A Sleight of Hand/Wiegand

[XLFD]

Anybody traveling across the county over the last two months couldn't help but notice a deluge of mostly red signs littering the side of the roads touting one candidate for the Mason County Republican primary race:  Beth Hand.  The court-appointed incumbent following the resignation of the sitting prosecutor, Hand's campaigning paid off big time in that she won the filled oval tally of four of every seven voters in a three-person race, Handily beating her nearest competitor.  

But while Hand was going door-to-door and to town hall meetings to secure her future occupation by getting her name out, she was at the same time doing her best to hide her now county-famous last name from the police and the courtroom in what can only be called a severe violation of ethical conduct on her part.  Many would consider her questionable actions enough to warrant censure or at least dismiss a case brought to the 79th District Court where she chose a course of conduct for over a year that calls her integrity and honesty into serious question.  

The events leading up to this started on the east side of the county, in Walhalla, specifically at Riley's Rendezvous Bar on Monday, July 24, 2023 shortly before 8 PM.  Combining the narratives eventually compiled by the Michigan State Police (MSP), a simple assault was alleged to have occurred when a woman customer complained about a food order and the owner of the bar, Joseph Riley, argued with and made some incidental contact with her before her fiancé deescalated the situation.

The woman, her fiancé, and the bartender were interviewed that night, Riley left before the MSP arrived and could not be located that night, he called the MSP the next day as they left messages on his phone, but the trooper investigating the incident was not able to contact him later that evening. Also that day: the trooper notified the Mason County Prosecutor's Office (MCPO) of their progress as noted in the report so that they could review and decide whether charges should be filed: 

The next day on Wednesday, July 26, 2023, a surprise witness came forward, a woman who indicated that she was at the Rendezvous Bar at the time of the incident and saw the altercation, her name was Beth M. Wiegand:

The first thing you may notice about Ms. Wiegand is that she lives in Ludington and that not a lot of people that live in Ludington would go to a Walhalla bar on a Monday night.  But if you are an attorney and recognize the address above, you would be shocked that this woman lives at the Mason County Courthouse, a place you always thought was nonresidential.  One wonders why this witness did not come forward that night, so maybe it was not a surprise that she never met with the investigating state trooper, just did a phone interview and supplied a written statement:

Why didn't the trooper activate the body camera to document this phone interview as is the usual policy for witness contacts in a police investigation?  And why wasn't the written statement of Ms. Wiegand included in the report, or at least a summary of what it indicated?'

And why did junior prosecutor Sarah Valente take up the charge for a misdemeanor about a week later without putting Ms. Wiegand on the potential witness list?  After all, according to the police report, Beth M. Wiegand lives right at the courthouse and so it should be an easy subpoena to enforce if she decides not to show up.  

They would not catch up with Mr. Riley until two and half months after this misdemeanor charge was leveled, on October 17, 2023, he was picked up on an arrest warrant signed that date.  The next month, Riley's attorney would make the connection after a thorough review of discovery materials he received and confirmation by Valente, he mentions this in a motion to dismiss the case against Riley filed this July:

Had you not figured it out already, the fictional Beth M. Wiegand is actually Prosecutor Beth M. Hand, who would never disclose this herself, instead obfuscating the many conflicts present by having her subordinate prosecute a case where she would be one of the four primary witnesses; this ruse would continue among the paperwork without disclosure by the MCPO of the impropriety inherent.  Even up to a scheduled December 2023 trial, Wiegand was listed as a witness with an address at the courthouse:

But the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss has another issue that the conflicted Prosecutor Beth M. Hand and her fake name and address, in that they were withholding key discovery material (body cam footage) from Riley for a period of nine months.  While the case would be effectively assigned over to Jordan Miller shortly after the conflict was disclosed by Valente, the MCPO led by Hand for months this summer, failed to give the defense these records they had asked for in October 2023.  

That motion summarizes some of the issues that reflect poorly on the MCPO and the current prosecuting attorney:

While Judge Middlebrook would not ultimately dismiss the case, he did disallow the body cam footage to be used at an August 5th trial, but not address the overall duplicity of the MCPO in his 8/5 motion order.  It should be seriously looked at outside of a motion hearing for a criminal offense, because some would say Prosecutor Beth Hand's course of conduct was unethical, unlawful, and even illegal.   

The unethical and unprofessional conduct is mostly addressed in the motion, but the MSP reports indicate that she gave a false name and address to a police officer conducting an investigation, while failing to tell the trooper over the phone or in her written statement the relevant fact that she was in the prosecutor's office that would decide whether to prosecute an assault that appears to have resulted in no injury to the victim.  

If you, and especially us at the Ludington Torch, voluntarily gave a false name and address to a state trooper, we would have to be concerned about our own prosecution, this could come in the form of obstructing justice or even perjury.  By Michigan law, any person whom a police officer informs that they are conducting a criminal investigation shall not knowingly or willingly do any of the following:  Conceal from a police officer, by trick, scheme, or device, any material fact relating to that criminal investigation. Make any false or misleading statement regarding a material fact in a criminal investigation. Issue or provide any written document to the police officer that the person knows is false or misleading regarding a material fact in a criminal investigation.

We have yet to see whether Ms. Wiegand's written statement has other untruths other than her name and address, we hope to get this document through the prosecutor's office as it is not in the court's file or the motion.  Our laws and rules for professional conduct by attorneys, indicate that prosecutors be held at even higher standards than the general population.

We need to have the MSP conduct their own investigation into this incident of subterfuge by the prosecutor-elect, who goes by the name of Beth Hand when she is not at a local rendezvous bar on Monday nights. apparently without her husband.  What else is she hiding through using fake names and artifice?

[Willy]

WOW. This has to be one of the top stories you have investigated X. Great job of revealing just how badly some people can act, especially those In power. She needs to come clean and step aside from being a prosecutor for the sake of maintaining some sort of ethical standards. if any, that still exist in local politics. What is the matter with these people? What happened to honesty and integrity?

[XLFD]

That "one of the top stories you have investigated" means quite a bit coming from one of our original members who have followed us regularly for the full 15 year period.  This is definitely an interesting plot twist to what would seem to be a simple assault charge, and I'm on the belief that Judge Middlebrook needed to address better than he had in his order.  

BTW, Wiegand wasn't a totally made-up name by Ms. Hand; she has been married to a Mr. Wiegand for two decades but never claimed his last name as a professional prosecutor.  The main problem wasn't that she gave an alternate name of hers, but that she did it without disclosure to all parties including the MSP and the defendant that she had supervisory powers and decision making authority over the case, even before it became a case.  That's a big problem and shows that she hasn't really gotten any purer since the days two decades ago when she titillated an elderly judge to help her win drug convictions in Oakland County.  

[Willy]

The reason I described this as one of your top stories is the amount and type of deceit involved. With the common run of the mill politician it's almost a given that exaggerations and lies may be involved when those politicians are in the limelight. Although a County Prosecutor is a political position it stands to reason that most folks think that someone holding that office will be fair and above board when prosecuting cases. I know there are exceptions but when someone who is in the process of seeking that job uses deception and deceit to affect a complaint or case  before being chosen by the people to represent the  peoples interests, it  makes this incident heads and shoulders above ordinary politics. After all she is going to be trying to convince juries that John Doe or Jane Doe is definitely guilty and that she should be trusted to be honest about the facts about evidence and information presented in court. What she has done, in my opinion, has committed  a whopper of deceit. How can she be trusted? What is her real name? She has 3 names, that we know of to choose from. Her maiden name, her first marriage name and second marriage name. Like the old TV show, To Tell The Truth, will the real Beth please stand up. Why did she choose the name Hand to put on her posters and not one of her other aliases? After all she clearly uses them when it's convenient for the situation at Hand.

[XLFD]

Alright, so it wasn't that this was my best investigative reporting, but it uncovered something bigger than the usual graft and corruption expected from the city hall and courthouse in Ludington.  I'll take it!

The unfortunate thing among the general voters in this county looking at prosecutor candidates, is that they side with one that walks hand in hand (pardon the unintended pun) with law enforcement, rather than one who is dedicated into getting justice.  I've seen Hand-Weigand go after good people accused of low level crimes with no victims, where the elements would be nigh impossible to prove with the fact set.  She has proven in such cases that she is not a wise person, choosing to follow along with a police-created bugbear rather than seeking justice.  

This is what got her such backing with police and with those in the county Republican Party who believe in strong-talking prosecutors, rather than case backlog and case failure rates that were fairly high for the last prosecutorial team she was part of.

[Freedom Seeker]

So is her husband still a MSP and is that a conflict of interest for a prosecutor?

[Freedom Seeker]

Is it common for a prosecutor to practice under a maiden name? Is Weigand her married name?

[Freedom Seeker]

Would a prosecutor be exempted from giving address on public records?

[XLFD]

Until I learn otherwise, here are the answers to your question.  MSP Sergeant David Wiegand appears to have retired in 2016.  A prosecutor who marries an active MSP sergeant would have to be very careful when prosecuting any crimes investigated even in part by the MSP, and the relationship should be disclosed even if a different MSP post is involved.

Her name on voter rolls is Beth M Wiegand and this holds true for her and her husband's property deeds, it is her legitimate name, but as we have seen, she practices her profession under a name that is not her own-- and to that end I have a little empathy with her.  But according to the report, on the phone interview she never told the trooper (who lives outside our county) that she was the prosecutor Beth Hand who would decide whether prosecution should happen, so she couldn't claim any address exemption existed due to her profession.  If such exemption exists, I cannot find it, and it was never noted on the report.  

I would not be surprised that the trooper making the report recognized the "304 E Ludington Avenue" address as that of the courthouse, and so there may be an additional level of complicity on that end-- which might not be surprising given her intimacy with a retired MSP sergeant.

[AnxiousGuy]

The thing that makes me curious is why she didn’t stick around and make her claims that night? Is it because she was intoxicated and her input might not have held any weight? The owner was not the only person suspiciously leaving before police arrived.

If a judge, prosecutor, or police officer witnesses a crime they have no good reason conceal their identity. They instead should be able to stand on their credentials to further expand on their credibility. Her motivation was not to protect her residence. It was to protect her behavior that night and possibly hide a bias.

[XLFD]

Great points, Anxious, and one that I didn't look at in detail, mostly because the one key was missing that I'm going to keep searching for: her written statement.  Why wouldn't she have come forward on that night when she was at the bar, saw the commotion and heard that the police were coming?  One suspects that if she was there with her husband, a retired trooper, that he would have stayed and gave his observations, which would likely be seen as gospel by his fellow trooper?  Maybe she was gelling after a long workday and hadn't made it home yet.  So presumably she left alone sometime after the altercation on Monday at 8 PM and phoned it in on Wednesday, after receiving a warrant request on Tuesday when she was a material witness who had not come forth?!  

A lot of things don't add up if we are to believe that Hand/Wiegen (Hand waggin', lol) is an ethical prosecutor, and it's my belief that her statement, when located, will show even deeper issues.

[Freedom Seeker]

True! Maybe Weigand-Hand stopped off "for just one" (makes sense on her way home from work) and didn't want to get involved because she didn't want her husband to know she stopped off at the bar without him. Hmmm? Lots of unknowns but what makes me a bit upset is that she uses two names and wasn't totally forthcoming to the voters that she is married to a retired? MICHIGAN state police sergeant. Would that change my vote or anyone's votes? Maybe. Maybe not. But do voters have a right to know?