Comment In a landmark ruling, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that a teenage girl who killed her sex offender may have a chance to be cleared of all charges. The ruling is a major victory for Chrystul Kizer, now 22, a black woman facing life in prison for crimes she committed when she was 17, and for anti-trafficking advocates who have spent decades pushing for laws to protect victims like her. Kizer has not denied killing 34-year-old Randall Phillip Volar III in 2018. For years, she has been fighting for the chance to show a judge and eventually a jury that her actions were the “direct result” of exploitation and abuse that submitted by Volar. He had hoped to implement a never-used Wisconsin law designed to offer legal protections to some trafficking victims, who are often coerced or lured into committing crimes while being exploited. He sexually abused underage girls. Then one of them killed him. The law states that such victims have an affirmative defense to “any offense committed as a direct result” of trafficking. But the prosecutors and Kizer’s lawyers have argued over what “immediate effect” actually means. They have also argued over whether the law would give Kizer a “complete defense” to the charges, meaning she could be fully acquitted, or whether her charge should only be reduced from first-degree to second-degree murder — meaning she would he still faced up to 60 years in prison. The court, in a 4-3 decision, settled the matter, affirming a lower court’s decision and ruling in Kizer’s favor on both counts. “We’re keeping this [the law] is a complete defense to a charge of first degree premeditated murder,” Judge Rebecca Frank Dallet wrote. Now, the Kizer case, which has been stalled for years, can resume. If a judge agrees that there is “some evidence” that her crimes were a “direct result” of human trafficking, he will be able to present the same argument to a jury. If the court sides with her, she could be acquitted of some or all of the charges against her. “Chrystul Kizer deserves an opportunity to present her defense, and today’s decision will allow her to do so,” Colleen Marion, one of Kizer’s public defenders, said in a statement Wednesday. “While the legal process in this matter is far from over, we, along with Chrystul and her family, believe that today’s decision affirms the legal rights afforded under Wisconsin law to victims of sex trafficking facing criminal charges.” . Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, whose office represented Kizer in court, said in a statement: “Today’s decision brings much-needed clarity to the scope of affirmative defense for survivors of the heinous crime of human trafficking.” The news is a triumph for those who have rallied around Kizer. There are more than 1.5 million signatures on a Change.org petition calling for all charges against her to be dropped. Celebrities and high-profile sex-trafficking survivors, including authors Cyntoia Brown-Long and Sara Kruzan, have argued that Kizer needs treatment, not prison. Anti-sex-trafficking advocates and lawyers, including those who have represented victims of stockbroker Jeffrey Epstein, believe Kizer’s case is a clear example of the extremes to which victims of trafficking sometimes go to survive. Kizer was first arrested in 2018 after Kenosha police found Volar shot twice in the head and his home set on fire. The investigators already knew who he was. Records show Volar, who was white, was under investigation for sexually abusing another black child. Police had recently found “hundreds” of videos of child sexual abuse in his home during a raid, including videos he had made of his own abuse of black girls. One of those girls, records show, was Kizer. Kizer told the Washington Post in 2019 that Volar paid her in cash, dinners and gifts. Under Wisconsin and federal law, this meets the definition of child sex trafficking because Volar exchanged something of value for sex. Regardless of the circumstances, minors cannot legally consent to engage in commercial sex. Read the Washington Post’s investigation into Chrystul Kizer’s case But while Volar was under investigation by Kenosha police, he was allowed to remain free for months. One night in June, he paid Kizer to take an Uber home. Kizer, who has not yet been able to give evidence in court, told police she was tired of Vollar touching her and that he was on top of her on the ground when she went to get the gun she carried in her purse. In interviews with The Post, she said Volar was trying to rip her jeans. He said he set his house on fire and fled in his car because he panicked. Despite video evidence that Volar sexually abused Kizer, prosecutors chose to file the maximum charge against her: first-degree murder, which carries an automatic life sentence in Wisconsin. They argued the evidence showed Kizer planned the murder, lied about it and was just trying to steal Volar’s BMW. The affirmative defense law, Assistant Attorney General Timothy M. Barber argued in March, “is not a license for a victim to kill a trafficker.” Kizer remained in jail for two years before supporters posted her $400,000 bail in the summer of 2020 using bond funds raised after the killing of George Floyd. It received even more attention in 2021 after a jury acquitted Kyle Rittenhouse, a white teenager, in the same county where Kizer is accused. Rittenhouse argued that he was acting in self-defense when he killed two people at a protest in 2020. Kizer also argued that he was acting in self-defense. But while people around the world have learned her story, her potential fate has remained the same as the appeals process has dragged on. The Wisconsin Supreme Court decision provides a clear path as to what she will have to prove in order to be afforded the protection of the affirmative defense statute. [Chrystul Kizer, the Wisconsin Supreme Court and a watershed sex-trafficking case] The judges defined what “direct effect” should mean in the eyes of the law: “if there is a reasonable, causal connection between the offense and the trafficking, such that the offense is not the result, in significant part, of other facts, circumstances, or considerations other than the offense of human trafficking.” That interpretation is even broader than the appeals court’s definition, which ruled that Kizer would have to prove her crimes were a “logical and foreseeable consequence” of human trafficking. Instead, the state’s highest court recognized the unique, prolonged trauma suffered by victims of human trafficking. “Unlike many crimes, which occur at discrete points in time, human trafficking can trap victims in a cycle of seemingly inevitable abuse that can continue for months or even years,” the majority said. For that reason, the judges wrote, Kizer will only have to prove that there is a “necessary logical connection” between her crimes and the trafficking she experienced, even if “other factors” are present. Legal experts noted that even the three dissenting justices, all of whom are conservatives, did not appear to dispute the majority’s definition of “immediate effect.” Instead, they argued that the statute should not provide a “complete defense” to manslaughter. But in a rare move, Justice Rebecca Grassl Bradley broke from her conservative ranks to side with the court’s liberal bloc. During oral arguments, Bradley had spoken about the severity of the victimization Kizer experienced. “They found evidence that this 34-year-old man was paying girls for sex, using them to make child pornography, prostitution to other men,” Bradley said in March. With Bradley at their side, the justices made clear what the ruling means for Kizer — and for other trafficking victims charged with crimes that may not be as serious as murder. The decision creates a path for these victims to show the courts how their exploitation was a factor in what they did. “Is there something disheartening and heartbreaking to say that this young woman just wants to explain the circumstances of her victimization that led to this awful event, and she’s unable to do that?” said Caitlin Noonan, of Legal Action Wisconsin. “Now, the court agrees that Chrystul should have the opportunity to present her story. That’s all he was asking from the beginning.” The decision is likely to have ramifications far beyond Wisconsin. The majority of states have some version of laws to protect victims of trafficking charged with crimes. But most states name specific crimes for which the protection applies. Victims in many states can seek protection only from their prostitution conviction. Other states are expanding, naming crimes that trafficked victims are often ordered to commit by their abusers, such as transporting drugs or committing fraud. The anti-trafficking movement has pushed for laws that give victims much more leeway, pointing to the severe psychological and physical trauma victims endure – and how it changes brain chemistry and decision-making. “For too long, there has been this tragic pattern of trafficking victims being punished rather than protected by the legal system,” said Lindsey Ruff, an attorney who represented several groups in a brief supporting Kizer. “This statute and this case can be a model for other states that want to provide this kind of broad protection to victims of trafficking.” Wisconsin’s decision could also boost efforts to pass a proposed federal law, dubbed Kruzan, that would allow judges more discretion when handling child trafficking cases. Meanwhile, Kizer’s case could finally be resolved. Her next trial is scheduled for September. correction An earlier version of this story was incorrect…
