1. Not since Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) has a case
been so compelling and brought before the U.S. Supreme Court needing a
federal court ruling, therefore, doesn't it make sense to make into a
new federal law that civilians deserve the knowledge that police officers
determining Probable Cause aren't themselves impaired as a novel federal
legal precedent?

2. And speaking of Brady 1, whether a Wisconsin Circuit
Court Judge completely abused it's power telling a defense attorney that
"But the implication is something was withheld from him, that I'm not
going to allow that, some indication withholding of evidence here. . .But I
just want to avoid some implication that somebody is withholding evidence
here. ", (R130:59-60) and whether he, and the Wisconsin Appellate Court,
who completely ignored the Petitioner 's Brady 2 claim in it's
Opinion/Decision (R131 Appendix pages 4-12 ) unconstitutionally denied
the Petitioner Due Process violating the U.S. Constitutional 5th and 14th
Amendments when a preponderance of exculpatory evidence was withheld?

Whether a Wisconsin Circuit Court Judge abused judicial discretion by preventing defense counsel from alleging potential evidence withholding and whether Brady v. Maryland principles were violated