Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
2261A(2) makes it a federal crime, punishable from five years to life in prison, to stalk another
person across state, tribal or international lines, using regular mail, e-mail, or the Internet (i.e.,
cyberstalking). The stalker must have the intent to kill or injure the victim, or to place the victim, a
family member or a spouse or intimate partner of the victim in fear of death or serious bodily
injury.
2261A(1) and 2261A(2) make it a federal crime to stalk someone within the special or maritime
of the U.S. This includes federal lands such as national parks and military bases.
back to top
2261(a)(1) makes it a federal crime, punishable from five years to life in prison, to travel across
state, tribal or international lines with the intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate a spouse or
partner and to commit, or attempt to commit, a crime of violence against
that spouse or intimate partner.
2261(a)(2) makes it a federal crime , punishable from five years to life in prison, to cause an
intimate partner to cross state, tribal, international lines, by force, coercion, duress, or fraud and
commit, or attempt to commit, a crime of violence against that spouse or intimate partner.
back to top
fris.org/Sections/…/3.07-FedStalk.html 1/2
9/18/2010 WV FRIS: Laws: Federal Stalking
18 U.S.C.2262 Interstate Violation of a Protective Order
2262(a)(1) makes it a federal crime, punishable from five years to life in prison, to travel across
tribal or international lines with the intent to violate a protective order and to subsequent conduct
that violates that order.
2262(a)(2) makes it a federal crime, punishable from five years to life in prison, to cause a person
to cross state, tribal, or international lines by force, coercion, duress, or fraud and subsequently
engage in conduct that violates a protective order. The protective order must state that the abuser
cannot threaten, harass or cause bodily injury. Federal anti-terrorism laws may also apply in some
stalking cases, allowing victims to bring charges in federal court as an alternative to the state
criminal court of their jurisdiction.
back to top
Who We Are | Victim Services | Laws | Sex ual Assault | Stalking | Statistics | Publications | Programs & Projects | Resources | Events Calendar
Copyright 1998-2008 © WV FRIS, Inc.(All rights reserved) Some images created by WVWebWorks
Site Designed and Maintained by Marshall University Forensic Science Center
fris.org/Sections/…/3.07-FedStalk.html 2/2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
for the
Prima Facie Corrupt Middle District of Florida
EMERGENCY MOTION
TO ENJOIN DESTRUCTION OF UNLAWFULLY SEIZED CRIME EVIDENCE
OF ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION AND
RETURN PROPERTY SEIZED UNLAWFULLY & UNDER FALSE PRETENSES
2
i. ACER
j. HP
k. DELL
Here, hundreds of thousands of readers had read the published proof of record Government
crimes. Here, hundreds of thousands of pages had officially
a. Exposed publicly recorded U.S. Government crime and corruption worldwide;
b. Implicated corrupt and criminal Government Officials on the record.
Here, no “probable cause” of “stalking” could have possibly existed, because, e.g.:
e. Plaintiffs sought prosecution away from the corrupt Middle District of Florida;
f. Plaintiffs were entitled to prosecute and un-conceal record Government crimes;
g. None of the elements of “18 U.S.C. § 2261A” could have possibly been presen here.
3
WEST PALM BEACH & NEW HAMPSHIRE PROSECUTION OF CORRUPT OFFICIALS
10. Here, the Plaintiffs prosecuted the Defendant Corrupt Government Officials in, e.g.:
a. West Palm Beach Federal Court;
b. New Hampshire Federal Court, i.e., away from crooked Middle District Officials.
Here, the Defendant Corrupt Government Officials moved prosecution back to the corrupt
Middle District of Florida. In particular, Defendant Officials even moved the Court(s) to have
Tampa Federal Judge Richard A. Lazzara preside over Plaintiffs’ prosecution. Defendants’
motion was denied. Therefore here, the facially fabricated Government allegations of
“stalking” were frivolous just like the
Fake Government affidavits of record;
Fake Government “law” on the record, “O.R. 569/875”;
Fake “judgments” for Government extortion purposes.
11. Here, the Defendant Tampa U.S. Attorney and other Government Officials have been seeking
to, e.g.:
a. Silence the plaintiffs through wrongful prosecution;
b. Intimidate the plaintiffs;
c. Coerce the plaintiffs to refrain from any further prosecution of crooked Government
Officials;
d. Criminalize plaintiffs’ rightful defense of their fundamental Constitutional and Human
rights
e. Destroy plaintiffs’ equipment and evidence;
f. “Frame” and/or “set up” the plaintiff whistleblowers.
4
NEW RECORD EVIDENCE OF ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIME & CORRUPTION
12. Here, said unlawful Government seizure only further validated, e.g.:
a. The well-proven record organized Government crime and corruption;
b. The well-pleaded Government cover-ups;
c. Organized Government concealment of Government crime and corruption;
d. The agreement/conspiracy of Defendant Officials to perpetrate organized crime on the
record;
e. The anarchy and lawlessness in the Middle District of Florida;
f. The wrongful prosecution of U.S. Government opponents and whistleblowers.
13. During said 09/08/2010 unlawful seizure, the Federal Bureau stated:
“If you disagree with the search you may have the evidence suppressed later …”
17. Here, published pictures of public officials were not any probable cause. Here, the FBI knew
from hundreds of written complaints that the issues were, e.g., rampant and well-proven
• Government corruption;
• Government oppression;
• Government injury upon the plaintiffs;
• Government intimidation of the plaintiffs;
• Government coercion of the plaintiffs to refrain from further prosecution of, e.g.,
Defendant crooked Charlene E. Honeywell and Jack Neil Peterson.
5
SYSTEMATIC GOVERNMENT CONCEALMENT
18. Here, the Courts had
a. Methodically concealed information about organized crime and corruption by Defendant
Charlene Edwards Honeywell;
b. Methodically concealed information about organized crime and corruption by Defendant
Jack Neil Peterson, and Attorneys in the Office of the Tampa U.S. Attorney;
c. “Struck” Plaintiffs’ pleadings;
d. Altered Plaintiffs’ pleadings;
e. Rejected Plaintiffs’ pleadings.
Here, said Officer falsely pretended a crime to engage Plaintiff Dr. Busse.
See, e.g.: www.youtube.com.
6
9/10/2010 United States Code: Title 18,2266. Def…
U.S. Code
m ain pa ge fa q inde x se arch
§ 2266. Definitions
In this chapter:
(1) Bodily injury.— The term “bodily injury” means any act, except one done in self-defense, that results in physical injury or sexual
abuse.
(2) Course of conduct.— The term “course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of 2 or more acts, evidencing a continuity
of purpose.
(3) Enter or leave indian country.— The term “enter or leave Indian country” includes leaving the jurisdiction of 1 tribal government
and entering the jurisdiction of another tribal government.
(4) Indian country.— The term “Indian country” has the meaning stated in section 1151 of this title.
(B) any support, child custody or visitation provisions, orders, remedies or relief issued as part of a protection order, restraining
order, or injunction pursuant to State, tribal, territorial, or local law authorizing the issuance of protection orders, restraining
orders, or injunctions for the protection of victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, or stalking.
(6) Serious bodily injury.— The term “serious bodily injury” has the meaning stated in section 2119 (2).
(7) Spouse or intimate partner.— The term “spouse or intimate partner” includes—
(A) for purposes of—
(i) sections other than 2261A—
(I) a spouse or former spouse of the abuser, a person who shares a child in common with the abuser, and a person
who cohabits or has cohabited as a spouse with the abuser; or
(II) a person who is or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the abuser, as
determined by the length of the relationship, the type of relationship, and the frequency of interaction between the
persons involved in the relationship; and
(II) a person who is or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the target of the
stalking, as determined by the length of the relationship, the type of the relationship, and the frequency of
interaction between the persons involved in the relationship.[1]
(B) any other person similarly situated to a spouse who is protected by the domestic or family violence laws of the State or tribal
jurisdiction in which the injury occurred or where the victim resides.
(8) State.— The term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and a commonwealth, territory, or
possession of the United States.
(9) Travel in interstate or foreign commerce.— The term “travel in interstate or foreign commerce” does not include travel from 1 State
to another by an individual who is a member of an Indian tribe and who remains at all times in the territory of the Indian tribe of which
the individual is a member.
…cornell.edu/…/usc_sec_18_0000226… 1/2
9/10/2010 United States Code: Title 18,2266. Def…
(10) Dating partner.— The term “dating partner” refers to a person who is or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate
nature with the abuser. The existence of such a relationship is based on a consideration of—
(A) the length of the relationship; and
(C) the frequency of interaction between the persons involved in the relationship.
Ask A Lawyer
Online.
Get an Answer ASAP!
Become a
Patient
Advocate
Become a Patient
Advocate w/ an
Online Degree.
Get Info.
www.Univ-Phoenix-Onlin
LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.
…cornell.edu/…/usc_sec_18_0000226… 2/2
9/9/2010 United States Code: Title 18,2261. Int…
U.S. Code
m ain pa ge fa q inde x se arch
(2) Causing travel of victim.— A person who causes a spouse, intimate partner, or dating partner to travel in interstate or
foreign commerce or to enter or leave Indian country by force, coercion, duress, or fraud, and who, in the course of, as a result of,
or to facilitate such conduct or travel, commits or attempts to commit a crime of violence against that spouse, intimate partner, or
dating partner, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
(b) Penalties.— A person who violates this section or section 2261A shall be fined under this title, imprisoned—
(1) for life or any term of years, if death of the victim results;
(2) for not more than 20 years if permanent disfigurement or life threatening bodily injury to the victim results;
(3) for not more than 10 years, if serious bodily injury to the victim results or if the offender uses a dangerous weapon during the
offense;
(4) as provided for the applicable conduct under chapter 109A if the offense would constitute an offense under chapter 109A
(without regard to whether the offense was committed in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in
a Federal prison); and
(6) W hoever commits the crime of stalking in violation of a temporary or permanent civil or criminal injunction, restraining order,
no-contact order, or other order described in section 2266 of title 18, United States Code, shall be punished by imprisonment for
not less than 1 year.
Ask A Lawyer
Online.
Get an Answer ASAP!
…cornell.edu/…/usc_sec_18_0000226… 1/2
9/9/2010 United States Code: Title 18,2261A. St…
U.S. Code
m ain pa ge fa q inde x se arch
§ 2261A. Stalking
Whoever—
(1) travels in interstate or foreign commerce or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or enters or
leaves Indian country, with the intent to kill, injure, harass, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate
another person, and in the course of, or as a result of, such travel places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily
injury to, or causes substantial emotional distress to that person, a member of the immediate family (as defined in section 115) of that
person, or the spouse or intimate partner of that person; or
(B) to place a person in another State or tribal jurisdiction, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United
States, in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to—
(i) that person;
(ii) a member of the immediate family (as defined in section 115 [1] of that person; or
uses the mail, any interactive computer service, or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce to engage in a course of conduct
that causes substantial emotional distress to that person or places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious
bodily injury to, any of the persons described in clauses (i) through (iii) of subparagraph (B); [2]
[2] So in original. Provision probably should be set flush with par. (2).
Ask A Lawyer
Online.
Get an Answer ASAP!
…cornell.edu/…/usc_sec_18_0000226… 1/2