith Kutska, exoneree Michael Piaskowski                                    

Secondly but most importantly is your taking on the task of seeing these men find justice and your resolve and tenacity in completing the task! Knowing somewhat of where you come from, if someone had told me someday you would be an author I would probably have dismissed it, knowing what a shy and quiet person you were. But now finding your voice through such a noble cause is very refreshing and I applaud your commitment to these men and their families and I wish you well in this endeavor. I only wish I had your ability to commit so totally to a cause.

You have created another believer in me as I sort of remember the case. But it happened when I was working on the Lakes so I never really paid attention and all but forgot about it. My wife who lived in GB at the time barely remembered it (as have many) till I started following you and your progress and reading about the sham investigation. The travesty brought on by it is repugnant and should be to any American who discovers it!

I believe your book is just the tip of the iceberg in waking up public interest and hopefully you can get a major network to join your fight and spread the word creating a broader groundswell of interest. I believe that through persistence, you and fellow Truth Seekers will prevail. I only pray that it comes soon for these men and their families!

Sincerely,
A Very Proud Friend
Brian Berghefer

On an extremely sad note, Brian passed away unexpectedly on Tuesday, November 6, 2018. I never got the chance to see him one last time in the UP of Michigan, where we grew up together. RIP my friend.

Brian Berghefer 1958 – 2018                                                            (Photo courtesy of The Daily Mining Gazette)                                                

Purchase my book through Amazon.

You may also purchase a signed copy (via paypal) on this website.