The pending case draws on several kinds of evidence, while important questions about individual illnesses and toxicology remain for court proceedings.
STEVENS POINT, Wis. — A Wisconsin poisoning case moving toward formal charges combines home-surveillance recordings, saved drink containers, years of medical complaints and statements police say were made by a woman accused of repeatedly putting eye drops into her former husband’s beverages.
Jessica Meis, 37, faces one count of aggravated battery with a domestic violence modifier and two counts of placing foreign objects in edibles, according to court reporting and the criminal complaint. She was arrested July 21 after Stevens Point police investigated allegations raised by her ex-husband. Meis remained jailed on a $100,000 cash bond after a July 27 appearance and is expected back in Portage County Circuit Court on Aug. 31 for formal charging. No trial has been held, and the collection of evidence described by police has not been tested before a jury. The prosecution therefore remains an allegation rather than an established account of criminal guilt.
One part of the case is physical evidence collected or preserved from drinks connected with alleged incidents. The man’s mother had kept an energy-drink can from July 2025 after he became ill and suspected something had been placed in the open container. He later gave police his account of that episode, and the can was submitted to investigators. A different bottle tied to July 2026 was also turned over after another person drank from it, according to the complaint. Those objects could provide investigators with material to examine, but public reporting reviewed for this story does not disclose final laboratory findings establishing the contents of every submitted drink or tying each item to a particular medical episode.
A second category of evidence came from a camera the man installed in his kitchen July 14, 2026. Police said video from July 16 showed Meis take an eye-drop bottle from her purse before handling a bottle of Propel water from the refrigerator. Her body blocked part of the view, investigators said, but they suspected she was adding the solution to the water. Two days later, another recording allegedly showed her remove a small container from her pocket, open it and pour its contents into a black water bottle. Police described that second sequence in greater detail, including their observation that the objects were kept below the kitchen island while two children were nearby.
The recordings mattered because the former husband had previously been working largely from symptoms and suspicion. He told police he had experienced exhaustion, dizziness, headaches and long periods of sleep since 2021. In 2025 and 2026, his health problems included episodes of very low blood pressure and a slow heart rate. Local reporting based on the complaint says he went to emergency departments in several Wisconsin cities and consulted specialists. He recalled being hospitalized repeatedly, including four times between July and September 2025. He also told investigators that one cardiologist had said his symptoms did not make sense. Until the household recordings were made, however, the possible connection between those symptoms and intentional tampering had not been established.
Investigators also looked at access and timing. Meis and the man divorced in June 2025 but continued living together temporarily before she moved to Plover. Because they shared custody of three children, she still visited his Stevens Point home. The man said Meis stayed there again in January 2026 when the heat at her residence stopped working and that he experienced three episodes of illness that month. His symptoms returned more forcefully in May, he told police, with low-blood-pressure episodes increasing through July. That history does not by itself prove poisoning, but investigators used it to build the chronology surrounding the more direct evidence they say appeared on camera.
After reviewing the footage, police obtained a search warrant for Meis’ home and interviewed her following her arrest. The complaint says officers advised her of her rights and that she agreed to speak with them. Police said Meis first characterized the substance she placed in a drink as saline or salt and suggested she had been trying to improve her ex-husband’s blood pressure. Investigators said she later changed her account and acknowledged putting Visine eye drops into his drinks. They said she initially described doing it only a couple of times, then eventually stated it had happened “many times.” Any statements attributed to Meis will be evaluated under the rules governing admissibility and proof as the case advances.
According to investigators, Meis named multiple kinds of drinks that she had allegedly contaminated and also said she attempted to use eye drops in her ex-husband’s CPAP equipment. She reportedly told officers she did not think the CPAP attempt worked. Police said her stated purpose was to make the man sick enough that he would rely on her for care. The alleged motive is likely to attract attention, but motive is only one part of a criminal case. Prosecutors must still establish the acts charged and any required connection to injury. The complaint’s description of an interview does not substitute for findings by a judge or jury, and the defense will have an opportunity to challenge the state’s evidence.
A toxicological issue could help explain why the alleged conduct produced felony charges. Some anti-redness eye drops contain tetrahydrozoline, a drug that is intended for use in the eyes rather than ingestion. Poison Control says swallowing tetrahydrozoline can cause serious toxicity, including sleepiness, low blood pressure and a dangerously slow heart rate. The complaint references the substance while describing the investigation. Those known effects resemble some symptoms reported by the former husband, but similarity is not proof that tetrahydrozoline caused each episode. The strength of any medical link will depend on evidence prosecutors present rather than on a general description of what the substance can do.
The presence of children and another person who reportedly drank from one of the bottles also appears in the state’s account. Police said the July 18 video showed Meis trying to keep the container and water bottle out of the children’s view. When officers later asked whether she had worried that the children might drink from allegedly contaminated beverages, Meis answered that they did not drink those products, according to the complaint. Investigators also said another person consumed from the Propel bottle connected to the July 16 recording. Those facts are relevant to why prosecutors filed two counts involving foreign objects in edibles, although the exact proof supporting each charge will be addressed through the court process.
Several questions remain open in the publicly available account. The reported materials do not establish that every illness dating to 2021 resulted from intentional contamination, nor do they provide final laboratory results for each drink investigators received. The state has not yet proved how many separate episodes may ultimately be attributed to alleged poisoning. Likewise, the complaint’s description of what Meis told police is not the same as a conviction or judicial finding. Those unresolved points matter because the case covers a much longer medical history than the two July recordings investigators specifically described.
The next confirmed step is the Aug. 31 court appearance. Meis requested time to obtain legal representation before formal charging when she appeared July 27, local station WSAW reported. She remained held on a $100,000 cash bond. The upcoming proceeding will move the case beyond its initial arrest stage, but questions about toxicology, causation, the scope of the alleged conduct and the weight of the recordings will remain for the court to address as the prosecution develops.
Author note: Last updated August 28, 2026.