I wasn't able to find the article I read in the amt of time I have available, but you are 100% correct. What the DA was referring to is the ability to charge as "Domestic Violence" (the legal term is applying DV "enhancers"). So for example, if a guy in a bar gets PO'd and slugs another guy, it might be misdemeanor battery; if that same guy got PO'd and slugged his wife at home, they can now charge battery with a "Domestic Violence Enhancer" and charge the guy with a felony - even though the actual conduct (a punch) is literally identical. The restriction the DA referred to was that Wisconsin State Law only allows for DV to be charged (actually, for those 'enhancers' to kick in) in three very narrow, very specific instances:
- They have a child together
- They are married
- They either now or at some point in the past have lived together

None of those three applied in this case - therefore, no DV enhancers.

That said, even without the DV enhancements, there are certainly felony-level battery charges that they could have charged Jacobs with, if his conduct had been befitting of those charges. And the DA most certainly saw the video in full - it was referenced in the initial charging document that "the video shows x, y, and z". And again: the fact that, having seen the video, they chose not to go for any of those more serious options that they did have available (without the DV enhancement), I'm inclined to think that the Jacobs' conduct wasn't actually as egregious as the rumor mill/court of public opinion would have us believe.

Not saying it wasn't bad (it was), but there's bad, and then there's bad, and then there's bad...