Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
From Hell
Honey-from-Hell’s
Record Crimes
GETTING IN THE EXPERTS:
Scott Gardner Hawkins
Our Firm Attorneys Practice Groups Firm New s Legal Updates Careers
©Copyright 2005 Jones Foster Johnston & Stubbs, P.A. All Rights Reserved
Plaintiffs in
Honey-from-Hell’s Courtroom
6/22/2010 Jones Foster Johnston & Stubbs
Our Firm Attorneys Practice Groups Firm New s Legal Updates Careers
FIRM NEWS
Dating to 1909, Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A. is a multi-disciplined, solution-
oriented firm of attorneys which has earned the highest state and national recognitions Allen Tomlinson receives the
and bar certifications. Our experienced legal counsel and attentive staff are sought after Legal Aid Society's Civil
by a growing local and national client base for responsiveness, integrity and creative Litigation Award
thinking. A commitment to state-of-the-art technology and on-going comprehensive
training enhances our ability to communicate effectively and to organize case loads Theo Kypreos is elected to
efficiently. With offices in West Palm Beach and Jupiter, this firm is a participant in a the Palm Beach County Bar
(561) 659-3000
growing and vibrant Palm Beach County and continues to embrace the traditional values Association Board of
and professionalism which have been its hallmark for over 100 years. Directors
West Palm Beach: Congratulations,
505 South Flagler Drive Scott G. Hawkins,
President-Elect Designate,
Suite 1100 The Florida Bar 2010 - 2011
West Palm Beach, FL
33401 ESTATE, GIFT AND GENERATION-
SKIPPING TAX
CLIENT ADVISORY 2010
Jupiter:
801 Maplewood Drive
Suite 22-A
Jupiter, FL 33458 Sidney A. Stubbs named
"Lawyer of the Year" by Best
Mailing Address: Lawyers
Post Office Box 3475
West Palm Beach, FL
33402-3475 ...........
sitemap
©Copyright 2005 Jones Foster Johnston & Stubbs, P.A. All Rights Reserved
http://www.jones-foster.com/index.html 1/1
STEAMROLLER:
I trust in title forgery
http://www.scribd.com/Judicial%20Fraud
6/22/2010 United States Code: Title 42,1985. Co…
U.S. Code
m a in page faq index sea rch
Ask A Lawyer
Online.
Get an Answer ASAP!
…cornell.edu/…/usc_sec_42_0000198… 1/2
Jennifer Franklin Prescott, Judicial Crime Victim
Dr. Jorg Busse, Governmental Crime Victim
http://www.scribd.com/JUDICIAL%20FRAUD
1. Your “legal advice” is as “frivolous” as the fake “legal descriptions” in your Court:
2. Your “incomprehensible” “contention” of “frivolity” is further fiction from your Court
of fabrications. The fear of further “frivolous” fabrications and NAZI style terror is
punishing. The Plaintiffs are forwarding the conclusive evidence of the CORRUPTION
in your Court to law enforcement authorities.
3. By presenting to this Court pleadings, written motions, and other papers, the Plaintiffs
certified that to the best of their knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an
inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, you criminally concealed and conspired to
conceal well-evidenced Government CORRUPTION and fraudulent Government
“claims” of “Government ownership” of non-existent and forged “land” “parcels” “12-
44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”.
4. “Frivolity” and “vexatiousness” were not any “defense” and not warranted under
existing law. You presented “sanctionability” and “frivolity” for unlawful purposes such
as to harass the Plaintiffs, cause unnecessary delay, and needlessly increase the cost of
litigation. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11.
5. No competent, honest, and intelligent judge in your shoes could have possibly concocted
that the proof of Government CORRUPTION and fake “land parcels” on the record
was “not meritorious”.
6. No intelligent, fit, and professional judge in your shoes could have possibly perverted
Florida’s Eminent Domain, Adverse Possession, and Record Marketable Title Act the way
you did. Your dishonesty, incompetence, and threats on the record have been
terrorizing and punishing. The Plaintiffs fear for their fundamental rights and are
suing you, PRESCOTT v. HONEYWELL, Case # 2:2010-cv-00390-36-DNF.
7. Defendants’ fraudulent denials of Plaintiffs’ factual contentions were not warranted on
the record evidence and not reasonably based on belief or a lack of information. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b).
8. Your fraudulent perversions of Plaintiffs’ well proven factual contentions were not
warranted on the record evidence and not reasonably based on belief or a lack of
information. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b).
9. Pursuant to the public record evidence, your belief and policy are CORRUPTION and
terror, and the Plaintiffs objected.
10. You concealed the prima facie criminality and nullity of, e.g., forged “land” “parcels”
“12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000” and Government ownership
claims in the record absence of any Government title evidence.
11. The record conclusively proved your intimidating contempt of the law, and in
particular of, e.g., Chapters 712; 73, 74; 95, Florida Statutes; and Florida and Federal
Constitutions.
12. The Plaintiffs defend against your NAZI style Court CORRUPTION and demand
EMERGENCY relief from your well-proven fraud upon the Court and legally
“incomprehensible” bogus contentions of “frivolity”.
2
6/22/2010 Prescott et al v. Alejo et al :: Justia Do…
Justia.com Lawyer Directory Law Blogs Dockets & Filings more ▼ Sign In
Justia > Dockets & Filings > Florida > Florida Middle District Court > Civil Rights > Other Civil Rights > Prescott et al v. Alejo et al
March 25, 2010 98 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 80 The
Defendants, A. Brian Albritton, David P. Rhodes, Sean P.
Flynn, and E. Kenneth Stegebys (USAO Defendants) Motion
to Strike Plaintiffs Notices (Doc. # 74, 75, and 76) and for an
Award of Monetary Sa nctions. The Defendants, A. Brian
Albritton, David P. Rhodes, Sean P. Flynn, and E. Kenneth
Stegebys (USAO Defendants) Motion to Strike Plaintiffs
Notices is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court is hereby
directed to STRIKE (Docs. # 74, 75, and 76). (2) The
dockets.justia.com/…/case_id-239266/ 1/10
6/22/2010 Prescott et al v. Alejo et al :: Justia Do…
Defendants, A. Brian Albritton, David P. Rhodes, Sean P.
Flynn, and E. Kenneth Stegebys (USAO Defendants) Motion
for Rule 11 Sanctions is DENIED Signed by Magistrate Judge
Sheri Polster Chappell on 3/25/2010. (LMH)
March 26, 2010 99 ORDER denying 84 the Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin Prescott
and Jorge Busses Motion to Compel Defendants Responses
and Declare Defendants' Previous Pleadings not Responsive
to Proven Judicial Case Fixing, Corruption, Fraud in the
Court(s) and Bribery. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sheri
Polster Chappell on 3/26/2010. (LMH)
March 26, 2010 100 ORDER denying 89 the Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin Prescott
and Jorge Busse's Motion for Default Judgment in Plaintiffs'
Favor. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on
3/26/2010. (LMH)
March 30, 2010 116 ORDER denying 45 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin Prescott
and Dr. Jorge Busse's Motion for Recusal of Magistrate
Judge; denying 60 The Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin Prescott
and Dr. Jorge Busse's Motion for Recusal of Magistrate
Judge; denying 105 The Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin Prescott
and Dr. Jorge Busse's Emergency Motion for Recusal of
Magistrate Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sheri Polster
Chappell on 3/30/2010. (LMH)
March 31, 2010 117 ORDER denying 101 the Plaintiffs, Jennifer Prescott and
Dr. Jorge Busse's Emergency Motion for Judicial Notice of
Concealment of Evidence ; denying 102 The Plaintiffs,
Jennifer Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's Emergency Motion
for Judici al Notice of Concealment of Evidence and Objection
to Order (Doc. # 98) which was Procured by Fraud on the
Court; denying 103 The Plaintiffs, Jennifer Prescott and Dr.
Jorge Busse's Emergency Motion Objections to Order (Doc.
# 98) and Judicial Notice of Concealment of Evidence;
denying 106 The Plaintiffs, Jennifer Prescott and Dr. Jorge
Busse's Emergency Motion to Enjoin the Case Fixing on
Record and Conspiracy of Case Fixing and for Judge to
Recuse; denying 107 The Plaintiffs, J ennifer Franklin Prescott
and Dr. Jorge Busse's Emergency Motion for Miscellaneous
Relief to Clear Judicial Error; denying 108 The Plaintiffs,
Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's Emergency
Motion of the Dispositive Declaratio n of Plaintiffs' Record
Ownership by U.S. Court of Appeals ; denying 109 The
Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's
Emergency Motion for Miscellaneous Relief Specifically Timely
Objections to Clear Judicial Error ; d enying 110 The
Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's
Emergency Motion for Miscellaneous Relief ; denying 111 The
Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's
Emergency Motion for Injunction of Crim inal Concealment
and Striking of Document 76 by Judge Chappell ; denying
112 The Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge
Busse's Motion for Judicial Notice of Defendants' Fraud on
the Court and Fraudulent Pleadings. Signed by Magistrate
Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 3/31/2010. (LMH)
dockets.justia.com/…/case_id-239266/ 2/10
6/22/2010 Prescott et al v. Alejo et al :: Justia Do…
April 1, 2010 127 ORDER denying 31 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin Prescott
and Dr. Jorge Busse's Motion for Waiver of Any and All Fees
; denying 47 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr.
Jorge Busses Motion for Miscellaneous Relief, Specifically to
Set Aside Fraudulent Order (Doc. 36); denying 48 The
Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's
Motion for Recusal of Magistrate Judge Sheri Polster
Chappell; denying 49 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin Prescott
and Dr. Jorge Busses Motion to Set Aside Order (Doc. # 38)
and to Adjudicate New Issues; denying 50 Motion to Set
Aside Judgment; denying 50 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin
Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's Motion to Set Aside Order
(Doc. # 38) and Ma ndatory Recusal of Magistrate Judge
Chappell ; denying 51 Motion to Set Aside Judgment;
denying 51 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr.
Jorge Busses Motion to Set Aside Order (Doc. # 37) and
Mandatory Recusal of Magistrate Judge Chap pell ; denying
67 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge
Busse's Motion for Release of Lien; denying 72 The Plaintiffs
Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busses Motion to
Enjoin Judge Shopping and Enforce Courts Own Or der for
Removal of Corrupt R.A. Lazzara ; denying 73 The Plaintiffs
Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's Emergency
Motion to Enjoin Defendants' Title Fraud & Fraud on the
Court, and Any Government/ Judicial Sale (; denying [82 ]
The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's
Motion to Specifically Enjoin Governmental Fraudulent
Concealment of Uncontroverted Eminent Domain Record
Forgeries and Obstruction of Justice and Court Access ;
denying 83 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr.
Jorge Busse's Motion for Reconsideration and Declaratory
Statement(s) of the Emergency of Judicial Case Fixing, Fraud
on the Court(s) ; denying 85 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin
Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's Emergency Motion for
Immediate Screening of the Prima Facie Illegality and Nullity
of Lee County Scam O.R. 569/875 ; denying 86 The Plaintiffs
Jennifer Franklin Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's Emergency
Motion to Enjoin Gover nmental Extortion & Threats by
Defendant U.S. Agents, Judges, and Counsel (Doc. # 80)
and for Removal from all Proceedings of Magistrate Judge S.
Polster Chappell ; denying 90 The Plaintiffs Jennifer Franklin
Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's Emergency Motion for
Immediate Removal of Court Officer Corinins and Objection
to Perpetration of Fraud on Court. Signed by Magistrate
Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 4/1/2010. (LMH)
June 11, 2010 189 ORDER denying 144 the Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin
Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's Motion for Recusal. Signed
by Magistrate Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 6/11/2010.
(LMH)
June 11, 2010 190 ORDER denying 182 the Plaintiffs, Jennifer Franklin
Prescott and Dr. Jorge Busse's Motion to Reconsider Order
Denying the Plaintiff's Motion to Enlarge Time to Serve
Defendant. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sheri Polster
dockets.justia.com/…/case_id-239266/ 3/10
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
49
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
Defendants.
INDEPENDENT ACTION
FOR RELIEF FROM GOVERNMENT FRAUD,
CORRUPTION, AND WRIT OF EXECUTION
____________________________________________________________________________/
JURISDICTION:
1. This Court has jurisdiction over the CORRUPT and illegal acts by Defendant U.S. Agents,
who injured and harassed the Plaintiffs under facially false and fraudulent pretenses of, e.g.,
Defendant U.S. Officials’ conspiracy to fix Plaintiffs’ Cases under said false pretenses.
2. This Court had jurisdiction over deliberate deprivations, 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, and 42
U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, 1988, and Defendants’ direct violations of the 1st, 14th, 4th, 7th, and 5th
U.S. Const. Amendments. Here on the public record, the Defendants and Government
Officials deliberately deprived the Plaintiffs of due process and equal protection of Federal
and Florida law, any opportunity of justice and the just, speedy, and inexpensive adjudication
of Plaintiffs’ legal claims and issues of, e.g., CORRUPTION and relief from previous fraud
on the Courts, fraud, and facially forged “Government ownership” claims, and criminal
seizure and forced sale of Plaintiffs’ real property. See prima facie fraudulent “writ of
Court, and fraudulent pretenses of “frivolity”, and “sanctionability”, and by criminal means
3. The Defendants, Government Officials, and Defendant crooked U.S. Judge Honeywell
(“Honeywell”) evidenced a vexatious and vile disrespect for the law and facts in these mock
4. Hereby, the Plaintiff Government and judicial CORRUPTION victims adopt by reference in
this Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial their Notices of Appeal, Objections, and other
Pleadings in the related and associated Cases shown in the table below. In particular, the
2
“orders”, Plaintiffs’ Objections to said facially non-meritorious “orders” in Cases 2:2009-cv-
5. In Case after Case, Judge after Judge, Official after Official repeated the objectively idiotic
criminal assertions of, e.g., “vexatiousness”, “frivolity”, “lack of jurisdiction” even though
the prima facie criminality of concealing fictitious and facially forged “land” “parcels” “12-
conclusively proven.
though all Defendant Judges and Government Officials knew that fake “land” “parcels” “12-
legally described in reference to the publicly recorded 1912 “Cayo Costa” Subdivision Plat,
PB 3, PG 25.
3
GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION ON THE PUBLIC RECORD
7. Government Agents, Judges, and Defendants then fraudulently “attached a lien” against the
“Government owned”. Said fraudulent “lien” conclusively evidenced the criminality of bogus
never been platted or legally described and could not be linked to any title transaction and/or
8. The Government CORRUPTION was fully evidenced on the public record. According to the
ownership” “claims”, Government Agents recklessly perverted Federal and Florida real
property title standards. See, e.g., Florida Bar Uniform Title Standards; Lee County PB
3, PG 25 (1912); see also 24 C.F.R. § 203; and 24 C.F.R. § 203.385 Types of satisfactory
title evidence; Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1; PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App.
9. In the record absence of any valid “final judicial determination”, and while appeals and
independent actions for relief from fraud and fraud upon the Courts were pending, and under
disrupted and delayed the sham proceedings and obstructed any chance of justice and a fair
trial. In addition to her vile and vexatious disrespect for the law, Honeywell disrespected the
4
record facts and capriciously denigrated the pro se Plaintiffs as “vexatious” without ever
addressing the legal claims, issues, and merits in the fake judicial proceedings.
10. The record judicial and Governmental CORRUPTION spill, and in particular, the
the U.S. District Court and Defendant CORRUPT Official Honeywell just like the oil spill in
the Gulf of Mexico tarnished BP and the U.S. Government. However, Honeywell refused to
recuse Defendant Judge Sheri Polster Chappell and herself. For the criminal purposes of
obstructing justice, Honeywell entirely “dodged” the pleaded legal claims and issues by
11. Here, the Plaintiffs shall not comply with said record Governmental corruption, fraud,
extortion, and coercion schemes and NULL & VOID orders and judgments that were
procured through prima facie fraud and corruption. See PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009
U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL 1059631; “O.R. 569/875”; Lee County PB 3, PG 25
(1912).
12. Here any idiot could have scribbled the incomprehensible and legally unrecognized “claim”
“O.R. 569/875”, and any idiot could have blurted out “vexatiousness”, because no intelligent
and fit judge in Honeywell’s shoes could have possibly determined “vexatiousness” and/or
“frivolity” merely because the Plaintiffs relied on the public records and said 11th Circuit
5
pretending “vexatiousness”, because the Plaintiffs merely asserted the record truth and
defended against Honeywell’s vile and vexatious trickery and deception on file.
13. Here after years of CORRUPTION and concealment in the Fort Myers District Court,
concealment of record facts, and Governmental and judicial contempt of law. Therefore, the
14. The Plaintiffs are suing Defendant CROOKED Government Official Honeywell in her
private individual and official capacity as U.S. District Judge, Agent, and Official.
15. Defendant Honeywell denied and conspired with other Government Officials to deny to
Plaintiffs the equal protection of the laws, and to injure them and their property for lawfully
enforcing, and attempting to enforce, their rights to the equal protection of the laws.
16. In court(s) of the United States, Honeywell deterred and conspired to deter, by force,
intimidation, threats, “orders” (e.g., 2:2009-cv-00791; Doc. 186, 126), and a hearing
scheduled for June 22, 2010, the Plaintiffs and witnesses from attending such court, and from
testifying to the legal matters of, e.g., Government CORRUPTION and Government “land
robbery” pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully, and to injure the Plaintiffs and other
17. Under false pretenses of, e.g., “frivolity” and “vexatiousness”, Honeywell obstructed justice
and conspired with other Government Officials for the purposes of impeding, hindering,
6
Honeywell conspired to hinder Plaintiffs’ rights to own their property and exclude
Governments, and Lee County, which fraudulently asserted “Government ownership” of said
fake “land” “parcels”. Honeywell “scheduled a hearing” on June 22, 2010, for purposes of
18. Honeywell scheduled a hearing, just like Defendant Chappell had done on Nov. 7.2007, for
the purposes of depriving, directly and indirectly, the Plaintiffs of the equal protection of the
laws, and of the equal privileges and immunities under the laws; and for the purposes of
preventing and hindering U.S. authorities from securing to Plaintiffs and “Cayo Costa”
19. Honeywell conspired with other Defendants, U.S. Attorneys, and Lee County Defendants to
schedule said hearing to prevent by force, intimidation, “orders”, and/or threats of record,
said Plaintiffs, who were lawfully entitled to prosecute, from giving their evidentiary support
and advocacy in the asserted legal manners of Government CORRUPTION and forgery of
20. Defendant CROOKED Judge & Judicial Officer Honeywell fraudulently denied Plaintiffs’
forged eminent domain and condemnation due process claims , and forged which was not
warranted on the conclusive public record evidence and could not have possibly been based
7
2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL 1059631; Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912);
www.LeeClerk.org.
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
21. Defendant Judicial Officer Honeywell presented her prima facie fraudulent “orders” such as,
e.g., Doc. ## 126, 186, for improper and criminal purposes, and in particular, “harassed” the
Plaintiffs, “caused unnecessary delay”, and “needlessly increased the cost of litigation”. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. In particular, Honeywell knew that Government forged and conspired to
00001.0000”.
22. Defendant Honeywell obstructed the filing of Plaintiffs’ entire Complaint. Here, e.g., pages
101 through 178, and the Exhibits attached to the Complaint disappeared from the Court
files. See Docket. Here, Honeywell never even reviewed and read said Complaint parts.
23. Honeywell concocted purportedly lost electronic filing privileges even though the Court had
consistently obstructed any and all electronic filing. Here, Honeywell denied the Plaintiffs
24. Here, Defendant Honeywell [who acted like a “legal prostitute”] harassed the Plaintiff
landowners by fraudulently concealing the truth and record evidence that Plaintiffs’
“evidentiary support” and were conclusively proven by the public record. See, e.g., Lee
County PB 3, PG 25 (1912); see also 24 C.F.R. § 203; and 24 C.F.R. § 203.385 Types of
8
satisfactory title evidence; Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1; PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT
25. Under Government policy and custom of fraudulently and arbitrarily & capriciously
concealed that as a matter of law, the Plaintiffs were the exclusive rightful and
PB 3, PG 25 (1912) and that Lee County, FL, never owned fake “land” “parcels” “12-44-20-
fraudulent denials of Plaintiffs’ factual contentions were not warranted on the public record
evidence and could not have possibly been based on belief or a lack of information. Here, the
public record information, Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable marketable record title evidence, and
the absence of any Lee County ownership, possession, and title evidence had been patently
clearly established. Said facially false and absolutely impossible “vexatiousness” and
“frivolity” allegations on the record were criminal and CORRUPT acts by Defendant
26. Here, Defendant Honeywell knew that Plaintiffs’ claims and legal contentions were fully
warranted by existing law such as, e.g., Chapters 73, 74 (Eminent Domain); 712 (Florida’s
Marketable Record Title Act); 95 (Adverse Possession); 14th, 1st, 4th, 7th, 5th U.S. Const.
Amendments; the Federal and Florida Constitutions; 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242; 28 U.S.C. § 455.
See, e.g., Florida Bar Uniform Title Standards; Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912); see also
9
Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1; PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009
conspired with other Defendants and Officials to misrespresent, e.g., “vexatiousness” and
“frivolity” and ordered the Plaintiffs to “show cause” even though the Defendants had the
burden to defend against the prima facie record evidence of Government CORRUPTION and
sham condemnation “claims” in the record absence of any eminent domain or any other
27. Defendant Honeywell perverted and abused Rule 11 as a “tool” to illegally fix Plaintiffs’
Cases. Honeywell knew that co-Defendant John Edwin Steele had fraudulently pretended,
e.g., “lack of jurisdiction” & “frivolity”, and removed Plaintiffs’ legal action in State Court to
CORRUPT Judge Steele was prohibited from ever reaching the merits and faking “frivolity”,
which of course turned on the merits and record evidence of said fake “land” “parcels” and
28. Defendant judicial crook Richard A. Lazzara then harassed Plaintiffs with “Rule 11
sanctions”, which could not have possibly applied to the removed Complaint, which the
Plaintiffs had signed in State Court. Here, the “evidentiary support” of judicial idiocy,
CORRUPTION, fraud, and fraud on the Court was patently clear and crushing. See, e.g.,
Case # 2:2008-cv-00899; 12/05/2008; Florida Bar Uniform Title Standards; Lee County
10
satisfactory title evidence; Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1; PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S.
29. Under prima facie fraudulent pretenses of “sanctionability”, “frivolity”, and a “show cause”
hearing on June 22, 2010, Defendant Honeywell deliberately deprived the Plaintiff
Government CORRUPTION had the fullest “evidentiary support” and were indisputably
proven by the public record. Furthermore as a matter of law, Plaintiffs were the rightful
owners of their riparian Gulf front Parcel “12-44-20-01-00000.0015A”. Here, Lee County,
fraudulent denials of Plaintiffs’ factual contentions were not warranted on the public record
evidence and could not have possibly been based on belief or a lack of information. See
(1912); 24 C.F.R. § 203; and 24 C.F.R. § 203.385 Types of satisfactory title evidence;
PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL 1059631;
30. Defendant Honeywell [who acted like a “legal prostitute”] knew that the burden of proof was
upon the Defendant Government Officials and not possibly on the Plaintiffs. Here, no
Defendant had ever presented any valid defense under the Rules and therefore, the
Defendants admitted the well-proven claims for relief and prima facie record evidence of
11
Government CORRUPTION and facially forged “land” “parcels” “12-44-20-01-
31. Honeywell conspired to extend the unlawful Government and judicial policy and pattern to
NEVER NEVER NEVER address and adjudicate the record merits, claims, and legal issues
jurisdiction”. The law expressly prohibited Honeywell’s said record deception, trickery, and
Government idiot, Defendant U.S. Agent Honeywell continued the spill of judicial and
Governmental CORRUPTION and never demanded that Lee County and the other
Government Defendants support the frivolous and wrongful denial of the factual contentions
32. Honeywell employed “weapons of mass deception” and trickery to pull the wool over the
acted with wanton disregard for the conclusively proven rights of the owners of the more
than approximately 1,200 parcels platted in 1912. See Plat of Survey of private undedicated
“Cayo Costa” Subdivision. Plaintiffs and said other record property owners had the
indisputable and un-controverted rights to own property and exclude Government and to be
33. Honeywell betrayed the trust of the Plaintiffs and American people and breached her Oath of
12
upon the Courts, keep the Plaintiffs away from the Court(s), any just and speedy jury trial &
34. Honeywell was objectively partial and employed criminal means of obstructing justice under
said fraudulent pretenses, and aided and abetted the fraud-extortion-coercion schemes of
00001.0000”, and fraudulent “Government ownership” contentions that lacked any legal
35. Defendant Honeywell conspired to criminally conceal that Plaintiffs presented to the Court
CORRUPTION, crimes, and in particular facially forged “land” “parcels” and “claims” of
“Government ownership”, which were totally unrecognized by the law and therefore
“frivolous” and for criminal purposes. Plaintiffs were of course entitled to rely on the public
record, the Lee County Real Property Grantor Grantee Index, and the final dispositive
Marketable Record Title Act. Honeywell was estopped from perverting the public record and
deliberately contradicting the affirmation of the public record and evidence by the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. See PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS
00899; Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1; Florida Bar Uniform Title Standards; Lee County PB 3,
evidence.
13
36. Defendant CORRUPT Judge Honeywell knew and criminally concealed that the Plaintiffs
could not have possibly been “vexatious litigants” and that the fraudulent pretenses of
“vexatiousness” were for the criminal purposes of covering up for other Government Agents
and their crimes such as, e.g., fellow Judges John Edwin Steele, Sheri Polster Chappell,
Richard Allan Lazzara, and Mark A. Pizzo, Gerald Bard Tjoflat, Susan Black, who had
fraudulently pretended that facially forged Governmental sham “claim” “O.R. 569/875” was
and/or “law”.
37. Instead of correcting and “reviewing” the facially fraudulent pretenses of a “resolution” and
repeated the same criminal judicial nonsense and added yet another vile and vexatious layer
Honeywell deliberately deprived the Plaintiff unimpeachable record landowners of, e.g., their
Here, any and all of, e.g., Defendant Honeywell’s, Steele’s, Polster Chappell’s, and Lazzara’s
orders were NULL & VOID, because they were procured through fraud and fraud on the
14
CONCEALMENT OF DEFENDANTS’ CRIMINAL “CLAIM” OF “TITLE”
39. Honeywell knew that Lee County’s and the other Defendants’ forged, non-genuine, and
criminal “claims” and sham arguments were manifestly insufficient and futile, and without
any legal merit, whatsoever. Honeywell knew that no law recognized the fraudulently
40. Only a court judgment during judicial eminent domain and/or adverse possession
proceedings could have possibly involuntarily divested the Plaintiffs of their unimpeachable
record ownership of and/or title as dispositively determined by the U.S. Court of Appeals,
11th Circuit. See PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL
41. Here, Honeywell conspired with other Defendants and, e.g., judicial Defendants Steele,
Polster Chappell, Gerald Bard Tjoflat, and Susan Black to pervert the law and seize
42. Because Honeywell knew that the Defendants were helplessly caught in said conspiracy and
43. Defendant Judge Honeywell knew that any genuine “law” and/or “resolution” could have
only restricted and/or regulated the use of land [police power], but could not have possibly
15
transferred any land title to anyone. Rather than admit her idiotic criminal concealment of
the law and facial forgery “O.R. 569/875”, Defendant Honeywell then retaliated by
fraudulent pretenses of “vexatiousness” and “frivolity”, for which she never presented even a
and irrational.
44. Like a bungling Government crook, Honeywell conspired to confuse the most fundamental
principles of law and pull the wool over the eyes of the Plaintiffs and American people. Here,
Honeywell retaliated with false and fabricated allegations of “vexatiousness” and “frivolity”
to extend the record Governmental obstruction of justice and eminent domain extortion and
“VEXATIOUSNESS”-FRAUD-ON-THE-COURT-SCHEME
for the criminal purposes of obstructing justice and the just, speedy, and inexpensive
adjudication of Plaintiffs’ claims for relief. Here in 2010, Judicial Officer Honeywell
perpetrated fraud on the Court, and pursuant to judicial and Governmental policy terrorized
the Plaintiff record unimpeachable landowners with customary judicial threats and
punishments. Here, Honeywell never “reviewed”, and could not have possibly “reviewed”
Plaintiffs’ Complaint, because it was never even filed in its entirety. See 2:2009cv00791;
12/04/2009; Doc. # 1. Here, Honeywell obstructed the orderly filling of Plaintiffs’ Complaint
and deliberately deprived the Plaintiffs of any opportunity of justice. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 241,
242.
16
CRIMINAL JUDICIAL LOOPHOLE OR “HARASS-HOLE”: “VEXATIOUSNESS”
46. Defendant crooked Judge C. E. Honeywell harassed and terrorized the Plaintiff
47. Here, Defendant Honeywell failed to show good cause why and how the Plaintiff
unimpeachable record landowners’ legal claims for relief could have possibly been
“frivolous” after the U.S. Court of Appeals had affirmed the merits and Plaintiffs’ record
unimpeachable ownership, which directly controverted the facially forged “Lee County”
“land” “claim” “O.R. 569/875”. See PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS
48. Here, Plaintiffs had every right to defend against said record Governmental corruption and
riparian lands. See PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL
49. Here in contempt of the law, Honeywell lied, fabricated “vexatiousness”, and could not have
possibly determined that Lee County owned anything. Here, there was not even any legal
description, and Honeywell was full of vexatious and vile “frivolity”. Here, Honeywell
materially misrepresented and criminally concealed the absolute factual and legal
impossibility of “vexatiousness”:
17
“The Appellants are owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision in Lee
County, Florida”, Id., p. 2 [riparian waterfront Parcel 12-44-20-01-00015.015A,
as legally described and conveyed to the Plaintiffs in reference to Lee County
Plat Book 3, Page 25 (1912)].
See PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL 1059631;
Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912).
“The Appellants’ Lot 15A is on the west side of the Cayo Costa subdivision on
the Gulf of Mexico and is adjacent to land that was claimed through Resolution
569/875 to create the Cayo Costa State Park.” Id. p. 3.
50. Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell knew that Lee County, Florida, never took title “by
virtue of” sham “claim” “O.R. 569/875” and that fellow U.S. Judge Steele had perverted
Governmental scam “O.R. 569/875” into “law” and/or a “resolution” and unlawfully
disallowed the Plaintiffs to “assert” the truth and record evidence of Governmental
51. Here in particular, corrupt Honeywell knew and criminally concealed that “O.R. 569/875”
was
52. In particular, Honeywell knew that no “resolution” and/or “law”, whatsoever, could have
18
dispositively declared by the 11th U.S. Appellate Circuit. See PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846,
2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL 1059631; Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912).
53. Here, Defendant crooked Honeywell’s fraudulent pretenses and facially false assertions were
54. Here, Plaintiffs had rightfully claimed their record ownership, and owned what the records
stated, and what said U.S. Courts affirmed pursuant to the public record. Therefore here,
Honeywell played dumb and dumber when she CONTRADICTED, and conspired to
CONTRADICT, the record and maligned and denigrated the Plaintiffs as “vexatious” and
their record ownership claims as “frivolous”. Here, the objectively corrupt and frivolous
55. Defendant Honeywell knew that appeals of Plaintiffs’ existing actions did not count as “final
determinations”. Appeals and writs related to Plaintiff’s current actions did not count as
“final or additional determinations”, because until all avenues of appeal have been exhausted
the determinations could not be construed as “final”. A judgment could only be “final” when
all avenues for review have been exhausted. Here, the Plaintiffs had demanded relief from
fraudulent judgments, orders, and Governmental corruption, because the judgments were
conspired with other Defendants to obstruct any judicial “review” for the criminal purposes
19
of covering-up said Governmental corruption and fraud and “protecting” fellow judges from
rightful prosecution for, e.g., corruption, bribery, fraud, and deliberate deprivations.
57. By criminal means of her entirely unsupported and non-meritorious “vexatiousness” and
“frivolity” charade, Honeywell made a mockery of the judicial proceedings and obstructed
justice. Just like the record Governmental sham “claim” of “lands”, “O.R. 569/875”,
Honeywell’s facially false judicial allegations of “vexatiousness” and “frivolity” were a sham
and scandal. Honeywell obstructed justice and adjudication of Plaintiffs’ claims for relief
58. Defendant Honeywell failed to show good cause why she was not corrupt and did not
ownership of and title to legally un-described “raid lands” “by virtue of” prima facie
59. Based on the multi-year record of Governmental and judicial corruption, fraud, terror, and
threats, the Plaintiffs fear for their lives. Here, the Plaintiffs provided proof beyond any
reasonable doubt that Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell is deliberately depriving the
Plaintiffs and extending the record corruption and Governmental “vexatiousness”, “frivolity”,
60. Here, Honeywell has been threatening the Plaintiffs as “vexatious” for the criminal purposes
of, e.g.:
20
b. Defrauding them out of their Gulf-front lands, riparian Parcel # 12-44-20-01-
00015.015A;
c. Deliberately depriving them of judicial adjudication of their claims for relief under
fraudulent pretenses of “frivolity” and “vexatiousness”;
d. Extortion of money, property, and/or “monetary sanctions” under fraudulent pretenses of
“vexatiousness” and “frivolity”;
e. Seizure of Plaintiffs’ property by criminal means.
61. As a judicial officer, Honeywell knowingly made facially false statements of fact and law to
said tribunal and failed to correct premeditated mis-statements of material fact and law.
Here, Honeywell knowingly repeated mis-statements by fellow crooked Judges that were
based on fraud on the Court and the deliberate fabrications of “law” / “resolution” [prima
facie Governmental scam “O.R. 569/875”], “vexatiousness”, and “frivolity” with wanton
disregard for Plaintiffs’ fundamental rights under the Federal and Florida Constitutions.
62. Honeywell obstructed Plaintiffs electronic court access and privileges in this electronic
Court in order to deliberately deprive the Plaintiffs of their equal rights of court access and
just, speedy, and inexpensive adjudication, thereby injuring the Plaintiffs and placing them at
a massive disadvantage. In particular, Judicial Officer Honeywell lied on the record and
than 125,000 readers have read the contemptuous and criminal acts by U.S. Judges in said
Court.
21
DEFENDANT CROOKED U.S. JUDGE SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL
64. The Plaintiffs are suing Defendant CROOKED Government Official Sheri Polster Chappell
in her private individual and official capacity as U.S. Magistrate Judge, Agent, and Official.
65. Defendant Chappell denied and conspired with other Government Officials to deny to
Plaintiffs the equal protection of the laws, and to injure them and their property for lawfully
enforcing, and attempting to enforce, their rights to the equal protection of the laws. See
Transcript of 11/07/2007 Hearing; prima facie illegal and fraudulent Rule 11 Sanctions. See
66. In court(s) of the United States, Chappell deterred and conspired to deter, by force,
intimidation, threats, “orders” (e.g., 2:2009-cv-00791), and a hearing scheduled for June 22,
2010, the Plaintiffs and witnesses from attending such court, and from testifying to the legal
matters of, e.g., Government CORRUPTION and Government “land robbery” by forgery of
said “land parcels” pending therein, freely, fully, and truthfully, and to injure the Plaintiffs
67. Under false pretenses of, e.g., “frivolity” and “vexatiousness”, Chappell obstructed justice
and conspired with other Government Officials for the purposes of impeding, hindering,
Plaintiffs’ rights to own their property and exclude Governments, and Lee County, which
22
PRIMA FACIE SCAMS OF LIEN & WRIT OF EXECUTION & ORDER FOR SALE
with other Defendants and Lee County Defendants to illegally enforce a “lien”, which Lee
County Defendants attached to land that Defendants had “claimed” to be “Lee County
owned” and /or “Government owned”. Said “frivolously” alleged “Government ownership”
69. Just like Honeywell, Chappell scheduled a hearing on Nov. 7, 2007, for the purposes of
depriving, directly and indirectly, the Plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws, and of the
equal privileges and immunities under the laws; and for the purposes of preventing and
hindering U.S. authorities from securing to Plaintiffs and “Cayo Costa” Subdivision
70. In exchange for Defendants’ bribes, and before the Plaintiff(s) had even filed their “Third
conspired with Lee County Defendants to fabricate “frivolity” and to obstruct justice and
71. Chappell had conspired with other Defendants and Lee County Defendants to schedule said
hearing to prevent by force, intimidation, “orders”, and/or threats of record, said Plaintiffs,
who were lawfully entitled to prosecute, from giving their evidentiary support and advocacy
in the asserted legal manners of Government CORRUPTION and forgery of said fake “land
parcels”.
23
FRAUD UPON THE COURT & FRAUD
72. Defendant CROOKED Judge & Judicial Officer Chappell fraudulently denied Plaintiffs’
forged eminent domain and condemnation due process claims , and forged which was not
warranted on the conclusive public record evidence and could not have possibly been based
2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL 1059631; Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912);
www.LeeClerk.org.
73. Defendant Judicial Officer Chappell presented her prima facie fraudulent “writ of execution”,
“orders”, reports, and recommendations for improper and criminal purposes, and in
particular, “harassed” the Plaintiffs, “caused unnecessary delay”, and “needlessly increased
the cost of litigation”. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. In particular, Chappell knew that Government
forged and conspired to forge and conceal fake “land” “parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0”
and ”07-44-21-01-00001.0000”. Chappell called Plaintiffs names such as, e.g., “vexatious
litigants” even though the Court had falsely pretended and asserted “lack of jurisdiction”.
74. Here, Defendant Chappell harassed the Plaintiff landowners by fraudulently concealing the
truth and record evidence that Plaintiffs’ indisputable factual contentions of said Government
CORRUPTION had the fullest “evidentiary support” and were conclusively proven by the
public record. See, e.g., Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912); see also 24 C.F.R. § 203; and 24
24
PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL 1059631;
www.LeeClerk.org.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT
75. Under Government policy and custom of fraudulently and arbitrarily & capriciously
concealed that as a matter of law, the Plaintiffs were the exclusive rightful and
PB 3, PG 25 (1912) and that Lee County, FL, never owned fake “land” “parcels” “12-44-20-
fraudulent denials of Plaintiffs’ factual contentions were not warranted on the public record
evidence and could not have possibly been based on belief or a lack of information. Here, the
public record information, Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable marketable record title evidence, and
the absence of any Lee County ownership, possession, and title evidence had been patently
clearly established. Said facially false and absolutely impossible “vexatiousness” and
“frivolity” allegations on the record were criminal and CORRUPT acts by Defendant
Chappell.
76. Here, Defendant Chappell knew that Plaintiffs’ claims and legal contentions were fully
warranted by existing law such as, e.g., Chapters 73, 74 (Eminent Domain); 712 (Florida’s
Marketable Record Title Act); 95 (Adverse Possession); 14th, 1st, 4th, 7th, 5th U.S. Const.
Amendments; the Federal and Florida Constitutions; 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242; 28 U.S.C. § 455.
See, e.g., Florida Bar Uniform Title Standards; Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912); see also
25
Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1; PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009
with other Defendants and Officials to misrespresent, e.g., “vexatiousness” and “frivolity”
and ordered the Plaintiffs to “show cause” even though the Defendants had the burden to
defend against the prima facie record evidence of Government CORRUPTION and sham
condemnation “claims” in the record absence of any eminent domain or any other judicial
77. Defendant Chappell perverted and abused Rule 11 as a “tool” to illegally fix Plaintiffs’
Cases. Chappell knew that co-Defendant John Edwin Steele had fraudulently pretended, e.g.,
“lack of jurisdiction” & “frivolity”, and removed Plaintiffs’ legal action in State Court to
CORRUPT Judge Steele was prohibited from ever reaching the merits and faking “frivolity”,
which of course turned on the merits and record evidence of said fake “land” “parcels” and
78. Defendant judicial crook Richard A. Lazzara then harassed Plaintiffs with “Rule 11
sanctions”, which could not have possibly applied to the removed Complaint, which the
Plaintiffs had signed in State Court. Here, the “evidentiary support” of judicial idiocy,
CORRUPTION, fraud, and fraud on the Court was patently clear and crushing. See, e.g.,
Case # 2:2008-cv-00899; 12/05/2008; Florida Bar Uniform Title Standards; Lee County
26
satisfactory title evidence; Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1; PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S.
79. The Plaintiffs are suing Defendant CROOKED Government Official Steele in his private
individual and official capacity as U.S. District Judge, Agent, and Official.
80. Defendant Steele denied and conspired with other Government Officials to deny to Plaintiffs
the equal protection of the laws, and to injure them and their property for lawfully enforcing,
and attempting to enforce, their rights to the equal protection of the laws. See, e.g. 2:2007-
America and “disallowed” the Plaintiffs to assert the truth of the prima facie nullity and
criminality of sham paper “O.R. 569/875”. Steele concealed the record absence of any Lee
82. In court(s) of the United States, Steele deterred and conspired to deter, by force, intimidation,
threats, “orders” (e.g., 2:2007-cv-00228; Doc. 338; Doc. # 338, p. 12), the Plaintiffs and
witnesses from attending such court, and from testifying to the legal matters of, e.g.,
Government CORRUPTION and Government “land robbery” pending therein, freely, fully,
and truthfully, and to injure the Plaintiffs and other “Cayo Costa” Subdivision landowners,
27
83. In particular, Steele illegally blocked any filing of any further pleading by the Plaintiffs,
2:2007-cv-00228, so that Steele and Chappell can sodomize the Plaintiffs and ram-rod the
unlawful “writ of execution” up Plaintiffs’ behinds. Steele’s null and void orders were
procured through fraud, fraud on the Court, and the concealment of said bogus “land”
“parcels” under fraudulent pretenses of “frivolity”. Even though Steele had “claimed” “lack
of jurisdiction”, Steele fabricated “frivolity” the determination of which has been absolutely
How much dumber and more CORRUPT will it get? Here, Steele knew that Defendants’
false “Government ownership” “claim” had been non-meritorious and facially “frivolous”.
However, Steele punished the Plaintiffs and blocked any and all filings so that Steele can
84. Under false pretenses of, e.g., “frivolity” and “vexatiousness”, Steele obstructed justice and
conspired with other Government Officials for the purposes of impeding, hindering,
obstructing, or defeating, in various manners, the due course of justice. In particular, Steele
conspired to hinder Plaintiffs’ rights to own their property and exclude Governments, and
Lee County, which fraudulently asserted “Government ownership” of said fake “land”
“parcels”. Here. Steele fixed Plaintiffs’ Cases. Steele removed Plaintiffs’ Case from State to
Federal and then had the State Court evidence “removed”. See Docket, 2:2008-cv-00899.
Steele then fraudulently pretended that Plaintiff had not pursued “relief in State Court”.
85. Steele concealed said forged “land parcels” for the purposes of depriving, directly and
indirectly, the Plaintiffs of the equal protection of the laws, and of the equal privileges and
28
immunities under the laws; and for the purposes of preventing and hindering U.S. authorities
from securing to Plaintiffs and “Cayo Costa” Subdivision landowners the equal protection of
the laws.
86. Defendant CROOKED Judge & Judicial Officer Steele fraudulently denied Plaintiffs’ well-
eminent domain and condemnation due process claims , and forged which was not warranted
on the conclusive public record evidence and could not have possibly been based on belief or
a lack of information. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1; PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S.
www.LeeClerk.org.
OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
87. Defendant Judicial Officer Steele presented her prima facie fraudulent “orders” such as, e.g.,
said Doc. ## 338, for improper and criminal purposes, and in particular, “harassed” the
Plaintiffs, “caused unnecessary delay”, and “needlessly increased the cost of litigation”. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. In particular, Steele knew that Government forged and conspired to forge
00001.0000”. After faking “frivolity” without any valid explanation and concealing said
Government corruption and fake “land” “parcels”, Steele has been conspiring to enforce a
fraudulent “lien” and “writ of execution” from which the Plaintiffs sought relief in their
independent actions. Here, Steele totally blocked the filing of any pleading, 2:2007-cv-
29
00228, under fraudulent pretenses of “frivolity” for criminal purposes of seizing land and
88. The Plaintiffs are suing Defendant CROOKED Government Officials Jennifer Waugh
Corinis and A. Brian Albritton (supervisor of Defendant Corinis) in their private individual
and official capacities as U.S. Assistant Attorney and U.S. Attorney, Agents, and Officials.
89. Here, Defendant Waugh Corinis [who acted like a “legal prostitute”] and her supervising
U.S. Attorney Albritton harassed the Plaintiff landowners by fraudulently concealing the
truth and record evidence that Plaintiffs’ indisputable factual contentions of said Government
CORRUPTION had the fullest “evidentiary support” and were conclusively proven by the
public record. See, e.g., Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912); see also 24 C.F.R. § 203; and 24
PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL 1059631;
www.LeeClerk.org.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT
90. Under Government policy and custom of fraudulently and arbitrarily & capriciously
Corinis concealed that as a matter of law, the Plaintiffs were the exclusive rightful and
PB 3, PG 25 (1912) and that Lee County, FL, never owned fake “land” “parcels” “12-44-20-
30
01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”. Said Defendant Government Official’s
fraudulent denials of Plaintiffs’ factual contentions were not warranted on the public record
evidence and could not have possibly been based on belief or a lack of information. Here, the
public record information, Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable marketable record title evidence, and
the absence of any Lee County ownership, possession, and title evidence had been patently
clearly established. Said facially false and absolutely impossible “vexatiousness” and
“frivolity” allegations on the record were criminal and CORRUPT acts by Defendant J.
91. Here, Defendant Corinis knew that Plaintiffs’ claims and legal contentions were fully
warranted by existing law such as, e.g., Chapters 73, 74 (Eminent Domain); 712 (Florida’s
Marketable Record Title Act); 95 (Adverse Possession); 14th, 1st, 4th, 7th, 5th U.S. Const.
Amendments; the Federal and Florida Constitutions; 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242; 28 U.S.C. § 455.
See, e.g., Florida Bar Uniform Title Standards; Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912); see also
Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1; PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009
with other Defendants and Officials to misrepresent, e.g., “vexatiousness” and “frivolity”
even though the Defendants had the burden to defend against the prima facie record evidence
eminent domain or any other judicial involuntary alienation proceeding and/or judgment.
31
CONCEALMENT OF SERIAL CRIMINAL CASE FIXING AND COVER-UP
92. Defendant Corinis perverted and abused “sanctions” and/or Rule 11 as a “tool” to illegally
get Plaintiffs’ Cases fixed. In fact, Defendant Judge Honeywell had previously denied Rule
11 sanctions. See, e.g., 2:2009-cv-00791; March 25, 2010 “order”. Corinis knew that co-
Defendant John Edwin Steele had fraudulently pretended, e.g., “lack of jurisdiction” &
“frivolity”, and removed Plaintiffs’ legal action in State Court to Federal Court. After having
prohibited from ever reaching the merits and faking “frivolity”, which of course turned on
the merits and record evidence of said fake “land” “parcels” and fraudulent “Government
ownership” pretenses.
93. Here. all Defendants knew that Defendant judicial crook Richard A. Lazzara then harassed
Plaintiffs with “Rule 11 sanctions”, which could not have possibly applied to the removed
Complaint, which the Plaintiffs had signed in State Court. Here, the “evidentiary support” of
judicial idiocy, CORRUPTION, fraud, and fraud on the Court was patently clear and
crushing. See, e.g., Case # 2:2008-cv-00899; 12/05/2008; Florida Bar Uniform Title
Standards; Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912); see also 24 C.F.R. § 203; and 24 C.F.R. §
94. Under prima facie fraudulent pretenses of “sanctionability”, “frivolity”, and a “frivolous”
“show cause” demand, Defendant Corinis deliberately deprived the Plaintiff unimpeachable
CORRUPTION had the fullest “evidentiary support” and were indisputably proven by the
32
public record. Furthermore as a matter of law, Plaintiffs were the rightful owners of their
riparian Gulf front Parcel “12-44-20-01-00000.0015A”. Here, Lee County, FL, never owned
Plaintiffs’ factual contentions were not warranted on the public record evidence and could
not have possibly been based on belief or a lack of information. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 11 and 1;
Florida Bar Uniform Title Standards; Lee County PB 3, PG 25 (1912); 24 C.F.R. § 203;
and 24 C.F.R. § 203.385 Types of satisfactory title evidence; PRESCOTT, No. 08-14846,
2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 8678, 2009 WL 1059631; www.LeeClerk.org; Case # 2:2008-cv-
00899; 12/05/2008.
95. Defendant Corinis [who acted like a “legal prostitute”] knew that the burden of proof was
upon the Defendant Government Officials and not possibly on the Plaintiffs. Here, no
Defendant had ever presented any valid defense under the Rules and therefore, the
Defendants admitted the well-proven claims for relief and prima facie record evidence of
96. Corinis conspired to extend the unlawful Government and judicial policy and pattern to
NEVER NEVER NEVER address and defend against the record merits, claims, and legal
“lack of jurisdiction”. The law expressly prohibited Corinis’ record deception, trickery, and
obstruction of justice. Like a bungling Government idiot, Defendant U.S. Agent Corinis
continued the spill of judicial and Governmental CORRUPTION. Rather than defend against
33
the record evidence of Government CORRUPTION according to the Rules, Corinis
conspired to extend the frivolous and wrongful denial of the factual contentions of
CORRUPTION and “land robbery” and fully supporting public record evidence.
1. An Order declaring any and all previous orders, judgments, and rulings null and void,
because they were procured through fraud, fraud on the Court, deception and trickery;
2. An Order for relief from fraud & fraud upon the Federal Courts;
3. An Order striking and vacating any and all of Defendant Honeywell’s, Chappell’s, and
Steele’s orders in any and all tabulated and related Cases as null & void, because they were
procured through fraud, and in particular, an Order striking and setting aside said June 22,
2010, hearing, 2:2009-cv-00791, “writ of execution”, any and all “liens” against Plaintifffs’
property, obstruction of court access orders, and any forced sale order, 2:2007-cv-00228;
4. An Order compelling each and every Defendant in any and all related and associated Cases
to show cause why they did not conceal and conspire to conceal said “land” “parcel”
forgeries on the public record and the record absence of any “Lee County” and/or
6. An Order recusing any and all Judges previously involved in said concealment of
34
8. An EMERGENCY Order enjoining and all Defendants, Governments, and their Agents and
Officials from concealing the prima facie criminality and nullity of forged and non-existent
9. An Order affirming the record absence of any title evidence or “Lee County” or
10. An EMERGENCY Order enjoining the Defendants, Governments, and their Agents from
any forced sale and seizure of Plaintiffs’ riparian property on the Gulf of Mexico, Parcel 12-
44-20-01-00015.015A;
11. An EMERGENCY Order enjoining the Defendant Governments and Agents from the
14. An Order directing Federal and Florida law enforcement agencies to investigate the well-
proven crimes and forgeries of said fake “land” “parcels” by said Government Officials.
___________________________________
/S/JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT
Governmental Corruption & Fraud Victim, Plaintiff, pro se
P.O. BOX 845, Palm Beach, FL 33480; T: 561-400-3295
____________________________________
/S/JORG BUSSE, M.D., M.M., M.B.A., C.P.M.
Judicial Corruption & Crime Victim; Plaintiff, pro se, JRBU@aol.com
State Cert. Res. Appraiser, Lic. Real Estate & Mortgage Broker, Appraisal Instructor
EXHIBITS
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59