Slender Man Case: In-Depth Update on the 2014 Wisconsin Stabbing and Current Fallout

In the latest turn in the Slender Man case, key developments have emerged regarding one of the original perpetrators, painting a fuller picture of the ongoing supervision, legal dynamics, and public safety concerns.

Background and crime overview
On May 31, 2014, in Waukesha County, Wisconsin, two 12-year-old girls lured their classmate into the woods during a sleep-over. One of them stabbed the victim 19 times, inflicting serious injuries to the diaphragm, liver, and stomach. The motive was tied to a belief in the fictional horror figure known online as “Slender Man.”
Both attackers were tried as adults and ultimately found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, a rare legal outcome. Rather than conventional prison terms, they were committed to long-term psychiatric institutions with supervised release possibilities.

Recent developments in supervision and escape
Earlier this year, one of the two, now living under supervised release in a group-home setting, cut off her state-issued GPS monitoring bracelet late on a Saturday evening. According to law-enforcement statements:

• She was last seen around 8 p.m. at the group home in Madison, Wisconsin, accompanied by an adult acquaintance.
• Around 9:30 p.m., the Wisconsin Department of Corrections (DOC) received an alert of a malfunctioning bracelet.
• By approximately midnight, group-home staff reported she had removed the device and left the premises.
• The Madison Police Department (MPD) was formally notified only the next morning when 911 was called around 7:45 a.m. to report her missing.
• Later that evening, around 10:30 p.m., authorities confirmed that she had been taken into custody in Posen, Illinois, at a truck stop, ending the active search.
• The individual in her company, a 42-year-old man, was charged with criminal trespass and obstructing identification and released pending further review.

Legal status and implications
The escape and recapture raise multiple legal and supervisory questions:

• Under Wisconsin law, individuals found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect are subject to specialized supervision rather than traditional correctional custody.
• Removing or tampering with a court-ordered electronic monitoring device constitutes a serious violation of supervision terms—while not necessarily a new criminal conviction, it triggers immediate review.
• A hearing is expected to determine whether her supervised release will be revoked and she will be returned to a secure psychiatric facility. Factors under review include her risk to the public, treatment compliance, and the placement plan’s adequacy.
• Earlier this year, a judge approved her transition from the institutional setting to community placement, following expert testimony that she had shown progress in treatment.
• The victim’s family, while maintaining they are safe and cooperating closely with law-enforcement, issued a public statement acknowledging the new developments and expressing gratitude for the investigative efforts.

Supervision placement and community concerns
Her current placement in a group home had already drawn scrutiny prior to the escape:

• The potential host facility in a Milwaukee suburb initially declined placement this year, citing inability to provide the level of supervision required.
• Neighborhood residents near her group-home expressed concern upon learning she was living in the area, and the escape has reignited those concerns about community notification and transparency.
• The gap in notification between the DOC alert and the MPD being informed has led to questions about coordination between agencies in the supervision process.

Victim’s status and perspective
The girl who survived the attack in 2014 continues to live a more private life. In current statements, her family affirmed they are aware of the situation and remain in contact with local law-enforcement agencies regarding safety. They reiterated their commitment to ensuring ongoing protection and appreciate public interest in the case.

Why this remains a focal point
The case stands at the intersection of juvenile crime, mental-health law, digital culture, and public safety. Several themes underline its enduring relevance:

• The challenge of supervising individuals found not guilty due to mental illness as they reintegrate into the community.
• The function and reliability of electronic monitoring systems in high-risk supervision scenarios.
• The coordination (or lack thereof) amongst mental-health systems, corrections authorities, and local police when violations occur.
• The broader conversation about youth exposure to internet-generated mythologies and how those narratives may intersect with underlying mental-health conditions.
• The balance between treatment-oriented law and public-safety imperatives—especially in cases where the original crime was extremely violent, even though perpetrated by minors.

What to watch next
In the coming weeks and months, the following developments bear close monitoring:

• Whether a formal revocation of her supervised release takes place or whether new, stricter conditions are imposed.
• Whether any new criminal charges will be filed related to the monitoring bracelet removal and flight across state lines.
• How the DOC and court respond policy-wise to the delay and failure in inter-agency notification of her disappearance.
• Whether this case prompts legislative or procedural review in Wisconsin around conditional release supervision and community placement of forensic mental-health cases.
• How the family of the victim and local community respond to future decisions about the offender’s placement and supervision.

Timeline at a glance

Final thoughts
This high-profile case remains more than a historical incident—it is a live, unfolding legal and public safety matter. The recent escape and recapture highlight how fragile community supervision can be when dealing with complex forensic-mental-health cases. As decisions are made about future supervision, placement, and safety protocols, the broader implications for similar cases across the U.S. are clear.

We invite you to share your thoughts or stay tuned for future updates.