“Like a Prelude to a Violent Crime”

In what I would describe as one of very few examples of someone involved in this case understanding the severity of Luke Wenke’s actions and the future implication of said behavior, the prosecutor at the time, Assistant U.S. Attorney David Rudroff, urged the judge to impose a one-year prison sentence for the violation. In doing so, he admitted that he had erred by previously agreeing to a lesser-than-typical prison sentence for Luke Wenke’s original crime, stating, “18 months clearly was not enough for the defendant. His behavior resumed almost immediately upon his release from prison.”

Furthermore, Rudroff acknowledged Wenke’s apparent need for mental help while emphasizing the utmost importance of setting the example that his violative conduct would not be tolerated. He drove the point home by telling the judge that in his 12 years as a federal prosecutor, this was his first time requesting a sentence reflecting an upward departure from the standard guidelines. In his own words, Rudroff emphasized the irony of the situation, stating, “And it’s sort of surprising that it would be a violation of supervised release, where I would break that trend, but I do think it’s warranted here.”

While arguing his case, Rudroff reminded the court of its past description of Luke Wenke’s behavior as reading like a “prelude to a violent crime.” Rudroff seemed adamant that a return to prison was absolutely necessary in order to deter Luke Wenke from reoffending in the future.

“This is a Very Time Intensive Case”

During the hearing on August 3rd, probation supervisor John Taberski testified to the difficulties of getting Wenke to remain complaint with the terms of his supervision, stating:

“…the Assistant U.S. attorney brought up the pushing boundaries issue. And all I’ll say about that is that this is a very time intensive case.” (Doc. 84, p. 12)

Taberski went on to explain that there were a lot of things he could talk about that were not listed in the violation petition against Luke Wenke, but which reflected his tendency to push the boundaries of what qualifies as violative conduct. He also stated that upon learning about Wenke’s violation, it was probation’s intention for Wenke “to go to jail and be held accountable at that point.”

Another Missed Opportunity To Hold Luke Wenke Accountable

Luke Wenke’s public defender at the time, Alexander Anzalone, urged the judge to extend leniency to the defendant in order to accommodate his apparent need for mental health treatment. Anzalone insisted that Wenke wanted and would comply with treatment, and Wenke himself reassured the judge that he would. The judge accommodated the request, sentencing Wenke to time served plus 34 more months of probation. Under the newly-imposed conditions of his supervision, Wenke was required undergo a proper mental evaluation, attend anger management, and undergo a substance abuse evaluation and drug testing.

Much to my disappointment, Assistant U.S. Attorney Rudroff was recused from the case not long after this hearing. I don’t know why he left the case or whether it was his decision (although I suspect it had something to do with Wenke’s explosive social media posts about Rudroff), but thus far, he’s the only prosecutor who I think truly understood the seriousness of Wenke’s conduct. Some people see it, and some people don’t. I think Rudroff foresaw that when you give Luke Wenke an inch, he takes a mile, and that his conduct would only worsen if the court continued to extend leniency. Unfortunately, the prosecution’s caution fell on deaf ears, amounting to one of several missed opportunities to hold Luke Wenke properly accountable for his actions.

USA v. Luke Wenke – VOSR Sentencing Transcripts
8/3/2023 & 8/10/2023

CASE #1:22-cr-00035, DOCS. #84 & 85