Sabrina Radford’s 2016 shooting remained unresolved for years before renewed forensic work led authorities to accuse her husband of killing her.
SHAWANO, Wis. — Nearly a decade separates the morning Sabrina Radford was found dead in rural Shawano County from prosecutors’ latest decision in the case: an allegation that her husband, James Radford, intentionally killed her and that the death he reported as a suicide was instead a homicide.
The long timeline is essential to understanding the prosecution. Authorities did not immediately charge James Radford after his 25-year-old wife died April 11, 2016, at their home in the Town of Fairbanks. The investigation continued for years as evidence was revisited, witnesses were interviewed and experts became involved. Radford was eventually arrested and charged with reckless homicide in 2025. He was ordered to stand trial in July 2026, but prosecutors have since replaced that theory with a first-degree intentional homicide charge carrying a domestic abuse modifier.
On the day of Sabrina Radford’s death, her husband told investigators the shooting followed a dispute about their marriage. According to the criminal complaint, James Radford said he had learned his wife was cheating and confronted her. He said he told her that he intended to seek a divorce. His account was that Sabrina Radford retrieved his .44-caliber handgun, held the firearm in both hands and fired a shot into her chest. For investigators in 2016, the case did not result in a conclusive homicide determination.
As the investigation continued, authorities said pieces of the physical evidence increasingly conflicted with that account. Crime laboratory analysis found no blood or other blowback material on the gun’s muzzle or barrel that investigators said would support a close-contact shot of the kind Radford described. Testing showed one chamber empty, one shot fired and four rounds still in the handgun. Investigators also determined that Sabrina Radford was holding her cellphone at the time she died, contradicting the claim that both of her hands were on the weapon.
The phone became relevant for more than the physical reconstruction of the shooting. A February 2016 text cited in the complaint reportedly included Sabrina Radford saying that James Radford was threatening her if she saw another man. Investigators also examined the husband’s description of finding evidence of alleged infidelity in the home. The latest complaint says Radford claimed to have found a scarf with semen on it and believed similar material was on the couch. Authorities reported that investigators did not find evidence of semen on the couch.
Shawano County Sheriff George Lenzner later described the case as one in which investigators kept working after the initial inquiry. Authorities interviewed James Radford and other people connected to the matter, reviewed previously collected evidence and sought help from experts. Lenzner said advances in forensic technology and investigative tools contributed to the eventual conclusion that Sabrina Radford’s death was not a suicide. The sheriff’s office has not publicly detailed every investigative step, saying the case had moved into the jurisdiction of prosecutors and that officials wanted to protect its integrity.
The calendar itself became significant when the state finally brought a charge. On April 11, 2025, exactly nine years after Sabrina Radford’s death, James Radford was charged with first-degree reckless homicide. He was taken into custody days later and eventually held in the Shawano County Jail on $800,000 cash bond. The filing represented the first criminal allegation that his conduct caused his wife’s death, but it characterized the alleged homicide as reckless rather than intentional.
The case then entered a more public court phase in 2026. At a July preliminary hearing, a judge heard evidence and concluded prosecutors had shown enough probable cause for the reckless homicide prosecution to continue. Radford was bound over for trial and pleaded not guilty. A courtroom filled with relatives and supporters underscored the long-running impact of the case, but the hearing did not determine whether Radford was guilty. A preliminary hearing is a screening stage at which the state must show sufficient grounds to proceed with a felony prosecution.
Before a trial date was set, the prosecution’s theory changed. Assistant District Attorney Brent DeBord said he had recently been assigned the case and reviewed its evidence. He concluded that what investigators had gathered pointed to an intentional killing rather than reckless conduct. The Shawano-Menominee County District Attorney’s Office then filed a first-degree intentional homicide charge with a domestic abuse modifier. DeBord said the original reckless homicide filing predated his involvement in the office.
The decision was not based on an announced new forensic discovery. That point became central to the defense response. Attorney John Swimmer objected when the prosecution sought to raise Radford’s bond to $1 million because of the new, more serious charge. Swimmer argued that every fact underlying the prosecution remained the same and that Radford had already been jailed since his arrest. He also cited his client’s ties to Shawano County and argued that there had been no missed appearances or bail jumping.
DeBord argued that the new charge increased the risk that Radford might flee because first-degree intentional homicide carries the possibility of life imprisonment if he is convicted. Judge Gregory Huber declined to change the existing $800,000 cash bond. The defense also raised a procedural objection because the earlier homicide case had not yet been dismissed when the new prosecution was initiated. DeBord told the court he was taking steps to have the earlier case dismissed.
The shift from an unresolved 2016 death to a 2026 intentional homicide prosecution shows how the legal meaning assigned to the same event has evolved. First, Radford’s report presented the death as self-inflicted. Later, investigators said forensic and digital findings ruled out suicide. The first criminal charge alleged reckless homicide. After a judge allowed that case to proceed, a new prosecutor reviewed the record and alleged intent. Each stage has required a different legal assessment, and none of those charging decisions is a substitute for a verdict.
For Sabrina Radford’s family, the investigation also represents years in which there was no homicide prosecution. After the 2025 charge, family members issued a statement thanking investigators for continuing to work the case. Authorities have credited persistence along with changes in forensic capability. The public record does not establish that one new test or one witness alone resolved the case; instead, officials have described a continuing review involving evidence, interviews, expert witnesses and investigative tools.
For James Radford, the case now carries substantially greater legal stakes than it did when he entered his earlier not guilty plea. Prosecutors must prove the elements of the newly charged offense, including the allegation of intent, through admissible evidence. The defense may dispute the state’s interpretation of the weapon, cellphone information, statements and relationship evidence or challenge the reliability and weight of material examined years after the shooting. Radford is presumed innocent unless proved guilty.
The next scheduled step is a preliminary hearing at 11:45 a.m. Aug. 28 on the intentional homicide case. Radford remains in custody on $800,000 cash bond. More than 10 years after Sabrina Radford died, the case has therefore reached another beginning rather than an ending: prosecutors are seeking to establish probable cause for a new and more serious charge before the allegations can move toward trial.
Author note: Last updated August 24, 2026.