Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
8th Circuit Judicial Complaint

8th Circuit Judicial Complaint

Ratings: (0)|Views: 290|Likes:
Published by api-3848844

More info:

Published by: api-3848844 on Oct 18, 2008
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

03/18/2014

pdf

text

original

Don Hamrick
5860 Wilburn Road
Wilburn, Arkansas 72179
(501) 728-4235 Direct Email: 4donhamrick@gmail.com
Judge George Howard
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock
XX
SEE ATTACHED LETTER.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock
No. 1:06-cv-0044
XX
Unrepresented Civil Plaintiff (pro se)
SEE ATTACHED LETTER.
XX
But, I am very tempted.
In the event that I do file a lawsuit against Judge George Howard it

will be a Civil RICO Act Complaint (18 U.S.C. 1964(c)) Extortion of Filing Fee (18 U.S.C. \u00a7 872) In Violation of Seaman\u2019s Exemption (28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1916), as a Predicate Act of Racketeering under 18 U.S.C. \u00a7 1961(1)(A)

SEE ATTACHED LETTER.
XX
CASE LAW: \u201cThe object of civil RICO is thus not merely to compensate victims but to turn them into
1

prosecutors, \u2018private attorneys general,\u2019 dedicated to eliminating racketeering activity.\u201dR o te ll a -v-W o o d, 528 U.S. 549, 557 (2000); Cited in David F. Herr, ANNOTATED MANUAL FOR COMPLEX LITIGATION, Fourth Ed., 2006, Chapter 35.1, p. 792, pub. Thomson-West.

18 U.S.C. \u00a7 872. Extortion by Officers or Employees of the United States
2\u201cWhoever, being an officer, or employee of the United States or any department or agency thereof, or

representing himself to be or assuming to act as such, under color or pretense of office or employment commits or attempts an act of extortion, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; but if the amount so extorted or demanded does not exceed $1,000, he shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.\u201d

28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1916. Seamen\u2019s Suits
3

\u201cIn all courts of the United States, seamen may institute and prosecute suits and appeals in their own names and for their own benefit for wages or salvage or the enforcement of laws enacted for their health or safety without prepaying fees or costs or furnishing security therefor.\u201d

1
Don Hamrick
Thursday, January 25, 2007
5860 Wilburn Road, Wilburn, Arkansas 72179; cell phone: (757) 472-1776; Email: 4donhamrick@gmail.com

Complaint of Extortion Against Judge George Howard U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas in Hamrick -v- United Nations, Case No. 1:06-cv-0044

Judicial Council of the Eighth Circuit.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8 Circuit
th
111 S. 10 Street, Room 24.329
th
St. Louis, MO 63102
TO THE CHIEF JUDGE:
If it is true that I am in the position to act as a PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL simply because
1

I am an unrepresented civil plaintiff with a Civil RICO Act case against the U.S. Government (and now against the United Nations) then the federal judicial system and the agencies of the U.S. Government should be treating my case with dignity and respect to the rule of law than what I have suffered this past four years.

I am submitting my complaint against Judge George Howard of the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of Arkansas for engaging in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious
administration of the business of the court on allegation of unlawfully extorting the Court\u2019s $350
2
filing fee from me, a fully documented U.S. Merchant Seaman in violation of the Seamen\u2019s Suit law,3
on September 11, 2006 at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock.

Claim No. 8 in Volume 4 Amended Complaint of my Civil RICO Act Complaint will force Judge Howard to recuse himself because Claim No. 8 includes him as an extortionist of exempted filing fees in violation of 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 1916. It was a case of using a righteous dirty trick as a PRIVATE ATTORNEY

GENERAL to counter a malicious dirty trick by an unconscionable judge.

This Unrepresented civil Plaintiff with a potential
case of first impression is treated as a second class
citizen with no First Amendment right to petitition
the government for redress of grievances.

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
hramcorp liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

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