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.