BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD
OF THE
ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION
AND
DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION

In the Matter of:

STEPHAN WALTER ADDISON,

Attorney-Respondent, 

No. 6282418.

and

BENJAMIN BUTLER,

Attorney-Respondent,

No. 6284340. 

 

Commission No. 07 CH 39

 

 

 

Commission No. 07 CH 40

FILED - May 22, 2007

COMPLAINT

Jerome Larkin, Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, by his attorneys Wendy J. Muchman and Christine P. Anderson, pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 753(b) and 761, complains of Respondents Stephan Walter Addison and Benjamin Butler, who were licensed to practice law in Illinois on November 4, 2004, and November 30, 2004, respectively, and alleges that Respondents have engaged in the following conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice or to bring the courts or the legal profession into disrepute:

Count I
Addison and Butler
Criminal Conduct including Sexual Assault

1. Sometime prior to August 5, 2006, Respondents, Stephan W. Addison and Benjamin Butler, organized a week-end reunion at Addison's family summer house in Green Lake, Wisconsin.

2. On Friday August 5, 2006, in preparation for the trip, Respondents picked up supplies to bring to the house, including alcoholic beverages such as beer, vodka, whiskey and Jagermeister.

3. On the afternoon of August 5, 2006, and during the day-time hours of August 6, 2006, Respondents and their friends spent their time drinking, playing cards, boating, and eating.

4. On August 6, 2006, at around 11:00 p.m. Respondents went to the Goose Blind, a tavern located in Green Lake, Wisconsin. There they consumed additional alcoholic beverages. 5. At around 1:00 a.m. on the morning of August 7, 2005 Respondents arrived at another tavern, Berts, in Ripon, Wisconsin. There they drank additional alcoholic beverages.

6. Shortly before Berts closed, around 2:00 a.m., Respondent Addison met a woman, Dawn Paez, on the dance floor. They danced briefly and had no further interaction at that time.

7. After Berts closed, Respondents and Paez were standing outside the bar. Respondents asked Paez for a ride to the Green Lake county residence. Paez asked Respondents, "How do I know you're not a couple of weirdos or something?" Respondents answered, "Well, we are lawyers," and Respondent Butler handed Paez his attorney-at-law business card. Paez then agreed to give Respondents a ride home.

8. Respondents and Paez then drove out of Ripon heading toward Green Lake, Wisconsin. Paez was driving her car, Respondent Addison was in the front seat, passenger side, and Respondent Butler was in the back seat behind Paez.

9. After driving for approximately 20 minutes, Respondents asked Paez to pull over at a wayside or boat landing. Originally, Paez said she had responsibilities and would not stop. Eventually, Respondents told her to pull into the parking lot of Walker's Supper Club in Brooklyn, Wisconsin, to turn around, and she agreed to do so.

10. While stopped at Walker's Supper Club, Respondent Butler began holding and kissing Paez from the back seat. From the front seat, Respondent Addison reached his hand to Paez's crotch area and began fondling her. Addison also started pulling down Paez's tube top and bra and making sexual comments about her chest area. At all times, Paez attempted to resist Respondents' sexual touching, but Respondents persisted. Paez told Respondents; "No. What you think is going to happen here isn't going to happen with me." She told Respondents they had to give her directions so she could get them home. She then reassembled her clothing and pulled out of the parking lot.

11. Respondent Addison persisted in making inappropriate sexual comments. The Respondents then directed Paez to a boat landing close to the Green Lake residence.

12. Paez pulled her car into the boat landing and put her car in park. Respondent Addison turned the car off and took the car keys out of the ignition. Respondent Addison came around to the driver's side of the car. From the back seat, Respondent Butler was holding Paez's upper body and kissing her neck. Respondent Addison opened the driver's side car door. Paez was still seated. Addison's pants and underwear were down. Respondent Addison directed Paez to perform oral sex upon him. He pushed her head down toward his genitals. Paez resisted and told Respondent Addison she would not do it. Respondent Butler bit Paez's right arm. Respondent Addison tried to remove Paez's pants. Respondent Addison removed Paez's belt, ripped off her pants and her underwear. Respondent Addison then performed oral sex upon Paez. Respondent Addison made inappropriate sexual comments about Paez and encouraged Butler to participate in the sexual contact.

13. Respondent Addison pulled Paez out of the car and pressed her against the side of the car. Respondent Addison then pressed Paez against the car and attempted to have sexual intercourse with her. Respondent Addison urged Respondent Butler to pull Paez up on the hood of the car. Respondent Butler pulled Paez up onto the hood of the car and held her upper body down. Respondent Addison then forced Paez to perform oral sex upon Respondent Butler while Respondent Addison had sexual intercourse with her. Paez kept repeating, "No. This has to stop."

14. Paez eventually was able to scoot her way off the hood of the car. She grabbed her car keys from the hood of the car, but Respondent Addison again pressed her against the side of the car and performed another sexual act upon her.

15. On the occasion of each of the incidents described in paragraphs ten through fourteen above, Paez reasonably believed that Respondents would harm her and at no time did she consent to their conduct.

16. At all times relevant to the events alleged in this complaint there was a criminal statute in Wisconsin, sec. 940.225(1)(c) which outlaws "First Degree Sexual Assault." Respondents Addison and Butler committed first degree sexual assault when "by use of force they did have sexual intercourse or sexual contact with another without that person's consent and was aided or abetted by one or more persons."

17. At all times relevant to the events alleged in this complaint there was a criminal statute in Wisconsin, sec. 940.225(2)(a), which outlaws "Second Degree Sexual Assault." Respondents Addison and Butler committed second degree sexual assault when they "by use of force did have sexual contact with a person without that person's consent."

18. At all times relevant to the events alleged in this complaint there was a criminal statute in Wisconsin, sec. 940.225(3m), which outlaws "Fourth Degree Sexual Assault." Respondents, Addison and Butler committed fourth degree sexual assault when they "had sexual contact with a person without that person's consent."

19. At all times relevant to the events alleged in this complaint there was a criminal statute in Wisconsin, sec. 940.19(1), "Battery." Respondents Addision and Butler committed battery when they did an act "with intent to cause bodily harm to a person, without that person's consent and with the knowledge that the person so harmed did not consent."

20. At all times relevant to the events alleged in this complaint there was a criminal statute in Wisconsin, sec 940.30 "False Imprisonment." Respondents Addison and Butler committed false imprisonment when they "intentionally restrained a person without that person's consent and with the knowledge that they had no lawful authority to do so."

21. At all times relevant to the events alleged in this complaint there was a criminal statute in Wisconsin, 940.225(1), 939.05 Wis. Stats, First Degree Sexual Assault Party to a Crime. Respondent Butler committed first degree sexual assault party to a crime when "he aids another who by use of force has sexual intercourse with a person without her consent."

22. As a result of the conduct set forth above, Respondents Addison and Butler have engaged in the following misconduct:

  1. committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(3) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct by committing First Degree Sexual Assault in violation of Wisconsin, sec. 940.225(1) (c)(Addison), Second Degree Sexual Assault in violation of Wisconsin, sec. 940.225(2)(a)(Addison and Butler), Fourth Degree Sexual Assault in violation of Wisconsin, sec. 940.225(3m)(Addison and Butler), Battery in violation of Wisconsin, sec. 940.19(1)(Addison and Butler), False Imprisonment in violation of Wisconsin, sec 940.30, and 940.225(1), 939.05 Wis. Stats(Addison and Butler), First Degree Sexual Assault Party to a Crime(Butler);

  2. conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(5) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct: and,

  3. conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice or bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute in violation of Supreme Court Rule 770.

Count II
Respondent Addison's Criminal Conviction for
Reckless Endangerment and Public Sexual Gratification

1. On August 16, 2005, Respondent Stephan Addison was charged in a criminal complaint issued by the Green Lake County Wisconsin's Sheriff's Department in the Circuit Court of Green Lake County, State of Wisconsin. State of Wisconsin v. Stephan W. Addison, Case No. 05 CF 90. A copy of the complaint is attached as Exhibit 1.

2. The complaint described in paragraph 1 above charged that on Sunday August 7, 2005, Respondent Addison committed the criminal offenses first degree sexual assault, fourth degree sexual assault and false imprisonment, arising from the conduct alleged in Count I above.

3. On November 30, 2006, information was filed against Respondent Addison. On December 8, 2006, Respondent Addison was charged in amended information in case no. 05 CF 90. The amended information charged that Respondent had engaged in the following offenses:

  1. Count 1: Second Degree Reckless Endangerment when Respondent in the town of Brooklyn, Green Lake County Wisconsin, did recklessly endanger the safety of Dawn M. Paez contrary to sec. 941.30(2) Wis. Stat.;

  2. Count 2: Sexual Gratification in Public when Respondent in the town of Brooklyn, Green Lake County, Wisconsin, did commit an act of sexual gratification in public involving the sex organ of one person and the mouth of another contrary to sec. 944.17(2)(a) Wis. Stat.;

  3. Count 3: Sexual Gratification in Public when Respondent in the town of Brooklyn, Green Lake County, Wisconsin, did commit an act of sexual gratification in public involving the sex organ of one person and that of another contrary to sec. 944.17(2)(a) Wis. Stat.

4. On December 8, 2006, Respondent Addison in case no. 05 CF 90 stipulated to no contest to the charges set forth in paragraph 3 above.

5. On December 8, 2006, a judgment of conviction was entered against Respondent Addison in the Circuit Court of Green Lake County, Wisconsin, in case no. 05 CF 90. A copy of the judgment of conviction is attached as Exhibit 2. On Count 1 Respondent Addison was sentenced to 3 years probation and 10 years in the Wisconsin State Prison with 5 years of initial confinement. Respondent Addison was found eligible for the Challenge Incarceration Program and the Earned Release Program, and he was sentenced to 300 hours community service. On Counts II and III Respondent Addison was sentenced to thirty days in jail which was to be served concurrently and 100 hours community service. In January 2007, Respondent Addison concluded his thirty days incarceration.

6. As a result of the order of conviction, Respondent Addison has engaged in the following misconduct:

  1. committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(3) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, by committing reckless endangerment and public sexual gratification in violation of 941.30(2) and 944.17(2)(a) Wis. Stat.;

  2. conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(5); and

  3. conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice or bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute in violation of Supreme Court Rule 770.

Count III
Respondent Butler's Criminal Conviction for
Reckless Endangerment

1. On August 16, 2005, Respondent Butler was charged in a criminal complaint issued by the Green Lake County Wisconsin's Sheriff's Department in the Circuit Court of Green Lake County, State of Wisconsin. State of Wisconsin v Benjamin Butler Case No. 05 CF 91. A copy of the complaint is attached as Exhibit 3.

2. The complaint described in paragraph 1 above charged that on Sunday, August 7, 2005, Respondent Butler committed First Degree Sexual Assault Party to a Crime, False Imprisonment and Misdemeanor Battery arising from the conduct alleged in Count I above.

3. On November 30, 2005, an information was issued against Respondent Butler and on November 14, 2006 an amended information issued in case no. 05 CF 91.

4. On December 8, 2006, Respondent Butler was charged in a second amended information in case no. 90 CF 91. The second amended information charged that Respondent Butler had engaged in the following offense:

  1. Second Degree Reckless Endangerment, when Respondent in the town of Brooklyn, Green Lake County Wisconsin, did recklessly endanger the safety of Dawn M. Pawz contrary to sec. 941.30(2) Wis. Stat.;

5. On December 8, 2006, Respondent Butler stipulated to no contest to the charges set forth in paragraph 4 above.

6. On December 8, 2006, a judgment of conviction was entered against Respondent Butler in the Circuit Court of Green Lake County, Wisconsin, in case no. 05 CF 91. A copy of the judgment of conviction is attached as Exhibit 4. On Count 1 Respondent Butler was sentenced to 3 years probation; 3-1/2 years in the Wisconsin State Prison with 1-1/2 years of initial confinement; Respondent Butler was found eligible for the Challenge Incarceration Program and the Earned Release Program; and Respondent Butler was sentenced to 300 hours community service.

7. As a result of the order of conviction Respondent Butler has engaged in the following misconduct:

  1. committing criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(3) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, by committing second degree reckless endangerment in violation of 941.30(2) Wis. Stat.;

  2. conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice in violation of Rule 8.4(a)(5); and,

  3. conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice or bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute in violation of Supreme Court Rule 770.

WHEREFORE, the Administrator requests that these matters be assigned to a panel of the Hearing Board, that a hearing be held, and that the panel make findings of fact, conclusions of fact and law, and a recommendation for such discipline as is warranted.

Wendy J. Muchman
Counsel for the Administrator
130 East Randolph Drive, #1500
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Telephone: (312) 565-2600
Respectfully submitted,

Jerome Larkin, Administrator
Attorney Registration and
Disciplinary Commission

By:  Wendy J. Muchman