After asking Fassbender about the last person to see Teresa Halbach alive being an obvious place to start, kRATz makes the exaggerated check-mark motion on his note pad. He did that sickening motion numerous times. It is a sign of utter arrogance. So infantile. Can you imagine his bullet list?
- Ask Fassy super smart question.
- Sweat.
- Petty objection.
- Sweat some more.
- Send dickpic.
- Sweat so much I feel drips tickle my crack as they run down my back.
- Erection!
"The way I hear it, Kenny was indeed offering up his 'services' to a whole list of domestic abuse victims... pro boner... cost him a 4-month suspension, 20k, his marriage, his house, his reputation, and any semblance of integrity remaining in his horrific existence...he's THE PRIZE... LOL." [HuNuWutWen]Click here for Associated Press reporter Ryan Foley's audio interview of Ken Kratz.
"I am the most notable prosecutor in Wisconsin history because of the Steven Avery case." - Ken Kratz, May 2010 (page 19)
"He [Ken Kratz] would remind me of who he was, how he had prosecuted the biggest case around here, and what a 'prize' he was." - Dawn King, September 24, 2010 (page 14)
A domestic violence victim who turned to Kratz’s office for help claims that the DA sexually harassed her via numerous text messages, trying to convince her to have an affair with him. One of his texts read, in pertinent part:
“I’m the atty. I have the $350,000 house. I have the 6-figure career. You may be the tall, young, hot nymph, but I am the prize!”
Stephanie Van Groll: "Three Days of Hell" When Wis. DA Kenneth Kratz "Sexted" Her
Domestic abuse victim Stephanie Van
Groll and Calumet County, Wisc. District Attorney Kenneth Kratz are seen
in file photos. Katz "sexted" Van Groll repeatedly while prosecuting
her alleged assailant, threatening to drop the case if she didn't engage
in a sexual relationship. (AP Photo)
September 15, 2010
A prominent Wisconsin district attorney sent repeated text messages trying to spark an affair with a domestic abuse victim while he was prosecuting her ex-boyfriend, a police report shows.
The 26-year-old woman complained last year to police after receiving 30 texts from Calumet County District Attorney Kenneth Kratz in three days, according to the report obtained by The Associated Press.
"Are you the kind of girl that likes secret contact with an older married elected DA ... the riskier the better?" Kratz, 50, wrote in a message to Stephanie Van Groll in October 2009. In another, he wrote: "I would not expect you to be the other woman. I would want you to be so hot and treat me so well that you'd be THE woman! R U that good?"
Kratz was prosecuting Van Groll's ex-boyfriend on charges he nearly choked her to death last year. He also was veteran chair of the Wisconsin Crime Victims' Rights Board, a quasi-judicial agency that can reprimand judges, prosecutors and police officers who mistreat crime victims.
In a combative interview in his office Wednesday, Kratz did not deny sending the messages and expressed concern their publication would unfairly embarrass him personally and professionally. He said the Office of Lawyer Regulation had found he did not violate any rules governing attorney misconduct. That office cannot comment on investigations.
"This is a non-news story," Kratz shouted. But he added, "I'm worried about it because of my reputational interests. I'm worried about it because of my 25 years as a prosecutor."
'Three days of hell'
Van Groll told police in Kaukauna, Wis., where she lived, that she felt pressured to have a relationship with Kratz or he would drop the charges against her ex-boyfriend.
By The Associated Press
March 28, 2011
A former prosecutor who sent racy text messages to a domestic abuse victim will not face criminal charges over misconduct and sexual assault allegations levied by more than a dozen women, the Wisconsin Justice Department announced Monday.
State investigators determined that former Calumet County District Attorney Ken Kratz’s “conduct appears to fit the connotation of ‘misconduct’ and demonstrates inappropriate behavior but does not satisfy the elements required to prosecute,” wrote Assistant Attorney General Tom Storm.
Kratz’s attorney, Robert Bellin, said his office was investigating whether anyone lied in an effort to hurt Kratz.
“I think it’s obviously the right decision,” Bellin said of not filing charges. “I don’t think we were that worried about it. We think that there were statements from individuals who came forward who were not completely truthful.”
Kratz resigned from his $105,000 per year position in October after The Associated Press reported he had sent 30 text messages trying to strike up an affair with a domestic abuse victim while he prosecuted her ex-boyfriend on a strangulation charge. Kratz, who was 50 at the time, called 26-year-old Stephanie Van Groll “a hot nymph” and asked if she was “the kind of girl that likes secret contact with an older married DA.”
Van Groll complained to police and Kratz was removed from her ex-boyfriend’s case. The Justice Department investigated at the time but decided not to file charges. Kratz was instead ordered to self-report the text messages to the Office of Lawyer Regulation, a separate state entity that reviews attorneys’ conduct. The office declined to discipline Kratz, saying he hadn’t violated any rules.
Pressure mounted on Kratz to resign after Van Groll’s allegations became public. Then-Gov. Jim Doyle began removal procedures and other women came forward with accusations. The Justice Department and the lawyer regulation office both reopened investigations.
The Justice Department on Monday released its case summary, which said Van Groll was among a dozen or so women who complained about Kratz.
Two claimed they had sexual contact with Kratz, five alleged misconduct in office, and one alleged Kratz improperly told her about a search warrant. The remaining complaints didn’t include an identifiable criminal offense, the report said.
Storm, who led the investigation, wrote that one of the alleged sexual encounters occurred in 1999 and the statute of limitations had expired. The other sexual contact complaint contained “insurmountable proof problems,” Storm wrote, adding the woman wouldn’t be a credible witness because she suffered from mental illness, had prior convictions and consented to the contact.
As for misconduct in office, complaints included the messages Kratz sent to Van Groll as well as accusations Kratz sought a personal relationship with one woman in exchange for help in winning a gubernatorial pardon and a relationship with another woman in exchange for help writing a victim impact statement against her husband.
But investigators found Kratz technically didn’t fail or refuse to perform his duties, didn’t exceed his authority and didn’t try to gain a dishonest advantage.
A woman also alleged that while she was out to eat with Kratz, he was on the phone with investigators discussing a search that was under way, possibly in connection with a search warrant. Wisconsin law prohibits premature disclosure of a search warrant’s existence. But the woman couldn’t say that Kratz actually disclosed a warrant existed at any time.
“There is no reasonable possibility that further investigation will reveal evidence establishing the elements of a criminal offense,” Storm wrote. “There are no further leads to pursue and the file should be closed.”
Separately, Van Groll has filed a federal civil lawsuit accusing Kratz of sexual harassment. Van Groll’s attorney, Michael Fox, didn’t immediately return a message Monday.
Further allegations against 'sexting' DA claim social invitation to an autopsy
By The Wisconsin State Journal
September 21, 2010
Weeks after Calumet County District Attorney Kenneth Kratz was caught sending sexually charged text messages to a crime victim, he shared confidential details of a murder investigation with another woman and invited her to wear high heels to the victim's autopsy, according to a letter obtained Monday by the Wisconsin State Journal.
September 21, 2010
Weeks after Calumet County District Attorney Kenneth Kratz was caught sending sexually charged text messages to a crime victim, he shared confidential details of a murder investigation with another woman and invited her to wear high heels to the victim's autopsy, according to a letter obtained Monday by the Wisconsin State Journal.
In the letter sent to Gov. Jim Doyle on Friday, the woman called for Kratz's removal from office and an investigation into why the district attorney was not sanctioned for his improper attempts to strike up a sexual relationship with Stephanie Van Groll, whose ex-boyfriend Kratz was prosecuting on domestic abuse charges
The woman could not be reached for comment Monday. However, Doyle spokesman Adam Collins released a copy of the letter to the media Monday afternoon - with the woman's name blacked out - shortly before Doyle announced he would seek to remove Kratz once he receives a "verified" complaint from a taxpayer in Calumet County. Van Groll lives in a different county.
Kratz, who has held his position for 18 years, has apologized for sending the text messages and said he would seek therapy. He began a medical leave on Monday, but his attorney has said he would fight attempts to remove him from office.
Kratz was also pressured to resign from the Crime Victims Rights Board, which he had chaired for 11 years, on Dec. 3 after Van Groll called Kaukauna police to report that Kratz had been harassing her by sending 30 text messages in three days.
Last week, another woman wrote to Doyle's office to say she had had a similar experience with Kratz, 50, after the two met on the online dating service Match.com in December.
"We exchanged a few emails and eventually agreed to meet for dinner," she wrote. "I was hesitant since he had written some things that were inappropriate to say to someone at that stage of communicating, and also seems to vacillate between kind and interesting and insecure, impatient and demanding. But I figured that as a public figure in a position of authority, I should be safe with him."
Later in the letter, the woman recounts incidents that appear to match the circumstances surrounding the case of Michelle Jaeger, a 39-year-old Chilton woman who disappeared in early January. Her body was found on Jan. 24, and Manitowoc County District Attorney Mark Rohrer has charged her former boyfriend, Roger D. Rosenthal, with first-degree intentional homicide. Jaeger's body was found near Brillion in Manitowoc County.
"We met for dinner at a restaurant in Green Bay on January 23, 2010," the woman wrote. "During dinner he was interrupted several times by phone calls from Detectives who were investigating a case of a missing woman who was suspected of having been killed by her boyfriend.
"I told him that if he needed to step away to have a private discussion, I didn't mind. He had no problem talking to them in front of me and then sharing the details with me as well. Many of the details that had not been made available to the public, as I later found out as I watched the news and searched reports on the Internet."
In the days following, the woman said Kratz kept her updated on the murder investigation "and even went so far as to inviting me to go with him to the autopsy (provided I would be his girlfriend and would wear high heels and a skirt)."
According to the Chilton Times Journal, Jaeger's autopsy was scheduled for Jan. 26.
The woman said she also felt harassed by text messages she received from Kratz, which appear to bear a strong resemblance to the texts the prosecutor sent to the abuse victim last October. She eventually told him to stop contacting her.
"If I didn't answer his texts immediately, he would become insecure and question why I hadn't responded and would attack me or my character," she wrote. "He would remind me of who he was, how he had prosecuted the biggest case around here and what a ‘prize' he was."
She ended the letter to Doyle by saying, "Please take action and do the right thing."
On Monday afternoon, Doyle said his office had not yet checked out the woman's allegations but called them "very troubling" and said officials would investigate. He added he found it "unimaginable" and "mind-boggling" that Kratz may have used his job, especially access to a victim's body, as a lure to become involved with the woman.
"To have an autopsy used as a premise for a social engagement, it's just beyond anything anybody could imagine," Doyle said.
The Sexting DA's Romantic Adventures On Match.com
By Jezebel
April 4, 2011

The Wisconsin Dept. of Justice has released details of its investigation of sexting DA Kenneth Kratz. In addition to disturbing allegations by a variety of women, investigators found Kratz's Match.com profile and messages. Kratz's username: exboytoy1.
In addition to his repeated and unwanted sexting of Stephanie Van Groll, Kratz was accused of inviting a woman on a date to an autopsy, and pressuring another woman to have sex with him so he would support her pardon.
In addition to these, documents released Friday discuss new allegations. One woman says Kratz made "sexual advances" her while he was prosecuting her husband, including asking her to listen while he described "sexual scenarios" over the phone, offering to "send [her] to Chicago to learn how to be submissive" and fondling her under her skirt (this was consensual).
A social worker accuses him of sending inappropriate emails (more on this below).
A woman whom Kratz had prosecuted said he told her to perform oral sex on him or he could "get her jammed up" (this woman was apparently deemed an unreliable witness because she has mental illness and a criminal record).
Several women came forward with other complaints — one said Kratz asked her 17-year-old daughter inappropriate questions after she was the victim of a sex offender, while another said Kratz once told her, at work, "I won't cum in your mouth."
Several of the women above saved email correspondences between themselves and Kratz, and the woman he asked on the autopsy date saved their Match.com correspondence.
Here's Kratz's profile summary:

If you're having trouble reading the grey-on-grey, the text reads:
It's complicated, I'm not!By January 2010, when Kratz began messaging the woman in question, these "amazing life experiences" already included several alleged incidents of harassment, including the 30 racy text messages he sent to Stephanie Van Groll in 2009 (he wasn't kidding about being communicative). It may also be true that his divorce was drama-free, but he failed to mention that it was his third. Complicated indeed!
Currently separated, final divorce pending. No drama in the divorce. I hope to be able to find someone to communicate with, then begin to date eventually. Serious relationships ONLY. I am an attorney in Appleton, respectful, communicative, very affectionate, "sappy" romantic, own my home, and have amazing life experiences.
Here's the first message the woman provided, sent by Kratz on January 8:
ironic
Its [sic, as is everything else from here on out] ironic that the woman who probably struck the sharpets chord with me is the one that I find most interesting. The fact that you accepted my explaination (despite the twinge of arrogance left therein) demonstrates the depth of your personality...any assumption that I made about you skaking through life on your looks has been dispelled.
Not only would I welcome an opportunity to meet you for some conversation, I'd be honorred.
[Name redacted], you have left an impression with me that is far removed from the plastic coated responses I otherwise receive...even the women who are "thrilled" to talk to me have a veneer of animation to them. There is nothing fake about you.
Thank you for your response. You are a stunning and impressive woman. I would live to take you to dinner. Write soon. Thank you.
KenThe fact that the woman in question both struck a chord with Kratz and interested him does not appear to be ironic, but what is ironic is that Kratz fancied himself something of a writing expert, mocking a social worker (not his Match.com contact) for using the word "conflictual" in a report. He said it wasn't a word; it is one. Unlike, say, "skaking." When the social worker set him straight about "conflictual," he replied "you can either flirt with me or not — you can't have it both ways." She told him she wasn't interested in flirting, and the matter dropped, although she says he did comment to her about a reporter who had "big, beautiful breasts."
But back to the Match.com story — here's Kratz's next message (sent at 12:45 AM on Jan. 12):
Re: ironic
Wednesday? Let me know if we can do it before you leave—-Im hungry!
By the way is this a date (where I get to hold out hope of seeing you eventually) or a lunch with a possible friend thing, where I get to see how beautiful you are but realize that never in a million years will you be holdingher???
I have so many questions for you, seems you wont get in any edgewise!!!
If we do go to dinner and its a date, can I pick out the heels you will wear? I find that entertaining!
OK, talk soon, my phone [redacted by DOJ]...text or call anytime!!!
KenKratz appears to have been quite the fan of heels — he'd subsequently ask her to wear them to a crime scene, and later to the autopsy (she declined both). At 7:57 the next morning, he apparently felt he had come on a little strong:
plans
I re-read my message from last night. Guess I was a little impatient.
OK, lets try this again... If you have to leave town, just call next week when we can schedule something! I am truly looking forward to taking you to a lovely dinner (I'm sure whatever heels you pick will be beautiful—-LOL).
Regarding whether this is a "date" or not, we are both single and if there is some spark great, we'll go from there. If not, you will always have me available as a friend of yours. We don't have to "call" this anything! Call or text me.
Better?
KenAnd finally:
RE: plans
If I get 1 meal with you, dinner for sure! Friday or Saturday is best...but I will make myself available when you are free. What kind of food do you like? Green Bay, Appleton, in between...everything works.
I am a little "taken" by you. Im sorry I sound like Im in 7th grade. Obvious that doesn't happen to me very often
Let me know, and Im there! Thanks again..
KenKen and the woman did end up having dinner at the Black and Tan restaurant in Green Bay, and it was there that he — according to her testimony — took several phone calls and discussed an ongoing missing-person investigation with detectives while at the table with her. He also told her he suspected that the missing woman's boyfriend had murdered her, and invited her to the crime scene (in heels, natch), all while getting increasingly drunk. She says "DA Kratz was not worried about drinking and driving, and she felt he thought he was 'above the law.' DA Kratz told [her] that he would not have a problem if he was stopped while driving home because he had friends."
In the days that followed, Kratz continued to text her with unreleased information about the case, including the fact that investigators had discovered a body. That's when he invited her to the autopsy, "as long as she would wear heels and act as his girlfriend." According to the documents, she "stated that she thought this was wrong on so many levels." There was apparently no second date.
The woman's statement and the e-mails sent by Kratz can be found at the following link:
https://www.convolutedbrian.com/Support/kratz/DOJ_Investigation/Kratz_Records_Part_1_20110401102147362.pdf
Kratz's Pretrial Behavior Called 'Unethical' by Others within the Legal Community
By lmogier at Reddit
I came across this article that Zellner tweeted a link to recently and found it Interesting that even Kratz's peers/colleagues think his behavior was unethical and wrong (although he still defends his actions - cause he is THE PRIZE!)...
http://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/local/steven-avery/2016/01/15/kratzs-pretrial-behavior-called-unethical/78630248/
Some highlights:
-- "To me, those press conferences would suggest a colorable violation of the (bar association) trial publicity rule. The risks of prejudice are magnified in smaller communities because of the pervasive nature of the publicity and the likelihood that virtually the entire community will have strong feelings about the case. The Avery case appeared to have captured the attention of the Fox Valley market ... and you cannot un-ring that bell." ----Ben Kempinen, University of Wisconsin Law School clinical professor of law and director of the Prosecution Project.
Prosecutors are not supposed to be making public statements prior to a defendant's trial regarding the following areas:
"The character, credibility, reputation or criminal record of a party, suspect in a criminal investigation or witness, or the identity of a witness, or the expected testimony of a party or witness." "The identity or nature of physical evidence expected to be presented." "Any opinion as to the guilt or innocence of a defendant or suspect in a criminal case or proceeding that could result in deprivation of liberty." "Information the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is likely to be inadmissible evidence in a trial and would, if disclosed, create a substantial risk of prejudicing an impartial trial."
Abbe Smith, director of the criminal defense and prisoner advocacy clinic at Georgetown University, said Kratz's opening declaration in his March 2, 2006, press conference exclaiming "we now have determined" and his continuing comments about Dassey supposedly hearing screams and running over to his uncle's trailer were highly improper for a press briefing.
"It's unethical behavior with no legitimate purpose," Smith told USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin. "Prosecutors should err on the side of not inflaming the public. To prosecute a case in the media damages the legal system because you're prejudicing the jury process."
*"There is absolutely no purpose for any of this stuff that Ken Kratz did," * said Ritnour, who served two terms in two largely rural counties similar to Manitowoc and Calumet counties, from 2003 through 2010.
"He likes and wants his name out there. He is definitely trying to get to the people who will then be in the jury pool. Even if Kratz loses (at trial), he still kind of wins anyway because he convicted Avery and Dassey in the court of public opinion."
However, several lawyers and courtroom experts said that Kratz's behavior was clearly inappropriate for any prosecutor because his statements were eroding the opportunity for Dassey and Avery to receive a fair and impartial jury trial.
FORENSIC EXPERT: KRATZ GIVES FALSE STORY.
Brent Turvey, a nationally recognized forensic scientist and criminal profiler in Alaska, said the crime scene evidence collected from inside of the Avery residence does not match up with Kratz's salacious and inflammatory press conference statements around the time of Dassey's arrest and purported confession to the pair of investigators.
Ken Kratz gives this false story," Turvey said. "It's pure fantasy. The entire theory comes from the fantasies of these police investigators (interviewing Dassey). The problem here is that (Kratz) gave false information, this whole sexual fantasy, talking about Teresa Halbach talking and begging and yelling when none of this had any forensic science to back it up.
"Why does this matter? Because you are not allowed to gin up the public and misrepresent the evidence when talking to the press, and the only reason you do that is when you and the police don't have a good case to begin with. Ken Kratz was trying this case in the press to disparage the defendants. What these judges should have done was put a gag order in place. There should have been some consequences from the Wisconsin Bar Association, and the judge who is seeing this nonsense go on should have put a stop to this. Nobody in this case wanted a fair trial."
Link to motion that lists ALL of publicity (and actual wording) of media coverage - including Kratz's:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Defendants-Memo-on-Examples-of-Prejudicial-Pretrial-Publicity.pdf
Sexual Misconduct Accusations Against ‘Making a Murderer’ Prosecutor Undermine Conviction, Defense Attorney Says
The Wisconsin prosecutor who convicted Steven Avery, the subject of the blockbuster documentary Making a Murderer, bragged about his role in the controversial case to impress women he wanted to date and was accused multiple times of abusing his official position to coerce women into sexual conversations and acts, according to documents obtained by Newsweek.
