Ron Schroeder Supervision requirements that leave him homeless and friendless

We are especially harsh on sex offenders and treat them all horribly, whether they are serial rapists or are a young man who had an affair with a consenting underage girl. All studies /experience shows that sex offenders are usually known well by the victim-often a family member and are often protected by that family, are never stopped and never brought to justice, The sex offender laws make these people homeless and friendless, making them vulnerable to new crimes to stay alive. They have  however, the lowest rate of re offense (with same type of crime)of any group.

Ron Schroeder
Ron Schroeder  528682
JCI ,PO Box 233, Black River Falls, WI 54615

Ron Schroeder was revoked for writing his daughter, supposedly to tell her why he could not contacting there anymore after restrictions were put on him> He is a find litigator and did win his release for the summer> However- the DOC is refusing to allow him to live with the family that is welcoming him and will help him reestablish himself; he is banned form having any contact with any ex offenders which includes the Project return and EXPO support groups which are specifically set up to support prisoners upon release. His is a sex offence crime- A one time event with the mother of his child. Like all our sex offense laws, Ron faces restrictions that make reintegration impossible and are way more than is needed.

Here is a petition for his release which gives the conditions
                   (mail to):
Judge Ralph Ramirez                   Sally Tess, Regional Chief
Waukesha Co. Courthouse             WI DOC / DCC
515 W. Moreland Blvd.                   141 NW Barstow St., Rm. 126
Waukesha, WI 53188                   Waukesha, WI 53188
262-548-7543                         262-521-5157   

Re: Ron Schroeder, DOC #528682
Waukesha Co. Case No. 2007CF496

I/we ask the court and DCC to:

1. Not allow Ron to be homeless. If he is, I/we'll ask him to reside on the courthouse, steps. I/we'll also send all snail-mail to him at the courthouse and/or DCC. I/we'll also petition Mayor Reilly, Alderman Thieme, and County Executive Farrow.

2. Not require "approval" for felon contact. Otherwise all felon letters, texts and emails will be sent to the court and/or DCC for review, "approval," and forwarding to Ron. See the reasoning in U.S. v. Colson, 16-2391 (CA7 1/11/17).

3. Not subject Ron to GPS monitoring without a due process hearing. CONPAS puts him at a low risk to reoffend and he's been given no offense-related risk assessment, despite his request for one. (Wis. Stat. 301.48(2g) requires a risk assessment.) See also Grady v. S.C., 135 S. Ct. 1368 (2015); State v. Moore, 792 S.E'.2d 540 (NC Ct. App, 2016). If on GPS without a due process hearing and/or risk assessment, I/we'll regularly request copies of Ron's Total Access Client Movement maps to ensure his wellbeing.

4. Not require Ron to have pre-approval nor chaperone to use computers/smartphones. Otherwise, all emails will be sent to the above email addresses for review and forwarding to Ron. No one can be expected to "chaperone" Ron for hours at a time during his legal research. And few employers will hire Ron if he requires a chaperone to even complete electronic applications. See the reasoning of Colson, above.
5. Not restrict Ron's access to libraries. See #4 above and the reasoning in Doe v. City of Albuquerque, 667 F.3d 1111 (CA10 2012). On Jan. 7, 2009 Judge J. Mac Davis clearly stated Ron's "victim" was an adult and there's no indication that Ron has an interest in victimizing minors (Tr. 10). Expecting Ron to be chaperoned at libraries is unreasonable. If required, I/we'll ask Ron to direct his inquiries to me/us and I/we'll forward to the court and/or DCC. I/we'll also petition Judge Crabb as this unreasonably restricts his ability to work on his federal appeal.

4 14 17
Explanation and more docs : I wrote and asked for more details for those who want to know more about Ron's conviction and sex offender status:
Ron Schroeder 528682, JCI PO Box 233, Black River Falls, WI 54615
   from  letter 4 5 2017
My conviction was 2nd degree sexual assault of an unconscious person. This was my then adult live in girlfriend; this  “crime” happened in our shared bed. I’ve enclosed 2 motions to dismiss my lawyer filed in February 2008. The Judge denied them and I went to trial March 2008. My appeal is still pending, and among other things, I am challenging the statute-arguing that our state lawmakers created that statue for date rape, College parties etc and not for adult consenting couples as Cassandra and I were. Cassandra was my girlfriend after my divorce. She is NOT the mother of my children. My ex-wife Nichole, ( the kid’s mother) has nothing to do with my criminal case.

I hope this explains it well enough for you. If not, don’t be afraid to ask me direct even difficult questions. I’m not only not ashamed of my case, I am aggressively appealing it and eager to get my conviction overturned ( it’s now in the Madison Federal court). I will be on SO(sex offender) status and cannot stay in shelters. 

And here is his original explanation of his revocation: written 2015:

I've been writing my daughters weekly since 2007 per a family court order.
Prior to my Oct. 2013 release from prison, my ex-wife told my-probation agent she no longer wanted me to write our kids. The agent filed an unsigned memo, without legal counsel, with Waukesha County Judge Kathryn W. Foster (my criminal judge), who held a hearing. According to the transcript, the sole reason for the no contact restriction was simply because the mother (my ex-wife) requested it (there were no allegations of misconduct towards the kids on my part at the time). I objected because the memo wasn't signed by DOG legal counsel (see footnote 1) and thus the agent was practicing law without a license, a crime (see footnote 2).
I also objected that the ban prohibited contact with children and others and violated my First Amendment right but Judge Foster replied, "You want to throw the 1st Amendment in, you are going to waste my time and your time" and implemented the prohibition.

I then pleaded with Judge Foster, saying that I've been writing my daughters weekly for years and now they're going to wonder why I've abandoned them. Judge Foster's shocking response was, "Mr. Schroeder, shush."

While appealing, I wrote my daughters after my release from prison under the 1st and 14th Amendment Constitutional protect¬ions. I simply didn't want my daughters to think I'd abandoned them. My agent moved to reimprison me for 3 years for continuing to write them. (He also sought to revoke my supervision for attending a Goodwill Industries job fair, applying for employ¬ment at a temp agency, and going to a social service agency for food - I left prison penniless.) After a hearing, an admin¬istrative law judge ordered me reimprisoned for 3 years. I'm appealing.

 This should be shocking, especially to civil/children's/ father's rights advocates It's a clear case of abuse of pro¬bation agent and judicial power.

I'm happy to provide copies of the transcript portions, revocation or court pleadings or decisions. If this wasn't documented in writing, it'd be almost unbelievable..

Thank you for taking time to read my situation. And thank you very much for your support.
I give authorization to publish the above, with or without editing.

Ron Schroeder, #528682 Jackson Corr. Inst. - Melrose P.O. Box 233
Black River Falls, WI 54615

1. Wis. Stat. 802.05(1) states, "Every pleading, written motion and other paper shall be signed by at least one attorney of re¬cord in the attorney's individual name, or, if the party is not represented by an attorney, shall be signed by the party.. .An unsigned paper shall be stricken unless omission of the signat¬ure is corrected promptly after being called to the attention of the attorney or party."

2. Wis. Stat. 757.30(2) states, "Every person who appears as agent, representative or attorney, for or on behalf of any other person, or any firm, partnership, association, or corporation in any action or proceeding in or before any court of record, circuit or supplemental court commissioner, or judicial tribun¬al of the United States ... shall be deemed to be practicing law within the meaning of this section." Wis. Stat. 757.30(1) makes practicing law without a, license punishable by a $50-500 Line and/or up to 1 year in jail

essays By Ron Schroeder:
Corrections imposition of Conditions of Supervision Unlawful/Prisoner petitions court to Stop Practice:

The Wisconsin Constitution And Separations of Powers Doctrine Do Not Authorize the Executive Branch of Government (I.E. state correction agency) to Impose a criminal sentence , including conditions of one.//

Re-Imprisoned for treatment never received:


Popular posts from this blog

AC case one: Jimmy Chandler solitary confinement AC setup at Boscobel

Anthony Salmon- Revocation that ruins all progress