Support for Obamacare Collapsing  |   Home  |   Reporting Fail

Former School Board President Caught Stealing

Wow.  This lady has issues. 

Lewandowski stole $60 from the wallet of a “close friend of 20 years” on April 23; $50 from the woman’s wallet May 7; and $880 in Franklin Little League funds from the same woman’s home May 21.

Suspecting Lewandowski of the first two thefts, the friend had acquired and installed a “nanny cam,” which recorded Lewandowski stuffing the cash into her bra during the third theft.

The video led police to another friend of Lewandowski’s, who said Lewandowski took cash from her wallet Aug. 29. That friend said the amount was $100 and Lewandowski said it was $50.

Lewandowski admitted to all four thefts and two not detailed in the complaint. But only the three thefts involving the woman who used the video camera have been charged.

Each of the three misdemeanor charges carries a maximum penalty of nine months in jail and a $10,000 fine.

Lewandowski was president of the School Board before she resigned for personal reasons in 2002. She was first elected to the board in 1992.

This, however, is intolerable. 

Jankowski said Lewandowski stated a reason that she allegedly stole the money, but he would not say what it was. Jankowski also said the prosecutor and Lewandowski’s attorney are negotiating a possible deferred prosecution agreement.

She’s a chronic thief who was caught on video and admitted to the crime.  Is there any reason that we can’t put her away for a while?  If she’s willing to steal from her friends, isn’t there also a strong possibility that she has stolen or will steal from others too?  Some jail time is in order here.

Posted by Owen at 1726 hrs
Law + Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

1. I can think of one reason this may not get prosecuted, and also why Detective Jankowski wouldn’t elaborate:  a claim of kleptomania.  If there is a valid diagnosis, then treatment and a suspended sentence may be in order.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2009 at 1744 hrs
   
   
   

2. You’re kidding, right? If not, I hope you never get called for jury duty. What’s next, letting murders go if they claim they just couldn’t resist? The best treatment, in my opinion, is good old tried and true jail time, then if that made the proper impression, she could pay for her own therapy, cuz you know if she gets a suspended sentence and is ordered to get treatment, we, the people will wind up paying for it.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2009 at 2008 hrs
   
   
   

3. Whoah, back the truck up.

   First of all I said I could think of one reason. I did not give it either approval or disapproval. Second, I said a VALID diagnosis, not a Twinkie defense where it is here today and gone tomorrow. I would venture to guess that treatment will cost no more than incarceration, if cost is your bottom line for determining what to do.

   As for hoping who does and doesn’t get called for jury duty?  I doubt you would make it past voir dire so any potential defendant won’t have to worry if your name comes up.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2009 at 2116 hrs
   
   
   

4. Treatment is a hell of a lot cheaper than incarceration of a criminal for a non-violent crime.

   Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on July 20, 2009 at 2118 hrs
   
   
   

5. Imagine that ... a (prior) WB school board thinking our money belongs to them…

   (I know, it’s a cheap shot)...

   

   Posted by Smeety on July 20, 2009 at 2129 hrs
   
   
   

6. alright, it’s not a good joke, especially since she was school board prez at like Oak Creek or something…

   Posted by Smeety on July 20, 2009 at 2130 hrs
   
   
   

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.