Story originally printed in the La Crosse Tribune or online at www.lacrossetribune.com

Published - Friday, August 08, 2008

Judge refuses to vacate Tetting plea on homicide charges

By AMANDA BECKER / Lee Newspapers

MAUSTON, Wis. — A motion to vacate the plea a Tomah, Wis., man entered to reckless homicide charges in the March 2007 shooting deaths of two people in rural Juneau County was denied Thursday.

John Tetting Jr., 25, pleaded no contest April 7 to two counts of party to the crime of second-degree reckless homicide. He was charged Oct. 5, 2007, in the shooting deaths of Joshua Alderman, 31, of La Crosse and Tabatha Nealy, 23, of Wisconsin Rapids, Wis. Their bodies were found March 11 inside a car in the town of Finley north of Necedah, Wis.

Tetting is accused of driving David Turner, 33, of Tomah to the secluded spot where Turner shot Alderman and Nealy, according to the criminal complaint. Turner has pleaded not guilty to two counts of first-degree intentional homicide and has a status conference scheduled for Aug. 18.

The motion to vacate the plea was denied by Juneau County Circuit Court Judge John Roemer.

Tetting testified that the legal definition of party to a crime was not explained to him at his April plea hearing.

When his attorney, John Brinckman, went over the plea agreement with him, Tetting said he had questions about the “intentionality” aspect of party to a crime.

Party to a crime involves intentionally aiding and abetting in a crime, said Tetting’s new attorney, Dennis Ryan. Tetting said he did not aid and abet in the deaths of Alderman

and Nealy.

After the plea hearing, Tetting said he went back to his cell, looked through a Wisconsin law book and found the legal definition of party to a crime. Tetting then wrote a letter to Roemer stating that he wanted to withdraw his plea.

Brinckman said in the early stages of his representation, Tetting never discussed not wanting to take a deal. Brinckman said he advised Tetting to not take a deal until Turner’s trial was completed.

“I never pushed a plea on Mr. Tetting. I discouraged him from pleading at an early point,” Brinckman said.

Brinckman testified that Tetting wanted to get the plea deal in place because he wanted to get out of the jail.

Although Tetting testified that the legal definition of party to a crime was not explained to him, Brinckman said all of his conversations with Tetting revolved around party to a crime.

“We spent a lot of time talking about party to a crime because that’s all this case is,” Brinckman said.

Special prosecutor Michael Luell pointed out that Tetting has been charged and convicted of party to a crime on more than one occasion.

Roemer told the court that his ruling would have been different if Tetting was not charged with party to a crime in the past and if he was not told about party to a crime on many occasions from lawyers and a case detective.

Amanda Becker is a reporter at the Juneau County Star-Times.