OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Fitchburg, Wisconsin/Common Council & City Boards
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Fitchburg Municipal Court Session - September 24, 2026

Common Council & City Boards — Thursday, September 24, 2026
BodyFitchburg, Wisconsin
SessionCommon Council & City Boards
DateThursday, September 24, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:09:57

Original source
Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

Speaker numbers apply only to this recording.

Speaker 1

0:00

Hi, I'm Jeremy Crosby.

0:01

And I'm Nick Bouchet.

0:02

We're your host for the program.

0:04

It's all about your city, Talking Fitchburg.

Speaker 2

0:06

Every weekday, we pull together the news, events, and information you need to stay on top of what's happening in the city of Pittsburgh.

0:12

Find

Speaker 1

0:12

Talking Fitzburg on Cable TV, Roku, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, and our live stream on the web.

0:18

Plus, you can find all our headlines and stories on Facebook, YouTube, and our video on demand service.

Speaker 2

0:23

This is your city.

0:24

Keep up with Talking Fitchburg and the issues affecting you and your neighbors.

Speaker 3

0:29

Get connected, Fitchburg.

0:31

Sign up for Fitchburg Connect, the city's monthly e-newsletter that keeps you informed about all the events, services, and updates that matter to you.

0:39

Get it in your inbox once a month.

0:42

Sign up today to get Fitchburg Connect.

Speaker 4

0:46

Stay connected everywhere you go.

0:48

Fitchburg is on your phone and your tablet and your laptop and TV.

Speaker 5

1:09

And good evening.

1:12

Before we start, I would like to explain the process that we'll be following tonight.

1:17

Tonight's session is an arrangement session.

1:20

You're going to be asked a very simple question, and that is what plea would you like to enter.

1:25

Now we have three alternatives.

1:27

And the first one is to enter a plea of not guilty, which means you believe you are innocent or you believe that should the case goes to trial, the city will fail to prove its case.

1:38

The burden of proof is on the city to prove that you are guilty.

1:42

You do not have to prove that you are innocent.

1:44

The second alternative is the opposite.

1:46

That's to enter a plea of guilty, which means you are accepting the facts and circumstances that are stated in the citation that you have already received.

Unassigned speaker

1:56

The

Speaker 5

1:56

third alternative is called a plea of no contest, which means, though in your heart you believe you are innocent, there are lots of evidence against you, and you would rather say, I will enter a plea of no contest instead of entering a plea of guilty or not guilty.

Unassigned speaker

2:13

If

Speaker 5

2:14

you enter a plea of no contest, you'll be found guilty.

2:17

However, there's one advantage to appeal no contest in cases involving potential liability, civil liability claims in civil court.

2:27

That's when somebody alleges that because of your negligence or your violation of the statute, you have also uh cause them injury.

2:39

So in these cases, if you enter a plea of guilty, it may be used against you.

2:45

So if you have a civil claim and you are worried that somebody's gonna sue you for for damages and contemplating entering a plea of guilty, my advice to you is to enter a plea of no contest instead.

2:59

Now most of you are here for alleged traffic citations.

3:02

You should understand if found guilty, in addition to the fine that I'm gonna ask you to pay, I will take from you something called demerit points.

3:11

In the state of Wisconsin, if you accumulate 12 demerit points in one single year, your driving privilege will be revoked.

3:19

If you are here for the offense of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence, also known drunk driving, you should know that you have the right to request a jury trial.

3:29

If you do so, the trial will be held at the Dane County Circuit Court.

3:34

It will not be held in Fitchburg.

3:36

So briefly, I'm gonna talk to you a little bit about our philosophy in Fitchburg.

3:40

It's our philosophy to see that justice is individualized.

3:44

What I mean by that, that I'm gonna let you have the opportunity to um advance any mitigating circumstances that you may wish to advance.

3:57

However, if you do that, you have it has to be believable and it has to be reasonable.

Unassigned speaker

4:05

The

Speaker 5

4:05

other variable that I use is um I look at your past record right in front of me, uh, any record that you have accumulated previous to coming here.

4:17

So based on those two variables, I'll come with a verdict.

4:20

It may then mean that two people faced with identical association may have different outcome.

4:26

And that's the case in all traffic citations with the exception of traffic citations where alcohol or drugs played a factor in the issuance of the citations.

4:36

In these cases, I do not have any willingness to compromise the verdict.

4:41

You'll pay the maximum uh verdict as stated in the statute.

Unassigned speaker

4:45

The

Speaker 5

4:45

same thing could be said about city ordinances where there is a criminal law parallel to this to the city ordinance.

4:54

So let me explain that to you.

Unassigned speaker

5:00

Fitzburg have opted to adopt city ordinances that are exactly similar to the criminal code.

Speaker 5

5:03

So in Pittsburgh, you would have a city ordinance for battery, disorderly conduct, carrying concealed weapons, prostitutions, and even ours.

5:13

Now, if a police officer complained against a citizen alleging that citizen have violated the penal code and you are being prosecuted in municipal court, you got a very big big advantage.

5:28

And that is no matter what.

5:47

Now I say all of this because if you have one of those citations, do not expect me to lower the to to lower the fine no matter

Unassigned speaker

5:56

what.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Public Safety█████████████████████████████████████████████57%
Transportation Safety█████████████████22%
Procedural████████████15%
Mental Health Awareness██3%
Driver Licensing██3%
Summary of Proceedings

Fitchburg Municipal Court Session - September 24, 2026

This was a municipal court arraignment and sentencing session held on September 24, 2026, in Fitchburg, Wisconsin, presided over by the judge. The court heard a series of cases involving traffic violations, operating while intoxicated (OWI), and other city ordinance offenses. The judge explained the plea process, the consequences of convictions (fines, demerit points, license revocation, potential jail), and the court's philosophy of individualized justice.

Discussion Items

  • The judge outlined three plea options: not guilty, guilty, and no contest. He emphasized that for OWI first offenses in Wisconsin the conviction is civil, but subsequent offenses become criminal with mandatory prison time.
  • He stated that for alcohol- or drug-related citations, and for city ordinances with criminal parallels, he will not compromise the verdict or reduce fines.
  • The judge noted that defendants could present mitigating circumstances, and he would consider prior record to individualize outcomes.
  • He warned that unpaid fines could lead to a warrant for arrest and up to 90 days in jail, with a $50 credit per day but an $85 daily jail maintenance fee.

Key Outcomes

  • First OWI case (0.19 BAC, no children, no accident): Plea no contest. Fine $1,046, 8-month license revocation, mandatory assessment, IID for 1 year. Also failure to keep vehicle under control: $78, 3 points.
  • Michael Schaller (stop sign violation): Plea no contest. Reduced fine $78, 2 points (removable after 1 year clean record).
  • Having Grisham (OWI 0.15, guilty): Fine $933, 7-month revocation, mandatory assessment, 6 points, IID waived. Also failure to keep vehicle under control: $92, 3 points.
  • Jacob Lester (zone speeding 72 in 50): Plea no contest. Reduced fine $134, 4 points.
  • Colin Bundy (operating under influence of controlled substance): Plea no contest. Fine $996, 6-month revocation, mandatory assessment, 6 points.
  • Heather Kirkpatrick (red light violation): Plea no contest. Reduced fine $78, 2 points.
  • Abby Abersheim (stop sign): Plea not guilty. Case set for trial with prosecutor.
  • Shakira Ward (underage, 17): Treated as adult; mother present; no disposition recorded.
  • Cody Ball (fireworks violation): Plea no contest. Judge noted limited latitude; fine not specified.
  • Grace Owen (zone speeding 53 in 35): Plea no contest. Reduced fine $92, 3 points.
  • Anthony Fisher (OWI 0.14, possession of drug paraphernalia, reckless driving): Pleas no contest. OWI: fine $933, 7-month revocation, mandatory assessment, 6 points; paraphernalia: $323; reckless driving: $96, 6 points. Total fines $1,352.
  • Rebecca Barry (failure to yield left turn): Plea no contest. Reduced fine $78, 3 points.
  • Aiden Hughes (underage alcohol consumption): Plea no contest. Fine $197, 60 days to pay.
  • Julie Wellbourn (inattentive driving): Plea no contest. Fine $48, no points.
  • Jose Accamani (multiple citations including OWI 0.19 with accident, no license, no insurance): Pleas guilty. OWI: fine $1,109; no license: $134; no insurance: $134; failure to keep vehicle under control: $146. Revocation, mandatory assessment.
  • Gomez Zarko (OWI 0.15, open intoxicant, no valid license): Pleas guilty. OWI treated as 0.149: fine $933, 7-month revocation, mandatory assessment, 6 points; open intoxicant and no license reduced to $78 each and 3 points.
  • Another case (OWI refusal, no lamps, driving while suspended): Guilty to OWI refusal; fine at maximum, 1-year suspension, mandatory assessment; lamps and suspended charges reduced.
  • Renee Perez Torres (OWI 0.09, no valid license): Guilty. OWI: fine $870, 6-month revocation, mandatory assessment, 6 points; no license: $134, 3 points.
  • David Valencia (OWI 0.15, open intoxicant): Guilty. OWI treated as 0.149: fine $933, 7-month revocation, mandatory assessment, 6 points; open intoxicant: $197.
  • Victor Trin turn a dad (no lamps, open intoxicant): Plead not guilty to open intoxicant; case referred to prosecutor for plea bargain.
  • Kamar Aiden (red light): Initially not guilty, then changed to guilty after discussion with judge; specific penalty not recorded.
  • Brian Torres (motion to reopen 3-year-old no-insurance case): Judge expressed reluctance but considered the motion; no final decision stated.

The session concluded with the judge noting that all cases were handled.

Meeting Transcript

Hi, I'm Jeremy Crosby. And I'm Nick Bouchet. We're your host for the program. It's all about your city, Talking Fitchburg. Every weekday, we pull together the news, events, and information you need to stay on top of what's happening in the city of Pittsburgh. Find Talking Fitzburg on Cable TV, Roku, Amazon Fire, Apple TV, and our live stream on the web. Plus, you can find all our headlines and stories on Facebook, YouTube, and our video on demand service. This is your city. Keep up with Talking Fitchburg and the issues affecting you and your neighbors. Get connected, Fitchburg. Sign up for Fitchburg Connect, the city's monthly e-newsletter that keeps you informed about all the events, services, and updates that matter to you. Get it in your inbox once a month. Sign up today to get Fitchburg Connect. Stay connected everywhere you go. Fitchburg is on your phone and your tablet and your laptop and TV. And good evening. Before we start, I would like to explain the process that we'll be following tonight. Tonight's session is an arrangement session. You're going to be asked a very simple question, and that is what plea would you like to enter. Now we have three alternatives. And the first one is to enter a plea of not guilty, which means you believe you are innocent or you believe that should the case goes to trial, the city will fail to prove its case. The burden of proof is on the city to prove that you are guilty. You do not have to prove that you are innocent. The second alternative is the opposite. That's to enter a plea of guilty, which means you are accepting the facts and circumstances that are stated in the citation that you have already received. The third alternative is called a plea of no contest, which means, though in your heart you believe you are innocent, there are lots of evidence against you, and you would rather say, I will enter a plea of no contest instead of entering a plea of guilty or not guilty. If you enter a plea of no contest, you'll be found guilty. However, there's one advantage to appeal no contest in cases involving potential liability, civil liability claims in civil court. That's when somebody alleges that because of your negligence or your violation of the statute, you have also uh cause them injury. So in these cases, if you enter a plea of guilty, it may be used against you. So if you have a civil claim and you are worried that somebody's gonna sue you for for damages and contemplating entering a plea of guilty, my advice to you is to enter a plea of no contest instead. Now most of you are here for alleged traffic citations. You should understand if found guilty, in addition to the fine that I'm gonna ask you to pay, I will take from you something called demerit points. In the state of Wisconsin, if you accumulate 12 demerit points in one single year, your driving privilege will be revoked. If you are here for the offense of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence, also known drunk driving, you should know that you have the right to request a jury trial. If you do so, the trial will be held at the Dane County Circuit Court. It will not be held in Fitchburg. So briefly, I'm gonna talk to you a little bit about our philosophy in Fitchburg. It's our philosophy to see that justice is individualized. What I mean by that, that I'm gonna let you have the opportunity to um advance any mitigating circumstances that you may wish to advance. However, if you do that, you have it has to be believable and it has to be reasonable. The other variable that I use is um I look at your past record right in front of me, uh, any record that you have accumulated previous to coming here. So based on those two variables, I'll come with a verdict. It may then mean that two people faced with identical association may have different outcome. And that's the case in all traffic citations with the exception of traffic citations where alcohol or drugs played a factor in the issuance of the citations. In these cases, I do not have any willingness to compromise the verdict.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com