00-1570-CR State v. Polashek

Listen to this article

After two school staffers reported suspected abuse of a student, and the abuse was deemed unlikely by a social worker, defendant school superintendent wrote to the student’s parents attempting to explain the reporting requirements and naming the two staffers.

The trial court properly proposed to instruct the jury that it should not find defendant guilty unless the jury found that defendant’s revelation of the staffers’ names was news to the parents; the court of appeals erred in rejecting that jury instruction.

But because the statute creates a strict liability offense, the court of appeals properly rejected a jury instruction requiring a showing that the disclosure of the staffers’ names was intentional.

DISSENTING OPINION: Crooks, J. “I dissent from the first substantive point of the majority opinion; I conclude that the term ‘disclose’ in sec. 48.981(7) is ambiguous, and that, consistent with the goals and purposes of the statute, the definition of ‘disclose’ does not require lack of knowledge on the part of the recipient.”

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

Review of a Decision of the Court of Appeals, Wilcox, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Sandra L. Nowack, James E. Doyle, Madison

For Respondent: Nila Jean Robinson, Appleton