Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
34468551 Complaint of Rampant Public Corruption in U S Courts

34468551 Complaint of Rampant Public Corruption in U S Courts

Ratings: (0)|Views: 19 |Likes:
Published by JUDICIAL TERROR
Rampant Public Corruption in U.S. Courts
Rampant Public Corruption in U.S. Courts

More info:

Published by: JUDICIAL TERROR on Jul 19, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/25/2012

pdf

text

original

 
COMPLAINT OF RAMPANT PUBLIC CORRUPTION INTHE U.S. DISTRICT COURT, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA,U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, AND OFUNLAWFUL AND CRIMINAL ACTS BY DEF. U.S. AGENTS & OFFICIALSIN THEIR PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES OUTSIDE ANY “
 IMMUNITY 
AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL[CC: INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE]DEFENDANT CORRUPT U.S. JUDGE CHARLENE E. HONEYWELLRECORD LACK OF
 IMMUNITY 
1.The Plaintiff public corruption victims are suing Defendant corrupt U.S. District JudgeCharlene Edwards Honeywell (“Honeywell”), a female Afro-American Judge, in her 
privateindividual capacity
. Defendant Honeywell’s unlawful and criminal acts on record wereoutside any
immunity
and
official 
capacity.
 
CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL ILLEGALITY & CRIMINALITY OF FAKE “
WRIT 
 
2.
On or around 07/14/10
, Defendant corrupt U.S. Judge Honeywell conspired with, e.g.,U.S. Defendants Chappell and Steele to fraudulently conceal the prima facie nullity andillegality of a facially forged “
writ of execution
” and “
 July judgmen
”, Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, Doc. # 48, p. 1:“On February 1, 2010, Magistrate Judge Chappell issued an order granting DefendantKenneth M. Wilkinson's Motion for Issuance of a Writ of Execution (2:07-CV-228,Dkt. 424). Shortly thereafter, the writ was issued (2:07-CV-228, Dkt. 425).”3.Defendant crooked Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal thatDefendant Wilkinson had never filed any “
 Rule 38 motion
”, Fed.R.App.P.4.Defendant corrupt U.S. Judge Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired toconceal that Defendant Co-conspirator Chappell had fabricated a
mandate
and/or 
 judgment 
,Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 424:“On July 28, 2009, the Eleventh Circuit issued a Judgment awarding Wilkinson$5,000.00 in attorney’s fees and double costs in the amount of $48.60, as sanctionsfor Busse’s pursuit of a frivolous appeal.”5.Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that admittedlyDefendant Wilkinson had never 
alleged 
a
 frivolous appeal 
and that no
mandate
or 
 judgment 
awarding Wilkinson $5,000.00 in attorneys fees…” had ever 
existed 
, Case No.2:2007-cv-00228.6.In the certified record absence of any “
 Rule 38 motion
” by Def. Wilkinson, a fraudulent
 judgment 
” in the amount of “$24.30” “
issued as mandate on June 11 2009
”, Case No.2:2007-cv-00228.7.Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that the mandated
amount of $24.30
” had been paid and was not “
outstanding 
”:“The
 Judgment 
to date remains
outstanding 
.”
 
8.Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired with other U.S. Agents toconceal thata.No such mandated
 judgment 
” existed, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228; b.No mandated
 judgment 
” was ever “
recorded in the Public Records of LeeCounty
”;c.The fraudulently alleged “
certification
” was facially forged;d.“Instrument No. 2009000309384” could not have
 possibly
become any “
lien
onany property pursuant to Ch. 55, 56; and 55.10 Florida Statutes; ande.No
writ of execution
legally existed 
.9.Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired with U.S. DefendantsChappell, Steele, and other U.S. Agents to conceal that nothing in that or any other Casecould have
 possibly
 served as a lien against 
” any property under Florida and Federal law:
 
“A certified copy of the Judgment was recorded in the Public Records of Lee County,Florida at Instrument No. 2009000309384 and
 serves as a lien against the property
.”10.Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal thata.Defendant Wilkinson had neve
 filed 
any “
 Rule 38 motion
”; b.Kenneth M. Wilkinson had never been
awarded 
any
mandated 
 judgment 
”;c.Def. Wilkinson was not
entitled to tax
….”;d.The prima facie fraudulent “
Writ 
was due to be denied as unlawful andunauthorized.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF JURISDICTION & FRAUD ON THIS COURT
11.
On or around 06/23/10
, Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed the jurisdiction of this Court over the unlawful acts of the Defendant U.S. Agents and recklessly deprived thePlaintiffs of any chance of justice and adjudication of their perfected claims:
“B. Supplemental Jurisdiction
The decision to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over pendent state claims rests
 
within the discretion of the district court.”
 Raney v. Allstate Ins. Co.
, 370 F.3d 1086,1088-89 (11th Cir. 2004). Once a district court dismisses all claims over which it hadoriginal jurisdiction, it may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the
 
remaining state claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). This Court, therefore, declines toexercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ remaining state claims.”12.Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that this Court had jurisdiction of any and all claims involving the Defendant U.S. Government Officials and including “stateclaims”.13.Defendant Honeywell had no
discretion
” but was absolutely obligated to adjudicatePlaintiffs’ claims, because United States Agents had perpetrated unlawful and criminal actsof record.14.Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Co-Defendant U.S. Judges Steele andChappell themselves had removed Plaintiffsstate action,
2006-CA-003185
,
BUSSE v.STATE OF FLORIDA
, to Federal Court. See 2:2008-cv-00899.15.
 Declining jurisdiction
over unlawful and criminal U.S. Governmental acts provedDefendant Honeywell’s fraud on the Courts and required her disqualification.
 
RECKLESS OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESSFRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF COURT ACCESS RIGHTS
16.Recklessly, Defendant Honeywell obstructed Plaintiffs’ court access on 06/23/10, Doc. #213, p. 21:2
 
“With its discretionary authority, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state claims.”17.
On 07/07/10
, Defendant Honeywell again fabricated “loss” of
electronic filing  privileges
” in response to Plaintiffs’ “specific” demand for “equal court access and privilegesfor filing purposes.” See Doc. # 38, p. 1; see Def. Honeywell’s previous fabrications, Case No. 2:09-CV-791, Doc. ## 133, 151.
RECORD CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE & ADJUDICATION
18.Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Defendant U.S. Judges and Officials not to
 justly
and
 speedily adjudicate
Plaintiffs’ conclusively proven “state claims” against FederalDefendants.
DENIAL & FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS
19.
On or around 06/23/2010
, Defendant Honeywell recklessly and disparately denied thePlaintiffs the equal protection of the laws under fraudulent pretenses, Doc. # 213, p. 19:“In this case, Plaintiffs claim that they were denied equal protection of the laws by
 
Defendants in relation to Lot 15A. As a general matter, Florida counties may exerciseeminent domain over property not owned by the state or federal government. Fla.Stat. § 127.01(1)(a);
id 
. “Since a state landowner would not be subject to eminent
 
domain power but [Plaintiffs], as . . . [alleged] private landowner[s], would be,”Plaintiffs cannot be similarly situated to a state landowner.
 Busse
, 317 Fed. Appx. at973. Plaintiffs, “therefore cannot rely on [their] disparate eminent domain treatment
 
vis-a-vis state landowners as the basis for an equal protection claim.
 Id 
 
.Consequently, the Court finds that Plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and dismisses their Equal Protection claim.”20.In exchange for Defendants’ bribes, Defendant Honeywell fixed and fraudulentlyconcealed Plaintiffs’ perfected
equal protection claim
and the record absence of any
eminent domain
” “exercise”. On 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealedthat none of the Government Defendants ever had any
eminent domain powe
” and perpetrated fraud on the Court.
CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL U.S. JURISDICTION & OBSTRUCT COURT ACCESS
21.Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Federal Defendants to conceal Federal jurisdiction and obstruct Plaintiffs’ meaningful court access.22.In particular, Defendant Honeywell conspired to conceal that of course, the Plaintiffsrightfully prosecuted 1
st
, 14
th
, 4
th
, 7
th
and 5
th
Amendment violations by Federal Defendants inFederal Court.23.
On or around 06/23/10
, Defendant U.S. Judge Honeywell fabricated “
necessary state procedures
”, Doc. # 213, p. 18:
 
“They have not exhausted the
necessary state procedures
to address their dispute prior to filing in federal court. Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiffs failed to statea claim upon which relief can be granted and dismisses their 
Seventh Amendment 
claim.”24.Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that Plaintiffs’ prosecution of Federal Defendants for 
Seventh Amendment 
Violations did of course not require “
necessary state procedures
”. Brazenly and idiotically, Defendant Honeywell concocted “
necessary state procedures
on the record. Said reckless fabrications were outside Honeywell’s scopeof 
immunity
and
official 
capacity.3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->