Those bloody bloody shoes

Xoff scored this earlier, but:

Detail in Koschnick's 'bloody shirt' campaign issue emerges

So Judge Randy Koschnick himself had ruled to exclude even more damning evidence at trial: two pairs of blood-spattered shoes. His ruling was reversed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in Knapp I.

The best part is the Koschnick campaign person's response:

Asked if Koschnick was omitting a detail of the murder case to help his campaign, Seamus Flaherty said, "We’re telling the whole story to the extent that it is relevant in this election."

I can see this guy is going to be a real barrel of laughs.

By the way, Journal-Sentinel reporter Steven Walters writes:

The issue was twice considered by the state Supreme Court, and once by the U.S. Supreme Court, because a police officer did give Knapp a Miranda warning before asking him what clothes he had been wearing. That led to the discovery of the blood sweat shirt.

No.

The issue was twice considered by the state Supreme Court, and once by the U.S. Supreme Court, because a police officer deliberately and intentionally did not give Knapp a Miranda warning before asking him what clothes he had been wearing. That led to the discovery of the bloody sweat shirt.

Fixed.

More precisely, the relevant U.S. Supreme Court decisions did not directly address the Wisconsin case insofar as it involved the deliberate and intentional withholding of the Miranda warning.

That fact is crucial to a meaningful understanding of the Wisconsin Supreme Court's disposition in Knapp II. But it's something you're also unlikely to hear from the Koschnick campaign.

I guess because it's not "relevant in this election." The hell it isn't.

When you're grandstanding about "tying the hands of law enforcement," best be aware of what law enforcement was up to.

See also: One Wisconsin Now's press release (.pdf).