Misconduct
    1.  unacceptable or improper behavior, especially by an employee or professional person.
    2. mismanagement, especially culpable neglect of duties.

Federal law holds all people granted lawful authority accountable for dismissing people’s rights without collecting justification.

18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law

The Wisconsin authorities hold equal standards for law enforcers within the State.  Officers are required to enforce the law without committing crimes or other misconduct.  Every department has written standards defining how an officer must act in all circumstances they will encounter.  To identify misconduct, compare officer actions to such documents which are available upon request at the department. (Officer procedures go by multiple titles.  Dept staff will provide)

Entering the position of law enforcement includes accepting responsibility for upholding standards that are reviewable online.  Such as the code of ethics, standards of conduct, multiple requirements in State statutes, the Bill of Rights and Constitutions they’ve sworn to uphold.  Recorded actions of law enforcers that violate elements of these documents serves as grounds for requesting correction of unlawful actions or dismissal of some actions within a court of law.  Correction requests can be made with superiors within an enforcers department.  A judge can also supply confirmation of misconduct that can be included with a grievance submitted to staff of the department.

Effort to Correct Misconduct
Bringing an issue to authorities outside a department can remedy what will not be addressed internally.  Be prepared to approach multiple positions in government to determine if someone will handle the issue you’re dealing with.  If none are helpful, one option is bringing the issue into a court of law where your questioning of the officer will be recorded.  The hearing transcript can be requested from the court to be presented to a city counsel, mayor, chief of police, or others.  Electing future local candidates that will properly address the issue may also become necessary for success.  

Tracking of Misconduct
Refer to Wis. Stat. § 165.85(3)(cm) Law enforcement standards board, which lists requirements and consequences imposed on officers by the State of Wisconsin.  The Wisconsin Legislature passed a law requiring law enforcement agencies to maintain these employment files and mandated that officers moving to new departments must allow the new department to review the previous department’s employment file.  However, this law does not compel the new agency to take action based on the information or even require them to review it.

Concerns exist about the inconsistent tracking of police officer reliability
There are documented issues with the “Brady list” system in Wisconsin, which is meant to track officers with histories of dishonesty or other conduct that could impact their credibility in court.  Prosecutors and defense attorneys are hence challenged to identify and address potentially unreliable testimony from officers.

Administrative Procedure and Review
If an initial court hearing disregards contents of evidence (gives a response contrary to evidence) The Administrative Procedure and Review process in Chapter 227 gives citizens an ability to have actions of law enforcers reviewed by a judge to determine if actions were within boundaries.