Todd Kendhammer said the death of his wife, Barbara, was a freak accident. A Wisconsin jury did not believe him. They convicted him. Now new lawyers say they...
Can New Evidence Undo a Wisconsin Jury? The Kendhammer Case Explained
Lead
Todd Kendhammer said the death of his wife, Barbara, was a freak accident. A Wisconsin jury did not believe him. They convicted him. Now new lawyers say they have critical new evidence. They say it could change everything.
Background: The verdict and the claim
The case was simple on paper. A wife died. A husband gave an account. Prosecutors said the story did not hold. A jury found against him. The conviction followed. The public saw a courtroom and a sentence. The family saw loss and grief. The accused saw defeat.
What the new attorneys say
New counsel has stepped in. They say they found evidence that was not available at trial. They call it critical. They say it undermines the prosecution’s theory. They say it may point to a different timeline and raise doubts about intent.
What "new evidence" can mean
New evidence often falls into a few clear types:
- Forensic revisions. A new analysis of blood, DNA, or toxicology that changes the medical picture.
- Digital records. Phone location data, video footage, or deleted messages recovered later.
- Witness changes. A witness recants or a new witness comes forward.
- Expert testimony. A fresh expert review that contradicts earlier testimony.
Each can be decisive. Each can also fail in court. The law sets a high bar.
The legal hurdles
Wisconsin law requires more than surprise. To win a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, defense lawyers must show the evidence is truly new, material, and likely to produce a different verdict. They must show the evidence could not, with due diligence, have been found at the time of trial. Judges and appeals courts are cautious. Juries’ decisions carry weight.
What the defense needs to prove
Defense lawyers must do three things well:
- Prove the evidence is genuine and undiscovered at trial.
- Show it would probably have changed the jury's verdict.
- Show they acted with due diligence to find it earlier.
If any of those fail, a motion for a new trial is likely to fail.
What prosecutors will argue
Prosecutors will push back. They will stress the original evidence. They will question the timing and source of the new material. They will argue the jury considered the facts and rightly convicted. They will say new evidence is too thin to undo months of courtroom work.
What to watch next
Look for filings. The defense must file a motion for a new trial or a petition for post-conviction relief. The court will schedule hearings. Experts may testify. The judge will weigh the new evidence against the trial record.
Broader questions
This case raises larger questions about the justice system. How do we correct possible errors? How do we balance finality with fairness? Those are old questions. They demand careful answers.
Conclusion
New evidence can topple a verdict. It can also fail to move a court. The Kendhammer case will test that truth. Expect legal briefs, expert debate, and a judge’s measured ruling. Watch the filings. Watch the forensics. The law moves on steady feet. But sometimes the truth, like light through a small window, finds its way in.
Keywords: Todd Kendhammer, Barbara Kendhammer, Wisconsin jury, new evidence, conviction, new trial, post-conviction relief, forensic review, criminal appeal, legal standards.