Professional Documents
Culture Documents
THE KILLING OF
JOSEPH BIEGERT
February 24, 2015
agencies in Green Bay and Madison, Wisconsin. The “facts” given to the media, was designed
to conceal what really occurred on February 24, 2015. Below, is the truth and not meant to sway
public opinion on behalf of law enforcement. If you will feel offended by reading the truth about
law enforcement covering up for each other in the “Blue Wall” mentality, then stop reading
now and return to your Sunday paper. If you want to see the documents that incriminate killers
We have heard how Joseph’s Mother, Toni, called GBPD for a “wellness check” on
Joseph, worrying that Joseph was depressed. We know that GBPD Officer Matthew Dunn was a
first responder to Joseph’s one bedroom apartment. We know that Officer Dunn and Officer
Kreuger were not immediately permitted to enter the apartment and Joseph, fearing for his
safety, called 9-1-1- and verified that GBPD officers were at his door. We know that when
questioned by Dunn, Joseph admitted to taking three pills from his prescription medication. We
know that Dunn and Kreuger were taking Joseph into custody and “turning him over to medical
people” from GBFD. We know that Dunn and Kreuger began a search “for weapons” as they
did not wish to turn Joseph over to medical people if he were armed. We know that Dunn and
Kreuger stated that Joseph began resisting the arrest and a struggle ensued, resulting in Joseph
1. We have no factual basis for Dunn and Kreuger determining that Joseph was an
1
51.15 Emergency detention.
(1) Basis for detention; purpose.
(ag) The purpose of this section is to provide, on an emergency basis, treatment by the least restrictive means
appropriate to the individual's needs, to individuals who meet all of the following criteria:
1. Are mentally ill, drug dependent, or developmentally disabled.
2. Evidence one of the standards set forth in par. (ar) 1. to 4.
3. Are reasonably believed to be unable or unwilling to cooperate with voluntary treatment.
(ar) A law enforcement officer or other person authorized to take a child into custody under ch. 48 or to take a
juvenile into custody under ch. 938 may take an individual into custody if the officer or person has cause to believe
that the individual is mentally ill, is drug dependent, or is developmentally disabled, that taking the person into
custody is the least restrictive alternative appropriate to the person's needs, and that the individual evidences any of
the following:
Page 2 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
2. We have no factual basis for Dunn or Kreuger determining that Joseph’s cooperation
3. We have no factual basis to believe that either Dunn or Kreuger were trained or qualified
to make any Chapter 51.15 determination. In fact, neither officer, according to official
GBPD records, has ever undergone any such training. (see below)
4. We don’t know why GBPD had no Crisis Intervention Training for its officers, when the
1. A substantial probability of physical harm to himself or herself as manifested by evidence of recent threats of or
attempts at suicide or serious bodily harm.
2. A substantial probability of physical harm to other persons as manifested by evidence of recent homicidal or other
violent behavior on his or her part, or by evidence that others are placed in reasonable fear of violent behavior and
serious physical harm to them, as evidenced by a recent overt act, attempt or threat to do serious physical harm on
his or her part.
3. A substantial probability of physical impairment or injury to himself or herself or other individuals due to
impaired judgment, as manifested by evidence of a recent act or omission. The probability of physical impairment or
injury is not substantial under this subdivision if reasonable provision for the individual's protection is available in
the community and there is a reasonable probability that the individual will avail himself or herself of these services
or, in the case of a minor, if the individual is appropriate for services or placement under s. 48.13
(4) or (11) or 938.13 (4). Food, shelter or other care provided to an individual who is substantially incapable of
obtaining the care for himself or herself, by any person other than a treatment facility, does not constitute reasonable
provision for the individual's protection available in the community under this subdivision.
4. Behavior manifested by a recent act or omission that, due to mental illness, he or she is unable to satisfy basic
needs for nourishment, medical care, shelter, or safety without prompt and adequate treatment so that a substantial
probability exists that death, serious physical injury, serious physical debilitation, or serious physical disease will
imminently ensue unless the individual receives prompt and adequate treatment for this mental illness. No
substantial probability of harm under this subdivision exists if reasonable provision for the individual's treatment
and protection is available in the community and there is a reasonable probability that the individual will avail
himself or herself of these services, if the individual may be provided protective placement or protective services
under ch. 55, or, in the case of a minor, if the individual is appropriate for services or placement under s. 48.13
(4) or (11) or 938.13 (4). The individual's status as a minor does not automatically establish a substantial probability
of death, serious physical injury, serious physical debilitation or serious disease under this subdivision. Food, shelter
or other care provided to an individual who is substantially incapable of providing the care for himself or herself, by
any person other than a treatment facility, does not constitute reasonable provision for the individual's treatment or
protection available in the community under this subdivision.
(b) The officer's or other person's belief shall be based on any of the following:
1. A specific recent overt act or attempt or threat to act or omission by the individual which is observed by the
officer or person.
2. A specific recent overt act or attempt or threat to act or omission by the individual which is reliably reported to
the officer or person by any other person, including any probation, extended supervision and parole agent authorized
by the department of corrections to exercise control and supervision over a probationer, parolee or person on
extended supervision.
Page 3 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
THE TRUTH
5. We know that SA BRADLEY KUST of DCI, was quite friendly to Dunn and Kreuger,
even announcing before taking their statements, that “it was a good shooting” and
6. When MATTHEW DUNN met with SA Bradley Kust from DCI, he stated that he had
never met Joseph Biegert. (see Dunn Statement to DCI SA Kust, annexed hereto)
7. We know that Dunn lied to SA Kust and that GBPD officials knew that he lied, yet did
8. On December 7, 2014, about seventy days prior to killing Joseph, MATTHEW DUNN
answered another “wellness check” call from Joseph’s Mother, Toni, responding to the
same one bedroom apartment and spent about TWENTY MINUTES with Joseph and
9. That the Toxicology Report failed to show the presence of any narcotic or pharmaceutical
that would have impaired Joseph or indicated his taking any overdose of medications as
10. That Joseph had no history of violence whatsoever and MATTHEW DUNN had prior
Page 4 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
Page 5 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
Page 6 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
11. We know that an official at GBPD ran the above report on February 25, 2015 and knew
interviewed.
12. We know that MATTHEW DUNN, having prior knowledge of Joseph’s mental illness
any Crisis Intervention Training and intended to forcefully take Joseph into custody.
13. We know that MATTHEW DUNN and BRIAN KREUGER were so scared on February
24, 2015, that they sprayed bullets from floor to ceiling, sending projectiles into adjoining
14. We know that the alleged “stabbing” of MATTHEW DUNN, was more of a 2”
superficial slash, where Dunn was bandaged and released from the hospital.
Page 7 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
15. We know that MATTHEW DUNN, so scared of Joseph that night, he tased BRIAN
16. We know that while firing at Joseph, allegedly holding a knife in his right hand, one of
Joseph’s fingers was shot off, all but making holding a knife, impossible.
17. We know that the gunshot wound to Joseph’s forehead, was left to right and
DOWNWARD, indicating being shot from an elevated position over Joseph and from
Joseph’s right side. (see below)
Page 8 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
Page 9 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
18. We know that the “knife block” indicated by MATTHEW DUNN in his statement where
Joseph was to obtain the alleged knife used on MATTHEW DUNN, was photographed
on the kitchen stove, an unusual place to store knives where you had just cooked food
and left a pan on the stove, with the knife block FACING AWAY from the front of the
stove, not towards where the alleged struggled occurred. (see below)
19. We know that MATTHEW DUNN, told SA Kust that the knife block was NOT on the
20. We know that BRIAN KREUGER, when meeting with SA Kust, stated that Joseph had
placed a hand inside his pocket, causing them concern, which MATTHEW DUNN never
stated in any interview whatsoever. (see Brian Kreuger statement annexed hereto)
Page 10 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
21. We know that despite Joseph’s finger being shot off while allegedly holding this knife,
there is no apparent damage to the knife from the bullet which tore Joseph’s finger off or
Joseph’s blood from the missing finger. It does not make sense to even a layperson
22. We know that MATTHEW DUNN told SA Kust that he had no suspicion whatsoever
23. We know that MATTHEW DUNN stated that his “defensive wound” to the right bicep,
would have required Joseph, while missing his finger, alleged holding the knife, to reach
across MATTHEW DUNN, avoid Dunn’s forearm and hand which is the customary
Page 11 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
CONCLUSION
What we have is a very friendly, “let’s finish this up and get some Mexican food” agent
from DCI, Bradley Kust, who had a predisposition that the “shooting was good”, even before
getting the details from Matthew Dunn. That is not “independent”, but more resembling the
“good ole boy” mentality which offends the Michael Bell Law and the spirit of neutrality.
We have MATTHEW DUNN, who lied to SA Kust and said he had never met Joseph
Biegert. (emphasis added) Instead, we have MATTHEW DUNN returning to Joseph’s meager
apartment for another wellness check and knowing that Joseph suffered mental disorders,
experience or training in dealing with people with mental disorders and is intent on taking Joseph
into custody, turn him over to medical people, with or without Joseph’s surrender and rid himself
of Joseph from his shift. The complexion of the investigation now changes because Dunn lied
about knowing Joseph. His attitude now comes into play and his aggressive behavior runs
The statements from Dunn and Kreuger conflict, yet the common thread is that Joseph
did not have a weapon and was cooperative, but without question, it is Dunn who has made the
decision to forcefully turn Joseph over to medical people for transport to mental health facilities.
However, he was lacking any articulable suspicion that Joseph was a threat to himself or others,
What is a distinct and arguably provable scenario, is that Matthew Dunn, having shot and
killed Joseph during his unlawful attempt to arrest Joseph, inflicted the superficial slice to his
right bicep, as justification. This would require Brian Kreuger’s pledge of allegiance to the
Page 12 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
fabrication and may be the cause for Officer Kreuger’s inability at restful nights attempting to
sleep. After the shooting, while Joseph lay mortally wounded on the floor, we hear “drop the
knife” on the audio. Voice print exemplars will tell us who that was.
One of the most disturbing aspects of this killing, is the gunshot to Joseph’s forehead,
which came from a superior position, downward, which means Joseph may well have already
been on the floor and wounded, execution style. We must remember these officers were scared.
Kreuger had been tased by Dunn. Dunn was spraying bullets, sending projectiles into
surrounding apartments, even the apartment below. The room was dark, according to the
statements from Dunn, Kreuger and others. We recall the case of Jeffrey MacDonald from
Fatal Vision, who was convicted of murdering his family and cutting himself in an attempt to
2
exonerate himself from their murders. Scared and shaken by the self-imposed combat with
Joseph, a young man who suffered from mental illness and chronic depression, it is clearly
arguable that Joseph Biegert was slaughtered by Dunn and Kreuger and Dunn superficially cut
2
CID investigators then theorized that MacDonald attempted to cover up the murders, using articles on the Manson
Family murders that he'd found in an issue of Esquire in the living room. Putting on surgical gloves from a medical
supply in the hallway closet, he went to the master bedroom, where he used Colette's blood to write "pig" on the
headboard. He laid his torn pajama top over her dead body and repeatedly stabbed her in the chest with an ice pick.
He then took a scalpel blade from the supply closet, went to the adjacent bathroom, and stabbed himself once.
Finally, he used the telephone to summon an ambulance, discarded the weapons out the back door, disposed of the
surgical gloves and scalpel blade, and lay by Colette's body while he waited for the military police to arrive.
Page 13 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
Page 14 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
Page 15 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
Page 16 of 17
THE KILLING OF JOSEPH BIEGERT
Page 17 of 17