United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin
STEPHEN L. CROCKER MAGISTRATE JUDGE
23, 2019, defendant Frederick G. Kriemelmeyer appeared in
court to be arraigned, but otherwise refused to cooperate in
any fashion with the proceedings, essentially asserting a
Fifth Amendment privilege whenever he was addressed in any
fashion. Although Dr. Kriemelmeyer proclaimed that he was
representing himself, he refused to engage in a
Faretta colloquy, so the court appointed AFD Joseph
Bugni to represent him over Dr. Kriemelmeyer's objection.
The court excused Dr. Kriemelmeyer from being booked because
it had his information on file in his previous tax evasion
prosecution, No. 07-cr-52.
this Court's Pretrial Services Office reported that did
not have a home address or a telephone number for Dr.
Kriemelmeyer and Kriemelmeyer had point-blank refused to
provide it. On July 30, 2019, the court ordered Dr.
Kriemelmeyer to provide this information by August 2, 2019 or
he would be arrested and subjected to a revocation hearing.
See dkt. 17. Dr. Kriemelmeyer provided this
information, which confirmed Pretrial Services' belief
that Dr. Kriemelmeyer was living in Minnesota. This led to
courtesy supervision by that district's federal PTS
office, which led this district's PTS office to
report that there was no copy of the pretrial conference
order to provide to Minnesota because Dr. Kriemelmeyer had
taken the signed copy with him after the arraignment.
August 30, 2019, this court filed its pretrial release order
for Dr. Kriemelmeyer, nunc pro tunc July 23, 2019.
This order stated:
Defendant Frederick G. Kriemelmeyer has been indicted for tax
evasion. At his July 23, 2019 arraignment, hewing to his
philosophical/political antipathy toward the government in
general and this court in particular, Kriemelmeyer refused to
cooperate in any fashion with the proceedings. This included
his refusal to sign an order releasing him on conditions. The
court released him anyway, after he chose the option of
returning home-which the court deemed an acceptance of its
standard release conditions-rather than surrender to the
marshals service for self-imposed pretrial detention while
this case is pending.
Against this backdrop and for reasons stated more fully at
the arraignment, it is ORDERED that defendant Frederick
Kriemelmeyer shall be released during the pendency of this
case upon defendant's implicit promise to obey the
following conditions of release:
Dkt. 22 at 1.
this court received from Dr. Kriemelmeyer a copy of this
pretrial release order on which he had handwritten:
Refusal for cause of fraudulent RELEASE ORDER and want of
jurisdiction, without dishonor and without recourse to me,
nunc pro tunc!
[signed] Frederick George Kriemelmeyer 09/09/2019.
Dkt. 24 at 1.
clear that the court gave Dr. Kriemelmeyer way too much
credit for being willing to submit to even nominal pretrial
supervision. But even with the benefit of hindsight, this was
the appropriate approach to take at Dr. Kriemelmeyer's
arraignment. This is not a detention case. This court has
done everything it can to allow Dr. Kriemelmeyer to remain in
the community while his case is pending. But every step of
the way, Dr. Kriemelmeyer has flaunted his intent to defy
this court and Pretrial Services. Today, Dr. Kriemelmeyer
crossed the line by declaring his release order fraudulent
and announcing his refusal to comply with it. After receiving
Dr. Kriemelmeyer's renunciation, Pretrial Services passed
along an oral report from Minnesota's PTS Office that Dr.
Kriemelmeyer has refused to allow a home visit and has
refused to provide a UA sample. I have asked for a written
supplemental PTS report to be filed with the court to
complete the record.
now, the evidence points toward Dr. Kriemelmeyer's
violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 3148(b)(1)(B) and
(b)(2)(B), which augurs revocation and detention, but I am
prepared to continue Dr. Kriemelmeyer on pretrial release if
he is willing to submit and does submit to supervision by
Minnesota's PTS Office. The court will hold a revocation
hearing pursuant to § 3148(b) on September 26 at 2:00
At the hearing this court's PTS Office must provide an