Inside Franklin’s Political Crime Syndicate: How Officials Weaponized Police, Courts, and Power

Seventeen new John Doe exhibits expose a coordinated multi-official operation involving Franklin’s Mayor, County Supervisors, Alderwoman, police leadership, and a shared municipal law firm — revealing conduct that mirrors an organized political crime enterprise aimed at silencing a community journalist.

FAST FACTS

• A 17-exhibit Supplemental John Doe Filing now alleges Franklin Mayor John Nelson, County Supervisor Steve Taylor, Alderwoman Michelle Eichmann, and Franklin Police leadership coordinated a retaliatory campaign to criminalize protected speech by a local journalist.
  
  

• New evidence shows the Disorderly Conduct citation was issued minutes after a failed remand attempt, ordered by the Franklin Police Chief after the DA declined charges, and based on a police report withheld from the defendant for eight months.
  
  

• Conflicts of interest were uncovered at the November 20, 2025 hearing: the surprise prosecutor, the judge, Franklin officials, and the municipalities involved are all tied to the same law firm (Wesolowski, Reidenbach & Sajdak).
  
  

• Major constitutional violations were documented, including suppression of evidence, unlawful jail-call monitoring, missing defense motions, improper prosecutorial influence, and misuse of police authority—prompting a Motion to Vacate Judgment and a request to transfer the John Doe to another county.

Franklin Community News has obtained and submitted newly discovered evidence showing that the Disorderly Conduct citation issued against Dr. Richard Busalacchi, Publisher of Franklin Community News in October 2024 — based entirely on a political blog post — was not an organic law-enforcement action.

Instead, the record now shows it was the product of a coordinated political retaliation campaign involving:

• Franklin Mayor John Nelson
  

• Milwaukee County Supervisors Steve Taylor and
  

• Franklin Alderwoman Michelle Eichmann
  

• Franklin Police Department leadership
  

• The municipal law firm Wesolowski, Reidenbach & Sajdak (WRS) — which simultaneously represents Franklin, South Milwaukee, and Hales Corners

These findings are part of a new 17-exhibit Supplemental Filing submitted to the pending Milwaukee County John Doe petition submitted on September 22, 2025, documenting:

• Misconduct in public office
  

• Suppression of evidence
  

• Unlawful surveillance
  

• Conflicts of interest
  

• Misuse of police authority
  

• Retaliation against protected political speec
  

• Improper influence over police departments and municipal courts

Given the involvement of the Milwaukee County Chief Judge and the Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office — both of whom appear in the record through conflicts — a motion has been submitted requesting:

• Transfer of the John Doe to another county, or
  

• Appointment of a special prosecutor

Busalacchi's attorney will also be filing an appeal of the Disorderly Conduct conviction, which — based on the new evidence — should never have been issued.

Summary Facts: John Doe Filing (Case No. 2025JD000011)

Forwarded to the Milwaukee County DA on October 9, 2025, the sworn filing alleges that Franklin and Milwaukee County officials conspired to weaponize restraining orders, fabricate police reports, and misuse law-enforcement systems to silence constitutionally protected speech.

Filed By:

Dr. Richard A. Busalacchi, Publisher, Franklin Community News

Officials Named:

• John Nelson — Franklin Mayor
  

• Steve Taylor — Milwaukee County Supervisor
  

• Kathleen Vincent — Milwaukee County Supervisor
  

• Michelle Eichmann — Franklin Alderwoman
  

• Mike Zimmerman — CEO, ROC Ventures

Central Findings:

• 2023 — False restraining order engineered for political suppression
  

• April 2024 — Entrapment operation using Waterford Facebook group
  

• October 2024 — Fabricated Disorderly Conduct citation
  

• 2023–2025 — Employment interference at MATC
  

• Late 2024 — Illegal access to restricted law-enforcement systems
  

• 2024–2025 — Coordinated defamation portraying a journalist as a “stalker”

Background — The Political Blog Post That Triggered a Retaliatory Campaign

The October 13–14, 2024 police report reveals that Alderwoman Michelle Eichmann, Mayor John Nelson, and Supervisor Steve Taylor contacted Franklin Officer Dakota Elm claiming that a political article Busalacchi wrote constituted “disorderly conduct.”

The article

 (Exhibit 97):

• Analyzed the phrase “for the greater good” in political philosophy
  

• Referenced a quote from the Frontier Institute
  

• Compared public officials’ decision-making to historical misuse of the concept

It contained:

• No threats
  

• No directives
  

• No incitement
  

• No targeted harassment

Yet the report admits:

• Police told complainants no threats existed
  

• Eichmann did not initially want to be a “victim”
  

• She asked to “remain anonymous”
  

• She needed to “speak with colleagues” first
  

• Mayor Nelson told Officer Elm:
  “If I were in your shoes, I’d write up state DC and bail jumping.”

The DA declined charges within days (“no process”).

But the political agenda was already in motion.

How the Case Was Moved Out of Franklin — Only to Have Safeguards Sabotaged

Because the complainants were Franklin’s own elected officials, the Franklin Municipal Judge recused the case and transferred it to South Milwaukee Municipal Court to avoid conflicts.

But on November 20, 2025, those safeguards completely collapsed.

What Happened at the November 20 Hearing — A Breakdown of Due Process

A. The Surprise Appearance of Attorney Roger Pyzyk

Despite prior statements that WRS attorney David Fleming was the assigned prosecutor, none of the following was disclosed:

• That Fleming was removed
  

• That attorney Roger Pyzyk would appear
  

• That witnesses (Nelson, Taylor, Eichmann) would be present

Pyzyk arrived claiming to be a “special prosecutor” — yet:

• No appointment order existed
  

• No written authorization existed
  

• No notice was given
  

• No legal basis was provided

B. The Conflict of Interest

Wesolowski, Reidenbach & Sajdak (WRS):

• Represents Franklin
  

• Represents South Milwaukee
  

• Represents Hales Corners, where Judge Sonntag also sits as judge

Thus the prosecutors work for the same law firm, while the complainants are represented by the same law firm — the exact conflict the recusal was meant to prevent.

C. Secret Meetings with Franklin Officials

Witness affidavits confirm:

• Franklin officials entered with Pyzyk through staff-only hallways
  

• They met privately before the hearing
  

• They met again after the hearing

During recess, Pyzyk told me:

“Franklin wants to go to trial.”

A prosecutor acting under direction of Franklin officials is not neutral.

D. Undisclosed Attendance by Political Officials

Without notice, the following appeared at the hearing:

• Mayor Nelson
  

• Supervisor Taylor
  

• Alderwoman Eichmann
  

• Franklin PR employee Mary Christine
  

• Officer Elm

This violated disclosure requirements and suggests coordinated influence.

E. Judge Sonntag Never Reviewed the Defense Motions

On the record, Judge Sonntag admitted she had not received or read:

• August 18 Motion to Dismiss (Exhibit 109)
  

• November 18 Supplemental Motion (Exhibit 110)

These motions contained:

• Due-process arguments
  

• Conflict-of-interest claims
  

• Suppression-of-evidence arguments
  

• First Amendment issues
  

• Jurisdictional defects

The court never considered any of them.

New Filings: Motion to Vacate Judgment Based on Structural Due-Process Violations

In addition to the 17-exhibit John Doe supplement, a formal Motion to Vacate Judgment has been filed in South Milwaukee Municipal Court arising from the November 20 Disorderly Conduct hearing.

The motion alleges:

• The Court never reviewed the August 18 or November 18 pre-hearing motions
  

• No witness list or prosecutorial notice was provided
  

• Mayor Nelson, Supervisor Taylor, and Alderwoman Eichmann appeared without disclosure
  

• Attorney Roger Pyzyk appeared without appointment, without notice, and without authority
  

• Pyzyk privately stated: “Franklin wants to go to trial,” demonstrating improper influence
  

• The prosecutor, judge, and complainants are connected through the same law firm, WRS
  

• Franklin Police falsely claimed no recordings existed and suppressed evidence
  

• Officer Elm admitted the Franklin Police Chief ordered the citation after the DA declined charges
  

• The municipal citation was issued minutes after a failed state remand attempt
  

• The underlying police report was given to the complainant by Mayor Nelson before it was ever provided to the defendant

The motion requests the judgment be vacated and held in abeyance, or dismissed outright due to pervasive due-process violations and retaliatory prosecution.

Detailed Breakdown of Newly Uncovered Evidence

Below is a synthesized version of the comprehensive investigative findings.

A. Fabrication and Escalation of the October 13–14 Police Report

The unredacted report (Exhibit 88) shows that elected officials attempted to transform political criticism into a criminal matter by:

• Claiming fear based on speech
  

• Suggesting a non-existent “stalking” history
  

• Asking to remain anonymous
  

• Meeting with colleagues before deciding what to allege

No stalking charge has ever existed.

No stalking report has ever been filed.

No court has ever issued a stalking sentence.

Let’s be clear: the “stalking” claim was a lie — a deliberate, strategic lie. No department ever filed a stalking report, no prosecutor ever charged it, and no court ever sentenced it. Franklin officials invented a criminal history that did not exist and then used that fabricated label as political ammunition to intimidate, silence, and criminalize a journalist who exposed their misconduct.

B. Use of Undisclosed Report at an October 24, 2024 Sentencing Hearing

The unreleased report was used:

• By ADA Witte
  

• By the protected individual
  

• By the court

Meanwhile, Franklin PD refused to release the report, claiming it would “prejudice an investigation” — even though the DA had already marked it “no process” and declined to issues charges.

This violated:

• Due process
  

• Brady obligations
  

• Wisconsin discovery rules
  

• The right to confront evidence

C. Retaliatory Municipal Citation Issued Minutes After Failed Remand Attempt

At 3:34 p.m. on October 24, 2024 — five minutes after the sentencing hearing — Franklin issued the disorderly conduct citation.

No new conduct occurred.

Officer Elm later testified:

“Chief Liermann ordered me to issue a municipal citation after the DA declined charges.”

This is direct evidence of retaliation.

D. Contradictions and Influence Exposed in Sworn Testimony

At the November 20, 2025 hearing:

• Elm claimed he warned about “bail jumping”
  

• Body-cam footage proved this never happened
  

• He said he “didn’t recall”
  

• He looked to the prosecutor for permission before answering

His narrative mirrored earlier recommendations by Nelson and Taylor — showing coordinated influence.

E. Disorderly Conduct Report Used at October 24, 2024 Sentencing Before Disclosure (Exhibits 92 & 93)

One of the most serious due-process violations documented in the Supplemental Filing involves the use of the October 13–14 police report at the October 24, 2024 sentencing hearing in the separate criminal matter involving an alleged restraining-order violation.

Despite the Franklin Police Department withholding this report for more than eight months, the court relied on it in determining sentencing.

At that hearing:

• The protected individual made statements that clearly drew from the Oct. 13–14 allegations, despite the report not being disclosed to the defense.
  

• ADA Madeline Witte relied on the unreleased report as part of her argument to have the defendant remanded into custody.
  

• The court relied—at least in part—on the unreleased report in evaluating risk and conditions.

Yet:

• No redacted version of the report was provided until June 27, 2025 (Exhibit 87).
  

• No unredacted version was provided until after July 1, 2025 (Exhibit 88).

While withholding the report, the Franklin Police Department issued a contemporaneous letter (Exhibit 92) claiming that release would “prejudice an ongoing investigation and potential criminal charges”—even though the Milwaukee County District Attorney had already marked the matter “no process” (Exhibit 93).

This sequence of events violated multiple constitutional and procedural rights:

• Due process
  

• Right to confront and rebut evidence
  

• Brady obligations requiring disclosure of potentially exculpatory material
  

• Wisconsin discovery requirements

This is one of the clearest examples demonstrating both the concealment of exculpatory information and the weaponization of undisclosed reports to influence judicial outcomes.

F. Missing Motions and Judicial Irregularities

Judge Sonntag acknowledged she never reviewed:

• The August 18 Motion to Dismiss
  

• The November 18 Supplemental Motion

The court therefore never reviewed:

• exculpatory suppression claims
  

• conflicts of interest
  

• constitutional protections
  

• retaliatory enforcement claims

Retaliatory Intent Proven Through Public Statements

A. Exhibit 111 — Nelson’s Records Requests

Nelson requested all Greendale PD records about Busalacchi — three weeks before Greendale arrested him.

Witnesses confirmed in sworn signed affidavits:

• Supervisor Vincent told multiple people including a Greendale Village Board member Ron Barbian, she was working with a friend of hers an Assistant ADA to gett Busalacchi. Two weeks later she told Barbian that she and Taylor were working with the DA on behalf of the complainant to “take me down”

• Vincent circulated my booking photo and protected information, which Nelson obtained illegally through a law-enforcement-only system.

• Most recently Vincent is running around like chicken little telling Barbian and anyone that will listen that Busalacchi’s will be in Jail over Christmas this year.

B. Exhibit 112 — Franklin Common Council Meeting (Sept. 17, 2024)

Nelson publicly attacked FCN as “Fake Community News.”

Eichmann told residents not to trust anything published.

Nelson promised:

“Appropriate measures will be looked into.”

C. Exhibit 113 — ICC Meeting (Nov. 28, 2024)

Nelson admitted:

• He filed police complaints
  

• He acted as a complainant
  

• He compared critics to Columbine and Oklahoma City
  

• He stated:
  “He got cited for that. DA wouldn’t act, so he got cited.”

This corresponds exactly to:

• The October 14 complaint
  

• The DA’s “no process” decision
  

• Chief Liermann’s citation order

D. Exhibit 114 — ICC Meeting (Nov. 11, 2025)

Nelson described online critics (referring to me) as:

• “Psychopathic bloggers”
  

• “Rogue”
  

• “Trolls”

He advocated municipal policies to regulate social-media speech.

The Intergovernmental Cooperation Council (ICC) is a body in Milwaukee County composed of the mayors, village presidents, or administrators from the 19 municipalities within the county. Its purpose is to foster cooperation among local governments by sharing best practices, discussing ways to save tax money, enhancing services through collaborative efforts, and advocating for changes in state and federal laws that affect them.

The Disorderly Conduct Charge Was Not Legally Valid

Franklin ordinance §183-21 requires:

1. Conduct (not speech), AND
   

2. Circumstances that tend to cause or provoke a disturbance.

The blog post:

• Was pure political speech
  

• Contained no threats
  

• Was directed exclusively at public officials
  

• Caused no disturbance

The DA agreed, marking the case “no process.”

Only after the failed remand attempt did the Chief order a citation.

Supplemental Filing and Next Steps

The 17-exhibit Supplemental Filing includes:

• Unredacted police report
  

• Suppressed evidence
  

• Withheld recordings
  

• Jail-call monitoring
  

• False statements
  

• Conflicts among officials
  

• ICC admissions showing retaliatory motive
  

• Franklin’s political use of police power

A motion has been filed requesting reassignment of the John Doe investigation to another county or appointment of a special prosecutor.

My attorney will file an appeal based on:

• Due-process violations
  

• Conflicts of interest
  

• Suppression of evidence
  

• Retaliation against protected speech
  

• Unlawful prosecution

Conclusion

The Disorderly Conduct case is no longer just a citation.

It is now a fully documented example of:

• Retaliatory prosecution
  

• Misuse of police authority
  

• Judicial conflicts
  

• Unlawful surveillance
  

• Weaponization of government
  

• Suppression of protected speech
  

• Manipulation of municipal courts
  

• Coordinated efforts to silence a journalist

The “Greater Good” and the Cost of Corruption in Franklin What’s happening here isn’t just about one bogus Disorderly Conduct ticket. It’s about what kind of city Franklin is going to be — and who gets to decide what “the greater good” really means. According to the sworn John Doe filings and newly uncovered evidence, Franklin’s most powerful officials didn’t just dislike criticism — they allegedly weaponized restraining orders, police reports, municipal courts, and even law-enforcement databases to shut it down. If those allegations are proven true, that isn’t “public service.” It’s corruption in real time. You cannot have transparency when: • Police reports are hidden from defendants but quietly funneled to favored complainants. • A case is supposedly transferred to avoid conflicts, then handed right back to the same law firm and political circle behind closed doors. • Elected officials compare local critics to mass shooters and then brag, “DA wouldn’t act, so he got cited.” Franklin residents deserve better than a government that treats criticism as a crime scene and public safety as a political tool. The real “greater good” isn’t about protecting a mayor’s image or a supervisor’s ego — it’s about protecting the Constitution, the rule of law, and a community’s right to know what its leaders are doing with their power. If this can be done to one journalist in Franklin, it can be done to anyone who speaks up. That’s why this case matters.Franklin Community News will continue reporting as these matters move through the courts.

“The greater good isn’t a slogan — it’s a responsibility.  The truth is the foundation on which democracy stands.”

🕯️ The solution isn’t another insider in a new office. It’s sunlight, scrutiny, and the courage to vote differently.

Because until voters demand honest, transparent government, the corruption won’t stop — it will only change titles.

Elections have consequences — and Franklin’s next one may decide whether transparency makes a comeback.

💬 If you value hard-hitting, fact-based investigative reporting about our hometown of Franklin — follow Franklin Community News on Facebook.

Together, we can keep local government honest, transparent, and accountable 

— for the greater good.

© 2025 Franklin Community News. All rights reserved.