well-being of the criminal justice system of this state, the legislature declares its intent, in this chapter, to ensure that all victims and witnesses of crime are treated with dignity, respect, courtesy and sensitivity; and that the rights extended in this chapter to victims and witnesses of crime are honored and protected by law enforcement agencies, prosecutors and judges in a manner no less vigorous than the protections afforded criminal defendants.” Wis.Stat. § 950.01. Thus, the defendant officers in investigating the suspicious circumstances concerning the intimidation and harassment of their primary crime witness were only fulfilling their obligation and sworn duty as law enforcement officers under Wisconsin law. See e.g., State v. Lombardi, 8 Wis.2d 421, 99 N.W.2d 829 (1959) (<HOLDING>). As the Wisconsin Supreme Court explained in
holding that counsels performance was deficient for failing to investigate readily available evidence of mental impairment holding trial counsel ineffective for failing to investigate and present evidence of the appellants good conduct in prison holding sheriff liable for inter alia failing to properly investigate possible battery holding counsel ineffective for failing to investigate and present mitigating evidence holding that counsel was ineffective for inter alia failing to impeach a witness with prior inconsistent statements