7/27/2010 The Wikileaks 'source': Former army a…

The Independent now has a Google Chrome Extension. Get th

Join the debate: The Independent blogs - for a whole ne w ra nge of views

The Wikileaks 'source': Former army analyst facing 52 years in

prison
Tuesday, 27 July 2010

Share
Print
Email
Text Size
Normal
Large
Extra Large

As governments around the world assessed the damage done by Wikileaks's Afghanistan w ar logs, thoughts also turned to a lonely US Army private, w ho
goes by the screen-name bradass87, currently behind bars in Kuwait.

Bradley Manning, 22, w as serving as an army intelligence analyst in Baghdad when he was taken into custody by military police in May this year and
transferred to Kuw ait. Charges against him were filed this month and, if they stick, he could face 52 years in prison.

Related articles
Archie Bland: Of course Julian Assange has an agenda. He has never claimed otherwise
Released Nato files 'only scratch the surface' of w ar in Afghanistan
Patrick Cockburn: The battle to justify this as a w ar w orth fighting just got a lot harder
Julian Assange: Wikileaks founder is a hacker fighting for freedom of information
Leading article: A light shone on the dark side of this war
Search the new s archive for more stories

That Manning and Wikileaks are acquainted has been well established. Manning is charged w ith providing Wikileaks w ith a US military video of a raid in
Iraq in July 2007 showing the gunning down of civilians, including tw o Reuters journalists. The charges currently filed against him stem from him
disseminating that video.

Julian Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, said he was ready to help fund a civilian defence Manning might launch to fight those charges. As to whether he
was the source for the new trove of documents, Assange noted: "There's no allegation, as far as we can determine, that this material is connected to Mr
Manning."

If Manning was the source, he might have got away with it had he not struck up a cyber-relationship w ith Adrian Lamo, a convicted hacker in California,
who reported their contact to the Pentagon.

If Lamo thought he was doing the nation a service by exposing Manning, there was apparently little he could do about Wikileaks. It "has acted in a
tremendously irresponsible fashion", Lamo said yesterday. "They took advantage of systems that were put into place for the purpose of intelligence
sharing, for the purpose of making sure that all elements of national security both at home and abroad had access to the information they needed in
order to do their job."

Lamo contended Manning could not have done it all alone. But Manning, we learn, had sufficient guile to see that while the military had banned all
personnel from using zip drives and other storage devices that might be used to download sensitive material, they had not included CD-Roms. So, he
would slip in discs that he pretended were Lady Gaga albums and even reportedly lipsynched her songs as he downloaded the secret material.

SPONSORED LINKS:

Ads by Google

Resurrection of Jesus
Did Jesus Rise From the Dead?Discover the Facts From Scholars
www.y-Jesus.com/Resurrection

Looking to Buy an Annuity

Talk to an Annuity Advisor, C ompareAll Annuity Rates for your State.
www.AdvisorWorld.com

NEU Online MBA Program

Earn an MBA Online at NortheasternUniversity. No GMAT, Free Brochure.
OnlineMBA.NEU.Edu

Beautiful Florida Beaches

The coast is clear. C heck dailyvideo to see for yourself.

independent.co.uk/…/the-wikileaks-so… 1/2
292. Defendant Martin extorted and concealed, and conspired to extort and conceal, that he

procedure on execution did not accord with the procedure of the State of Florida. See

Fed.R.Civ.P. 69. Defendant knew that Florida procedure required a recorded and certified

judgment, which here had never existed. The Court never had any authority to award

“$5,048.60”, and the judgment issued as mandate on 06/11/2009 in the amount of $24.30 had

been paid. The prima facie fraudulent “affidavit” by Defendant Racketeer JACK N.

PETERSON fraudulently pretended a “07/29/2009” “judgment”, Doc. # 432-2, Case No.

2:2007-cv-00228, which all Defendants knew, concealed, and conspired to conceal had

never existed. See also Ch. 55, 56, Florida Statutes.

DEFENDANT CHARLENE E. HONEYWELL

RECORD LACK OF IMMUNITY - PERPETRATION OF UNLAWFUL ACTS

293. The Plaintiff public corruption victims are suing Defendant corrupt U.S. District Judge

Charlene Edwards Honeywell (“Honeywell”), a female Afro-American Judge, in her private

individual capacity and official capacity. Defendant Honeywell’s unlawful and criminal acts

on record were outside any immunity and official capacity.

FELONIES OUTSIDE ANY “official” CAPACITY

294. Defendant Corrupt Honeywell had knowledge of the actual commission of felonies and

concealed them. Here even though Def. Honeywell had knowledge of, e.g., judicial Co-

Defendant Chappell’s, Steele’s, Pizzo’s, and Lazzara’s obstruction of justice and

fraudulent concealment of facially forged “land parcels”, a falsified “writ of execution”,

falsified “$5,048.60 judgment”, Corrupt Honeywell did not make the same known to some

judge or person in authority, but covered up for said Offenders in exchange for bribes, 18

U.S.C. §§ 3, 4.

74
 ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT

295. Defendant Crook Honeywell knew that Defendant principal Offenders Steele, Chappell,

Pizzo, and Lazzara had committed record offenses and assisted said Offenders, 18 U.S.C. §§

3, 4. See, e.g., Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, Doc. # 50, assistance with facially fraudulent

“writ of execution”; see Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. ## 213, 236, assistance with record

forgeries.

DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS UNDER COLOR OF FAKE “writ” AND “resolution”

296. Defendant Government Whore deliberately deprived the Plaintiffs, e.g., under color of a

fake “writ of execution” and “resolution 569/875”, 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242.

RECORD RETALIATION UNDER COLOR OF WRIT OF EXECUTION & SANCTIONS

297. With the intent to retaliate, Corrupt Honeywell knowingly took actions harmful to the

Plaintiff public corruption victims, which included interference with Plaintiffs’ livelihood

and record land ownership, because the Plaintiff landowners had provided truthful

information relating to the commission of Federal offenses to law enforcement, 18 U.S.C. §§

1513.

298. Knowingly, Honeywell extorted Plaintiffs’ property and/or threatened to do so, with

corrupt intent to retaliate against the Plaintiffs because the Plaintiffs had blown the whistle

on public corruption; in particular, because the Plaintiffs had produced records and testimony

conclusively evidencing Government corruption and fraud, and information about the

commission of Federal offenses by Government Officials. Here, Plaintiff Government crime

and corruption victims had the right to be reasonably protected from the Government

Offenders and Judges of record, 18 U.S.C. § 3771.

75
 RECORD POLICY, CUSTOM, AND CULTURE OF CORRUPTION

299. Customarily, and over and over again, Honeywell coerced the Plaintiffs to refrain from

prosecuting and producing crime evidence. Idiotic lies and threats of “sanctions” have played

a central role in Honeywell’s record crimes and concealment. Just like Jews and

Government opponents in Nazi Germany, the Plaintiff Government crime victims are

running from the anarchy, extortion, and coercion in Honeywell’s court of perversions

where un-recorded and non-existent judgments can be perverted into a “lien on property”.

BLACKMAIL, EXTORTION, UNLAWFUL COMMUNICATIONS & THREATS

300. In retaliation and exchange for bribes, Defendant Crooked Judge Honeywell made

threatening demands without any justification under color of law, authority, and falsified

official records. In particular, Defendant Corrupt Judge threatened, e.g., “monetary

sanctions”, “civil contempt”, and/or arrest, merely because the Plaintiff public corruption

victims had exposed and blown the whistle on, e.g., Honeywell’s crimes, extortion,

coercion, and fraud on the Court.

EXACTION OF MONEY BY THREAT OF, E.G., ARREST AND CIVIL CONTEMPT

301. Honeywell exacted, threatened to exact, and/or conspired with other Officials and

Defendants to exact money from Plaintiffs by threat of “monetary sanctions”, “civil

contempt”, and/or arrest under color of, e.g., office and falsified official records. In

particular, Def. Honeywell conspired to extort $5,048.60” in the absence of any recorded

authentic judgment and justification. Honeywell caused other Government Officials to

falsify, alter, and destroy official records for criminal and illegal purposes of concealing

Honeywell’s extortion, coercion, obstruction of justice and other crimes of record.

76
 Honeywell made unlawful communications and threatened Plaintiff public corruption

whistleblowers. See, e.g., Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, Doc. # 50, p. 3:

“Shortly thereafter, the writ was issued (2:07-CV-228, Dkt. 425).”

Defendant Government Whore Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that no “writ”

had ever been issued and/or could have possibly been issued, because, e.g., no recorded

“$5,048.60 judgment” had ever existed. For criminal & illegal purposes of, e.g., extorting

and obstructing justice, said Defendant falsely and idiotically pretended lack of

“authority” over record extortion under color of a falsified official record by U.S.

Defendants, Case No. 2:2010-00089, Doc. # 50, 07/14/10, p. 3:

“Because Case No. 2:07-CV-228 was assigned to Judge John Steele, this Court does
not have the authority to grant relief from the writ of execution.”

302. Just like a bungling Government idiot, Def. Honeywell contradicted herself in the next

paragraph, in which she cited “Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)”, Doc. # 50, pp. 3-4:

“A party may move for relief from a final judgment or order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b).”

“As such, the matter is closed, except for the issue of sanctions.”

“Plaintiffs have given the Court more than enough grounds to impose sanctions for

their misconduct.”

MISCONDUCT AND EXTENSION OF RECORD CRIMES AND FALSIFIED “writ”

303. Def. Honeywell recklessly extended the record Government crimes and falsified “writ”,

Doc. # 425:

“To the extent that Plaintiffs request injunctive relief, the Motions will be denied.”

See Doc. # 50, p. 4.

304. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed that sanctions were not any “issue” but

Honeywell’s record crimes and unlawful acts such as, e.g., extortion, concealment, and

77
 fraud were. In said organized cover-up, Defendant Honeywell concealed that there had

never been any “$5,048.60 judgment” of record and that no “judgment” of record had ever

even referenced any “frivolous appeal”.

305. Honeywell promoted the record culture and policy of corruption, anarchy,

lawlessness and perversion of law and facts. With corrupt intent to obtain illegal benefits,

Honeywell “incomprehensibly” and “disjointedly” copied and pasted together illegal

“orders” and judicial trash without ever addressing the complained about legal issues and

claims for relief.

RECKLESS DEPRIVATIONS AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE & COURT ACCESS

306. For criminal and illegal purposes of obstructing justice, extorting, coercing, and

concealing, Defendant Criminal Honeywell obstructed, and caused other Officials and

Defendants to obstruct, the filing of, e.g., Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal from “order”, Doc. #

213, Notice of Appeal from “order”, Doc. # 236, Case No. 2-2009-cv-00791:

“The Clerk is directed to terminate these motions.

3. The Clerk is further directed to no longer accept ANY filings from Plaintiffs
in this case because a judgment has been entered and Plaintiffs have filed a
notice of appeal as to the Court’s Order (Dkt. 213), and this case is CLOSED.
4. Finally, the Clerk is also directed to strike Published Public Notices from the
record (Dkt. 220, 221, 223, 225, 226, 229, 230, 232, 233, 234, 235).”

ILLEGAL DESTRUCTION AND MUTILATION OF OFFICIAL RECORDS

307. With corrupt intent to extort, blackmail, coerce, defraud, deprive, and obtain illegal

benefits, Defendant Corrupt Honeywell destroyed, mutilated, caused others to destroy and

mutilate, and conspired with, e.g., other Officials to destroy and mutilate official records,

Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. # 236, 07/02/2010, p. 3:

“Plaintiffs have also filed several documents entitled “Published Public Notice” (Dkt.
220, 221, 223, 225, 226, 229, 230, 232, 233, 234, and 235). These documents do not
relate to any pending motion. Further, they are not motions which request affirmative
relief by the Court. They are immaterial to this case, which has been dismissed.

78
 Moreover, some of the documents contain scandalous materials. These notices
should, therefore, be stricken.” See Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. # 236, pp. 2-3.

MISUSE OF PUBLIC OFFICE, CONCEALMENT, AND COVER UP

308. In exchange for bribes, Defendant Government Whore Honeywell obstructed, delayed,

and prevented the communication of judicial and Government corruption information

relating to the commission of felonies by, e.g., U.S. Agents J. E. Steele, S. Polster Chappell,

M. A. Pizzo, R. A. Lazzara, and Def. record Forger of “land parcels” K. M. Wilkinson, and

Crooked Attorney Jack N. Peterson, § 838.022 (1)(c), Fla. Stat.

DELIBERATE DERPRIVATIONS AND PERVERSIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

309. U.S. Defendant Honeywell recklessly perverted express Florida and Federal

Constitutional guarantees of, e.g., the rights to due process, equal protection of the law, to

own property, exclude Governments from private property, redress Government grievances,

prosecute by jury trial, be free of Government corruption, extortion, coercion, oppression,

falsification of records, unlawful seizure of private property under fraudulent pretenses such

as, e.g.:

a. Idiotically and brazenly, Def. Whore Honeywell manufactured and conspired with

other Government Officials to pervert express Constitutional guarantees and concoct

that property rights are not fundamental rights;

b. Def. Honeywell concocted and conspired to concoct that Plaintiffs could not assert their

perfected “state claims” against U.S. Agents in U.S. Courts;

c. Def. Honeywell fabricated and conspired to fabricate that Defendant Forger of “land

parcels” Wilkinson had filed a non-existent “Rule 38 motion”. Here, Defendant

Honeywell falsified and caused others to falsify dockets, docket entries, and official

records. See § 838.022 (1)(a), Fla. Stat.;

79
 d. Def. Predator Honeywell concealed, covered up, and/or altered official records and

documents, § 838.022 (1)(b), Fla. Stat.;

e. With corrupt intent to obtain illegal benefits for Lee County Officials and to harm the

Plaintiff record landowners & corruption victims, Def. Honeywell maliciously fabricated

and conspired to fabricate a “regulation” by nameless, un-named, and non-existent

“legislators”. See § 838.022 (1), Fla. Stat.

OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESS & FILING OF NOTICE OF APPEAL, DOC. 213

310. On or around 07/16/2010, Defendant Whore Honeywell prevented and conspired with

other Officials such as, e.g., Defendant Clerks Drew Heathcoat and Diane Nipper the filing

of Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal from Order, Doc. # 213 …, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, and

the communication of information relating to the commission of felonies in the U.S. District

Court, Fort Myers, Florida.

311. Recklessly, Honeywell’s illegal and felonious acts deprived the Plaintiffs of their rights

as stated in Doc. # 214, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791.

“RULE 38/WRIT OF EXECUTION”-FRAUD-SCHEME, CONSPIRACY TO EXTORT

312. Pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 39, costs may be taxed against the appellant, if a judgment is

affirmed. Defendant Whore Honeywell knew and concealed that the “costs allowed” and/or

taxed were “$24.30”, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. ## 365, p. 15; 386-3, p. 15. Def.

Honeywell concealed that no costs were ever allowed under purported “Rule 38”.

“FRIVOLOUS APPEAL”-FRAUD & EXTORTION-SCHEME

313. “FRAP 38, Frivolous Appeal - Damages and Costs” provides that

“if a court of appeals determines that an appeal is frivolous, it may, after a separately
filed motion or notice from the court and reasonable opportunity to respond, award
just damages and single or double costs to the appellee.”

80
314. Defendant Government Whore Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that pursuant

to 11th Cir. R. 38-1, Time for Filing Motions, Motions for damages and costs pursuant to

FRAP 38 must be filed no later than the filing of appellee’s brief. Here, Defendant Wilkinson

had tendered and/or filed his prima facie fraudulent brief on or around 08/08/2008. See

Appellate Case No. 2008-13170-BB, certified Docket sheet. Admittedly, Defendant

Wilkinson never filed any “Rule 38 motion” before 08/08/2008.

315. Admittedly, Defendant Wilkinson had never filed any Rule 38 motion. Rule 38 only

provided for damages and costs. Here, Defendant Wilkinson had never filed any such motion

and perpetrated fraud on the Court. See certified Docket. Defendant Government Whore

Honeywell concealed said “Rule 38 motion”-fraud-scheme and conspiracy to extort.

CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL ILLEGALITY & CRIMINALITY OF FAKE “WRIT”

316. 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 and

illegality of a facially forged “writ of execution” and “July judgment”, Case No. 2:2010-cv-

00089, Doc. # 48, p. 1:

“On February 1, 2010, Magistrate Judge Chappell issued an order granting Defendant
Kenneth 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).”

317. Defendant crooked Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that

Defendant Wilkinson had never filed any “Rule 38 motion”, Fed.R.App.P.

318. Defendant corrupt U.S. Judge Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to

conceal 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 sanctions
for Busse’s pursuit of a frivolous appeal.”

81
319. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that admittedly

Defendant 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.

320. 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.

321. 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.”

322. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired with other U.S. Agents to

conceal that

a. No such mandated “judgment” existed, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228;

b. No mandated “judgment” was ever “recorded in the Public Records of Lee County”;

c. The fraudulently alleged “certification” was facially forged;

d. “Instrument No. 2009000309384” could not have possibly become any “lien” on any

property pursuant to Ch. 55, 56; and 55.10 Florida Statutes; and

e. No “writ of execution” legally existed.

323. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired with U.S. Defendants

Chappell, Steele, and other U.S. Agents to conceal that nothing in that or any other Case

could 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.”

82
324. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that

a. Defendant Wilkinson had never 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 and unauthorized.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF JURISDICTION & FRAUD ON THIS COURT

325. 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 the

Plaintiffs of any chance of justice and adjudication of their perfected claims, Doc. # 213:

“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 had
original jurisdiction, it may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the
remaining state claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). This Court, therefore, declines to
exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ remaining state claims.”

326. 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 “state

claims”. Defendant Honeywell had no “discretion” but was absolutely obligated to adjudicate

Plaintiffs’ claims, because United States Agents had perpetrated unlawful and criminal acts

of record.

327. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Co-Defendant U.S. Judges Steele and

Chappell themselves had removed Plaintiffs’ State action, 2006-CA-003185, BUSSE v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, to Federal Court. See 2:2008-cv-00899.

328. “Declining jurisdiction” over unlawful and criminal U.S. Governmental acts proved

Defendant Honeywell’s fraud on the Courts and required her disqualification.

83
 RECKLESS OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESS

DISPARATE DENIAL OF COURT ACCESS RIGHTS

329. Recklessly, Defendant Honeywell again obstructed Plaintiffs’ court access on 06/23/10,

Doc. # 213, p. 21:

“With its discretionary authority, the Court declines to exercise supplemental

jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state claims.”

OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESS UNDER FALSE PRETENSES OF “misconduct”

330. On 07/07/10, Defendant Honeywell again fabricated “misconduct” and/or “loss” of

“electronic filing privileges” in response to Plaintiffs’ “specific” demand for “equal court

access and privileges for filing purposes.” See Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, 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

331. Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Defendant U.S. Judges and Officials not to

justly and speedily adjudicate Plaintiffs’ conclusively proven “state claims” against Federal

Defendants.

DENIAL & FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS

332. On or around 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell recklessly and disparately denied the

Plaintiffs 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 exercise
eminent 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. at
973. 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.”

84
333. In exchange for Defendants’ bribes, Defendant Honeywell fixed and fraudulently

concealed Plaintiffs’ perfected “equal protection claim” and the record absence of any

“eminent domain” “exercise”. On 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed

that none of the Government Defendants ever had any “eminent domain power” and

perpetrated fraud on the Court.

CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL U.S. JURISDICTION & OBSTRUCT COURT ACCESS

334. Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Federal Defendants to conceal Federal

jurisdiction and obstruct Plaintiffs’ meaningful court access.

335. In particular, Defendant Honeywell conspired to conceal that of course, the Plaintiffs

rightfully prosecuted 1st, 14th, 4th, 7th and 5th Amendment violations by Federal Defendants in

Federal Court.

336. 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 state
a claim upon which relief can be granted and dismisses their Seventh Amendment
claim.”

337. 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 scope

of immunity and official capacity.

85
 DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS OF COURT ACCESS UNDER FALSE PRETENSES

338. Without any meritorious “defense” or “claim”, and under facially idiotic pretenses of

“frivolity” and “vexatiousness”, Defendant Honeywell deliberately deprived the Plaintiffs of

court access.

CONCEALMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO OWN PROPERTY AND

CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL THAT PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE FUNDAMENTAL

339. Defendant Honeywell conspired to fraudulently conceal that property rights are most

fundamental rights. On or around 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell conspired to brazenly

and irrationally concoct, Doc. # 213, p. 20:

“Property rights would not be fundamental rights since they are based on state law.”
Id. Here, Plaintiffs claim that they have been denied their alleged property rights in
Lot 15A. These property rights are defined by state law. Therefore, the Court finds
that Plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and dismisses
their Substantive Due Process Claim.”

340. No halfway intelligent and non-corrupt judge in Defendant Honeywell’s shoes could

have possibly denied that property rights and the right to own property are most fundamental

rights. Honeywell’s above assertion was recklessly false and for unlawful and criminal

purposes of extorting property and fees and illegally bypassing due process and equal

protection of the law.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF PLAINTIFFS’ PREVIOUS “STATE ACTION”

341. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed Plaintiffs’ State action, Case No. 2006-CA-

003185 (Lee County Circuit Court), BUSSE v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Doc. # 213, p. 15:

“Although they have been previously told by the Eleventh Circuit that they must
proceed in state court prior to bringing suit in federal court for several of their claims,
Plaintiffs refuse to do so and continue to re-file their complaints with additional
Defendants and claims all surrounding the same property dispute.”

86
342. Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Officials such as, e.g., Defendants Steele and

Polster Chappell to conceal Plaintiffs’ 2006 State action of record, 2006-CA-003185.

Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendants Steele and Chappell had removed

Plaintiffs’ record 2006 State action to Federal Court. See 2:2008-cv-00899.

343. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed Plaintiffs’ fundamental entitlement to sue

Defendant U.S. Agents in Federal Court for any and all claims.

06/23/2010 SLANDER OF RECORD REAL PROPERTY TITLE, DOC. # 213

344. On or around 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell unintelligently slandered Plaintiffs’

record marketable title to riparian Lot 15A, “Cayo Costa”, Doc. # 213, 2:2009-cv-00791:

“In a resolution adopted in December 1969 by the Board of Commissioners of Lee

County, Florida, Lot 15A, among other property, was claimed as public land
(“Resolution 569/875") (Dkt 5, Ex. 3, p. 9). See Prescott, et al., v. State of Florida, et
al., 343 Fed. Appx. 395, 396-97 (11th Cir. Apr. 21, 2009); Busse, et al. v. Lee County,
Florida, et al., 317 Fed. Appx. 968, 970 (11th Cir. Mar 5, 2009).”

07/14/2010 FABRICATION OF “WRIT OF EXECUTION”

345. On or around 07/14/2010, Defendant Honeywell irrationally fabricated a “writ of

execution”, Doc. # 48, p. 1, 2:2010-cv-00089:

“In the motion, Plaintiffs appear to seek a release of the writ of execution and
attachment of a lien to property issued in Busse v. Lee County, Florida, et al., Case
No. 2:07-CV-228-FtM-29SPC. That case was before Judge John Steele and
Magistrate Judge Sheri Chappell.”

346. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed the record lack of any “writ of execution”

mandated “July 2009 judgment”, and of any ‘Rule 38 motion” by Def. “land parcel” Forger

Wilkinson. See Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228; see Case Docket as certified on 07/16/2010 by

Def. Clerk D. Nipper.

87
347. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the record 03/05/2009 “judgment” and

paid “amount of $24.30” “issued as mandate on 06/11/2009”, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228,

had ruled out any possibility of a “writ of execution”.

348. Because of her irrational contradictions on record, Defendant Honeywell’s “orders” were

facially arbitrary, capricious, incomprehensible, and idiotic:

349. In particular, no rational, competent, and honest judge in Defendant Honeywell’s shoes

could have possibly reconciled a fake “writ of execution” with a fake “claim”.

350. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that in the hypothetical event of any

involuntary title transfer to Government, no “writ of execution” could have possibly existed.

351. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that in the hypothetical event of a “writ of

execution”, there could not have possibly been any involuntary title transfer to Lee County,

Florida. For bribes, Def. Whore Honeywell conspired to extort Plaintiffs’ property under

fraudulent pretenses of a non-existent “Rule 38 motion”, fake “judgment”, and fake “writ”.

TRESPASS ONTO PRIMA FACIE PRIVATE “CAYO COSTA” SUBDIVISION

352. Defendant Honeywell’s unlawful and criminal acts of record, reckless orders, Case ##

2:2009-cv-00791; and 2:2010-cv-00089, slander of title, fraudulent pretenses and/or

fabrications of a non-existent mandated “judgment”, “writ of execution”, “lien” proximately

caused unlawful and criminal trespass onto Plaintiffs’ private street and up lands on the Gulf

of Mexico in the private undedicated residential “Cayo Costa” Subdivision.

353. Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that the public had no

Subdivision access, because as a matter of law, the public had no right to use any of the

prima facie private street and alley easements as legally conveyed in reference to the 1912

Plat of Survey in PB 3 PG 25.

88
 ILLEGAL FIRES AND ARSON

354. Defendant Honeywell’s reckless orders, Case ## 2:2009-cv-00791, and 2:2010-cv-00089,

slander of title, fraudulent pretenses and/or fabrications of a non-existent mandated

“judgment”, “writ of execution”, “lien” have been inducing the public to start unlawful fires

and perpetrate arson on private “Cayo Costa” Subdivision property, PB 3 PG 25 (1912).

CONSPIRACY TO COVER UP FOR GOVERNMENT CROOKS

355. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal the record crimes

and illegal acts of, e.g., U.S. Defendants John E. Steele, Sheri Polster Chappell, Richard A.

Lazzara, Mark Allan Pizzo, and to cover up for said Government Crooks.

RECORD THREATS AND FABRICATIONS OF “VIOLATION OF ORDER”

356. On or around 07/14/20, Defendant Honeywell again threatened, intimidated, and

coerced the Plaintiffs to refrain from prosecuting Defendant Honeywell, 2:10-cv-00089, Doc.

# 49, p. 2:

“…Plaintiff Busse has directly violated an order of this Court.”

357. Defendant Government Whore Honeywell has been a named party Defendant, because

she, e.g., accepted Defendants’ bribes, fixed Plaintiff’s Cases under false pretenses of a

“regulation”, fabricated a “writ of execution”, perverted the Florida and Federal

Constitutional guarantees of the most fundamental rights to own property and exclude

Governments, redress Government grievances, be free of Government corruption,

oppression, unlawful seizure of property, et al. The Plaintiff corruption victims sued Def.

Honeywell in her individual private capacity outside any immunity, because Def.

Honeywell maliciously extended, e.g., record Government extortion, corruption, and crimes

89
 and unlawful acts. See, e.g., Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. # 213, 236; Case No. 2:2010-

cv-00089, Doc. ## 48, 49, 50.

358. Under color of office, Defendant Honeywell falsified and/or caused other persons to

falsify official record and documents. See § 838.022, Fla. Stat.

RECORD EXTORTION OF FEES AND PROPERTY

359. For unlawful and criminal purposes of extorting fees and Plaintiffs’ record property,

Defendant Honeywell fabricated a “writ of execution”.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF RECORD “06/11/2009 MANDATE”

360. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that a facially fraudulent 03/05/2009

“judgment” “issued as mandate on June 11, 2009” and was received by the U.S. District

Court on 06/15/2009. See Doc. # 365; Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF CLOSURE OF CASE 08-17130-BB ON 06/11/2009

361. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th

Circuit had closed Case No. 2008-13170-BB on 06/11/2009.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF “$24.30” MANDATE

362. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th

Circuit had “allowed the amount of $24.30” “issued as mandate on June 11, 2009”

363. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the “amount of $24.30” was not

outstanding.

364. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that no “writ of execution” could have

possibly existed on the record.

90
 FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF NON-EXISTENCE OF “RULE 38 MOTION”

365. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendant crooked Official Kenneth M.

Wilkinson had never filed any Rule 38 motion.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF RECORD COERCION

366. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed that Defendant K. M. Wilkinson expressly

coerced the Plaintiff corruption victims to refrain from prosecution on the record. See

Wilkinson’s “Rule 27-4 motion”.

COERCION

367. On the record, Defendant Honeywell coerced the Plaintiffs to refrain from prosecution

under color of authority and office.

368. Without any authority or justification, Defendant Honeywell threatened, intimidated,

harassed, and “punished” the Plaintiffs on the record, including the obstruction of court

access.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF NON-EXISTENT “LAND PARCELS”

369. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendant Forger K. M. Wilkinson had

unlawfully and criminally forged “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-

01-00001.0000”. Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that said forged

“parcels” did not appear on the 1912 “Cayo Costa” Subdivision Plat of Survey in Lee

County Plat Book 3 Page 25.

370. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that said non-existent and forged “land

parcels” had never been legally described, platted, and/or conveyed in reference to said Plat

of Survey, PB 3 PG 25 (1912) and had never existed.

91
 BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION

371. In exchange for Defendants’ bribes, Defendant Honeywell concealed said evident record

forgeries and covered up for Defendant K. M. Wilkinson.

372. Defendant Honeywell accepted Defendants’ bribes and enforced the culture and policy of

corruption in her office even though Honeywell knew that the prima facie fake “writ of

execution”, “lien”, “judgment”, and “land parcels” had never existed and could not have

possibly existed.

DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS & FRAUD ON THE COURT

373. With wanton disregard for Plaintiffs’ fundamental rights to, e.g.

a. Be free of Government racketeering, corruption, extortion, coercion, and threats;

b. Be free of unlawful seizure, bribery, and retaliation;

c. Redress Government grievances without retaliation, coercion, extortion, and threats;

d. Have meaningful and free court access;

e. Have due process and equal protection of the law;

f. Own property;

g. Exclude Defendant Governments from Plaintiffs’ record property.

Defendant Honeywell perpetrated fraud on the Court and deliberately deprived the

Plaintiffs of their express fundamental rights under the Federal and Florida Constitutions.

DEF. HONEYWELL’S PROSECUTION UNDER CIVIL RICO

374. The Civil RICO statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1964, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968, expressly

authorized civil remedies. Defendant Racketeer Honeywell perpetrated record RICO

predicate acts such as, e.g., extortion, obstruction of justice, and retaliation.

92
375. Defendant Honeywell knew that Defendant K. M. Wilkinson’s “motion”, “Rule 27-4”,

Fed.R.App.Proc., Doc. # 386-2, was for prima facie illegal and criminal purposes of

extorting money and property, obstructing justice, retaliating, and racketeering:

“In order to discourage the Appellant [Dr. Jorg Busse] from engaging in the same
practices [of having conclusively proven and exposed Government extortion,
racketeering, and corruption] in this Court, the Appellee [Def. Racketeer Kenneth
M. Wilkinson, Lee County Property Appraiser’s Office] would respectfully request
that this Court require the Appellant to pay a monetary penalty into the Court for
filing his frivolous motion to strike.” Id., p. 2.

Plaintiff Appellant, Dr. Jorg Busse, was entitled to defend against recorded extortion,

racketeering, corruption, and fraud.

INJURY TO PLAINTIFFS’ CAYO COSTA PROPERTY AND BUSINESS

376. Defendant Crooked Honeywell injured the Plaintiff record property and business owners

by reasons of publicly recorded violations of Section 1962. See Section 1964(C). Plaintiffs

are holding legal and beneficial interests in their Cayo Costa business and property, riparian

Lot 15A “on the Gulf of Mexico”, Parcel # 12-44-20-01-00015.015A. See Section 1961(3).

Plaintiffs demand recovery for both tangible and intangible property losses, business

interruptions, and other losses as a direct and proximate result of Defendant Honeywell’s

extortion, racketeering, and obstruction of justice.

18 U.S.C. § 1962 VIOLATIONS

377. Pursuant to Section 1964(C), Plaintiffs suffered damages by reason of Defendant

Honeywell’s Section 1962 violations, which proximately and directly resulted from the

publicly recorded commissions of the predicate acts such as, e.g., extortion, retaliation,

fraud, fraud on the State and Federal Courts, fraudulent concealment of facially forged “land

parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000” under color of a fake

“writ of execution”, fake “judgment”, fake debt, fake “$5,048.60” debt, fake “ripeness

93
 requirements”, et al. See Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. ## 434, 432, 424, 422, 386, 338,

288, 282, 360, 87, 25, 5.

CONSPIRACY TO CORRUPTLY GAIN CONTROL OF PLAINTIFFS’ PROPERTY

378. Defendant Honeywell acquired control and conspired with other Officials to acquire

control of Plaintiffs’ Lee County property and business through, e.g., organized crime such

as, e.g.:

a. Exercising various forms of extortion;

b. Acquiring interest in Plaintiffs’ property in satisfaction of illegally procured “debt” such

as, e.g., “$5,048.60”;

c. Charging & collecting Government fees and for fictitious “frivolity” with usurious rates;

d. Profiteering from extra-judicial crimes and bribes.

FOR BRIBES DEFENDANT FRAUDULENTLY CONCEALED BINDING PRECEDENT

379. In exchange for bribes, Defendant Racketeer Honeywell concealed and conspired with

other Officials and U.S. Circuit & District Judges to conceal binding precedent:

WEST PENINSULAR TITLE CO. v. PALM BEACH COUNTY, 41 F.3d 1490

(11th Cir.1995); Murrell v. United States, 269 F.2d 458 (5th Cir.1959)

DEFENDANT HONEYWELL’S SECTION 1962(B) LIABILITY

380. Under color of prima facie falsified “writ of execution”, falsified “judgment”, fake

“$5,048.60 debt”, falsified “law”, “legislative act”, “regulation”, “resolution 569/875”,

“O.R. 569/875”, falsified “land parcels”, Defendant Honeywell has been collecting an

unlawful debt to acquire and maintain an illegal interest in and control of the prima facie

illicit “park” enterprise in the private, undedicated, residential “Cayo Costa” Subdivision

as platted in 1912, PB 3 PG 25. Plaintiffs’ injuries flowed directly from Defendant

94
 Honeywell’s and other Officials’ maintenance and acquisition of control of the “park”,

entertainment, and recreation enterprise, and acquisition and/or maintenance of control of

falsified “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000” with an

area of Hundreds of Acres along the “Gulf of Mexico” and “Charlotte Harbor”, PB 3 PG 25.

381. Section 1962(B) provides that:

“It shall be unlawful for any person through a pattern of racketeering activity or
through collection of an unlawful debt to acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly,
any interest in or control of any enterprise which is engaged in, or the activities of
which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.”

DEFENDANT HONEYWELL’S SECTION 1962(C) LIABILITY & “ASSOCIATION”

382. Under color of prima facie falsified “writ of execution”, falsified “judgment”, fake

“$5,048.60 debt”, falsified “law”, “legislative act”, “regulation”, “resolution 569/875”,

“O.R. 569/875”, falsified “land parcels”, Defendant Honeywell has been collecting an

unlawful debt and participated in the conduct and affairs of said Government enterprise.

Plaintiffs’ injuries flowed directly from Defendant Honeywell’s and other Officials’

participation in said record Government “land parcel” extortion and fraud scheme, ##

“12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”, and the participation in

Government fraud and extortion schemes of “frivolity” and “vexatiousness”.

383. Section 1962(c) provides that:

“It shall be unlawful for any person employed by or associated with any enterprise
engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce, to
conduct or participate, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprise's affairs
through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of unlawful debt.”

384. The Plaintiffs proved

1. The existence of Defendant(s)’ entertainment and recreational enterprise affecting

interstate commerce;
2. That the Defendants were associated with the “State Park and Recreation”
enterprise;

95
 3. That Defendant participated, either directly or indirectly, in the conduct or the
affairs of said entertainment enterprise; and
4. That Defendants participated through a pattern of racketeering activity, which
included the allegation of at least two racketeering acts such as, e.g., extortion,
bribery, obstruction of justice, and retaliation.

385. As a Judge presiding over Defendants’ prima facie fraudulent defenses, claims,

falsifications, and forgeries, Defendant Honeywell had a very meaningful connection

between the illegal enterprise and the racketeering and extortion of land, money, and fees

for the enterprise under color of, e.g., office and authority.

Defendant Honeywell extorted and concealed, and conspired to extort and conceal, that he

procedure on execution did not accord with the procedure of the State of Florida. See

Fed.R.Civ.P. 69. Defendant knew that Florida procedure required a recorded and certified

judgment, which here had never existed. The Court never had any authority to award

“$5,048.60”, and the judgment issued as mandate on 06/11/2009 in the amount of $24.30 had

been paid. The prima facie fraudulent “affidavit” by Defendant Racketeer JACK N.

PETERSON fraudulently pretended a “07/29/2009” “judgment”, Doc. # 432-2, Case No.

2:2007-cv-00228, which all Defendants knew, concealed, and conspired to conceal had

never existed. See also Ch. 55, 56, Florida Statutes.

DEFENDANT GERALD BARD TJOFLAT

RECORD LACK OF IMMUNITY

386. The Plaintiff public corruption victims are suing Defendant corrupt Gerald Bard Tjoflat

(“Tjoflat”) in his private individual capacity and official capacity as very old U.S. Circuit

Judge. Defendant Tjoflat’s unlawful and criminal acts on record were outside any immunity

and official capacity.

96