Law Enforcement
■ May 8 - An officer was asked to speak with an individual at a gas station in Abbotsford. Upon arrival, the officer observed the individual to have an injury to the left side of their face, mainly around the eye. The individual said they did not need an ambulance, but agreed to let EMTs check out their injuries. The individual agreed to go with the officer to the police station to file a report.
As the individual was walking toward the squad car, they were observed to be unstable on their feet, as well as having glossy, bloodshot eyes and constricted pupils. The individual admitted to taking a controlled substance, which they did not have a prescription for, and pulled the packaging from their pockets. The officer confiscated the substance and took the individual to the police station.
The complainant said they had called someone to pick them up from their friend’s house in Colby as their friend had been arrested earlier in the day. While outside on the sidewalk, they noticed a vehicle come towards them, almost running them over. The complainant identified their friend’s romantic partner as the one driving. The driver began yelling at the complainant, blaming them for the friend being arrested.
The complainant said the driver grabbed them by the collar, pulled them into the vehicle, and punched their face multiple times. The complainant was able to pull away and tried to run, but tripped and fell. The driver and another male individual got out of the car and started to punch the complainant again. The complainant was eventually able to push the assailants off and ran away. The complainant told the driver they were going to get their belongings from the friend’s house. The driver told them to leave. The complainant had left their fanny pack with their phone and wallet in it at the friend’s house.
During the interview, the officer noted that the complainant was slow to respond and would zone out. The officer asked when the complainant had last used drugs. The complainant said about five hours ago.
The complainant said they had let their friend use their vehicle to go to the post office, and the friend had left their child at home with the complainant. After the friend got arrested, the child’s grandparents came and picked up the child. After the interview, the complainant was asked if they could get a ride home, due to them being impaired. The complainant tried several times to contact a ride but was unsuccessful. The complainant was then taken back to the gas station. The officer was later made aware that the complainant committed retail theft after they were dropped off at the gas station.
On May 9, the officer made phone contact with the driver regarding the incident. The driver initially denied knowing anything about the altercation, but later admitted to attacking the complainant. The driver said they found out that the complainant was supposed to be watching their partner’s child after their arrest. When the grandparents came to pick up the child, they found the child’s face was covered in feces, as the complainant was not caring for the child’s needs. When the driver went to their partner’s residence to lock it up, they saw the complainant outside and lost control of their emotions.
The officer advised that they would need to speak with the driver in person. The driver said they would speak with the officer in person the next day. The driver denied taking any of the complainant’s belongings during or after the altercation.
On May 10, the complainant told police that they had been concussed and did not recall all of the events. The complainant said it had been dark outside during the altercation, and they did not feel right saying that the person who assaulted them was the accused individual. The complainant said they believed it was the individual’s voice, but could not see or remember if it was actually that individual. The complainant said they did not want the individual charged as they were unsure if it was actually them.
The officer asked the complainant if they wished to pursue criminal charges if the police could verify the attacker. The complainant said if they could positively identify the person, then they would like to continue with criminal charges. Charges of false imprisonment, disorderly conduct, battery, and theft were requested for the driver. Charges of possession of Schedule 3 narcotic, retail theft, and neglect of a child were requested for the complainant.
■ May 9 - An officer was dispatched to an Abbotsford residence in reference to a father threatening the caller’s kids. The officer was informed that there were four people inside the residence and the father was outside. Upon arrival, the officer observed a male walk down from the porch leading to the front door and go near two windows. The officer also observed a female standing in the window and it appeared the male was trying to speak with her.
The officer had the male step away from the residence and walk toward them. The officer asked the male what was going on. The male said they had come there angry, as they believed that the mother of his children was lying to him. He said he came to talk to her because she was going to a dance tonight and she was supposed to be working.
The officer asked why he was being aggressive. He said all he did was take her car keys, but did not hit her or cause any harm. The male denied threatening anyone.
The officer asked when the male had arrived. He said someone left him there not long ago. The officer asked him if he had driven the truck parked in the driveway, which he had been given consent to searched. He stated no. While speaking with the male, the officer could smell alcohol.
The officer then spoke with the female. The female said the male was the father of her kids, but they were not together. She said he had been following her and wouldn’t leave her alone. She said he had been knocking on the window, scaring the kids. She opened the door for him and believed he was drunk and probably drugged up. When he came in, he told her that she was not leaving and took her car keys. She tried to stop him, but he threw her to the ground while the kids were watching. He told her that he did not want her to go to the dance and said that he would take the kids away from her.
She said he would follow her wherever she goes, even to work. She said she never says anything since he is the father of her children. She said he also has people check if she is at home or at work because he believes she is seeing other people. The officer asked if she had done anything back after she was pushed. She said she was just trying to get up and she did not want to fight. The officer asked if anything like this had happened in the past. She stated similar things had happened while they were living in another state. The officer asked if he had driven there in the truck that was parked in the driveway. She said he had. The officer found that the engine area of the truck was warm and observed an open beer can in the center console. The officer returned to the male and asked if he would be willing to do field sobriety tests. He said no because he was not driving. The male agreed to do a preliminary breath test, and the result was 0.175. The male was placed under arrest for operating while under the influence and battery (domestic related). He was issued citations for operating while under the influence (1st) and operating with prohibited alcohol content (1st). He was taken to the Marathon County Jail and issued a trespass warning letter.
■ May 10 - An officer was alerted to a vehicle driving erratically through Abbotsford. The officer located the vehicle and activated their emergency lights to conduct a traffic stop. The vehicle came to a stop in the middle of the traffic lane.
The driver had bloodshot and glassy eyes. The officer knocked on the car window and the driver opened the door and exited the car. The officer asked what was going on. The driver said they were looking for their house. The officer asked where they lived. The driver stated Curtiss. The driver denied having anything to drink. The officer could smell alcohol on the driver, who agreed to do field sobriety tests. They also consented to a preliminary breath test, but were unable to supply an adequate sample.
The driver was placed under arrest and issued a citation for operating while under the influence (first). The driver consented to an evidentiary chemical test of their blood and was taken to a hospital before being booked at Clark County Jail.
■ May 12 - An officer took a report of a dog bite from a Colby resident. The owner of the dog said their dog had bitten their friend’s son. They provided the officer with proof of vaccination and the friend’s contact information. The officer contacted the friend, who said their son had been bitten on the upper thigh and it had broken skin. They had already taken their son to a walk-in clinic. An animal bite form was completed.
■ May 13 - While on patrol, an officer observed a vehicle traveling through Abbotsford on STH 13 with no headlights or taillights on at approximately 11 p.m. As the vehicle approached, the officer could see that the driver appeared very young. The officer activated their emergency lights to conduct a traffic stop.
The vehicle quickly crossed into the fast lane and turned onto city streets. The officer advised dispatch that they were in pursuit and activated their sirens. The vehicle failed to yield for stop signs at several intersections. The vehicle then turned north onto STH 13, failing to stop at the intersection of East Pine. The vehicle continued north on STH 13, reaching speeds of 106 mph. While in pursuit, the officer observed the vehicle to be driving in the middle of the road. Near Center Road, the officer observed the vehicle exit the roadway, hit the shoulder, and nearly lose control. The vehicle then drove on the wrong side of the roadway. The vehicle turned on CTH A, going into Dorchester. The vehicle drove over some gravel, which kicked up a lot of dust and made it hard to see the vehicle. The officer observed the vehicle’s brake lights as it turned south onto a village street, but lost sight of the vehicle.
The vehicle was later located on the side of the road, but no one was inside. The officer requested the K-9 unit for tracking the suspect, but the K-9 was unable to track the suspect’s whereabouts. The officer then made contact with the registered owner of the vehicle, who said the vehicle had been involved in a minor accident on May 12 and had been left at their mechanic’s shop in Abbotsford. They said the vehicle must have been stolen from there and would look for video footage of the theft. The officer advised that the vehicle had been found and the owner said they would come pick it up.
The owner arrived and provided video footage of the suspect at the mechanic shop. The owner examined the vehicle and concluded that no new damage had occurred to the vehicle and only the keys were missing.
On May 14, an officer examined the surveillance footage from the mechanic shop. A suspect is observed walking up to a vehicle parked in the shop’s parking lot and using their cellphone’s flashlight to look through the window. The suspect then walked to the back of the building. The suspect appeared to be a juvenile, based on their short stature and young appearance. The side of the suspect’s face was briefly visible on camera. Security footage from other businesses in the area provided a timeline of the theft and more detail regarding the suspect’s clothing and appearance. From various police interactions, the officer identified the suspect as possibly being a juvenile that lives in Dorchester. The officer was aware that the suspect had a history of being associated with individuals who have stolen cars in the past.
The school resource officer was contacted and provided with the security footage. The SRO noted that the suspect’s distinctive walk and attire suggested it may be the juvenile in question. The SRO reviewed the school’s camera footage of the juvenile the day prior and observed them to be wearing the same clothing as the suspect. The SRO advised that the juvenile’s mother had requested to speak about an unknown issue. The officer contacted the juvenile’s mother, who said she was concerned because the juvenile did not return home until around 11 p.m. on May 13. She said the juvenile had called around 7:30 to inform her that they were at a church in Colby. She told the juvenile to meet her at a park in Colby, but the juvenile hung up the phone. She drove to the park, but did not locate the juvenile. She drove to the church and surrounding area but couldn’t find them. She said she knew about a stolen vehicle because an officer had come to her workplace seeking camera footage. She doubted it was her child, but found the circumstances strange.
The officer informed the mother that police suspected her child of being the one who stole the vehicle. She was advised that the vehicle had been involved in a pursuit with law enforcement shortly afterwards and the vehicle was abandoned in Dorchester. The mother said her child came home at that time was out of breath and had wet pants. The officer said the juvenile would be transported to the police station for questioning. The mother agreed to meet the officers there.
The juvenile was questioned about their whereabouts the day prior. The juvenile said they had been at a friend’s house in Colby. They said they stayed until after dark and did not know when they got home, but knew it
See POLICE REPORTS/ Page 9 Police reports
Continued from page 7
was late. The juvenile said they had walked home on Hiline from Colby to Dorchester, which took them approximately two hours. The officer asked if that was the story the juvenile wished to stick to. The juvenile said yes. The officer then asked if the juvenile believed the officers had more information than what the juvenile had stated. The juvenile stated “probably.”
The juvenile said they just wanted to get home and had looked around for a car to steal. The juvenile said they walked from Colby to Abbotsford and admitted to stealing a vehicle. The officer advised that there were other ways of getting home. The juvenile said they did not want to call someone and inconvenience them for a ride.
The officer informed the juvenile that the crimes they were being accused of were felony offenses. While they would have faced consequences for stealing the car, the officer said it would have been more beneficial to them and safer for the public if they had chosen to stop. The juvenile said they did not stop because they just wanted to get home. They said it was dumb to flee, but they didn’t want to get ripped out of the car and have guns pointed at them if they stopped.
The officer advised that Clark County Social Services would be contacted to recommend their placement into secure detention. The juvenile provided the location of the vehicle’s keys, which were later located and returned to their owner. Social services was given details of the events on May 13. A secure detention placement was authorized for the juvenile at the Marathon County Juvenile Detention Facility in Wausau. The juvenile and their mother were given the date and time for a custody hearing at the Clark County Courthouse. The juvenile was then taken to the juvenile detention center. A juvenile referral form was completed for fleeing an officer, operating a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent, and second degree recklessly endangering safety.
■ May 14 - An officer responded to a domestic disturbance in Colby. The officer arrived and spoke with the complainant’s husband while another officer spoke with the complainant. The husband said he had gotten home around 7:30 a.m. that morning and had cooked some breakfast. An argument started over his wife not wanting to clean the kitchen. The husband said his wife did not work and slept all day so he was not happy about her refusing to clean a simple mess.
The husband said the argument had been a very heated yelling match, but had never gotten physical. Their child had been woken up by the argument. The child confirmed that nothing physical happened. The wife ended up grabbing the recently made breakfast and threw it in the trash. She eventually pushed her husband with one hand and went outside saying she was going to call the police.
The officer was advised that the wife had told a similar story. She said the reason for the argument was over the husband accusing her of cheating on him. She also confirmed nothing physical happened during the argument. The officers advised that it would be best for the couple to be separated for the day. The wife said she had no money and nowhere to go. The husband said he would be driving their child to work shortly in the family’s only vehicle and could find somewhere else to stay for the day.
■ May 17 - An officer conducted a traffic stop on a vehicle with an expired registration. The officer met with the driver and observed a vape pen on the front passenger seat, which the driver identified as a marijuana vape pen. The officer had the driver step out of the vehicle. A search uncovered a container with a strong odor of marijuana and crumbs of a green leafy substance. The pen and container were placed in an evidence bag and the driver was informed that the confiscated items would be tested. The items tested positive for marijuana. The driver was cited for the expired registration and possession of drug paraphernalia.
