Attack ads in judicial elections can be deliberately misleading on material facts

Evidence

The television visual in one Gableman commercial was striking: an image of Butler, the only African American on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, next to that of an African-American man convicted of rape. So was the message: “Louis Butler worked to put criminals on the street. Like Reuben Mitchell, who raped an 11-year-old girl with learning disabilities. Butler found a loophole. Mitchell went on to rape another child.” Yet the ad distorted the facts. Butler did not deal with Mitchell’s case as a judge but as a public defender, when he represented Mitchell in the first rape case. Butler did convince an appellate court that the fact that the victim was a virgin should not have been admitted in evidence at trial. But this ruling was overturned by the Wisconsin Supreme Court, so Butler did not secure his client’s release, and Mitchell served his term in prison. It was three years after his release from prison that Mitchell committed the second rape, for which he was convicted and imprisoned. The independent Judicial Campaign Integrity Committee, which monitored campaign ads, called the spot “highly offensive and deliberately misleading.” — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 425

Categorization

  • CANDY: The distortion chain — public defender vs judge, overturned ruling, rape three years after release — makes a crisp concrete example of campaign dishonesty.
  • XREF: connects to: Attack ads in judicial elections routinely distort candidates’ actual records — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 590; Prediction-style claims immunize propaganda from present-tense refutation.; Selective evidence can mislead juries about the case’s credibility. — Lynley Hood, A City Possessed, 2644 (+1 more)

Broader Connections