KENOSHA, Wis. — If someone told you that a journalist was writing stories critical of a judge, exposing embarrassing information about that judge, and then found himself the subject of multiple law-enforcement complaints apparently aimed at having him criminally prosecuted and jailed, you might assume the story was unfolding in a third-world country under a dictatorship — not in the United States. But according to records reviewed by Kenosha County Eye, that controversy is playing out right here in Kenosha County.

Kenosha County Circuit Court Judge Chad Kerkman (D) first reported Kenosha County Eye editor Kevin Mathewson to the Kenosha County Sheriff’s Office on Sept. 12, 2025, classifying Mathewson’s critical reporting on him as “threats,” according to law-enforcement records reviewed by Kenosha County Eye. Despite the serious classification, the Sheriff’s Office apparently took no law-enforcement action against Mathewson, never contacted him for an interview, and never sought criminal charges. Instead, the matter was reportedly discussed with Kenosha County Corporation Counsel, and no action was taken against the journalist. Shortly afterward, Kerkman appears to have escalated the matter to the Wisconsin State Capitol Police, who have now been involved in the dispute for approximately eight months.

The complaint appears to stem from Mathewson’s critical reporting on Kerkman, including articles criticizing the judge’s courtroom decisions, repeated reversals by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals, Kerkman’s ban on photography in intake court, reporting surrounding felony identity-theft charges filed against the judge’s longtime bailiff, allegations of an inappropriate sexual relationship with a former clerk, Mathewson photographing Kerkman at public meetings, publishing Kerkman’s publicly available campaign registration statement, and photographs Kerkman himself publicly posted on social media with Kenosha County District Attorney Thomas “T. Clair” Binger (D).

Mathewson believes the timing is not coincidental. Shortly after he filed a federal lawsuit in the Eastern District of Wisconsin challenging Kerkman’s photography ban and courtroom restrictions, the judge allegedly began making complaints to law enforcement agencies.

Although State Capitol Police have apparently been involved behind the scenes for approximately eight months, Mathewson only recently received a direct phone call from a detective with the agency.

“The delay alone speaks volumes,” Mathewson said. “If there was actually a credible criminal threat here — which no one, including Kerkman, believes — law enforcement would have acted immediately, not sit on it for month after month. This looks more like an attempt to weaponize police against a critic than an actual public safety issue. I’d expect this in China, Russia — not here in the USA.”

According to information reviewed by Kenosha County Eye, investigators have examined complaints involving Mathewson publishing critical articles about Kerkman, using publicly available social-media photographs of the judge, photographing the judge at a public meeting, and publishing Kerkman’s campaign registration statement obtained from the State of Wisconsin’s public Sunshine website.

Mathewson said investigators appeared to believe his reporting was intended to improperly influence future judicial rulings, rather than criticize prior decisions already made from the bench.

Mathewson said the reporting in question focused on decisions already made by Kerkman — decisions that many readers and attorneys strongly disagreed with — not attempts to influence future rulings.

Mathewson also rejected what he described as a false narrative that he singularly targeted Kerkman, noting that Kenosha County Eye has published critical reporting involving numerous judges, prosecutors, commissioners and public officials over the years.

“Anyone who follows Kenosha County Eye knows I’ve written dozens of stories casting other judges, prosecutors and law enforcement in an unflattering light — because of their own conduct,” Mathewson said. “The idea that I have some singular obsession with Chad Kerkman is simply not true.”

The detective also reportedly questioned Mathewson’s use of photographs showing Kerkman and Binger embracing socially, including shirtless photos the two men had publicly posted themselves online.

Mathewson maintains that publicly available photographs of elected officials are fair subjects for commentary and scrutiny, particularly when those officials maintain close political and professional relationships with one another. Mathewson noted that Kerkman was closely aligned with numerous local officials who circulated nomination papers during his most recent judicial election campaign, including County Board Supervisors Erin Decker (R) and Gabe Nudo (D), County Executive Samantha Kerkman — the judge’s former spouse — then-Assistant District Attorney Thomas “T. Clair” Binger (D), likely future inmate Andy “Sgt. Hard” Berg, and Court Commissioner Elizabeth Pfeuffer.

Wisconsin’s own judicial ethics rules recognize that judges occupy a unique role and are expected to endure criticism and heightened public examination. The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s commentary to SCR 60.03 states that judges “must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny” and accept restrictions and criticism that ordinary citizens may find burdensome. Mathewson said the current situation appears inconsistent with that principle, arguing that criticism of a judge’s public actions should not be treated as a law-enforcement matter. “The Supreme Court is essentially saying judges need to have a thick skin,” Mathewson noted. “Chad’s skin can’t be any thinner.”

Investigators also reportedly asked about an article in which Mathewson published Kerkman’s campaign registration statement showing when the judge would next be up for election. Mathewson noted the document was obtained directly from the official Wisconsin Sunshine website and was already publicly accessible through a government source.

Although Mathewson said he was not legally required to remove information obtained through government sources, he voluntarily complied with nearly all requests to redact information from the filing.

The detective additionally questioned Mathewson’s presence at a public meeting attended by Kerkman. Mathewson said he sat in one place during the meeting, photographed numerous public officials in attendance, and never followed Kerkman around the room.

Mathewson said the entire situation appears retaliatory and designed to intimidate him because of his reporting and pending federal litigation.

“This started after I sued him and after I exposed embarrassing things involving his courtroom and his conduct,” Mathewson said. “I report critically on a lot of judges. Anybody who actually reads Kenosha County Eye knows that. The idea that criticism of a public official somehow becomes criminal harassment is absurd.”

Mathewson also pointed to the fact that, despite the “threats” classification and the passage of approximately eight months, law enforcement has still not alleged that he threatened violence against Kerkman or anyone else.

Records reviewed by Kenosha County Eye further show that Kerkman requested deputy bodyguards to escort him to at least two separate Judiciary and Law Committee meetings. In one request, Kerkman specifically asked that a deputy escort him to the administrative building and remain present during the meeting. The deputy bodyguard requests were personally approved by Sheriff David W. Zoerner (D).

The records also show Kerkman coordinated an official courthouse security assessment through the Wisconsin State Capitol Police, conducted at public expense. Emails contained in the records discuss courthouse walkthroughs, judicial security concerns, residential security assessments for judges and their families, panic alarms, escorts and other security-related recommendations. The only tangible security-related change Kenosha County Eye has been made aware of following the assessment is that Clerk of Courts Rebecca Matoska-Mentink reportedly stopped allowing certain courthouse personnel to bypass the metal detector screening process.

“I’m told that lately Chad is not in his right mind,” Mathewson said. “The fact that he’s asking for deputy bodyguards to committee meetings already filled with law enforcement officers and requesting formal security assessments at the courthouse leaves two possibilities, in my opinion. Either he genuinely believes people are out to harm him and is acting in a paranoid fashion, or he is intentionally trying to gaslight law enforcement into treating political criticism as a public-safety threat in order to silence a critic and punish me for suing him. Either possibility is equally alarming.”