home

Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills Self

By Jeralyn, Section Crime in the News
Posted on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 11:34:25 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A man in Wisconsin killed himself and left behind notes confessing to killing Judge Lefkow's husband and mother. She had ruled against him in a medical malpractice suit.

Update: Article about the suspect here.

He would come to court and sit quietly in the front row, an angry man with a disfigured face, a tormented mind - and an all-consuming grudge against the doctors he claimed had botched his cancer treatment and ruined his life.

Bart A. Ross, the 57-year-old Polish emigre who killed himself in a Milwaukee suburb Thursday, left a suicide note in his van saying that he had killed the husband and mother of U.S. District Judge Joan Lefkow, Chicago police said.

< Arrest Warrant Issued for Michael Jackson | Reporters' Shield Law Protections Seen as Weakening >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills Self | 31 comments (31 topical)
    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 11:54:20 AM EST
    Does this mean they will let Matt Hale see his parents now?

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:11:22 PM EST
    How long before the wingers start demanding apologies to Hale for jumping to the conclusion that he must be involved?

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:12:33 PM EST
    does anyone else smelll a set up?

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#4)
    by Patrick on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:16:49 PM EST
    Wingers? A perjorative comment like that frequently indicates the commenter is not open to debate. As it stands, Hale was a legitmate Suspect/Person of Interest or however you want to label him, in this case.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#5)
    by Jlvngstn on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:20:24 PM EST
    Just goes to show that we should not go around and detain a bunch of white folks with bad haircuts and swastika tattoos just because there is a level of interest in a particular group. Sad sad story........

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:21:36 PM EST
    Gave him radiation treatment without consent? That guy was obviously off his rocker. Getting set up for radiation treatments is not like going for an x-ray, it takes quite a bit of preparation during which he would have had plenty of time to fend off the "terrorists" by just walking out. And no I don't think Hale deserves an apology. He was the obvious suspect because of his own actions. Meanwhile, a Denver columnist is getting death threats that look an awful lot like the ones that Alan Berg got before The Order (part of Hale's crowd) had him executed. Methinks that all the government focus on islamic terrorists has caused them to neglect our own home-grown Christian terrorists too much.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:27:52 PM EST
    Christian terrorists aren't being ignored by the government; Christian terrorists ARE the government

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:39:06 PM EST
    OK, so it appears Ross was not a white supremicist, Matt Hale disciple, or something else along those lines. But the response on the extreme right wing was certainly revealing. They reveled in the murders, seeing them as justified and as terrorisitic leverage that can be used against the judicial system. Apologies? Hell no!

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:42:11 PM EST
    Michael Ditto-- The government had Hale under surveillance (taping conversations) for 2.5 years before busting him on what almost everyone thinks was slim evidence. They weren't ignoring squat.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#10)
    by Che's Lounge on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 12:50:10 PM EST
    There were two of them. Ramember?

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 01:03:07 PM EST
    Mr Ross did the world a favor! Ballistics match, letter sent to NBC gives details only the killer would know, Ross's family said he was unbalanced and the attorney who represented the attorney Ross sued said EVERY court ruling and decision went against Ross and they were afraid he'd do something crazy. Enough for me. I hope NO ONE apologizes to Matt Hale, the anti semetic pig. He's a logical suspect who authorities will look at over and over again for crimes he may be involved in. I just hope he gets 10-20 years for his conspiracy charge when he's sentenced next month!!!

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 01:45:45 PM EST
    Ditto, Canuck Matt Hale isn't a Christian. Careful, your religous hatred is showing. Another comment like that might make you a bigot. Silo Show me where anyone on this site (or anywhere, for that matter) "reveled" in the judges death. I am continually surprised by the increasing Anti-Christian, disingenuous attitude that permeates the Left. You guys never cease to write your own epitaphs, do you?

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#13)
    by txpublicdefender on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 02:25:00 PM EST
    The Horse, there were many postings on white supremacy and neo-Nazi sites that praised the murders of the judge's family. I haven't seen anything like that on this site, however.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 02:26:21 PM EST
    The Horse with no Name at March 10, 2005 02:45 PM that horse your riding, definitely has a name, and it is a disingenuous attitude that you suggest otherwise.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#15)
    by txpublicdefender on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 02:32:50 PM EST
    Just wanted to add that I don't think Matt Hale or any of his followers are owed an apology either. Law enforcement was right to investigate their possible involvement. It's like not investigating the spouse of a murder victim. You always have to at least investigate the most logical suspect. The key is not having tunnel vision and investigating only that person. Here, law enforcement seemed to be focusing a lot of their energy on properly collecting and testing the forensic evidence at the scene, so it doesn't appear that they were just looking for a scapegoat. On another note, what the hell was Hale's attorney doing telling the press about the cryptic message Hale wanted him to send? I realize that's probably not privileged, because it went through the mom, but it's still confidential--since it relates to his representation. Unless Hale consented to him releasing that information, I would think that is something he could face discipline for.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 05:02:47 PM EST
    Matt Hale you dirty bastad, you didn't do it afterall.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#17)
    by Richard Aubrey on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 05:02:49 PM EST
    txpublic. Are you sure that had something to do with his defense? Did his attorney decline to do a Lynne Stewart and pass on messages to bad guys?

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Mar 10, 2005 at 05:51:11 PM EST
    Horse no name, See Orcinus for your proof of 'revelers': http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2005/03/gotcha.html

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 11, 2005 at 03:27:00 AM EST
    Horse: I never claimed that Matthew Hale was a Christian. I didn't use the word Christian in the same paragraph. What I did write was that Hale is part of the same white supremacist crowd as The Order. And nothing I wrote could be construed as anti-Christian except maybe by the most insecure of Christians, who could never possibly admit that there might be extremists among their ranks. If you want to be an apologist for the likes of Fred Phelps and his Christian cult, then you had better be prepared to do the same for the mullahs in Saudi Arabia. Because if you don't, you're a hypocrite. Or you can join us in the world that isn't all black and white, and realize that there are bad Christians and bad Muslims and bad atheists and bad politicians, and they all deserve to be treated equally under the law.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#20)
    by txpublicdefender on Fri Mar 11, 2005 at 06:35:50 AM EST
    Richard, I agree that the defense attorney was right not to pass on the message. But that's where it should have ended. There was absolutely no reason or justification for telling the news media about the incident at all, except to insert himself in the public discussion of the Judge's murder, and to possibly do damage to his client.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#21)
    by Jlvngstn on Fri Mar 11, 2005 at 08:13:13 AM EST
    nicely said Ditto.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 11, 2005 at 08:32:35 AM EST
    Ditto Not to belabor the point, but your post was about Matt Hale and The Order. What this had to do with "Home Grown Christian Terrorists" - I have no idea - but I can only conclude some animosity as you obviously felt the need to inject an anti-religious sentiment as a parting shot. I agree - let's denounce all terrorists. But lets also be honest - Fred Phelps and Osama aren't even in the same ballpark.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 11, 2005 at 08:42:25 AM EST
    ok so I just googled Fred Phelps; he's much worse than I thought. I don't think he is a typical Christian. He's definately a radical, lots of hate speach, etc.. Maybe even a 'terrorist' - but he still hasn't flown planes into any buildings.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 11, 2005 at 09:47:49 AM EST
    I never meant to imply that such comments were posted on this site. I apologize for my lack of clarity. I meant that gleeful comments were posted on the sites of a good number of white supremacist and other hate groups.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 11, 2005 at 08:18:56 PM EST
    The Horse: You make my point for me. Fred Phelps is not the typical Christian, and Osama is not the typical Muslim. Anyone who thinks The Order isn't a terrorist organization obviously hasn't googled them either.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 11, 2005 at 08:49:34 PM EST
    Ditto Agreed. But your suggestion that the government should divert resources from hunting down head-chopping WTC-destroying civilian-mass-murdering islamic terrorists to focus on Fred Phelps, a small-time potty-mouthed christian wacko, is ridiculous.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#27)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Mar 12, 2005 at 05:36:39 AM EST
    Horse. We all pick our particular betes noires. Ditto's is Phelps and his ilk. That Phelps isn't actually killing people wholesale is not exactly relevant. He's CHRISTIAN, for Somebody's sake! Isn't that bad enough? And he says lots of bad things about gays. Put together mass murderers by comparison just ain't in it.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 12, 2005 at 09:28:25 AM EST
    You seem to be side tracked on religion. This man ross murdered a family period. Hale is a lethal bigot period. colour race religion means nothing. If the judge was white and her ancestors had come on the mayflower Hale would still have found a reason. He is not stable. He paranoia is fuled by those who follow him period

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#29)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 12, 2005 at 09:35:30 AM EST
    Apologies to Mr. Ditto, if I used a sledgehammer to drive a tack.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#30)
    by Richard Aubrey on Sat Mar 12, 2005 at 09:52:31 AM EST
    Lisa. If Hale is a bigot and the judge and her kin were all members of the DAR and the Mayflower society or whatever it is, what would Hale have to be bigoted against? I know Hale's worth discussing, but as far as we know he had nothing to do with this murder. Ross was under the delusion the judge was responsible for his situation. No bigotry there, as far as we know.

    Re: Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sun Mar 13, 2005 at 12:04:02 PM EST
    Brian Nichols, Bart Ross, Perceived Unfairness (Courts Under Attack)... Taking a life is wrong! Fighting the justice system outside of its contour isn’t rational. Freedom has provided civil liberties when used correctly removes insurmountable barriers such as segregation, discrimination and the like. Although many Americans have formed certain perceptions about the judiciary that represents an overall lack of trust, one must prove their argument within the structure provided and advocate change through civilized conduct. There are many methods of mentally or physically withdrawing from a hostile situation. The most common, attribute racist behavior to ignorance and chose to educate as a response to discrimination, which can give a sense of empowerment. A spate of violence in the judicial system has many uneasy and on edge. Security at federal, state, and local courts across the country has been increased in the wake of the shooting of three people in Atlanta (Judge Rowland Barnes, his court reporter and a Fulton County deputy) today and last week’s killings of U.S. District Court Judge Joan Humphrey Lefkow’s husband and mother in Chicago. Since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, courthouses today are already secured by electronic surveillance systems, armed security officers, and metal detectors and scanning devices at every public entrance. In short, Judges are often the target of threats from defendants or litigants. They worry that their addresses and other personal information are easily accessible using the Internet and public records. And, there are trials that have the potential for additional security concerns. In Chicago, police concluded that 57-year-old Bart Ross, a Poland immigrant, harbored a grudge against Judge Lefkow because she dismissed his malpractice lawsuit. In Atlanta, observers say a second rape trial was going badly for 34-year-old Brian Nichols, an African-American. It was his second trial in as many weeks. The first ended in a mistrial after a jury was unable to reach a verdict (8 to 4 in favor of acquittal). Public confidence plays a significant role in the ability of courts to perform their function effectively. Courts must rely for enforcement of their decisions on retaining sufficient respect from individual citizens so that the vast majority will comply voluntarily. Perceptions influence, even shape, behavior. Both Bart Ross and Brian Nichols appear to have expressed a concern about possible unfairness. Note, more than one-third of all Georgians see African Americans as receiving worst treatment than others by the court system. See “Essay: Race and the Georgia Courts: Implications of the Georgia Public Trust and Confidence Survey for Batson v. Kentucky and its Progeny,” 37 Ga. L. Rev. 1021. In fact, there are twenty years of surveys (1978 to 1998), that identify positive and negative images of the judiciary recurred with varying degrees of force-fulness across the nation. See David B. Rottman’s, “On Public Trusts and Confidence: Does Experience with the Courts Promote or Diminish It?” Negative images centered on perceived inaccessibility, unfairness in the treatment of racial and ethnic minorities, and lack of concern about the problems of ordinary people. There is also a concern that the courts are biased in favor of the wealthy and corporations - political considerations exerted an undue influence on the judiciary. Nonetheless, improving public trust and confidence of the courts is fundamental and likely to be the best defense against the emotional reaction of losing a legal case. As early as 1988, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice, William H. Rehnquist, detailed the extent, almost since the inception of our system of government, that the courts require the public’s trust and confidence. See “The Supreme Court: The First Hundred Years Were the Hardest,” 42 U. Miami L. Rev. 475, 477 (1988). Justice Rehnquist provided the following example: “When former Chief Justice Oliver Ellsworth, an appointee of President George Washington, fell ill in December 1800, president John Adams turned to John Jay asking him to return to that position (Jay having served as the first Chief Justice). But, John Jay refused the appointment writing ‘The Court, labored under a [judicial] system so defective that amongst its other problems, it did not possess the public confidence and respect which as the last resort of the justice of the nation, it should....’” Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor in her address to the National Conference on Public Trust and Confidence in the Justice System (July 1999) has expressed a similar concern: “[i]n the lasts analysis, it is the public we serve, and we do care what the public thinks of us.” But, prior to a 1999 study sponsored by the National Center for State Courts and the Hearst Corporation, “How the Public Views the State Courts” there was no systematic body of evidence that could document the extent to which and the ways in which perceptions of the court differ across social groups. The 1999 survey findings reveal stark differences in how minority groups view the judicial system. African Americans consistently display a more negative view of the courts and less trust and confidence in the judicial system than do White/Non-Hispanics or Hispanics. That is, as a general matter, blacks express low levels of confidence in the courts, lower than other groups. Minority groups perceive themselves as treated worse by the judicial systems because: (1) court personnel aren’t helpful and courteous; (2) most juries are not representative of the community; (3) courts fail to make reasonable efforts to ensure that individuals have adequate attorney representation; (4) judges are generally dishonest in deciding cases; and (5) courts are just “out-of-touch” with what’s going on in their communities. Interestingly, Caucasians appear to either not understand or discount the perceptions of minority group members about the fairness of the court process. A perception that money (court costs) matters in the treatment one receives from the courts is also an important component of the court’s public image. Nearly all respondents (87 percent) believed that having a lawyer contributed “a lot” to the high cost of going to court. More than half the respondents believed that the slow pace of justice, the complexity of the law, and the expenditure of personal time (e.g. missing work) additionally contributed “a lot” to the cost of going to court. Most distressing, all of the groups said courts handle cases in a poor manner. Family relations cases and juvenile delinquency cases, in particular, are said to fare worst. In Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that a government lawyer prosecuting an African American criminal defendant violates the Equal Protection Clause if the prosecutor uses peremptory challenges for the purposes of excluding African Americans from the jury. The decision was premised in part on a desire to bolster public confidence in the fairness of the court system. The Batson principle has been extended in a series of subsequent decisions, so that the prohibition on racially discriminatory peremptory challenges now extends to all trial attorneys, regardless of the nature of the case or the identity of the client. See Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992); Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., 500 U.S. 614 (1991); Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400 (1991). In Powers v. Ohio, the Court held a jury “acts as a vital check against the wrongful exercise of power by the State and its prosecutors,” and that racial discrimination in jury selection “damages both the fact and the perception of this guarantee.” While Batson has not produced a general public consensus that all races receive equal treatment in the court system, that does not necessarily mean the decision has been completely ineffective, or that it is somehow fundamentally misguided. By striking at the use of racial stereotypes as the basis for peremptory challenges, one expected outcome of the Batson decision would be to increase the number of minorities serving on juries. Such an outcome could play a potentially significant role in improving public confidence in the court system. Data from the Georgia survey (Essay: Race and the Georgia Courts: Implications of the Georgia Public Trust and Confidence Survey for Batson v. Kentucky and its Progeny,” 37 Ga. L. Rev. 1021) suggests that, in certain respects, those who have served as jurors tend to have greater trust in the court system than other citizens, and this hold true when minority jurors are examined.

    Man Confesses to Killing Judge's Family, Kills Self | 31 comments (31 topical)