MONROE — The first criminal perjury case filed in Green County in at least 20 years failed to stick after a judge found there wasn’t enough evidence to take it to trial.

District Attorney Craig Nolen filed the felony charge of perjury in September against Kenneth H. Kopplin, 47, Janesville. Nolen later amended the perjury charge to a charge of false swearing in a government setting, also a felony and based on the same evidence.

But Judge Thomas Vale dismissed the case at a preliminary hearing Dec. 3, clearing Kopplin of the charges.

The case against Kopplin involved a question over his involvement in a motorcycle gang and a related assertion that he solves problems with guns. The evidence included a three-minute, 15-second DVD recording of body camera footage from Officer Brent Krebs of the Monroe Police Department as well as transcripts of court testimony before Judge James Beer.

Nolen’s criminal complaint alleged that Kopplin lied under oath before the judge at a July hearing in a civil case regarding a harassment injunction.

During this hearing, a petitioner seeking a restraining order against Kopplin asked him about statements he made to the Monroe police officer two weeks earlier.

Kopplin was recorded saying to the officer, “You handle things with guns ... so do I,” adding that if the man who sought the restraining order against him was found in a ditch, “it happens” and “he has been warned.”

“He knows I’m a Hells Angel and we will leave it at that,” Kopplin told Officer Krebs.

At the injunction hearing in Green County Circuit Court two weeks later, Kopplin was asked about this interaction by the man seeking the restraining order, Jamie R. Schrimpf, 33, Monroe: “In your contact with the police department, did you state that you were a member of Hells Angels and that you solved your problems with guns?”

“Absolutely not,” Kopplin responded. When asked if he was a member of Hells Angels, he responded, “I was.” According to court records, Kopplin also said in court that day that he owns no firearms.

Schrimpf’s petition for a restraining order against Kopplin was denied. Court records indicate Schrimpf himself is under two harassment injunctions until 2021.

In the perjury case, Kopplin’s attorney Robert Duxstad successfully argued that Schrimpf’s questioning of Kopplin in court was imprecise and misinterpreted Kopplin’s words.

“The phrase ‘solved my problems with guns’ was never stated by the defendant,” Duxstad wrote in a motion. “The statement of the defendant to the officer as reflected on the body camera is nothing more than an assertion that if he is threatened by another person, he will protect himself by using a gun.”

The grammatical setup of the question was also problematic, Duxstad said. Kopplin was asked a compound, or double-barreled, question in court: “Did you state that you were a member of Hells Angels and that you solved your problems with guns?”

“Since the defendant never said he solved his problems with a gun, he could not truthfully answer the question with an affirmative response,” Duxstad wrote.

Judge Vale sided with Duxstad, citing as part of his reasoning the imprecise questioning as well as the broader context in which Kopplin made his statements.

“I don’t agree, but I’m not appealing the decision,” Nolen said, reflecting on the case later. He said the video from police “spoke for itself,” and that “at a minimum, Mr. Kopplin was playing very fast and loose with the court.”

In reflecting on the case later, Duxstad pointed to its flaws. There was “such a low standard” for probable cause, “it didn’t even get past a preliminary hearing,” he said.

“While the court can never find someone innocent, I think in this case it comes pretty darn close to that,” Duxstad said.