Sept. 13, 2023

Child Pornography Charges For Tayler

From Sean Riker: 100 Percent Innocent and Sentanced to 200 Years by Sean Riker



Hello People,

I have some incredible news. I am still a little stunned. I've spoken about this before but there is a new development that I must share:

Back in 2009-2010 while I wallowed in the Racine county jail fighting my then-wife's false allegations, she downloaded child porn onto our home computer and laptop and falsely accused me of being the downloader/viewer. The corrupt police in Racine (secretly) did a forensic exam of the hard-drives and determined ALL of the porn was downloaded/viewed while I sat in the county jail, (w/o disclosing). My now-ex, Tayler, was never charged with possession of child porn or for filing a false police report because it would have ruined the case against me. How would it look with their star witness walking into my trial with worse crimes that she falsely accused me of committing? The state had already put out the false media narrative about me being a child abusing psychopath and Tayler being this poor abused waif, "Oh poor me!" The state had already staked their reputation on their false narrative.

If I am to serve 200 years for crimes I did not commit, well Tayler will serve life for the crimes she DID commit. I have made it my life's mission to get her charged.

I have attached my latest ruling from Racine and the judge FINALLY concedes that I was incarcerated when the child porn was downloaded. Furthermore, he states that he cannot file charges against Tayler until the state refuses to file charges. So my next step is to force the state to say whether or not charges will be filed and one they give the answer that will determine whether the judge will have to step in and file/refer charges.

This is the FIRST time the state has conceded I was incarcerated when the child porn was downloaded, so therefore I COULDN'T have committed the crime. If Tayler would falsely accuse me of such heinous crimes, child porn, she would DEFINITELY falsely accuse me of child abuse. This is the first domino falling that will ultimately lead to my wrongful conviction being overturned.

Tayler WILL be charged before I die. I WILL second mug-shot, first one in Larimer county jail, but this time for possession of child porn. Justice is at the door. Finally.


AUG 17 2023

State of Wisconsin,
Sean A. Riker,

Case No. 2009CF1490


The above-styled matter is now before the Court on the Defendant's pro se motion "Moving the Court to Refer Criminal Charges for Prosecution," file stamped August 15, 2023.

Brief History

The genesis of the present motion is the request of Mr. Riker in obtaining a laptop computer or computers that contained pornography. It has been conceded by the State that the pornography was downloaded by someone while Mr. Riker was incarcerated. Mr. Riker asserts that the download was performed by Tayler Anne a witness against him in the above-captioned matter.

A short videoconference hearing was conducted on this and an unrelated juror issue matter on July 28, 2023. The matter is rescheduled for a further status hearing. The motion is the second request of Mr. Riker that criminal charges be lodged against Tayler with respect to the pornography.


In Wisconsin, district attorneys have the primary responsibility and wide discretion to determine whether to commence a criminal prosecution. State v. Karpinski, 92 Wis.2d 599, 607, 285 N.W.2e 729 (1979). The authority is conferred by Wis. Sta. § 968.02(1), which provides that "[e]xcept as otherwise provided in this section, a complaint charging a person with an offense shall be issued only by a district attorney of the county where the crime is alleged to have been committed."

A district attorney in Wisconsin is a constitutional officer and is endowed with a discretion that approaches the quasi-judicial. State ex rel. Kurkierwicz v. Cannon, 42 Wis.2d 368, 378, 166 N.W.2d 255 (1969). The district attorney's duty is quasi-judicial in the sense that it is his or her duty to administer justice rather than simply obtain convictions.

Wisconsin court decisions have recognized that there is no obligation or duty upon a district attorney to prosecute all complaints that may be filed with him or her. Kurkierwicz, 42 Wis.2d at 378; see also Thomson v. State, 61 Wis.2d 325, 330, 212 N.W.2d 109 (1973).

In general, the district attorney is answerable to the people of the state and not to the courts or the legislature as to the way in which he or she exercises power to prosecute complaints. Kurkierwicz, 92 Wis.2d at 608; State v. Kenyon, 85 Wis.2d 36, 42, 270 N.W.2d 160 (1978).

Wisconsin Statute 968.02(3) reads as follows: "If a district attorney refuses or is unavailable to issue a complaint, a circuit judge may permit the filing of a complaint, if the judge finds there is probable cause to believe that the person to be charged has committed the offense after conducting a hearing. If the district attorney has refused to issue a complaint, he or she shall be informed of the hearing and may attend. The hearing shall be ex parte without the right of cross-examination."

A judge's order issued under Wis. Stat. § 968.02(3) is not appealable. Gavcus v. Maroney, 127 Wid.2d 69, 377 N.W.2d 201 (Ct.App. 1985).

It would be premature for this Court to conduct any hearing under Wis. Stat. § 968.02(3) as there has been no showing that the district attorney refuses to issue a complaint regarding the pornography.

Accordingly, upon all the files, pleadings and proceedings heretofore had in this matter,

IT IS ORDERED that the present motion is DENIED.

Dated this 17th day of August, 2023.

Honorable Eugene A. Gasiorkiewicz

CC: File.
Attorney Patricia Hanson.
Sean Riker.


State Of WI.,
Sean A. Riker,

Case No; 09CF1490


Comes Now, Sean Riker, pro se Defendant moving this court to compel the Racine District Attorney to answer the attached letter/questions:

Riker filed a motion in this court to have his computers returned to him. The computers were confiscated during this case based off of false allegations, perpetrated by the states star witness, Tayler, because she downloaded child pornography onto them and blamed Riker. Judge Gasiorkiewicz denied Riker's motion mainly because they contain child porn and because the computers may be used as evidence.

Riker filed another motion with this court asking that the court refer criminal charges against the person that downloaded said child porn, (Tayler), and the Judge ruled that the Racine District Attorney must first refuse to file said charges before He can step in and refer or file criminal charges.

So Riker must write a letter, which seems absurd, to the Racine District Attorney and ask that child porn charges be made and if not, why? Riker has attached the letter to the Racine DA Patricia Hanson as well as a copy of this motion to compel. If the Court will notice Riker gave ample time for the Racine DA to answer the questions. Riker further mentions that he would like the answers BEFORE our upcoming hearing on Sept. 18th, 2023.

Riker asks that no ruling be made on this Motion To Compel until on or after the upcoming Sept. 18th, 2023 hearing. If the Racine DA has not answered these questions in the attached letter, Riker will ask this court to compel the Racine DA to do so at the upcoming hearing.

Once the DA refuses to press charges for the child porn IN WRITING or verbally in front of this court, Riker will file another motion for this court to file or refer the charges.

Executed this 27th day of August, 2023

Sean Riker
Sean Riker #567232
Boscobel, WI. 53805

Case; 09CF1490
Inre; Filing Charges For Child Pornography Questions

Dear Racine DA Patricia Hanson,

as you know I have been trying to obtain my two computers that were confiscated after Tayler, your star witness, downloaded child porn onto both and tried to blame me. She did this false allegation to bolster her already false allegations in this case which lead to my ultimate wrongful conviction.

Judge Gasiorkiewicz denied my motion to return the computers in question because they were tainted with your star witnesses child pornography. His Honor also mentioned that they were evidence for possible criminal charges regarding the child porn.

I then filed a motion asking that His Honor refer criminal charges against your star witness Tayler for the child porn she downloaded. His Honor made his ruling that, in a nutshell, the Racine DA must refuse to press charges in order for His Honor to refer or file charges against your star witness Tayler, or whomever is responsible for the porn...You know.

In writing this letter I ask you the following questions and I would like written answers to them before our Sept. 18, 2023 hearing:
1) This child porn has been thoroughly vetted by the Racine sheriffs dept and they/you know whom is responsible for this child porn: Are you going to file child pornography charges against your suspect?
2) If you are not filing charges for said child porn, why not?
3) Are you going to inform the Federal Government about this child pornography and if not, why?
4) If you are going to file charges and inform the Federal Government, when is this going to occur?

I will be filing a Motion To Compel with Judge Gasiorkiewicz accompanied with a copy of this letter. I will ask the Judge to hold off on answering the motion until our Sept. 18th, 2023 hearing. A copy of the motion to compel will be attached to this letter.

Please do the right thing.

Thank you for your time and professionalism.
Aug. 27th, 2023

Sean Riker
Sean Riker #567232
Boscobel, WI. 53805


Replies Replies feed

Comments disabled by author.

Other posts by this author


Get notifications when new letters or replies are posted!

Posts by Sean Riker: RSS email me
Comments on “Child Pornography Charges For Tayler”: RSS email me
Featured posts: RSS email me
All Between the Bars posts: RSS