Chandler Halderson sentencing hearing

[00:00:00] James Langer: Good afternoon everybody my name is James Langer I am the digital content manager at channel3000.com we are standing by for the start of Chandler Halderson's sentencing hearing so if you remember if you were following this case all along you'll remember that Chandler Halderson was convicted of killing and dismembering his parents after a lengthy trial in January so we've been waiting for the sentencing since that date there was some little news coming out earlier this week about this hearing in anticipation of it happening and whether or not Chandler himself would actually show up for this hearing he had his attorneys had actually filed a motion to request that he not have to appear saying he was waiving his right to appear at his sentencing they believe that he should be able to opt out of that however the prosecutors in the case then wrote a letter to the judge basically saying or arguing that this wasn't allowed under state law they're basically in Wisconsin about 25 years ago there's a state supreme court case that ruled basically that [00:01:30] Speaker ?: people who are convicted of felonies have to appear in their sentencing hearing they cannot voluntarily opt out of it the only reasons they could be able to miss it were basically if some set of [00:01:30] James Langer: extenuating circumstances happened or if they basically caused such a scene that they wouldn't be able to appear in court because they would be such a distraction obviously not the case in this situation as far as far as we know so yesterday actually the judge in the case judge John Hyland made an order that he was denying that motion and requiring Chandler to appear so that means we will see Chandler here very shortly as his hearing is about to get started here any minute but before that starts we will kind of recap some of the events here and what we can expect to hear so in Wisconsin a conviction on first degree intentional homicide of which Chandler was convicted back on january 20th for killing both his parents Bart and Krista Halderson that carries a mandatory life sentence in the state of Wisconsin so we do know already that's basically what's going to come out of today the only thing still up in the air right now is whether he will have any ever have any chance for parole so that's part of what the judge will decide today after we hear some victim impact statements and possibly hear Chandler speak himself although that doesn't seem likely based on the fact that he did not testify during the trial and that he didn't seem to want to come to this hearing in the first place so we will still keep an eye out for that but again the judge will decide if there's ever going to be a possibility of parole for Chandler Halderson and if that's the case whether the life sentences will be served consecutively or concurrently meaning at the same time so that's kind of what we're waiting for the judge to decide today after we hear all those victim impact statements and basically we will see if Chandler Halderson ever has a chance to get out so here he is actually walking in the courtroom now so we will take you there live and then we will take you there live [00:04:07] Speaker 2: all right for the court thank you everyone please be seated give me just a moment to make sure everything is set up here and to Sign in. Did we know if anyone else was expected to participate via zoom? [00:05:24] Speaker 3: I think we have them on right here. [00:05:32] Speaker 2: Thank you April. Let me call state of Wisconsin versus Chandler M. Halderson case number 21 C.M. 1568. CF. 1568. [00:06:09] Speaker 3: Could I have the appearances please? William Brown and Andrea Raymond appear for the state of Wisconsin. Thank you. [00:06:13] Speaker 4: Mr. Halderson appears in custody in court with his attorneys Crystal Vera and Kathryn Doral. Good afternoon. [00:06:18] Speaker 2: Good afternoon. Let's first touch base to ensure that everyone has had access to the same materials as we're here for sentencing. A pre-sentence investigation was ordered and agent Alyssa Burke filed with the court the report of that investigation on March 7th. Attorney Brown did the state receive and have the opportunity to review a copy. We have and are there any substantial corrections that the state needs to know for the record. No. Attorney Vera did you attorney Doral and your client have an opportunity to receive and review the report. We did. Now I did receive from attorney Doral signature a letter March 14th raising a couple of issues. Were there anything in addition to those that you wanted to raise? No your honor. I'm going to order that that letter be attached to the pre-sentence so that it accompanies it and notes those corrections and issues in this age of electronics. There's no whiting out or writing on the original anymore, but I want to ensure that those are noted for purposes of future reference to this report. And I will note as well that the court received as I noted and reviewed the report multiple times agent Burke you have my gratitude for your work in this matter. I always appreciate the information I gleaned from your reports and those of your fellow agents, but I know I understand the work that goes into this and I understand the number of steps you take and how you reach out. And thank you very much for everything with regard to this matter and those reports. I also wanted to note the following. Victim impact statements which the court received to ensure that the parties received those as well. Beyond statements reflected within the pre-sentence I received a victim and impact statement from BH which is. Mr. Halderson's brother from CA and Mr. Mitchell Halderson's fiancee J. A. H. who as I recall testified at trial and is. I received essentially a sister in spirit to Krista Halderson and then a fourth letter from an individual E. T. who was an individual impacted here based upon past connections with Krista Halderson. I also did receive courtesy of J. A. H. one of the memorial cards regarding the what I assume were funeral services regarding. Bart and Krista Halderson attorney Brown has the state received and had an opportunity to review all of those materials. [00:09:12] Speaker ?: Yes. [00:09:12] Speaker 2: Do you know of anything that I've overlooked that was submitted. No. And attorney Vera have you attorney Doral and your client been. Provided the opportunity to review all those materials. [00:09:23] Speaker 4: For some reason the E. T. one doesn't sound familiar. [00:09:27] Speaker 2: I did direct that it be distributed to everyone. Was that from today. That would have been a few days ago. It had come in directly to the court. I can provide a copy to you. [00:09:56] Speaker 4: If we could just have a moment to review it and go absolutely. [00:10:05] Speaker ?: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:10:51] Speaker 3: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:11:06] Speaker 2: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:11:20] Speaker ?: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:11:22] Speaker 2: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:11:24] Speaker ?: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:11:26] Speaker 2: I can provide a few days later. [00:11:27] Speaker ?: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:11:49] Speaker 2: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:11:51] Speaker ?: I can provide a few days later. [00:11:52] Speaker 2: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:11:54] Speaker ?: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:12:06] Speaker 3: I can provide a few days later. [00:12:07] Speaker 4: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:12:11] Speaker 3: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:12:15] Speaker 4: I can provide a few days later. [00:12:16] Speaker ?: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:13:35] Speaker 2: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:13:37] Speaker ?: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:13:50] Speaker 2: I can provide a few days later. [00:14:06] Speaker 4: I can provide a few days later later. [00:14:08] Speaker 2: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:14:18] Speaker 3: I can provide a few days later. [00:14:19] Speaker 2: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:14:24] Speaker 3: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. [00:14:37] Speaker ?: I can provide a few days later. [00:14:38] Speaker 5: I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. I can provide a few days later. But I am going to start with talking about the character of the defendant. This PSI was kind of not your average PSI. I've often said in serious sentencing that reading PSI is one of the most depressing things about my job. And that I really dislike it. Although what it does provide is a context to crime. Almost every homicide I've prosecuted. There's been a fairly tragic back story of the defendant. Violence, drugs, just tragedy. And you often are left with an explanation. Not an excuse, but an explanation as to why a crime occurred. Why did this 18 year old kill a 17 year old? There's not an explanation here. Chandler grew up with a life of privilege by pretty much I think any sort of angle you look at it. He had two parents that were married and that seemed to be happily married. Two parents that from all evidence were completely supportive. Very sort of his dad was the den leader for Boy Scouts. His parents attended every swim meet that he had. There's absolutely no evidence of abuse whatsoever in this case. Chandler grew up with no housing insecurities. He never had to wonder where his next meal was coming from. And he was never exposed to any violence that we saw any evidence of or even really guns. The only tragedy if you can even call it that it's more really a part of life that I can that I that we saw that occurred to him during his childhood was he did lose his maternal grandparents. He went to good and safe schools by all accounts. He had a supportive extended family that saw him often and a large network of family friends that considered themselves his family. He had numerous people that would drop everything to help them if it was needed. He never faced any sort of discrimination that I can find from any source by pretty much every measure. He was a white male who had a childhood of privilege. The only potential criticism that anyone that we talked to and we've talked to well over 100 people. Was that perhaps his mother babied him a little too much or was a little too doting. As I often explain to my husband that's what mothers do. It is out of this life of privilege this childhood. That was nearly ideal that he committed these crimes. It's also worse worth noting that these crimes were committed against these two individuals that provided this ideal childhood for him. The two people that took care of him. I only want to say one other thing about the character of the defendant. We certainly spent a lot of time in trial and I don't need to belabor any points about that. But I do think it's worth noting that in all of the jail calls and messages that the detectives and Mr. Brown and I listened to. There was never even a moment where Chandler mourned his parents death. I found that really unique. I prosecuted a lot of cases where somebody has killed a family member. Sometimes even a family member who was highly abusive to them. And they still there's mourning there. There's some sort of notion that they missed this person. It was interesting and one message somebody had told him that they just got back from his parents memorial service. And they were sad. He suggested that they watch a slasher movie Halloween. There was no discussion of who was at the memorial service. What they talked about who they saw. And remembering of his parents. I just think it's notable to bring up that how significant losing your parents is to a person's life and how much it impacts them. And there's been no comment no tears. And I just think that that. Is worth noting. You know certainly you could take that in a couple of different ways you could say well maybe they're just not an emotional person. That's certainly possible. But it also suggests a certain amount of callousness. And perhaps even lack of remorse. That is worth noting. So I'm going to spend the bulk of my time talking about the seriousness of the offense. And part of what that entails is the fact that this world no longer has Bart and Christa Halderson. And so I think it's an important part and to reflect on who they are. I'm going to start that by reading two victim impact statements. One was submitted to you earlier but they asked that I read it out loud. The other one has not been submitted yet. It was just written today I believe. The first victim impact statement is submitted by CA in who's the future daughter-in-law to Bart and Christa Halderson. She's engaged to their son Mitchell. She writes my life will be forever changed by the actions that occurred the week of July 1st through July 7th of 2021. I've lost my future mother and father-in-law in such a senseless and brutal way. This loss will remain with me for the rest of my life. I personally have been deeply impacted by this loss. My mental and physical health have suffered tremendously. As Mitchell and I move forward planning our wet wedding each decision we make comes with a reminder of two of the most important people to us Bart and Christa will not be there to celebrate this special occasion with us. I've cried about their loss on multiple occasions and will continue to mourn and cry many more times. I've experienced a lot of weight loss as I was unable to eat due to the high level of stress anxiety and uncertainty surrounding what had happened to Bart and Christa over that long period of time. I missed work for over a month and even now that I'm back there are times I struggle to make it through the day. Bart and Christa were amazing people. They were there to help everyone and anyone with whatever they could. Christa had always been so welcoming to me from the first time I met her in 2014 for Christmas to the morning that we both called her and Bart to tell them the good news that Mitchell and I were engaged in 2020 to the afternoon. We spent at their home for Father's Day in June of 2021 just a week before they were killed. Christa was excited to talk with me and always made me feel at home. Bart had a wonderful sense of humor and was a great handyman. He helped us with set up many things when we moved into our new home and help teach us so that we could do it on our own next time. I miss their warm presence and their kind hearts every single day. Both Bart and Christa had so much to look forward to that they will never get to experience. They will never get to see their son get married or start a family. Mitchell and I will miss them terribly during these milestones. Holding their grandchildren watching them play sports hearing about school and all those things that Bart and Christa were so excited for they will never get to do. They loved going to wineries breweries concerts on the square the farmers market and have been dreaming about many different trips to explore Wisconsin in the United States. But again due to their senseless murders they will never get to experience these things. We are comforted in knowing that Chandler cannot physically hurt us. However if he was given the opportunity for parole I would be terrified for Mitchell in my family safety. Given the fact that he was capable of a such calculated and horrific act of murder. I do not believe my family would be safe if he were ever to be released from prison. For this reason I believe he should not be given the chance for parole. Bart and Christa's murders have greatly impacted my life and the rest of the Halderson and Frater family lives as well. The second letter is from Kayleen Halderson mother of Bart and Chandler's grandmother. Judge. Judge. These are my feelings about Chandler. He is my grandson. I love him even though what he did was horrific. I can't believe his parents would want him to be incarcerated for life. I'm hoping he will find a trade or craft while and while there to become a productive and caring person. We hope the people in charge of that facility will feel someday he deserves a second chance in life with a possibility of parole. Chandler's grandma. So last week I had the pleasure and the opportunity to meet with Christmas best friend of 38 years. Jane and I just spoke to her very candidly tell me about Bart and Christa and she's shared some really interesting and I think important things. She shared that Christa was a staple in her life a sister in every way except for biological. She was the aunt to her daughters. She described Christa Halderson is having a lightness about her that when she'd walk into the room you would just feel happier. She was bubbly. She was a helper wanted to always fix people's problems. Christa was described by her boss at work as the work mom for everything. She was the person you went to if you needed Tylenol a hug or a pep talk. She listened to people and cared about people. She went out of her way to lift people up. She was the type of person that you would feel happier that would make you feel happier after you talk to her. The title that was most important to Christa was that of mom. That was her identity being a mom was her purpose in life. She was the type of mom that had bins where she saved her kids Legos for the grandchildren. She had meticulous bins in her basement each one perfectly labeled with no dust on them. That were organized and labeled their awards their Eagle Scout journey and various paraphernalia and photos. Jane said Christa was a joy and a blessing. I not only talked to Jane about Bart Halderson but also his family over the last several weeks. Bart was quieter. He worked hard and he provided for his family. He was up for quite a big promotion right before his murder. He liked the outdoors nature fishing and his family. He was redoing and in the process of renovating his entire house nearly down to the studs. He had recently built a brand new dining table made pure wood which he had hoped that they would use for the rest of their lives celebrating the holidays with the grandkids. He was close with his older brother Brett and his parents who are both still alive. Bart is described as generous doing little things to take care of people. Jane pointed out that every time he was in Milwaukee he would always take her daughters out when they were in college for a free meal with their uncle Bart. One other thing that actually one of our detectives pointed out today is in the course of their employment they read through a whole bunch of text messages. From all sorts of people and they were really struck about how nice Bart and Christa were. They really didn't say a bad word about anyone not even to each other they were kind respectful. They texted often about worrying about the sun or that sun and various things they were loving towards each other. Bart and Christa of course will now not see their older son get married. They won't be present for their grandchildren. They won't get to experience the retirement that they really had been planning for decades. They didn't get to say goodbye to anyone. Multiple people when we talk to them about Bart and Christa said you know if they would have found out about Chandler's lies and his deception. They would have been upset they would have been. But they also would have worked with him to get him back on the right track. They were sure of this more than one person had made a statement like this to us. That Bart and Christa would have continued to be the supportive parents that their entire track record had showed that they were. I just want to point out one more thing about the seriousness of the offense. The victimization that was caused here extends well beyond Bart and Christa Halderson. Because of Chandler's actions his grandparents had to bury a child. His brother lost his entire nuclear family overnight. The entire family is forever altered. People were who were generous to Chandler such as his girlfriend and her family have had their lives completely uprooted as well. Bart and Christa's friends will again never get to enjoy them. And numerous numerous people have guilt because they wonder were there red flags that I missed could I have prevented this. Chandler's actions have caused uncalculable amounts of trauma for dozens of people. You're honor as you craft a sentence I'm asking that you please consider all this trauma as part of the seriousness of this offense in creating a just sentence. [00:29:50] Speaker 3: I'm going to comment on some of the other sentencing factors. I'm going to start with the submission by the defense which I thought was was well put together well written and included a article law review article that I read. With great interest obviously concerns what I do for a living and it's something I should think about one thing that before I start I do want to thank both the defense attorneys. I think they've done a hard job job job that they sworn to do and dedicated their lives doing as being defense attorneys and public defenders and I've appreciated their presence and they've been nothing but respectful and honorable in their task. And and it was a hard job in this case but speaking especially to their submission today attorney doral said something that stuck out to me is is absolutely true which is one of the lines which is it seems that people quoting paraphrasing here. Believe that today's afford on conclusion as to what the outcome is and I like her I don't know that that's true and I certainly don't think it's true with with you judge. I'll tell you that as a prosecutor I I often prosecute homicides and that's an unfortunate reality of being a prosecutor in a city people commit the crime of an intentional homicide. These hearings happen a great deal. My job is obviously to convict people if I believe they're guilty and here obviously of course I believe that I did that. But when it comes to sentencing the questions are not simply in my in my gut do I feel like this is a bad guy. Do I personally have some vendetta or reason to want to push for a specific sentence. My role is to examine the legal factors and to employ my role as a brand the executive branches representative in these hearings as thoughtfully and as compassionately as I can. I have to recognize I think all prosecutors should recognize as the representative of the executive branch at a sentencing especially a sentencing in which we're talking about an imprisonment of the defendant that could be many decades. That's nothing should be a foregone conclusion that we should approach this with a level of analysis and questioning. And of skepticism that we do some of the most important questions in our lives professionally or personally and I'll tell you and Mr. Halderson in the community that I've done that. I've thought a great deal as as Ms. Raymond as the detectives. Mr. Halderson's being sentenced to life in prison today it's this hearing is about whether he's ever going to be granted parole or eligible for parole excuse me. And that's a challenging challenging decision for everyone to make and I'll I'll let you know that I have not entered this process and thinking about what the state's recommendation should be. With that being a foregone conclusion luckily the law tells me what I'm supposed to think about when I'm considering what the executive branch of government's going to represent as its opinion in this case. Tells me that I should consider the gravity defense the need to protect the public and the rehabilitative needs of Mr. Halderson amongst other factors mitigating factors and things of that sort. But those are the three that generally are focused upon they're called the gallion the factors here in Wisconsin. That's supposed to guide us in our thought process and I'll walk through those and my thought process in making my recommendation. I'll start with the rehabilitative needs of Mr. Halderson. I have no idea what they are. Mr. Halderson has an absolute right to not participate in these proceedings and he is not being sentenced today. I'm not asking you to sentence him based on his non participation in either the PSI or at trial. Of course those are his constitutional rights or even today. That being said as Miss Raymond said almost always in a sentencing hearing for a homicide or even lesser crimes. We have some understanding as players in the criminal justice system of the underlying causes of someone's problems. The root causes frequently its substance abuse frequently its mental illness frequently its inability to control anger and other behavioral problems that have manifested themselves throughout someone's life. You you probably are wondering and I'll tell you it's been thoroughly investigated of whether there were any red flags that anyone missed. Was Mr. Halderson engaged in bad behavior as a youth was he harming animals was he harming people. None of that is true that we can tell. He seemed to be a pretty normal kid. With pretty normal life. We did a pretty abnormal thing as he turned 23. You don't know what his rehabilitative needs are and that's a challenge. The reason we focus on that is this idea in the criminal justice system that we can rehabilitate almost everyone. And I'll say I think that to be true. I really do. The vast majority of people who are charged with this crime a first degree intentional homicide. As is grave as it might be and as difficult as it might be sometimes for the victims to hear it. They are people who can be rehabilitated that we can address that root underlying cause of mental illness or substance abuse. And they can emerge from the state prison system perhaps not a perfect person but a better person. And society can have some comfort and we can all go to bed at night and sleep soundly knowing that we've done what we can to try to prevent some future harm from occurring. Because we've addressed that identifiable problem. You don't have that. And if you don't have that I'm not sure how much you can consider that factor. And the law is very clear when you're addressing the galleon factors you don't have to weigh them up equally. You have to consider them all. But I would pose to the court that that's not a factor that you should ultimately consider a great deal. Because I don't know what information the court could rely on in determining that there are some identifiable and fixable rehabilitative needs of Mr. Halderson. Next the court has to consider the protection of the public. And here's where the court has to probably give a great weight to this factor. Mr. Halderson by all accounts chose to commit the crime of first degree intentional homicide twice on a single day. Because he was caught lying about where he was working and going to school. Or perhaps just where he was going to school. It was uncomfortable probably that he was caught. It probably wasn't an experience he was looking forward to and dealing with the repercussions of that. But those kind of inconveniences and uncomfortable situations are constantly present in life. Every one of us in this courtroom have dealt with bad situations in life. Every one of us have left work one day thinking man I really don't want to go home tonight because I did something and I'm going to have to talk about it. Every one of us here has probably walked into work one day thinking boy I don't really want to walk into my supervisor's office and got to talk about that. Life is full of inconveniences life is full of being uncomfortable. The difference between everyone else in this room and Mr. Halderson is all of us have owned up to that. All of us walked into those rooms walked into our front door. All of us have addressed those situations whether it be comfortable or uncomfortable. Whether it lead to the loss of relationships or respect or money. We've all addressed them. You walk in. You take your lumps. You leave. But when faced with in the grand scheme of things a minor inconvenience in his life. Mr. Halderson chose to commit the crime of first degree intentional homicide two times. And over the course of several days chose to. Cut up those people's bodies spread them around the state. Chose to lie to the police concoct a bizarre story lead his family down this road of of believing that there was just some hope somewhere out there that Barton crystal were alive. Because he got caught in a minor inconvenience. I don't know how you protect the public from someone like that. I don't know how any of us. Would have any comfort in thinking that Mr. Halderson would ever be in a better place to make those decisions more wisely. It's even more compounded and perhaps aggravated in the legal sense by the fact that no one saw this coming. He is someone who was able to perhaps have this capability or perhaps have these thoughts in life and insert himself into relationships social situations his family without anyone wondering is this a safe person to be around. Sometimes in court for homicide sentencing the guy next to us is history a mile long of violent crime and and is willing to talk about it and you wonder when people are even around that person seems like a dangerous guy. Part of the risk of Chandler is he doesn't look like a dangerous guy. He's packaged up into like a normal middle class kid and was able to fool everyone not only fool everyone about these crazy lies about work and school and activities. He doesn't fool everyone into believing that he was a safe person to be around that he was trustworthy that he wasn't going to. He's not exaggerating the fact shoot you in the back because that's in fact what happened. Someone in Mr. Halderson shoes with his mindset can never be safely in this community. His willingness to solve the minor inconveniences of life with brutal violence can never be mitigated in our community. As long as he breathes he will be a risk. He will be a risk because he will suffer more minor inconveniences as were we all. Lastly the court has to consider the gravity of the offense. Ms. Raymond talked a good deal about that part of that is considering the people he hurt. Not only is his parents who by all accounts were loving and and caring but but the community their their character as people. Gravity of the offense is sometimes called retributions in in some systems and I'll note that retribution is an appropriate. Thing to consider in law at times it's part of the gravity of the offense. But here there is no more grave offense. The crime of first-degree intentional homicide is as serious as it gets. Committing it twice is even more serious. And committing it against the people who are you you're supposed to love the most. Is beyond comprehension for many in our community. There's an interesting quote as I prepared for today I was looking at some cases. Just trying to. Look into the mindset of other judges as they've considered these. These factors and the concept of punishment in the law. Justice Stewart a while back in Furman versus Georgia wrote. The instinct for retribution is part of the nature of man. And channeling that instinct in the administration of criminal justice serves an important purpose in promoting the stability. Of a society governed by law. There was another case in the late 40s. It's Williams first New York. Retribution is no longer the dominant objective of criminal law. But it is neither forbidden. Or one inconsistent with our respect for the dignity of man. When we talk about the gravity of the offense. It's a consideration the court gets to decide what that means. But you should consider. That in my mind in my experience as prosecutor in this county as a citizen of this state. I've never heard of a crime more serious. I've never heard of a crime more brutal. Mr. Halderson's mere presence in our community. The fact that he did any of this. Has ripped apart the fabric. Of our community. The idea that someone can live amongst us with no warning signs and commit such heinous acts should scare everybody. And it sure as hell scared everybody here. No one who's interacted with Mr. Halderson will ever be the same. For whatever reason he decided to do it. Whatever justification he can come up with in his own mind. Whether it be today or down the road in many years. Nothing will ever explain it. His actions in July of this year were. Evil. And for this generation and at this time Mr. Halderson is the personification of evil in our community. He can work the rest of his life. Trying to earn back the respect and trust and love of maybe some of his family and I hope he does that. But that's a different thing than what's going on here today. Our question is whether Mr. Halderson should ever be released from prison. And if so when should he have that opportunity to ask. It's my position that he should never be released from prison. That the mere possibility. Of his return to our community. Would shock the conscience of almost every citizen of this community. It would appreciate the seriousness of what he's done. It would cause extreme angst. Animosity. Probably for many. To even feel that that's a possibility. We don't. Have a more serious punishment. But sometimes it's appropriate. And in this case. It's the state's position. It's my position. It is my recommendation. That Mr. Halderson spend the remainder of his life in prison. That he not be eligible for parole. At any point. Again. There is no more serious crime. Mr. Halderson has to come to terms with what he's done. And I hope he does someday. But that doesn't mean he should ever be released. And I ask that you not let him be released. Thank you. [00:43:30] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:43:33] Speaker 2: Attorney Vero. Were any statements being made. Beyond. Councils. Regarding the sentencing here on Mr. Halderson's behalf. [00:43:42] Speaker 4: No your honor. [00:43:43] Speaker 2: Then. Would you be speaking on this regard? I will yes. [00:43:47] Speaker 4: Go right ahead. [00:43:48] Speaker 2: Thank you. [00:43:49] Speaker 4: Earlier this week. Attorney Doral did a file a sentencing memorandum. Which we know your honor has read and considered. We stand by that submission. And we just have a couple more. Additions to add right now. You know we've talked about family and the seriousness of this case. And the public. And sentencing is a very intimate matter. Especially in a case like this where it is a family situation. I bring that up because at the end of the day regardless of what happens today in this courtroom. No one is going to be happy. No one is going to run out of this courtroom feeling like justice is served. No one is going to run out of this courtroom feeling good. This family is going to always have this situation is going to be touched by this situation and Chandler himself is always going to be touched by this moment. Which makes it a very intimate matter. But it also has become a very public affair. Regardless of what you do today. The outside world the community the public however you want to address it is going to be not happy. There are going to be people that if you decide to sentence Chandler to life without parole. They're still going to be mad. They're going to ask for Wisconsin to bring the death penalty back and to apply it retroactively to him. And if you sentence him without or with parole there are people that are going to be mad because it's too lenient. I bring this up because again it's what happens here today is not a win-win or lose-lose situation. It is what it is and it's it's difficult. What I do want to focus on today is just what we're asking for which we are asking for the possibility of parole. And I want to stress that it is a possibility it is not a guarantee. It is not something that is going to happen even if your honor says today that there's a possibility that it could happen. According to the statute 302.114 of the Wisconsin statutes. It's a process if your honor finds him eligible for parole today. He would have to go through this process that can start no earlier than 90 days before the eligibility date. It's a process that would require a petition to the court. It would perhaps be your honor or someone else but it would be a court petition. It would be something submitted to the district attorney's office as well. They are allowed to give their two cents on whether it should be granted or it should not be granted. Your honor is allowed to make the decision on its face if it's going to grant parole or not. There's the opportunity for victims and those impacted by this case to give their two cents as well. There's an opportunity for hearing. Where at that point Mr. Holderson would have to show that he is worthy of parole. Not only that but it's not a situation where he can continue to apply and apply. Your honor whoever the court is at that time would have the opportunity to say you are not allowed to apply anymore. I'm going to give you one more chance. I'm going to give you two more chances. It's not something that he would have to continue to ask for year after year after this eligibility. Eligibility date should be your honor granted. So it's not a process that is a guarantee. It is simply a process that we are asking that you allow for the possibility of that process happening. And I cannot stress that enough. I cannot stress enough how all we are asking for today is for the possibility of this man to show you that he is redeemable. Attorney brown brought up points about rehabilitation and how in everything that we've seen and guess there was a lot of evidence and a lot of discovery in this case. There may not be something to point out right away that is quote unquote. A rehabilitative process. There isn't any kind of substance abuse issue. None of that. But to be perfectly fair and whether you want to call him a kid a young man a young adults. Chandler is young. He just turned 24. There are a lot of growing up. There's a lot of adulting that he's going to miss out on that he's going to have to do in the institution that ultimately is going to affect who he becomes in the future. Most of us get the opportunity to do that around our family with a community whatever it is and he's going to have to do that in custody. But there's I bring that up because there's certain things about my own childhood about my own life that I didn't really understand until I was later in my late 20s. That affected how I was as a person in my early 20s. So it's it's easy to come up now and say that there's no rehabilitation needed here. We just don't know that. So ultimately it boils down to what your honor believes is an appropriate fair and just option given everything given all the galleon factors that the state has mentioned and that we have mentioned in our sentencing memorandum. And it's a delicate balance. If your honor believes that sentencing is purely punitive. Purely an issue of punishment then the only option is life without parole. But if your honor believes that it is a delicate combination of punishment. And rehabilitation redemption if you will and there's only one option and that is the option of life with parole. As far as when that eligibility comes to play. We leave that up to your honor. You know the case you've been here with the trial. That date we leave up to you. But we are asking that you do provide Chandler with the opportunity. The opportunity. To show to your honor that he is redeemable in the future. And that's all we're asking for today. Life with parole. Thank you. [00:50:20] Speaker 2: Thank you. Thank you. I know that. In your memorandum. There was an indication once again that Mr. Holderson would. Not exercise his right to. Elocute at this hearing. Obviously just as with trial it comes up to a decision at the very last minute. I just want to ensure at this moment. Whether or not Mr. Holderson wishes to make a statement. [00:50:42] Speaker 4: And thank you for doing that that has changed Mr. Holderson would like to. Give a statement to your honor. [00:50:48] Speaker 2: You may remove your mask if you wish. I believe the conditions in the jail are. And very good as far as the. The pandemic so if you want to speak without your mask. And attorney dorals comfortable with that you could. Absolutely. Okay. And I would only ask that you read slowly simply because. My court reporter has to take down what you're saying. And that and sometimes we read faster than we mean to. [00:51:11] Speaker 6: Your honor. I want to take this opportunity to state my intent to appeal my convictions. If there are any lawyers listening and willing to take on my appeal. Take a moment to please reach out to me. It's not that I do not have feelings. Is that I was warned to not show them. Due to the scrutiny of this case. Thank you. [00:51:34] Speaker 2: Thank you. The. Court always. Tends to make a number of observations. At sentencing hearings that are contested in which carry. A good deal of weight. And I'm not going to depart from that process today. I first think it's important. To acknowledge. That. The. The trial. And the process within this case that brings us here today. Was the united effort of a number of people. And. First and foremost. I want to recognize again the jurors. But not just those 12 people that rendered the verdicts here. But those alternates. Those people that responded to the summons. Especially. Given the time of year. That this occurred. And the concerns that were rife regarding. Individual health. We. As. By necessity. Inconvenienced. A number of citizens. And in the end. When I spoke to them. They had no regrets. About their service. And that is because. They understood. They understood. That under our system. That is vital. And they understood. That they had. Duty to perform. Once selected. So I thank them. Once again. And I thank the bailiff staff. Who. Throughout those weeks of trial. Worked. Incredibly well. In assisting. The parties. The court. The witnesses. And the media. I want to thank the prosecution. Because I thought that the case that they presented. Was done efficiently. Economically. But most importantly. With due deference. To the nature. Of the evidence. And the need. To present that evidence. In a manner. Which. Honored. The people. Who were lost. We had a number of lay witnesses. That came to court. To testify. I assume. That they all. Would rather have been somewhere else. But they all came. Willingly. And testified. Here. And. I appreciated. Their. Participation. And. [00:54:01] Speaker ?: The time. [00:54:02] Speaker 2: That it took. [00:54:03] Speaker ?: For them. [00:54:03] Speaker 2: Again. Under the circumstances. [00:54:05] Speaker ?: Both. [00:54:05] Speaker 2: As far as health. And the nature. Of the proceedings. And their testimony. Council. Mentioned. That. This. Crime. Caused. A rip. In our community. If there's one thing. That's a positive. Coming out of this. I think. That it is. A demonstration. Of the pride. We should feel. In our law enforcement. The pride. We should feel. [00:54:29] Speaker ?: In. [00:54:29] Speaker 2: How they investigated. This case. And how they presented. The evidence. In this case. It was. Well. I honestly think. It put. [00:54:38] Speaker ?: Dane County. [00:54:38] Speaker 2: On the map. [00:54:39] Speaker ?: Through. [00:54:39] Speaker 2: Both. The justice department. Efforts. And the efforts. Of our local. Sheriff's department. And other. Law enforcement agencies. Involved. It was. It was quite. Incredible. [00:54:51] Speaker ?: I also. [00:54:52] Speaker 2: Want to finally. Say something. About. The fact. [00:54:56] Speaker ?: That. [00:54:57] Speaker 2: At every. Trial. Just about. I hear. Defense attorneys. Speaking to jurors. In voir dire. About the fact. That. The defendant. Has a right. To a trial. Prove anything. The defendant. [00:55:11] Speaker ?: Does not have. [00:55:11] Speaker 2: To testify. Sometimes. [00:55:13] Speaker ?: The council. [00:55:13] Speaker 2: Will go. To the extent. Of saying. We don't have. To do anything. It's the state's. Burden. It's the state's. Responsibility. To carry. The case. Forward. To prove. Its case. Beyond a reasonable. Doubt. And you should find. The defendant. Not guilty. If you believe. [00:55:33] Speaker ?: They failed. [00:55:34] Speaker 2: In that. Attorneys. Doral. And Vera. For. Because of. Mention already. About. Questions. About. Their. The review. Of. What they. Did. In representing. Mr. Halderson. But I wouldn't. Be remiss. If I did not. Say. That their actions. At trial. Advanced. Mr. Halderson's. Constitutional. Right. To require. The state. To prove. Its case. And did so. In a professional. Is. Such. That. I find. That. They served. Their role. [00:56:14] Speaker ?: In this process. Admirably. I'm very passionate. About. Our system. And so. Let me. To move on. To the points. In this proceeding. At which I need. To be dispassionate. And I need to be dispassionate. Because as the person sitting in judgment. [00:56:27] Speaker 2: I'm very passionate about our system. And so let me move on to the points in this proceeding that which I need to be dispassionate. And I need to be dispassionate because as the person sitting in judgment, I have to try and achieve a proper analysis of the sentencing goals based upon the information that I have to do. Information and evidence put forward and what the legislature has determined to be the appropriate sentences. At least as far as maximums, mandatory minimums if any. And here obviously as addressed by everyone, the determination of whether there should be any eligibility for parole in the future. Technically extended supervision, but it's easier just to say parole. I've had the benefit of observing everything at the trial, whether it occurred before the jury or not. I've had the benefit of reviewing all the pre-trial submissions by the parties. I've had the benefit of the pre-sentence investigation and the materials submitted by victims, orally by the state in writing, by the defense, and orally here today. And Mr. Halderson has exercised his constitutional right as well. I don't know the victims. I did not know the victims. I know people like them. I'm privileged to say. And I know and can understand the empty space that this crime has left. I can empathize. I can empathize. I can only partially understand the feelings because I haven't lost people in my family through such a manner or had a violation by a member of the family causing such loss. But everyone in this room has a mother and a father. Everyone has siblings if they're fortunate and everyone can understand the loss that the Halderson family extended as it is and their friends and this community feel for their loss. It is tragic. It is tragic. It is something which will take decades for some to heal. I hope not that long but healing may never come for some. One does not know. And I hope that no one is coming here for that healing. This procedure provides closure only of this legal part of the matter. What people can do in their own lives to address their loss is what they must do themselves and amongst others. But I do want you to know that this court honors your loss honors the people who died and approaches this sentencing here weighing that gravity of that offense as one of those things which must be weighed in determining whether or not Mr. Halderson should ever be eligible for parole as the life sentences I must impose are predetermined by the legislature. It is true that rehabilitation is a factor that must be considered and Attorney Brown's point is well noted that I'm not certain that anyone has identified rehabilitative needs but those may arise over time depending upon an individual's receptiveness and willingness to participate in self-examination or diagnosis or other steps which our criminal justice system utilizes to try and determine how to fix something whether it's a substance abuse issue or an anger issue or something that is only amenable to treatment by medication or intensive therapy. Some people I believe can't be fixed I have no basis to know whether Mr. Halderson fits into any of those categories other than I think it's fairly clear here that nothing was identified in his 23 24 years of life up to this point except for his actions in July and to an extent his actions over the year plus leading up to that where he was deceiving his family and his friends the gravity of the offense is as serious as it could be and I must not overlook of course the steps taken to hide the crime the steps taken which if one ponders it certainly makes the crime even worse if you could say that the murder of your parents is something that could be made worse I've tried even though I've had to examine carefully the evidence not to think about it I've tried not to think about how or what steps were taken or how these things even took place I don't wish to engage in that speculation at sentencing but I recognize that the jury found Mr. Halderson guilty of mutilating both bodies hiding both bodies and presenting a story to law enforcement to try and lead them on a completely different path than what had actually occurred and that he took steps in those actions which really robbed those people of dignity but fortunately their dignity is in all here in these people that remember them these people that are here today because of them I appreciated learning more about them and my condolences go to every member of their family there's no foregone conclusions in sentencing I've learned that since my time on the bench I've learned that each case is different each case demands an individual examination and sometimes I will confess I sit down not knowing what I'm going to do or not even certain which direction I'm leading so I appreciate all of the statements made by council here and in writing recognizing that the determination doesn't come until this point and nothing is foregone as far as a conclusion this is the third individual for which I've had to make this determination and similar to ADA Raymond's comments I've had to sentence a host of other people up to this crime where you can observe a lot in the background of the individual that you end up wishing hadn't been the case because they might not have come to the point if they had had a better foundation it is to Barton Christa's credit the foundation Mr. Halderson enjoyed and it does not explain what happened here and as everyone has discussed there may be the ability to have rehabilitation throughout some course of time and that's why the defense requests that that be kept in mind as to the determination of eligibility for parole but in all honesty I must say that as a wiser judge indicated to me once you should sentence people not because of your anger if indeed you're fearful of them and not utilize the same standards for both I cannot conceive of a way to fulfill my duty to protect the public that I serve were I to perceive that at some point in time an individual who committed these crimes should be released back into that public I cannot grant to Mr. Halderson the generosity of spirit and empathy that his grandmother has for him empathy which his own parents would surely have had where he just owned up to what he had deceived them about I cannot say to the community here in this room or at large in this county that Mr. Halderson should have the ability to be reviewed and considered for release back into our community at any point despite his young age at this point in his life the gravity of these offenses and the need to protect the public outweigh the potential that there could be that at some future point he should have presence among us now that is not to say that he may not have the possibility of presence as a member of his family in the future that is up to those folks and he and that's mentioned in the defense memorandum regarding a hope that someday there might be a reconstruction of a relationship that's all well and good I would wish that for anyone because I don't like telling his grandmother that I'm not able to give her the relief that she's asking for here out of her love for her grandson I cannot do that I have to for this sentence ensure that the only time Mr. Halderson comes back into the community is to have the privilege of a burial that he denied his parents and so on counts one and five per statute I sentence him to life in prison and pursuant to section 973.014 sub 1G 3 I find that he is not rather superfluous to say the least but at the same time I absolutely acknowledge that we may be in a completely different position here had he committed the acts of homicide but then stopped and took other steps to accept responsibility and sought forgiveness of everyone because what happens with a weapon in a moment of panic is different than what happened over those 48 to 72 hours the events of which I don't wish to think of or consider once again having listened to the evidence and observed the testimony and the physical evidence evidence so to make this quite simple I will impose maximum terms concurrent to each other and concurrent to counts one and five on each of the other counts within the information of which the verdict convicted Mr. Halderson I do believe that by imposing the maximum I'm recognizing the severity of those individual acts but there is a life sentence here so making them consecutive does not undermine the gravity of that given the maximum penalty involved I determined by my calculation 253 days of credit the judgment of conviction would reflect from July 8th 2021 until yesterday's date and I will waive the court cost assessments and surcharges on each count based upon indigence the balance on each of the victim witness fee to be payable during the course of his confinement is there any restitution being sought [01:09:57] Speaker 5: then I [01:09:59] Speaker 2: will enter no order for zero restitution at this time I don't have to address conditions of extended supervision except to the point that there's an extended supervision component of the sentences on the other counts so I would adopt the recommendations of the department on page 24 of the pre-sentence as to those questions although I recognize that extended supervision is denied under this sentence so that point is moot attorney brown or raymond did I overlook anything in passing judgment [01:10:33] Speaker 5: no [01:10:34] Speaker 2: attorney Vera or Doral did I overlook anything other than addressing post conviction no Mr. Halderson you have the absolute right to seek an appeal you have 20 days within which to start that process that's through filing a notice of intent I believe that we have on file the notice that you understand and have been given notice of that right and most importantly of that deadline your signatures on that document that'll be placed within the file here I thank everyone for being here today we are adjourned [01:11:08] Speaker ?: thank you good [01:11:13] James Langer: afternoon everyone my [01:11:26] Speaker ?: my [01:11:26] James Langer: name [01:11:26] Speaker ?: my name [01:11:26] James Langer: is James Langer I am the digital content manager for channel 3000 dot com as you just heard there Chandler Halderson sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole the judge and really everybody in the courtroom getting very [01:11:41] Speaker ?: very in the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the the of the of the of the in the of the of the of the the of the of the of the the of the the of the the of the of the the of the of the the of the the of the of the of the of the of the the of the of the the of the of the of the the of the the of the of the of the the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the the of the of the the of the the of the of the of the of the the of the of the of the of the of the of the of the [01:14:15] James Langer: Hi, everyone. James Langer, realizing I was just muted. So we're going to recap everything that just happened here. As you just heard a little while ago, the judge in this case sentenced Chandler Halderson to life in prison without parole. The only thing that was really up for a question here was whether or not Chandler would be released at some point. But Judge John Highland, in making his ruling, made a really powerful comment there that the only time that Chandler would be allowed to leave prison would be for the dignity of a burial he did not afford his parents. So that was kind of the parting words he had for Chandler Halderson here after about an hour long or so sentencing hearing in which the prosecution argued for life with no parole. The defense argued that Chandler, being a young man who was 23 years old at the time of the crimes, just turned 24 this past week, that they felt he could be rehabilitated at some point and should have been afforded the opportunity for parole. But ultimately, the judge decided against that given the nature of the crimes and the impact statements that some members of his family submitted. We actually did hear a letter from Chandler's grandmother who said that even though what he did was horrific, she had hoped that he would learn a trade in prison and become a productive member of society and that he would be granted that. But Judge John Highland again referencing that letter basically said he couldn't share that same type of sympathy or forgiveness for Chandler Halderson before he ultimately sent him to prison for life with no opportunity of getting out. So this kind of wraps up a very traumatic for a lot of people case. We saw everybody basically who spoke today get emotional, including prosecutors, including including the judge. If we go back to the trial, they saw a lot of disturbing images, a lot of things that people frankly shouldn't see. And it clearly had an effect on a lot of people who were involved in this case. And as both the prosecutors and the defense said, there's really no happy ending here. The Halderson family is forever going to be touched by this. They're always going to have to to live with this. And Chandler's brother basically lost his entire family overnight, as the prosecutors said. So a very emotional day in court here and in kind of the culmination of really one of the more significant cases that that Dane County in Wisconsin has seen for quite some time. So if you missed anything at all about this case, if you missed the start of this hearing, you're going to be able to watch it in its entirety, whether it's on our website, channel3000.com, whether it's on our YouTube page, wherever else we have every single day of this trial archived, we have a dedicated web page set up that tracked this case from the start. So if you have any questions about what happened or want to go back and listen to pieces of testimony again, you can do that on that page there. We're also going to stay on this story certainly for the rest of today. We're going to have live team coverage of this on our evening newscast on News 3 Now. So join us at four o'clock and at five and at 5:30. We're normally on at 6:00 p.m. But because of the NCAA basketball tournament, our six o'clock news will actually be at 5:30. So tune in later this afternoon. We're going to have a full reaction of what it was like in the courthouse of what everybody's thoughts are after this case, now that it's all wrapped up. And so you'll want to make sure that you tune in for that as well and stay tuned for more updates over at channel3000.com. In the meantime, thanks for watching everybody and we will see you then.