Man fights for data after charges dropped
A St. Francis man who had faced charges of defamation and identity theft for emails he sent about Supreme Court Justice Rebecca Dallet during her campaign for the job was cleared after a judge found him incompetent.
But that didn’t end the litigation for Joseph R. Wilke.
Wilke, 57, is fighting for the return of the computer and other digital storage devices — and the data on them — that investigators seized when they served a search warrant at his apartment in March 2018.
Wilke admits he suffers from cognitive and physical disabilities, including one that tends to result in him using extreme profanity and angry verbal tics as he gets worked up discussing what he says are injustices and corruption.
But he argues that doesn’t mean he has lost his rights under the First and Fourth amendments.
The criminal charges came after Wilke posted “vile and defamatory” comments about Dallet on her opponent’s campaign Facebook page, and sent emails on Dallet’s campaign letterhead, purportedly by Dallet, saying she took bribes and cheated the disabled.
Though Dallet’s successful run for the high court came amid a very partisan atmosphere, Wilke’s beef with her goes back to when she presided over a civil lawsuit he filed against a pet grooming school in 2016. She had upheld earlier findings by an administrative law judge in favor of the grooming school, whose owner Wilke said changed his grades and failed him after he tried to report what he said was her abuse of other disabled students.
After two evaluations, Wilke was found incompetent and unlikely to regain competence in May, and in July his case was administratively closed. Legal competence refers to one’s ability to understand the charges against him and aid in his defense. Circuit Judge Pedro Colón ordered Wilke’s computer and other seized items returned.
The state later said it first wanted to clear the computer and other data storage devices.
At a court hearing Tuesday, an investigator for the District Attorney’s Office, Ron La Gosh, testified that it would be too difficult to find and delete only the files on Wilke’s computer that La Gosh contends are contraband. Those include photos and identifying information for contacting Dallet and two lawyers La Gosh said were also victims of Wilke’s efforts to intimidate and threaten them over the internet.
Wilke argues his seized computer contains no contraband, only “meticulously collected and maintained documentation about (Wilke’s) retraining attempt.” He was referring to his time at the dog grooming school.
He characterized the item he emailed on Dallet’s campaign letterhead as “an obvious and humorous exaggeration” of her fundraising efforts during the Supreme Court race.
“Parody is First Amendment protected speech,” said Wilke, who is representing himself.
Circuit Judge David Borowski declined to let Wilke cross-examine La Gosh, but did hear him out on his claims that much of what’s on his computer and digital storage devices consists of years of financial and medical records, family photos, music and books, resumes, legal research and other important personal documents.
“It’s irreplaceable stuff. The Constitution means something, sir,” Wilke said.
Borowski was not swayed. He told Wilke he could get the computer back erased of all stored material, or it would be kept by the DA’s office intact.
Wilke said he would appeal, so Borowski ordered the computer returned, after being wiped, but stayed the order pending any appeal Wilke might pursue.