James Radford now faces an intentional homicide charge after investigators rejected his account that his wife shot herself following an argument.

SHAWANO, Wis. — Prosecutors have upgraded the homicide charge against James Radford in the 2016 shooting death of his wife, moving the nearly decade-old case from an allegation of reckless conduct to an accusation that he intentionally killed her. Radford, 40, is now charged with first-degree intentional homicide with a domestic abuse modifier in the death of 25-year-old Sabrina Radford.

The change represents the latest and most serious turn in a case that began April 11, 2016, when James Radford reported that his wife had shot herself at their home in the Town of Fairbanks in Shawano County. Investigators did not conclusively determine the manner of her death at the time. Years of additional investigation, new forensic review and expert examination eventually led authorities to reject the suicide account and arrest Radford in 2025. He had initially been charged with first-degree reckless homicide and pleaded not guilty before prosecutors filed the more serious intentional homicide case.

Assistant District Attorney Brent DeBord said after being assigned to the prosecution that he reviewed the evidence and concluded the case should be charged as intentional rather than reckless homicide. According to local court reporting, DeBord said the earlier reckless homicide charge had been filed before he joined the district attorney’s office. The new complaint also includes a domestic abuse modifier. Radford has not been convicted, and the allegations against him remain to be tested in court.

The prosecution traces the case back to Radford’s description of what happened during the couple’s final hours together. According to the criminal complaint, he told investigators he had learned that Sabrina Radford had been seeing another man and that the two argued. He said he told her he intended to divorce her. Radford claimed his wife then retrieved his .44-caliber handgun, held it with both hands and fired a fatal shot into her chest. Authorities later said physical and digital evidence did not support that account.

One of the central issues involved the condition of the handgun and what investigators expected to find if it had been fired in the manner Radford described. The Wisconsin State Crime Laboratory reported that one chamber of the revolver was empty, one round had been fired and four cartridges remained. Investigators said there was no blood or other blowback material on the barrel or muzzle that would support the claim that Sabrina Radford held the weapon close to or against her chest when it was fired. Prosecutors have cited that finding as a significant inconsistency between Radford’s statement and the physical evidence.

Investigators also relied on evidence involving Sabrina Radford’s cellphone. The complaint says the crime laboratory determined that she was holding the phone when she died, a finding authorities said conflicted with James Radford’s description of her using both hands to hold the gun. The phone contained other material investigators considered relevant to the relationship. Prosecutors have cited a February 2016 text message in which Sabrina Radford reportedly said her husband was threatening her if she saw another man. That material is part of the state’s allegations and does not by itself establish Radford’s guilt.

Authorities also examined Radford’s account of what happened before the shooting. The latest complaint says he claimed he had found evidence that his wife was involved with someone else, including a scarf he believed contained semen and what he said were similar fluids on a couch. Investigators reported finding no evidence of semen on the couch. Radford said he left the home for a period and returned early April 11, when the couple discussed divorce. He told investigators that Sabrina Radford later appeared with his firearm and said she would not live without him. Prosecutors contend the evidence instead points to a homicide.

The case remained unresolved for years. Shawano County Sheriff George Lenzner said investigators dedicated substantial time to reexamining the death, interviewing Radford and others connected to the case, reviewing previously collected evidence and using advances in investigative and forensic technology. The sheriff’s office announced in 2025 that expert witnesses and renewed forensic work had led investigators to determine that Sabrina Radford’s death was not a suicide. Radford was charged on April 11, 2025, nine years to the day after she died, and was later transferred to the Shawano County Jail.

The prosecution moved closer to trial in July 2026. After testimony at a preliminary hearing, a judge found probable cause for the case to proceed and bound Radford over for trial on the reckless homicide charge then pending. Radford entered a not guilty plea. That proceeding did not decide whether he committed the crime; a preliminary hearing requires the state to establish sufficient grounds for a prosecution to continue. The subsequent decision by the district attorney’s office to file an intentional homicide charge changed both the legal theory and the potential consequences of the case.

The new charge also produced a dispute over Radford’s bond. DeBord asked a judge to increase cash bond from $800,000 to $1 million, arguing that the intentional homicide charge created a greater incentive to flee because a conviction can carry life imprisonment. Defense attorney John Swimmer objected, emphasizing that the underlying evidence had not changed and arguing that Radford had remained in custody without missed court appearances or allegations of bail jumping. Swimmer said the state was relying on the same facts it already possessed when the reckless homicide case was filed.

Judge Gregory Huber declined to increase the bond, leaving it at $800,000 cash. The defense also objected to moving ahead with the newly filed case while the earlier homicide case was still pending. DeBord told the court he was working to have the previous case dismissed. The dispute highlights an unusual procedural transition: prosecutors are not merely adding a detail to the original charge but changing their allegation about Radford’s state of mind when the shooting occurred.

The distinction is significant. A reckless homicide allegation centers on conduct creating an unreasonable and substantial risk of death, while the new prosecution alleges an intentional killing. The decision to strengthen the charge does not amount to proof, and Radford is entitled to contest the state’s forensic findings, interpretation of the couple’s communications and reconstruction of events. His attorneys have already stressed that prosecutors did not uncover a new fact before changing the charge and have challenged the state’s handling of the case in court.

The case has also changed sharply from the account authorities confronted in 2016. At that time, Radford was the person who reported his wife’s death and told investigators she had taken her own life after an argument over infidelity and divorce. Nine years later, investigators said improvements in forensic analysis, renewed interviews and expert review gave them grounds to conclude otherwise. In 2026, a judge determined the prosecution had enough evidence to move forward, and prosecutors have now gone further by alleging that the shooting was intentional.

Radford remains held on $800,000 cash bond. A preliminary hearing on the newly filed intentional homicide case is scheduled for Aug. 28. The hearing will address whether prosecutors have established probable cause for that charge to proceed; it will not determine guilt. The state’s allegations about the 2016 shooting, and the defense’s challenges to the interpretation of evidence that was gathered and reconsidered over many years, remain unresolved.

Author note: Last updated August 24, 2026.