Former Wauwatosa Police Officer Joseph Mensah visited the Wisconsin State Capitol earlier this month to testify in favor of Senate Bill 25, legislation aimed at placing limits on repeated investigations of law enforcement officers who have already been cleared of wrongdoing. Mensah’s case has become central to the debate over the bill, which seeks to prevent law enforcement officers from being subjected to multiple legal reviews under Wisconsin’s broad “John Doe” statute without new evidence being presented.
Mensah, who served as a Wauwatosa officer from 2015 to 2020, was involved in three fatal shootings while on duty. In each case, Milwaukee County prosecutors ruled the shootings were justified self-defense, meaning Mensah was not charged. However, despite these rulings, he continued to face legal and public scrutiny. Under Wisconsin’s current John Doe law, judges can open new investigations at their discretion, even without new evidence. This allowed for continued legal challenges against Mensah, leading to his eventual resignation from the department.
Mensah’s case became a flashpoint in the broader national debate over police accountability and officer protections. Anti law enforcement activist groups called for his removal, and legal challenges against him continued even after prosecutors cleared him of any wrongdoing. His supporters argue that the repeated investigations amounted to legal harassment, using the John Doe process as a means to keep him entangled in the system despite multiple determinations that he acted lawfully.
SB 25, which Mensah supports, would require that new evidence be presented before a judge can reopen an investigation into a law enforcement officer who has already been cleared. Supporters of the bill, including Mensah, argue that it prevents officers from being repeatedly investigated for the same incident due to political or activist pressure. They say the current system discourages officers from serving in high-risk roles, knowing they could face indefinite legal scrutiny even after being exonerated.
Opponents of the bill, however, argue that it places unnecessary restrictions on judicial oversight and could make it harder to reinvestigate cases where concerns about an officer’s actions emerge over time. Some advocacy groups contend that the ability to reopen cases is crucial for ensuring accountability.
The Wisconsin State Lodge Fraternal Order of Police has voiced strong support for the bill, stating that law enforcement officers subjected to repeated investigations struggle to move on from incidents and return to duty. Officers still employed in the profession often face administrative suspensions while dealing with ongoing legal challenges, exacerbating staffing shortages at police departments already struggling to meet minimum personnel levels.
