Judge Susan Crawford: A Disgraceful Bid for Wisconsin’s Supreme Court

Published: March 25, 2025 By: R House In a state that prides itself on hard-working citizens and common-sense values, Judge Susan Crawford’s candidacy for the Wisconsin Supreme Court stands as a grotesque affront to justice, decency, and the safety of our most vulnerable. This is a woman who, in 2022, stared into the abyss of one of the most heinous crimes imaginable—repeated sexual assaults on a five-year-old girl—and decided that a measly four-year sentence, with Curtis O’Brien walking free after just two years, was somehow sufficient. Now, she has the audacity to ask Wisconsinites to elevate her to the highest court in the state. Voters must reject this shameful bid with the contempt it deserves.

Curtis O’Brien, a predator who inflicted unimaginable trauma on a defenseless child, faced a potential 60-year sentence for his crimes. The prosecution, recognizing the gravity of his depravity, sought 10 years of confinement followed by five years of extended supervision—a fraction of what he deserved, but at least a meaningful attempt to protect society. Crawford, however, saw fit to slap O’Brien with a pitiful four-year term, crediting him for the 777 days he’d already served during his trial. The result? A monster who raped a little girl repeatedly between 2012 and 2014 was back on the streets by 2024, free to roam Madison, according to Wisconsin’s Sex Offender Registry. This wasn’t justice—it was a betrayal.

What kind of judge looks at a case this vile and decides that two years of actual prison time is enough? Crawford’s own words at O’Brien’s sentencing reveal a mind-boggling disconnect from reality. She admitted the offense was an “aggravated type of sexual assault” and a Class B felony—one of Wisconsin’s most serious crimes—yet argued that her sentence was “necessary to protect the community.”

Necessary? O’Brien’s victim, now a teenager battling PTSD, anxiety, and depression, wrote a heartbreaking victim impact statement listing her favorite colors and stuffed animals, a child’s attempt to reclaim innocence stolen by a predator Crawford set loose. The girl’s mother spoke of a shattered family, ostracized by their neighborhood, forced to endure the trauma of pelvic exams for a six-year-old. Crawford heard all this—and still chose leniency.

Her justification? During a March 2025 debate, Crawford doubled down, smugly declaring, “I don’t regret that sentence,” claiming she followed the law by considering “aggravating and mitigating factors” and ordering the “minimum amount of prison time” she deemed necessary. Minimum? For a man who could have been locked away for six decades? This wasn’t a shoplifting case or a first-time offender’s lapse in judgment—this was a serial child rapist. Crawford’s obsession with “mitigating factors” apparently outweighed the screams of a five-year-old, the pleas of a devastated mother, and the outrage of a community in Black Earth, where O’Brien was allowed to live across from an elementary school on a paltry $500 signature bond while awaiting trial. Her concern, she said, was O’Brien’s “future.” What about the future of his victim—or the next child he might target?

This isn’t an isolated lapse. Crawford’s record reeks of a soft-on-crime mentality that prioritizes offenders over victims. She’s handed similarly lenient sentences to other predators, like Kevin Welton, a serial child molester who got just four years when he faced a possible 100. Now, she wants a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, where her rulings could shape the state’s legal landscape for a decade. Imagine the damage she could inflict from that perch—undoing tough-on-crime laws, weakening protections for the innocent, and turning our justice system into a revolving door for the worst among us.

Crawford’s defenders might point to her résumé: a former prosecutor, a Dane County Circuit Court judge since 2018, a liberal darling backed by Planned Parenthood and Democratic megadonors. But no amount of credentials can whitewash this stain. Her opponent, Brad Schimel—a former Attorney General and current Waukesha County judge—has rightly called her out, backed by law enforcement leaders who see her for what she is: a danger to public safety. Schimel’s campaign ads don’t mince words, and they shouldn’t. Wisconsinites need to know the stakes.

On April 1, 2025, voters will decide whether Crawford’s brand of reckless leniency gets a promotion. The choice is clear: reward a judge who freed a child rapist after two years, or send a resounding message that justice matters. Susan Crawford doesn’t belong on the Supreme Court—she barely belongs on the bench. Wisconsin deserves better than this travesty. For the sake of our children, our communities, and our conscience, reject her at the ballot box.