A formal JTC complaint regarding Judge Schipper has been filed by the complainant. An active investigation is pending. A prior complaint resulted in a formal cautioning in 2019.
Demand letters and notices of intent to pursue legal action were served on June 23, 2026, on named individuals and entities connected to the conduct documented in this series. AGC grievances arising from this matter were filed previously and on June 23, 2026.
The underlying case is not named in this article per standing editorial discipline. Post-conviction motions are in preparation and have not been filed. Prior installments in this series are linked above.
A judge disqualified himself from a journalist’s Barry County proceedings on grounds of appearance of impropriety. In the same month, he presided over her husband’s criminal resentencing, in which she is the primary witness to the constitutional violations at issue. That is not a neutral procedural decision. It is a documented choice about which conflict to honor and which to ignore. This is what that choice means.
Judge Michael Schipper disqualified himself from the journalist’s Barry County proceedings in October 2023 on grounds of appearance of impropriety under MCR 2.003(C)(1)(a). That disqualification is documented in the Barry County court record.
In the same month, Schipper remained on her husband’s criminal case and presided over the November 2023 resentencing. The journalist is the primary witness to the plea agreement’s existence and to the prosecutorial and judicial conduct in those proceedings.
Three named sources with direct knowledge confirm that Schipper was in chambers discussing the plea agreement before the October 2022 hearing at which he stated on the record that no plea agreements existed.
Schipper admitted on the court record in December 2023 that he had read the complainant’s blog posts and ordered a Barry County jail inspection in response. That is a documented use of judicial authority in direct response to a journalist’s published investigative coverage.
Nicholas Missad, the Varnum LLP attorney retained by the complaining company who forwarded the journalist’s own correspondence to the prosecuting APA with the comment “I think the dam is about to break,” attended the November 2023 resentencing as an observer.
What Selective Disqualification Means
Michigan Court Rule 2.003(C)(1)(a) requires a judge to disqualify themselves when their impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including when there is an appearance of impropriety. The standard is objective. It asks whether a reasonable person knowing all the circumstances would question the judge’s impartiality. It does not ask whether the judge believes they can be fair. It asks whether a reasonable observer could question it.
When Judge Schipper disqualified himself from the journalist’s Barry County proceedings in October 2023, he made a formal judicial finding under that standard. He found that his involvement in proceedings in which she is a named party creates an appearance of impropriety requiring his removal.
The journalist is the primary witness to the events underlying her husband’s post-conviction proceedings. She confirmed the existence of a plea agreement through direct disclosures from defense counsel. She documented the prosecutorial conduct through her journalism. Her account is central to every factual claim in those proceedings.
The appearance of impropriety Schipper identified in October 2023 did not apply only to proceedings in which she was a named party. It applied with equal force to proceedings in which she is the primary witness. He removed himself from her case. He stayed on his.
A judge who acknowledges a conflict with a witness in one proceeding but presides over proceedings in which that witness’s account is the evidentiary foundation has not honored the disqualification standard. He has applied it selectively to protect his ability to control the outcome that mattered most. That selective application is itself a documented judicial act, made in the same month, with the same conflict present in both cases.
What He Knew Before He Got to the Bench
The selective disqualification does not stand alone. It sits inside a documented pattern of conduct that begins before the October 2022 plea hearing.
Three named sources with direct knowledge confirm that Judge Schipper was in chambers discussing the plea agreement prior to the October 26, 2022 plea hearing. One of those sources was present in chambers. He then took the bench and stated on the certified record that no plea agreements existed in the case. APA Christopher Elsworth confirmed it. Defense counsel said nothing.
A statement made with actual knowledge of an agreement’s existence, denying that agreement on the record, is not a judicial finding. The conditions Schipper then placed on the defendant at the plea hearing, turn in every item you can and the better job you do the more it will affect sentencing, were themselves conditional inducements. He set conditions while simultaneously denying that any agreement existed. He made those conditions illusory before the defendant finished answering his oath questions.
Schipper’s disqualification from the journalist’s proceedings in October 2023 came after she had spent months documenting exactly this sequence. He removed himself from proceedings involving the person building the record of what he had done, while staying on the case in which that record was most relevant.
The Jail Inspection That Came After the Blog Posts
In September 2023, officers at Barry County Jail checked lockers during an inspection. Judge Schipper admitted on the court record in December 2023 that he had read the complainant’s blog posts covering his sentencing conduct and that the inspection followed that reading.
That admission is documented. It establishes a direct connection between a judge reading a journalist’s investigative coverage of his court and using the powers of his judicial office in response. It is retaliation using judicial authority, admitted by the person who exercised it.
One month after that admission, Schipper disqualified himself from the journalist’s Barry County proceedings on appearance of impropriety grounds. One month after that, he presided over her husband’s resentencing.
September 2023: jail inspection ordered following review of the journalist’s blog posts, admitted on the court record. October 2023: Schipper disqualifies himself from her proceedings. Retaliatory charges filed against her in Barry County. November 2023: Schipper presides over her husband’s resentencing. December 2023: Schipper admits the blog-to-inspection connection on the court record. The sequence is documented. The admissions are his own.
Who Else Was in the Courtroom
Nicholas Missad is an attorney at Varnum LLP, retained by the complaining company in the underlying criminal matter. In late summer 2023, he sent a cease and desist to the journalist covering the case. When she responded, he forwarded her response to APA Christopher Elsworth with the comment: “I think the dam is about to break.” That email is in Clutch Justice’s possession, produced in Barry County court discovery.
Missad attended the November 2023 resentencing as an observer. The private attorney for the complaining company, who had forwarded the defendant’s spouse’s own correspondence to the prosecuting APA in anticipation of an outcome against her, was physically present in the resentencing proceedings over which Schipper chose to preside.
Schipper had found he could not be impartial in proceedings involving the journalist. He presided over a resentencing attended by the attorney who had coordinated with the prosecutor about anticipated outcomes against her.
The Lab includes a judicial misconduct database, FOIA generators, decision trees, and reference tools built from Clutch investigations. Free access, no signup required.
Go to The Lab ?What MCR 2.003 Actually Requires
The disqualification standard under MCR 2.003 does not require proof of actual bias. It requires the appearance of impartiality to be beyond reasonable question. When a judge has already found that his involvement in proceedings involving a particular person creates an appearance of impropriety, that finding does not expire when the caption changes. The person whose presence created the appearance is still present. The conflict is still present. The standard still applies.
Schipper’s disqualification from the journalist’s proceedings was not a finding that he was biased against her in that specific caption. It was a finding that his relationship to these proceedings, her coverage of his court, his prior conduct, and the circumstances surrounding both matters, created an appearance that required his removal. Those circumstances do not disappear when the case caption changes from her name to her husband’s.
No mechanism in the current Michigan judicial oversight structure automatically extends a disqualification finding from one proceeding to related proceedings involving the same witness. A judge can acknowledge a conflict with a journalist, remove himself from her case, and preside over her husband’s resentencing the following month, with no automatic review and no required disclosure. That gap is what selective disqualification exploits. It is also what this JTC complaint is designed to address.
The Prior JTC Record
This is not the first time Judge Schipper’s conduct has reached the Judicial Tenure Commission. The Commission issued a formal cautioning to Schipper in 2019 for making public comments on a pending case, a violation of Canon 3(6). He repeated the same conduct in 2021, making public comments on a pending case to the Hastings Banner, the same publication that receives preferential access to his courtroom without standard media credentialing forms and whose subscription appears in the Barry County Board of Commissioners claims list under a line reference to Schipper.
The Michigan Court of Appeals has ordered resentencing before a different judge in People v. Velasquez, explicitly barring Schipper from presiding, after he defied the initial remand directive. During the Velasquez appeal, APA Christopher Elsworth filed a Confession of Error formally admitting the government made a mistake due to a broken plea agreement. Elsworth is the same APA who denied the existence of a plea agreement in the underlying criminal matter at the center of the journalist’s coverage.
A judge who received a prior cautioning for making public comments to a favored outlet, repeated the same conduct two years later, was barred by the COA from resentencing a defendant he kept re-sentencing out of guidelines, admitted on the court record that he read a journalist’s blog posts and ordered a jail inspection in response, selectively disqualified himself from her proceedings while staying on her husband’s, and is now under active JTC investigation has not encountered accountability through the existing system. He has encountered the edges of it.
Selective disqualification is not a neutral procedural decision. It is a documented choice about which conflict to honor and which to exploit. The choice Judge Schipper made in October 2023, removing himself from the journalist’s case while retaining jurisdiction over her husband’s, preserved his ability to control the outcome in the proceeding where control mattered most. The record documents the choice. The JTC complaint asks the Commission to find that it was not a permissible one.
What is judicial disqualification under MCR 2.003?
MCR 2.003(C)(1)(a) requires a judge to disqualify themselves when their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. The standard is objective, not subjective. A prior disqualification finding based on a judge’s relationship to a witness applies with equal force to proceedings in which that witness’s account is the evidentiary foundation.
What is the documented basis for Schipper’s disqualification from the journalist’s proceedings?
Judge Schipper disqualified himself in October 2023 on grounds of appearance of impropriety under MCR 2.003(C)(1)(a). That disqualification is documented in the Barry County court record. He stated the grounds himself. He stayed on her husband’s case the same month.
What did Schipper admit on the court record in December 2023?
Schipper admitted on the court record in December 2023 that he had read the complainant’s blog posts covering his sentencing conduct and that a Barry County jail inspection in September 2023 followed that reading. That admission connects his use of judicial authority directly to his review of a journalist’s published investigative coverage of his court.
What is the status of the JTC complaint?
A JTC complaint has been filed regarding Judge Schipper by the journalist covering his court. An active investigation is pending. JTC proceedings are confidential until they result in public action. A prior complaint resulted in a formal cautioning in 2019. Schipper repeated the same Canon violation in 2021.
Court Record Barry County court record documenting Judge Schipper’s disqualification from the journalist’s Barry County proceedings, October 2023, on grounds of appearance of impropriety under MCR 2.003(C)(1)(a).
Court Record Certified transcript, Plea Hearing, October 26, 2022, People v. Ryan James Williams, File No. 2022-523-FH, Fifth Judicial Circuit Court, Barry County.
Court Record Certified transcript, Sentencing Hearing, January 12, 2023, People v. Ryan James Williams, File No. 2022-523-FH, Fifth Judicial Circuit Court, Barry County.
Court Record December 2023 court record admission by Judge Schipper regarding review of blog posts and September 2023 jail inspection.
Discovery Email from Nicholas Missad, Varnum LLP, to APA Christopher J. Elsworth, late summer/early fall 2023, produced in Barry County court proceedings (on file with Clutch Justice).
Appellate Record People v. Velasquez, Michigan Court of Appeals (order requiring resentencing before different judge; Confession of Error filed by APA Elsworth).
JTC Record Michigan Judicial Tenure Commission formal cautioning, 2019, re: public comments on pending case, Canon 3(6).
Prior Coverage “He Walked In Ready to Ruin Someone’s Life.” Clutch Justice, April 27, 2026. clutchjustice.com/2026/04/27/judge-michael-schipper-removal-barry-county/
Prior Coverage “When a Death Gets 30 Days: Judge Michael Schipper’s Sentencing Incoherence Problem.” Clutch Justice, January 17, 2026. clutchjustice.com/2026/01/17/when-a-death-gets-30-days/
Prior Coverage “Barry County Judge Says Only One Newspaper Allowed in Courtroom.” Clutch Justice, March 9, 2026. clutchjustice.com/2026/03/09/barry-county-judge-press-access-hastings-banner/
Bluebook: Williams, Rita. He Disqualified Himself from Her Case. Then Sentenced Her Husband., Clutch Justice (June 24, 2026), https://clutchjustice.com/2026/06/24/schipper-selective-disqualification/.
APA 7: Williams, R. (2026, June 24). He disqualified himself from her case. Then sentenced her husband. Clutch Justice. https://clutchjustice.com/2026/06/24/schipper-selective-disqualification/
MLA 9: Williams, Rita. “He Disqualified Himself from Her Case. Then Sentenced Her Husband.” Clutch Justice, 24 June 2026, clutchjustice.com/2026/06/24/schipper-selective-disqualification/.
Chicago: Williams, Rita. “He Disqualified Himself from Her Case. Then Sentenced Her Husband.” Clutch Justice, June 24, 2026. https://clutchjustice.com/2026/06/24/schipper-selective-disqualification/.
That map is what I sell.
Clutch Justice offers institutional forensics consulting for wrongful conviction organizations, documentary and podcast producers, investigative journalists, and families navigating post-conviction proceedings. Government accountability, procedural abuse pattern recognition, and legal AI and court systems domain expertise.
