09 CV 341 001 Complaint

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT MYERS DIVISION
JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE,

Plaintiffs,
versus Case # 2:09-cv-
GERALD B. TJOFLAT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, JOEL F. DUBINA,

STANLEY F. BIRCH, JR, ED CARNES, ROSEMARY BARKETT, J. L.
EDMONDSON, SUSAN H. BLACK, STANLEY MARCUS, R. L. ANDERSON,
WILLIAM H. PRYOR, RICHARD A. LAZZARA, JOHN E. STEELE, MARK A.
PIZZO, S. POLSTER CHAPPELL, UNITED STATES DEPT. OF JUSTICE, JACK
N. PETERSON, S. L. JOHNSON, R. K. RUSSELL, CHAD LACH, C. B.
STEVENS, CHARLIE GREEN, STEVEN CARTA, MENELAOS PAPALAS,
TOBY PRINCE BRIGHAM, WILLIAM MOORE, BRIGHAM MOORE, STEVEN
CARTA [HENDERSON & CARTA], RICK JESSUP, J. “RUSS” DEDRICK, K.
ANDERSON, S. FLYNN, BRIAN ALBRITTON, LESLIE KING, S. LOESCH, J. P.
GERSTENLAUER, A. TUCK FARRINGTON, T. K. KAHN, KAREN FORSYTH,
D. M. COLLINS, D. D. STILWELL, MIKE SCOTT, et al.,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
NOTICE OF [EXTRA-] JUDICIAL CRIMES UNDER FALSE PRETENSES
OF FICTITIOUS LOT “00A0”
OF FRAUDULENT BLOCK “1”
OF UN-PLATTED, UNCERTAIN “UNIDENTIFIED/UNDESIGNATED AREAS”
OF EXCECUTION OF PRIMA FACIE DEFECTIVE AND UNSIGNED O.R. 569/875
THAT SCAM O.R. 569/875 WAS A “LEGISLATIVE ACT”
THAT FORGERY O.R. 569/875 WAS AN AUTHORIZED, LEGITIMATE “CLAIM”
THAT PLAINTIFFS WERE FRIVOLOUS
THAT PLAINTIFFS’ PERFECT TITLE/OWNERSHIP OF RECORD WAS ENCUMBERED

THAT PLAINTIFF-APPELLANTS’ TITLE TO LOT 15A WAS NOT FREE AND CLEAR
THAT PLAINTIFFS DID NOT STATE HIGHLY RECOGNIZABLE/ADMITTED CAUSES
THAT PLAINTIFFS’ RIPE EMINENT DOMAIN ISSUES WERE NOT RIPE
[E.G.: OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE;
EMINENT DOMAIN EXTORTION AND FRAUD;
JUDICIAL CORRUPTION, CASE-FIXING, AND BRIBERY;
GOVERNMENTAL ABUSE AND OPPRESSION;
FALSE PRETENSES THAT SCAM O.R. 569/875 WAS A “LEGISLATIVE ACT”;
DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS;
DISPARATE TREATMENT;
CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS
ADOPTIONS OF SELF-AUTHENTICATING PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE

IN SUPPORT OF JUDICIAL CORRUPTION, CASE-FIXING, AND BRIBERY
03/05/2009 AND 04/21/2009 11TH CIRCUIT SHAM OPINIONS:

PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE OF CONSPIRACY TO DELIBERATELY DEPRIVE,
DEFRAUD, AND OBSTRUCT JUSTICE UNDER COLOR OF SCAM O.R. 569/875
[ADOPTION BY REFERENCE IN THIS COMPLAINT]
1. Hereby, the Plaintiffs [-Appellants] adopt by reference any and all Opinions and Orders by
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, GA, in this Complaint. With
particularity, the Plaintiffs adopt the 11th Circuit’s fraudulent March 5, 2009, and April 21,
2009, Opinions, in which said Circuit conspired to
2
a. Pervert Lee County scam O.R. 569/875 into a “legislative act” absent any evidence
whatsoever [e.g., execution, seal, witnesses, legal description, ascertainable boundaries,
legislator, legislative power, purpose, history];
b. Falsely pretend that Appellant Dr. Busse’s “[‘unconstitutional temporary’] takings
claim was not ripe”;
c. Conceal that said fraudulent “claim” of uncertain, un-platted, and fictitious
“unidentified/undesignated areas” could not have possibly effected any permanent
taking;
d. Conceal that Lee County never had any legitimate “claim”
e. Conceal that said scam O.R. 569/875 could not have possibly ever encumbered
Plaintiffs’ paramount title to their prima facie riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A [PID 12-
44-20-01-00015.015A];
f. Conceal that Lee County, Florida, could not have possibly enforced null and void scam
O.R. 569/875, which was prima facie void for, e.g., uncertainty, lack of execution,
legislative intent, authority, etc.;
g. Falsely pretend that Appellants “had not pursued available state remedies…”;
h. Conceal Plaintiff-Appellants’ State and State Appellate actions in exchange for bribes;
i. Obstruct justice and Federal adjudication of Appellant(s) multiple independent ripe
Federal claims and eminent domain extortion and fraud issues ‘under color of’ Lee
County prima facie scam O.R. 569/875;
j. Falsely pretend that Lee County “can exercise eminent domain over any land” under
false pretenses that said sham “claim” of uncertain lands was a “legislative act”. See
03/05/2009 Opinion, p. 9;
3
k. Abuse, oppress, and mis-treat Plaintiff [-Appellants] disparately from, e.g., similarly-
situated owner, Alice M. S. Robinson, of similar riparian Gulf-front lots in the private
undedicated residential Cayo Costa Subdivision. See Lee County Blue Sheet 980206 and
O.R. 2967/1084-1090;
l. Abuse and mis-treat disparately from, e.g., similarly-situated owner of similar and/or
identical riparian Gulf-front lands, A. C. Roesch.
2. The corrupt 11th Circuit concealed that
a. A "bill" is a proposition reduced to writing, submitted to the consideration of the
legislature, which, when it has received the endorsement or support of a majority vote of
the members present of each House and yea and nay vote taken upon the final passage
entered upon the journals of each House it is said to have "passed." The use of the word
"bill" in Section 28 of Article III of the Constitution provided that every "bill" that may
have passed the legislature shall, before becoming a law, be presented to the Governor;
and in the proviso to Section 17, Article III providing that all "bills" so passed shall be
signed by the presiding officers of the respective Houses.
b. Eminent domain extortion-scheme O.R. 569/875 was not signed by the two presiding
officers nor the clerk of each House, nor presented to the Governor by the legislature.
Thus, it failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of the Constitution.
Defendants Steele, Lazzara, Polster-Chappell, Pizzo conspired to fabricate a “legislative
act”, which was factually and legally impossible.
c. Absent any legislative record, there was no legislative purpose and intention. Eminent
domain scam O.R. 569/875 never became any official record and was never approved by
the Governor or passed over his veto;
4
d. Under Florida’s Constitution, the Secretary of State is the legal custodian of all records of
official acts of the legislative and executive departments.
e. The legislative records in said Office evidenced the fraud perpetrated by, and upon, the
11th Circuit. Contrary to the 11th Circuit’s concoctions, no legislative act could be found
to exist. Therefore, all Federal Court Orders in these related/associated actions are
automatically stayed and/or must be vacated.
11TH CIRCUIT’S SHAM ORDERS:
AWARD OF COST AND DAMAGES TO DEFRAUD AND EXTORT
PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE OF CONSPIRACY TO DELIBERATELY DEPRIVE,
DEFRAUD, AND OBSTRUCT JUSTICE UNDER COLOR OF SCAM O.R. 569/875
3. Fraudulently, the 11th Circuit awarded cost and damages to Defendant corrupt K. M.
Wilkinson, who fabricated an un-platted lot “00A0”, and block “1”.
4. Objectively partially, the 11th Circuit suspended the rules in order to obstruct justice.
5. In order to block Appellants’ court access and extort, the Appellants fixed Appellants’ cases
and rejected their pleadings.
6. The Plaintiffs adopt by reference the related sham 11th Circuit orders in this Complaint and
Notice of Judicial Corruption and Bribery.
UNEXECUTED VOID “CLAIM” OF UNPLATTED, UNCERTAIN “AREAS”:

PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE OF PRIMA FACIE LEE COUNTY SCAM O.R. 569/875
7. Hereby, the Plaintiffs adopt by reference the self-authenticating prima facie public record
evidence of Lee County’s null and void scam O.R. 569/875, which fraudulently “claimed”
uncertain un-platted “undesignated/unidentified areas”.
5
8. The judicial Defendants conspired to conceal that no fictitious “undesignated/unidentified
areas”, lot “00A0”, and block “1” appeared on the 1912 Plat of Survey of the undedicated
Cayo Costa Subdivision referenced in counterfeit O.R. 569/875. See Plat Book 3, p. 25.
9. All platted “areas” on said referenced 1912 Plat were fully identified as “streets”, “alleys”,
“lots”, and/or “blocks”]. The sham “claim/defense” of “undesignated/unidentified areas”
was prima facie frivolous and unsupported by the public record evidence on file.
05/05/2008 FRAUDULENT OPINION AND ORDER [DOC. # 338; “FIRST CASE”]:
PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE OF PRIMA FACIE FRAUDULENT OPINION AND
ORDER BY DEFENDANT CORRUPT JUDGE JOHN E. STEELE
10. Hereby, the Plaintiffs adopt by reference the self-authenticating prima facie public record
evidence of said 05/05/2008 Opinion and Order, in which Defendant John E. Steele falsely
pretended that Lee County’s null and void scam O.R. 569/875, which fraudulently
“claimed” uncertain un-platted “undesignated/unidentified areas”, was a “legislative act”.
See Doc. # 338, p. 12.
11. In their Complaints, Plaintiffs have charged fraud and extortion. Plaintiffs proved that the
Defendant [-Appellee] Governmental Officials, Judges, and Clerks of the legislature
conspired to impose a fraud. The 11th Circuit’s concoction of a “legislative act” was an act
of political depravity. On its face, sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 was not any record of an
executive or legislative act, because the officers of the legislature did not sign it during the
session of the legislature nor was it presented to the Governor by that body. Indisputably,
there was no signing of said fake “claim” during any session and no presentation to the
6
Governor by the legislature. Therefore, there could be no record in the legislative journals
upon said illegal subject. Therefore, forged “claim” O.R. 569/875 could not have possibly
become a record of either an executive or legislative act. Indisputably, O.R. 569/875 was a
spurious, illegitimate, void counterfeit thing of no virtue whatsoever, which the corrupt
11th Circuit perverted into a “legislative act” in exchange for Appellees’ bribes.
12. The 11th Circuit conspired not to review de novo but “rubber-stamp” Steele’s lies of a
“legislative act”. In his fraudulent and deprivatory May 5, 2008, Opinion and Order
[Document # 338; Case # 2:07-cv-228-FtM-[29]JES-SPC, Defendant corrupt U.S. District
Judge John Edwin Steele falsely pretended that
a. Lee County
i. had adopted said scam O.R. 569/875;
ii. had executed and signed said fraudulent “claim” O.R. 569/875 of uncertain, un-
platted, and un-described “undesignated/unidentified areas”;
b. Disallowed the Plaintiff(s) to “assert otherwise” [assert, e.g., the invalidity, illegality,
and nullity of said bogus “claim” O.R. 569/875] and obstructed justice in exchange for
Appellees’ bribes;
c. Falsely pretended that a “suit to quiet title” in state court [see Doc. # 338; p. 9] was the
available relief even though Defendant Steele knew that Lee County never had any
authorized ”claim” and had “removed” its sham “claim” pursuant to Blue Sheet 980206
and O.R. 2967/1084-1090;
d. Concealed that there never was any need to quiet title, because said sham “claim” O.R.
569/875 was null and void and never encumbered Plaintiffs’ prima facie perfect, free
and clear title to said riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A.
7
13. The Defendant-Appellees conspired to
a. Cover up John Edwin Steele’s concoction that said prima facie scam O.R. 569/875 was
a “legislative act”;
b. Pervert Plaintiff-Appellants’ actions in the Federal and State Courts into a “Cayo Costa
Gate” under false pretenses of, e.g., a fictitious “legislative act”; “frivolity”,
“vexatiousness”;
c. Conceal that said prima facie defective single piece of sham paper O.R. 569/875 could
not have possibly been a “legislative act” and/or “resolution” and/or effected any
permanent taking [with or without just compensation], because said scam O.R. 569/875
was prima facie null and void absent, e.g., any legislative execution, history, legislator,
ascertainable boundaries, and any platted legal description;
d. Obstruct justice and Plaintiffs’ court access to redress their grievances.
PLAINTIFF DR. BUSSE’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT [DOC. ## 288; 282]:
PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE OF PRIMA FACIE FEDERAL JURISDICTION
14. The judicial Defendants conspired to
a. Conceal that in his Third Amended Complaint, Plaintiff Busse had again asserted and
indisputably proven the prima facie invalidity and nullity of said eminent domain
extortion-scheme O.R. 569/875;
b. Conceal that the fictitious “resolution” was never passed by the legislature, and no yea
and nay vote was entered on the legislative journals of each House;
8
c. Conceal that the subject-matter of said scam, which was improperly recorded as O.R.
569/875, was unlawful and outside any Lee County legislative power;
d. Conceal that indisputably, said scam was in conflict with the express prohibitions of
the Constitutions of the United States and State of Florida.
15. For bribes, the 11th Circuit judicial Defendants conspired to conceal that scam O.R.
569/875 was an invalid instrument and null and void. Said forgery was not executed as
required under the Constitution(s). Lee County never had any legitimate “claim”, and it never
affirmatively “claimed” uncertain “lands”. See Doc. ## 282; 288].
LEE COUNTY BLUE SHEET 980206 AND O.R. 2967/1084-1090:
PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE OF REMOVAL OF PRIMA FACIE SCAM O.R. 569/875
16. Said adopted public records indisputably evidenced the removal and elimination of any
“cloud” and/or null and void sham “claim” O.R. 569/875.
17. Said public records before the Federal Courts had indisputably evidenced Defendants’
disparate treatment, abuse, and oppression of the Plaintiff-Appellants as compared to, e.g.,
similarly-situated Alice M. S. Robinson and A. C. Roesch.
LEE COUNTY O.R. 1651/2488:
PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE OF FRAUD
9
18. Adoption of O.R. 1651/2488 by referenc: Cayo Costa landowner Merrill R. Taggart
conveyed his interest in his accreted lands to Lee County, Florida, even though Lee County
had fraudulently “claimed” an interest in the accretions.
FOUR LEE COUNTY PLATS OF SURVEY OF CAYO COSTA SUBDIVISION:
INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF PLAINTIFFS’ EQUAL VESTED RIPARIAN RIGHTS
19. The indisputable public record evidence of the four Plats of Survey of the Cayo Costa
Subdivision proved Defendants’ deliberate deprivations of Plaintiffs’ equal vested
riparian rights, equal civil, and other well-pleaded and well-established rights under the
14th, 4th, 1st, 5th, and 7th Amendments. Just like similarly-situated original owner and
Subdivider A. C. Roesch, the Plaintiffs [who are successors-in-perfect title] had the equal
vested riparian rights of A. C. Roesch, who on the public record received and subdivided
accretions onto the undedicated private Cayo Costa Subdivision. Plaintiffs’ said riparian
Gulf-front Lot 15A was the very product of accretions as indicated by the letter “A” in 15A.
20. The 11th Circuit concealed that
a. Plaintiffs were entitled to the equal riparian rights of A. C. Roesch;
b. Plaintiffs were entitled to the equal riparian rights of Alice M. S. Robinson;
c. Plaintiffs were entitled to the equal riparian rights of Janet and John Lay. See John Lay
and Janet Lay v. State of Florida, on record.
10
TRANSCRIPT OF CORRUPTED NOV. 2007 COURT HEARING [DEF. CHAPPELL]:
INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF CONCEALMENT OF INVALIDITY OF LOT “00A0”
21. Hereby, Plaintiffs adopt by reference the Nov. 7, 2007, Transcript of the corrupted and
fraudulent proceedings before Defendant Sheri Polster Chappell, who conspired to conceal
the prima facie invalidity of un-platted and non-existent lot “00A0” and block “1”.
22. In exchange for Appellees’ bribes, Polster Chappell conspired to sanction the Plaintiff Dr.
Busse in order to obstruct justice and block Plaintiff(s)’ court access.
23. Polster Chappell was affiliated with both Defendant-Appellees Lee County and State of
Florida and refused to recuse herself violative of 28 U.S.C. § 455.
TRANSCRIPT OF PLAINTIFF’S FEB.29,2009, DEPOSITION OF JACK N. PETERSON:
INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF PLAINTIFFS’ PERFECT TITLE, AND
CONCEALMENT OF INVALIDITY OF SHAM O.R. 569/875, LOT “00A0”, BLOCK “1”
24. During his 02/29/2008 Deposition, Defendant corrupt Jack N. Peterson stated under oath
that Plaintiff-Appellants are the indisputable owners of riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A. No
evidence whatsoever that could have possibly diminished Plaintiffs’ perfect title and fee
simple ownership of the platted designated street, accretions, and upland had ever existed.
The Federal Courts corrupted and obstructed inquiry and discovery, because they knew
that no such evidence had ever existed. Corruptly, they slandered the Plaintiffs as frivolous
and vexatious in order to obstruct justice.
11
25. While the Federal Courts falsely pretended lack of subject-matter-jurisdiction, they
simultaneously and improperly reached and perverted the merits in order to fix Plaintiffs’
Cases for bribes. Said crimes are now under investigation.
26. For bribes, the 11th Circuit unabashedly perverted the construction of Plaintiff-Appellants’
prima facie perfect conveyance/Warranty Deed and the applicable existing rules of
construction. The lack of intelligence and knowledge exhibited by said 11th Circuit Judges
on the public record has been shocking to the American people. Not only was the 11th
Circuit’s construction of the public record(s) corrupt and exceptionally unintelligent, but
said Defendant 11th Circuit Judges conspired to cover up their case-fixing and bribery in
this “Cayo Costa Gate” conspiracy.
PLAINTIFFS’ APPELLATE BRIEFS:
INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF FRAUD, EXTORTION, AND
27. In Plaintiff(s)’ 11TH Circuit Briefs, they identified with particularity who, when, where,
how, and why perpetrated said fraud on said Federal Courts under false pretenses of, e.g., a
“legislative act”, lot “00A0”, block “1”, frivolity, vexatiousness, ripeness requirements, etc.
28. Like common criminals in robes, said judicial Defendants conspired to deliberately
deprive and defraud the Plaintiff-Appellants even though said Briefs had indisputably
evidenced the eminent domain fraud, extortion, and obstruction of justice.
12
29. Said corrupt 11th Circuit Judges conspired to obstruct any de novo review but to “rubber-
stamp” and cover-up the prima facie crimes and extra-judicial misconduct by their fellow
Judges John Edwin Steele and Sheri Polster Chappell.
BINDING PRECEDENT IN PLAINTIFFS’ PETITIONS FOR RE-HEARING EN BANC:
INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF FRAUD, EXTORTION, AND
30. West Peninsular Title Co. v. Palm Beach County, 41 F.3d 1490(11th Cir. 1995);
Caples v. Taliaferro, 197 So 861(Fla. 1940);
31. Murrell v. United States, 269 F.2d 458(5th Cir.1959);
See also 16.33 Acres;
32. Anthony v. Franklin County, 799 F.2d 681, 684(11th Cir.1986);
33. Corn v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 816 F.2d 1514,1517(11th Cir.1987);
[Dade County v. Nat. Bulk Carriers,Inc., 450 So. 2d 213,216(Fla. 1984)];
34. First English Evang. Lutheran Church v. Los Angeles County, 482 U.S. 304, 107 S.Ct.
2378, 96 L.Ed.2d 250(1987);
35. Mineral Range R. Co. v. Detroit & L. S. Copper Co. Miss. & R. River Boom Co. v.
Patterson, 98 U. S. 403, 25 L.ed. 206;
36. Kaiser Aetna v. U.S., 444 U.S. 164(1979).
13
PETITIONS FOR RE-HEARING EN BANC, BRIEFS, AND PLEADINGS:
INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF CASE-FIXING, BRIBERY, CORRUPTION, AND
37. In the 11th Circuit, the Appellants had properly appealed from immediately appealable
"collateral orders" within exception to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 as enunciated in, e.g., Cohen v.
Benef. Ind. Loan Co., 337 U.S. 541, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528(1949); Mitchell v.
Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511(1985); Marx v. Gumbinner, 855 F.2d 783(11th Cir.1988).
Indisputably, the 11th Circuit had jurisdiction over Appellants’ appeals from extra-judicial
criminal case-fixing andbribery.
38. Said Court lied about and concealed the truth about fake O.R.569/875 in order to extend
said fraud for bribes. The Court concocted that prima facie invalid O.R.569/875 was a
‘legislative act’ even though it knew condemnatory O.R.569/875 to be a fraud to obtain
property under force. Despite direct appealability and patently clear Appellate
Jurisdiction, the 11th Circuit conspired to fix Appellants’ Cases/Appeals [e.g. 09-10745;
09-10746; etc.] in exchange for Appellees’ bribes.
39. The Federal Court’s extra-judicial criminal misconduct and deliberate deprivations fell in
that class of claims of right separable from, and collateral to, rights asserted in the action,
too important to be denied review and too independent of the cause itself to require
appellate consideration be deferred until the whole case is adjudicated. The Supreme Court
had long given this provision of the statute this practical rather than technical construction.
Bank of Col. v. Sweeney, 1 Pet. 567,569,7 L.Ed.265; U.S. v. River Rouge Impr.’t Co.,269
14
U.S.411,414, 46S.Ct.144-45,70L.Ed.339; Cobbledick v. U.S., 309 U.S. 323-28, 60S.Ct. 540-
42, 84L.Ed. 783.
DOC. # 89-2:
INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE OF DONNA M. COLLINS’ FRAUD, EXTORTION, AND
40. Hereby, Plaintiffs adopt by reference Doc. ## 89; 89-2; 89-1 in this Complaint. In her Feb.
22, 1999 Letter of Extortion, Defendant Donna Marie Collins extorted, exacted, and/or
compelled Cayo Costa landowners to “relinquish” their private property and to refrain from
pursuing the exclusive Federal and State remedy of invalidation and damages for the
“unconstitutional temporary takings” under scam O.R. 569/875.
JURISDICTION
41. The Plaintiffs are suing the Defendant Governmental Officials, Clerks, Judges, and other
Defendants in their private individual and official capacities. The Federal Courts have
jurisdiction over the well-proven allegations against said Federal agents, which are
supported by the public record evidence.
42. The eminent domain extortion and fraud issues and deliberate deprivations by State of
Florida Officials invoked Federal subject matter jurisdiction. Pursuant to the concessions of
the Defendant U.S. Attorney(s), who have been representing judicial Defendants, e.g., in the
“Third Case”, Federal jurisdiction has been patently clear.
15
43. This Court has jurisdiction under, e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 1343; and 28 U.S.C. § 1331; 42 U.S.C.
§§ 1983, 1985, 1988 [18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242] over Defendants’ well-proven deliberate
deprivations of Plaintiff’s well-established Federal Statutory and Constitutionally-
guaranteed rights directly under, e.g., the 1st, 14th, 4th, 7th, and 5th Amendments. No ripeness
requirements ever existed. The Federal Courts concealed that any condemnation, inverse,
direct, or any other were factually and legally impossible. Prima facie unauthorized and
expressly unconstitutional scam O.R. 569/875 could not have possibly effected any
permanent taking. The Defendants conspired to obstruct justice and the exclusive available
remedy of invalidation and damages for the expressly “unconstitutional temporary
takings” under eminent domain scam O.R. 569/875.
44. The Florida and Federal Constitutions expressly prohibited any permanent taking, except
for public use, and/or any “resolution”, “legislative act” “claiming” uncertain,
“unidentified”, and un-platted “areas”.
45. Under 28 U.S.C. § 455, the Plaintiffs were entitled to the absolutely mandatory recusal of
the judicial Defendants, who objectively partially presided over their own prosecution.
46. The Defendants conspired to obstruct justice under 28 U.S.C § 1503 and have no immunity
for their extra-judicial criminal acts under false pretenses that eminent domain scam O.R.
569/875 was a purported “legislative act”/”passed/adopted resolution”.
47. The 11th Circuit conspired to fix and dismiss Appellants’ Cases and ‘played God’ with the
indisputable self-authenticating facts on the record. The 11th Circuit conspired to
fabricate “lack of ripeness/jurisdiction” even though no ripeness requirements could have
possibly attached/existed. The 11th Circuit concealed patently clear jurisdiction under, e.g.,
28 U.S.C. § 1343; and 28 U.S.C. § 1331; 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, 1988. Plaintiffs
16
demanded re-hearings en banc by another impartial circuit, which does not accept bribes
in exchange for fixing Plaintiff-Appellants’ cases and fabricating ripeness requirements.
48. E.g., Defendant Federal agents’ crimes, and Plaintiffs’ eminent domain issues,
“unconstitutional temporary takings” and other independent ripe claims directly under
the 1st [obstruction of right to redress governmental grievances], 14th [arbitrary,
capricious, pretextual due process and equal protection violations], 4th [seizure,
confiscation, and/or destruction of Plaintiffs’ property], 7th [right to jury trial] Amendments
had patently clearly invoked Federal jurisdiction.
49. The 11th Circuit concealed that all of its fraudulent orders are automatically stayed and
vacated, because the Defendant 11th Circuit Judges conspired to perpetrate a fraud on the
Court under false pretenses that counterfeit “claim” O.R. 569/875 was a “legislative act”.
CONCEALMENT OF PLAINTIFFS’ PERFECT PUBLIC RECORD OWNERSHIP:
INDISPUTABLY, PLAINTIFFS OWN PLATTED RIPARIAN GULF-FRONT LOT 15A
50. Indisputably and admittedly, the Plaintiffs are the exclusive record owners of riparian
Gulf-front Lot 15A [Lee County PID 12-44-20-01-00015.015A; “A”=ACCRETED] in the
undedicated private Cayo Costa Subdivision on Cayo Costa Island in Lee County, Florida.
51. Pursuant to the self-authenticating public record evidence on file, the Federal and State
Courts knew that Plaintiff-Appellants hold perfect exclusive legal title to said platted
upland, the platted designated 60’ wide street adjoining their upland, and the accretions
onto said upland and/or adjoining street.
52. Lee County, Florida, never had any interest in Plaintiff-Appellants’ said riparian Gulf-front
Lot 15A. Lee County never held title to any and/or all of Plaintiffs’ said riparian Gulf-front
17
Lot 15A. Concededly, Lee County never held title to the uncertain “undesignated areas”
fraudulently “claimed” in Lee County extortion and fraud-scheme O.R. 569/875, which
Lee County had never executed and/or signed.
53. Since there was no such description [“undesignated/unidentified areas”], Lee County’s
“claim” was null and void for uncertainty and unlawful. No conveyance of any interest in
the fictitious, uncertain, and un-platted “unidentified/undesignated areas” was legally or
factually possible.
54. Lee County never had any interest in fictitious lot “00A0” [fraudulent “PID 12-44-20-01-
00000.00A0”], which did not appear on the Cayo Costa Subdivision Plat. Lee County never
had any interest in fake block “1” [fraudulent “PID 07-44-21-01-00001.0000”], which did
not appear on said Subdivision Plat.
55. Lee County never had any eminent domain authority or purpose to fraudulently “claim” un-
platted “undesignated areas”, which did not appear on the Cayo Costa Subdivision Plat.
56. Lee County extorted Plaintiff-Appellants’ private property under false pretenses that fake
“claim” of uncertain and un-platted “unidentified/undesignated areas” was a “resolution”.
57. Lee County never had any valid “claim” and/or power to “claim” uncertain, un-platted, and
non-existent “undesignated” and/or “unidentified areas”.
58. Lee County never had any legitimate “claim” to any and/or all of said riparian Gulf-front
Lot 15A.
59. Lee County never identified any legitimate “claim” to either said riparian Gulf-front Lot
15A or the fraudulently “claimed” un-platted and uncertain “undesignated areas”.
60. Pursuant to the public record, the Plaintiffs are successors-in-title and interest to Alexander
C. Roesch, the Subdivider and original owner of said private Cayo Costa Subdivision.
18
61. Pursuant to the Federal Land Patent root title in Lee County Deed Book C, p. 110, the
Defendant United States of America conveyed certain legally described lands to said A. C.
Roesch and his successors-in-title.
62. The Plaintiffs had the equal rights, and in particular, equal riparian rights, equal private
easement rights, and equal civil rights of said Alexander C. Roesch.
63. The 1912 Plat of Survey of the Cayo Costa Subdivision evidenced the absence of any Lee
County acceptance of any dedication and/or any reversionary interest.
64. Said 1912 Plat in Plat Book 3, p. 25 was the fourth of four Plats of Survey between 1910
and 1912 of said private residential Subdivision, which has been subject to accretions and
erosion. Indisputably and admittedly, said four publicly recorded Subdivision Plats
evidenced the vested riparian rights of A. C. Roesch and his successors-in-title, which
include the Plaintiffs.
65. The platted natural monuments and boundaries of said Cayo Costa Subdivision were the
“Gulf of Mexico” and “Charlotte Harbor”. Said A. C. Roesch and his successors-in-title
owned fee simple any and all “areas” and/or “lands” between said platted natural
boundaries of the “Gulf of Mexico” and “Charlotte Harbor”. Said platted natural
monuments superseded any distances, and/or acreage.
66. Indisputably and admittedly, all Cayo Costa easements have been private easements since
1912. The public had no access to said undedicated Subdivision.
67. Indisputably, said publicly recorded private easements are Appellants’ Constitutionally-
protected property. Indisputably, Appellants’ publicly recorded vested riparian rights are
their Constitutionally-protected property. Indisputably, Appellants’ publicly recorded
causes of action are their Constitutionally-protected property.
19
68. Indisputably, the Plaintiffs own fee simple the platted designated 60’ wide street adjoining
Plaintiffs’ upland. See Caples v. Taliaferro, supra, and West Peninsular Title Co., supra.
69. Indisputably, the Plaintiff-Appellants have a Constitutionally-protected right to own their
property and exclude the government.
70. Indisputably, the Plaintiffs had a Constitutionally-protected right to be free from
governmental abuse, oppression, and crimes such as here, e.g., obstruction of justice,
deliberate deprivations, false pretenses, violations of due process and equal protection of
the law directly under the 14th, 4th, 5th, 1st, and 7th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
71. Indisputably, the Plaintiffs own fee simple the accretions onto the platted designated
adjoining street, which belongs to the Plaintiffs pursuant to West Peninsular Title Co., supra,
and Caples v. Taliaferro, supra.
72. Defendant corrupt U.S. Circuit Judge J. L. Edmondson had presided over West Peninsular
Title Co., supra.
73. The Appellants had proven and alerted the Courts to the prima facie invalidity and nullity
of Lee County eminent domain extortion-scheme O.R. 569/875.
74. In said prima facie unexecuted forgery O.R. 569/875, Lee County fraudulently “claimed”
“undesignated areas”, which did not appear on the 1912 Subdivision Plat. No
“undesignated/unidentified areas” appeared on the Subdivision Plat. Therefore, the corrupt
11th Circuit’s concoction of a “legislative act” was unintelligible and unlawful.
CONCEALMENT OF PRIMA FACIE LACK OF ANY LEE COUNTY “CLAIM”
75. The Defendant corrupt Officials and Judges conspired to conceal the prima facie absence
of any legitimate certain Lee County “claim”.
20
76. The Defendants conspired to conceal that
a. No legal description of any “undesignated/unidentified areas” existed;
b. Absence of any signatures and execution evidenced the prima facie absence of any Lee
County intent to “claim” uncertain and un-platted lands;
c. Lee County’s sham “claim” was null and void for uncertainty and unlawful;
d. No conveyance of any interest in “unidentified/undesignated areas” was legally or
factually possible;
e. Lee County could have never possibly held any title to said un-described and non-
existent “unidentified/undesignated areas” “by virtue of” said unexecuted and forged
“claim” O.R. 569/875.
77. The judicial Defendants conspired to conceal that the fictitious description was such an
uncertainty appearing on the face of said scam O.R. 569/875 that no court, reading the
language of said prima facie unexecuted and unsealed forgery in the light of all facts and
circumstances referred to therein, could have possibly been able to derive therefrom any
legitimate “claim”. Absent any legislator, ascertainable boundaries, legal description,
legislative history, Lee County never had any intent to “claim” any certain lands. Had there
been any intent, Lee County would have been absolutely required to, e.g., execute, sign, and
seal its intended “claim” in the presence of witnesses. Only an unfit and corrupt judge could
have determined any intent by Lee County to “claim” any and/or all of Appellants’ riparian
Gulf-front Lot 15A. All of said riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A was unencumbered by said
forged and null and void “claim” O.R. 569/875. The Defendants conspired to conceal that
Appellants’ perfect title was free and clear of any “cloud” and/or fraudulent “claim” O.R.
569/875.
21
78. Said case-fixing judges conspired to conceal that no legislator had ever executed said un-
sealed, un-signed, and un-witnessed scam O.R. 569/875. Multiple errors and type-fonts of
varying sizes appeared on said prima facie forgery O.R. 569/875.
79. No intelligent and fit person and/or judge could possibly identify any “undesignated or
unidentified areas”.
80. By definition, and indisputably, “unidentified/undesignated areas” could not possibly be
identified for lack of any identity.
81. No particular public use was indicated in said sham “claim” O.R. 569/875. Therefore, any
evidence of any necessity was factually and legally impossible.
82. Lee County’s sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 of uncertain, un-platted, and non-existent
“unidentified/undesignated areas” was null and void ab initio. The purported fictitious
description was prima facie null and void for uncertainty. Nothing in said unexecuted
and unsealed forged “claim” indicated which area could possibly be “claimed”. Any
criminal could have drafted said prima facie forgery O.R. 569/875. No intelligent and
impartial court and/or person could have possibly concluded that fake “claim” O.R. 569/875
was a “legislative act”. No legislator or legislative history could possibly be identified.
83. The Defendant corrupt Officials conspired to conceal the patent ambiguity of sham
“claim” O.R. 569/875.
84. In 1998, Lee County itself had again eliminated and removed any “claim” and/or “cloud”
under said scam O.R. 569/875 pursuant to Lee County Blue Sheet 980206 and O.R.
2967/1084-1090.
85. Lee County’s said scam of a “RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO PUBLIC LANDS IN
CAYO COSTA SUBDIVISION” was a fraudulent subject matter, because all private lands
22
in said Subdivision exclusively belonged fee simple to said A. C. Roesch and/or his
successors-in-title. Lee County had no possessory interest under said scam O.R. 569/875.
86. Said 11th Circuit fabrications of a “legislative act” purportedly “claiming” “unidentified
areas” were extraordinarily unintelligent criminal acts by said Defendant corrupt
Officials.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT 11TH CIRCUIT JUDGE GERALD BARD TJOFLAT
87. In exchange for Defendant-Appellees’ bribes, Defendant corrupt U.S. 11th Circuit Judge
Gerald Bard Tjoflat falsely pretended that Plaintiff(s)’ “unconstitutional temporary
takings” and other several independent ripe claims were “not ripe because he [Plaintiff-
Appellant Busse] had not pursued available state remedies…” See 11th Circuit 03/05/2009
Opinion; Appeal # 08-13170; ¶ “III. Conclusion”. In his sham Opinion, Tjoflat perverted
the truth about Appellant’s State [Case # 2006-CA-003185] and State Appellate [Appeal #
2D08-5797] actions and pursuit of invalidation of said prima facie scam O.R. 569/875.
Tjoflat betrayed the public’s and Appellants’ trust.
88. Defendant Tjoflat conspired to conceal Appellants’ pursuit of the exclusive remedy of
invalidation of said eminent domain extortion-scheme O.R. 569/875.
89. Defendant Tjoflat conspired to conceal that Lee County fraud-scheme O.R. 569/875 could
not have possibly effected any permanent taking or condemnation, direct, or inverse.
90. Defendant Tjoflat conspired to [unintelligently] invoke inverse condemnation, which was
factually and legally impossible. Government cannot “claim” “uncertain and un-platted
“unidentified areas”, whether with or without just compensation.
23
91. Defendant Tjoflat concealed that Lee County could not illegally bypass that which both the
Florida and Federal Constitutions expressly prohibited.
92. Defendant Tjoflat’s criminal acts on the record deprived him of any immunity.
93. Defendant Tjoflat had conceded that Lee County scam O.R. 569/875 effected an
“unconstitutional temporary taking” under false pretenses that said scam was “adopted”.
94. In particular, Defendant corrupt Gerald Bard Tjoflat conspired to
a. Extend Lee County scam O.R. 569/875 for Appellees’ bribes;
b. Concoct that Lee County “adopted” eminent domain scam O.R. 569/875, absent, e.g.,
any boundaries, legal description, execution, seal, witnesses, legislator, legislative
history in said prima facie fake “claim”;
c. Concoct “resolution 569/875”, no evidence of which could be found to exist in the public
record;
d. Conceal the invalidity of Official Record [O.R. 569/875], which fraudulently “claimed”
un-platted “undesignated areas”, which did not appear on the 1912 Plat of Survey of the
undedicated Cayo Costa Subdivision. See Lee County Plat Book 3, p. 25;
e. Fix Appellants’ Cases;
f. Accept bribes for the illegal purpose of fixing Appellants’ cases and falsely pretending
that Lee County eminent domain scam O.R. 569/875 was a “legislative act” and/or
“resolution”;
g. Falsely pretend that eminent domain extortion-scheme O.R. 569/875 was a “legislative
act” and/or “resolution”;
h. Conceal that Lee County never had any intent to “claim” un-platted and uncertain
“undesignated areas” absent any signatures, seal, and/or execution.
24
95. Defendant Tjoflat extorted the Appellants in multiple different ways, by, e.g.,
a. Falsely pretending that Lee County’s fake “claim” O.R. 569/875 was a “legislative act”;
b. Obstructing justice and Federal adjudication under false pretenses that Plaintiffs’
patently clearly ripe eminent domain extortion and fraud issues were not ripe;
c. Obstructing justice under false pretenses that Plaintiffs’ indisputable proof of the
prima facie invalidity of scam O.R. 569/875 was non-meritorious;
d. Objectively partially awarding cost and damages to Appellee K. M. Wilkinson, who
conspired to defraud and deliberately deprive the Appellants under false pretenses of,
e.g., said forgery O.R. 569/875, lot “00A0” and block “1”, and a forged plat;
e. Fixing Appellants’ Cases in exchange for Appellees’ bribes;
f. Suspending 11th Circuit Rules to benefit the Appellees in exchange for their bribes.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT 11th CIRCUIT JUDGE STANLEY F. BIRCH
96. Defendant 11th Circuit Judge Birch conspired with the Defendant-Appellees to conceal that
Lee County’s fake “claim” O.R. 569/875 was invalid and void because of
insufficiency/uncertainty of the purported description of “unidentified/undesignated areas”.
In exchange for Appellees’ bribes, Defendant Birch conspired to conceal that all “areas” of
said Subdivision as platted on said 1912 Plat were identified as [60’ wide designated]
“streets”, [20’ wide designated] “alleys”, “lots” [and/or “blocks”].
97. Birch conspired to obstruct justice and mandatory [under writ of mandamus] judicial
determination of the prima facie invalidity of said scam O.R. 569/875. Birch conspired to
a. Concoct a “legislative act”, which Birch knew could not have possibly existed absent,
e.g., any legislator, legal description, ascertainable boundaries, Lee County
25
condemnation authority, execution, seal, witnesses, etc. See 03/05/2009 fraudulent 11th
Circuit Opinion;
b. Conceal that Lee County never had any intent to “claim” un-platted and uncertain
“undesignated areas” absent any signatures, seal, and/or execution by Lee County’s
legislative body;
c. Conceal that Lee County never had any authority to diminish Plaintiff-Appellants’
prima facie perfect title to their riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A under false pretenses of
scam O.R. 569/875, which was a prima facie null and void sham “claim”.
98. No fit and intelligent judge and/or person in Birch’s shoes could have possibly perverted the
platted designated 60’ wide streets into “unidentified areas”. Birch knew that in America,
lot owners and/or subdivision residents customarily use platted designated “streets” to
access their residential “lots” and not “unidentified/undesignated areas”. In exchange for
Appellees’ bribes, Birch unusually unintelligently perverted said 1912 public record
evidence of a 60’ wide designated “street” in order to obstruct justice, deliberately
deprive, and defraud the Appellants under false pretenses that said scam O.R. 569/875 was
a “legislative act”.
99. Defendant Birch conspired to conceal that said prima facie defective and unexecuted fake
“claim” O.R. 569/875 of uncertain “lands” could not have possibly been “adopted” absent,
e.g., any witnesses, legal description, ascertainable boundaries, legislator, legislative
authority, purpose, history, Lee County seal, execution, etc.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT 11TH CIRCUIT JUDGE JOEL F. DUBINA
26
100. Defendant corrupt U.S. 11th Circuit Judge Joel F. Dubina [“Dubina”] conspired with the
Defendant-Appellees to conceal that said eminent domain scam O.R.569/875 falsely
“claimed” that “undesignated areas” “appeared” on the 1912 Subdivision Plat of Survey.
See said extortion-scheme O.R. 569/875; ¶ 2.
101. In exchange for Defendant-Appellees’ bribes, Defendant Dubina conspired to fix and
dismiss Appellants’ Cases and/or Appeals and to falsely pretend that Lee County, Florida,
eminent domain scam O.R. 569/875 was a “legislative act”. See www.leeclerk.org.
102. Defendant Dubina conspired to conceal the prima facie invalidity of said fraudulent
“claim” of uncertain “undesignated areas”, which Dubina knew did not appear on said
Plat. See 1912 Plat in Lee County Plat Book 3, p. 25.
103. Dubina conspired to conceal that Lee County had never executed said “claim” of
fictitious un-platted “undesignated areas”. See said scam O.R. 569/875.
104. Defendant corrupt Judge Dubina conspired to
a. Conceal the platted designated 60’ wide street. See said 1912 Plat;
b. Extend Lee County fraud-scheme O.R. 569/875;
c. Obstruct justice, deliberately deprive, and defraud the Appellants by falsely
pretending the said scam O.R.569/875 was a “legislative act”;
d. Conceal that the platted Cayo Costa Subdivision had never been dedicated and that Lee
County had never accepted any dedication;
e. Conceal that no witnesses and/or seal appeared on said sham “claim” of uncertain
“lands”;
f. Conceal that no legislator and/or legislative history could be identified in said scam O.R.
569/875;
27
g. Conceal that Lee County never had any legislative authority or purpose to fraudulently
”claim all of raid lands and accretions thereto”, which admittedly could not be
“identified”. See eminent domain fraud-scheme O.R. 569/875;
h. Conceal that admittedly unexecuted scam O.R. 569/875 contained multiple different
type fonts and errors such as, e.g., “raid lands”; “tho County”; “there’ ”;
i. Conceal that admittedly and indisputably unexecuted and unsigned Lee County fraud-
scheme O.R. 569/875 was never adopted;
j. Conceal that Defendant-Appellees’, State of Florida, sham “claim”/”defense” of adverse
possession of the uncertain “undesignated areas” was a scam in order to deliberately
deprive and defraud the Appellants;
k. Concoct a permanent taking of “200 Acres in all” even though Dubina knew that scam
O.R. 569/875 could not have possibly effected any permanent taking.
105. Judicial Defendant Dubina conspired to usurp legislative authority and to concoct a
“legislative act”, which he knew was factually and legally impossible.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT 11TH CIRCUIT JUDGE SUSAN H. BLACK
106. Defendant corrupt 11th Cicuit Judge Susan H. Black, who is being sued in her private
individual and official capacities, conceded in her 04/21/2009 Opinion [p. 3] that
“[Plaintiff-] Appellants’s Lot 15A is on the west side of the Cayo Costa subdivision on the
Gulf of Mexico…” Here, Black affirmed the riparianess of Plaintiffs’ Gulf-front Lot 15A.
107. In her Opinion, Black refers to “resolution 569/875”, which indisputably never existed.
In exchange for Appellees’ bribes, Black concocted a “resolution 569/875” even though she
knew that there was no resolution number on Lee County’s scam O.R. 569/875.
28
108. Defendant corrupt 11th Circuit Judge Susan H. Black conspired to
a. Falsely pretend that “[t]he Appellants’ complaint alleged that the Appellees
i. ‘passed’ and/or ‘enacted’ ‘resolution 569/875’”.
b. Conceal that no “resolution 569/875” had ever existed and/or was ever “passed” or
“adopted” by Lee County or any Lee County legislator or legislative body;
c. Conceal that Lee County never had any intent to “claim” un-platted and uncertain
“undesignated areas” absent any signatures, seal, and/or execution by Lee County’s
legislative body;
d. Conceal Lee County’s prima facie lack of any legislative intent as indisputably
evidenced by the absence of any signatures, seal, and witnesses on said sham “claim”;
e. Conceal that Lee County never had any authority to diminish Plaintiff-Appellants’
prima facie perfect title to their riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A under false pretenses of
scam O.R. 569/875, which was a prima facie null and void sham “claim”;
f. Falsely pretend that Lee County had eminent domain authority to “claim” uncertain and
un-platted lot “00A0”, block “1”, and/or “undesignated areas”;
g. Falsely pretend that Plaintiffs “failed to state a claim” even though Black knew the 11th
Circuit had admitted to Plaintiff-Appellants’ “unconstitutional temporary takings”
and other claims, which were ripe;
h. Concoct that Plaintiff-Appellant’s eminent domain extortion and fraud issues
purportedly did not invoke Federal subject matter jurisdiction;
i. Concocted ripeness requirements that no reasonable and intelligent judge in Black’s
shoes could have possibly determined to exist;
29
j. Conceal that the Defendant-Appellees treated the Plaintiff-Appellants disparately from
similarly-situated owners of Cayo Costa riparian lands such as, e.g., Alice M. S.
Robinson and A. C. roesch as indisputably evidenced by the
109. Black knew that
a. Lee County never had any valid “claim”;
b. Plaintiff-Appellants’ title was free and clear of any fictitious encumbrance by sham
O.R. 569/875;
c. Sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 had never created any “cloud”, because it was null and void
for uncertainty and lack of execution and legislative intent.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT 11TH CIRCUIT JUDGE WILLIAM H. PRYOR
110. Defendant corrupt 11th Circuit Judge William H. Pryor conceded in his 4/21/2009
Opinion, on p. 2: “The Appellants are owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision in
Lee County, Florida.”
111. Absent, e.g., any legislative intent, execution, signatures, legal description, ascertainable
boundaries, Pryor concealed that no evidence had ever existed to diminish Plaintiff-
Appellants’ perfect title to said prima facie Cayo Costa riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A.
112. Pryor knew that indisputably said Lot 15A was a prima facie riparian Gulf-front lot,
which abuts the natural boundary of the “Gulf of Mexico” as platted.
113. Defendant Pryor concealed that
a. Lee County never had any valid “claim”;
b. No “resolution 569/875” had ever existed;
30
c. Plaintiff-Appellants’ title was free and clear of any fictitious encumbrance by sham
O.R. 569/875;
d. Sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 had never created any “cloud”, because it was null and void
for uncertainty and lack of, e.g., any execution and legislative intent;
e. Lee County had no authority to condemn un-platted and uncertain
“undesignated/unidentified areas”
f. Lee County had removed and eliminated its sham “claim” in 1998 pursuant to Blue
Sheet 980206 and O.R. 2967/1084-1090;
g. Lee County had abused and mis-treated Plaintiff-Appellants disparately from
similarly-situated owners of similar and/or identical riparian Cayo Costa lands such as,
e.g., Alice M. S. Robinson and A. C. Roesch.
114. Unintelligently, Pryor concealed that Plaintiff-Appellants had the equal rights, and in
particular, equal vested riparian rights of, e.g., A. C. Roesch, who had received and
subdivided the accretions onto said Subdivision as indisputably evidenced by the four Cayo
Costa Plats of Survey publicly recorded between 1910 and 1912. See www.leeclerk.org.
115. Pryor was objectively partial and unfit and must be recused pursuant to § 455. Plaintiff-
Appellants are entitled to be free from Pryor’s arbitrary, capricious, and exceptionally
unintelligent deliberate deprivations under 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT 11TH CIRCUIT JUDGE FRANK M. HULL
116. In his 04/21/2009 Opinion, Defendant corrupt 11th Circuit Judge Frank M. Hull
conceded that “[T]he Appellants are [exclusive] owners of [riparian Gulf-front] Lot 15A
in the Cayo Costa subdivision in Lee County, Florida.” With particularity, Defendant Hull
31
affirmed and conceded the riparianess of said Gulf-front Lot 15A: “The Appellants’ Lot
15A is on the west side of the Cayo Costa subdivision on the Gulf or Mexico…”.
117. The Plaintiffs are suing said Defendant in his private individual and official capacities.
Hull’s criminal acts were extrajudicial, and Hull has no immunity. Objectively partially
and unintelligently, said Defendant conspired to fix Plaintiff-Appellants’ Case(s): “The
district court dismissed Busse’s procedural due process claims regarding [non-existent] Lee
County resolution 569/875 because the [fictitious] resolution was a legislative act that was
not subject to a procedural process claim and, even if it was not, Busse had not alleged that
post-deprivation remedy was inadequate.”
118. Here unfit Hull concealed the exclusive remedy of invalidation and damages for the
“unconstitutional temporary takings” under scam O.R. 569/875, which was null and void.
119. Hull falsely pretended a [counterfeit] “legislative act” and “post-deprivation remedy”
even though he knew that prima facie void “claim” O.R. 569/875 could not have possibly
effected any permanent taking. Therefore, Hull fabricated a post-deprivation remedy in
order to deliberately deprive and defraud the Plaintiffs. Hull concealed that the Plaintiffs
were entitled to Federal adjudication and invalidation of said unauthorized scam O.R.
569/875.
120. Said Defendant concealed that the Constitution requires all bills to be signed by the
presiding officers of the two houses and the Secretary of the State and the Clerk of the House
of Representatives during the legislative session. Such bills when so signed must be
presented to the Governor by the legislature before adjournment. Like all other provisions of
the Constitution, this was mandatory. Therefore, prima facie forged O.R. 569/875 was
32
never, and could not have possibly been, enacted in accordance with the essential
requirements of the Constitution, and thus invalid, inoperative, and void.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT 11TH CIRCUIT JUDGE JAMES LARRY EDMONDSON
121. The Plaintiffs are suing Defendant corrupt 11th Circuit Chief Judge J. L. Edmondson
who conspired with the Appellees to conceal that Defendant John E. Steele had falsely
pretended that prima facie defective and unconstitutional fake “claim” was a “legislative
act”.
122. Edmondson concealed that
a. Prima facie sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 was void for uncertainty, because no
reasonable surveyor could have possibly ascertained and located the fictitious un-
platted “undesignated/unidentified areas”;
b. Lee County’s prima facie intent was not to sign, execute, seal, and acknowledge said
sham “claim”.
c. Edmondson’s and the 11th Circuit’s perversion of the truth and obstruction of justice
were brazen and unlawful;
d. The official legislative records were devoid of any [fictitious] “legislative act” and/or
“resolution 569/875”;
e. The 11th Circuit fixed Plaintiff-Appellants’ cases in exchange for Appellees’ bribes;
f. while Plaintiffs’ Warranty Deed was signed, sealed, and witnessed, purported Lee
County sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 was never signed, executed, sealed or witnessed;
g. No evidence of any legislative intent existed, and Lee County never affirmatively
“claimed” the fictitious un-platted and uncertain “unidentified/undesignated areas”.
33
JUDICIAL DEFENDANTS R. L. ANDERSON, ED CARNES, AND R. BARKETT
123. The Plaintiff-Appellants are again suing 11th Circuit judicial Defendant-Appellees R.
Lanier Anderson, Ed Carnes, Rosemary Barkett in their private individual and official
capacities. Said 11th Circuit judicial Defendants conspired to conceal the prima facie
invalidity of said sham Lee County “claim” of uncertain “unidentified” land(s) [prima
facie scam O.R. 569/875], which lacked, e.g., any legal description, boundaries, seal,
legislator, legislative history, vote count, notarial acknowledgment, signatures and execution
by Lee County.
124. Said Defendant-Appellees conspired to conceal that in 1998 Lee County had removed
and eliminated any “cloud” from said fake “claim” of uncertain non-platted “undesignated
areas” pursuant to Lee County Blue Sheet 980206 and O.R. 2967/1084-1090. Said
Defendant-Appellees conspired to conceal that Defendants Lee County, Florida, could not
have possibly “laid claim” to un-platted “unidentified areas”. See fraudulent Opinion, p. 2.
125. Said Defendants conspired to refuse to enjoin Defendant-Appellees’ from enforcing said
eminent domain scam O.R. 569/875 and defrauding the Appellants under false pretenses
that the Plaintiff-Appellants were purportedly frivolous and vexatious even though their
concoctions were controverted.
126. Said Appellees obstructed justice and perverted the truth, because they knew that all
“areas” platted on the publicly recorded 1912 Cayo Costa Subdivision Plat within the 4
corners of Appellants’ Appeals and/or Complaints were identified as either lots, alleys,
streets [and/or blocks].
34
DEFENDANT CORRUPT REAGAN KATHLEEN RUSSELL
127. The Plaintiffs are suing Defendant-Appellee corrupt Reagan Kathleen Russell in her
private individual and official capacities. Defendant-Appellee Reagan Kathleen Russell
conspired to conceal the prima facie illegality and nullity of Lee County eminent domain
extortion and fraud-scheme O.R. 569/875, which fraudulently “claimed” uncertain
“undesignated” lands. Russell conspired to conceal that no “undesignated” and/or
“unidentified areas” were ever platted on the 1912 Plat of Survey of the undedicated private
residential Cayo Costa Subdivision on Cayo Costa Island in Lee County, Florida.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE RICHARD A. LAZZARA
128. The Plaintiffs are suing Defendant-Appellee corrupt U.S. District Judge Richard A.
Lazzara in his private individual and official capacities. Said Defendant Lazzara conspired
to falsely pretend that the Plaintiff-Appellants were “frivolous” and “vexatious” even though
the Appellees knew that Appellants’ legal claims and causes of action had been highly
cognizable and meritorious and supported by the self-authenticating public record
evidence.
129. Defendant corrupt Judge Lazzara concealed that concededly, Lee County eminent
domain extortion and fraud-scheme O.R. 569/875 effected “unconstitutional temporary
takings”. Lazzara knew that said forgery O.R. 569/875 could not have possibly effected any
permanent taking, because “claim” O.R. 569/875 was prima facie null and void ab initio.
130. Absent any legislative authority and intent, Lee County had never executed said scam
and “cleared the title” of similarly-situated Cayo Costa landowner Alice M. S. Robinson,
who owned riparian lots similar to Appellants’ riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A [PID 12-44-
35
20-01-00015.015A]. Plaintiffs’ said admittedly riparian Lot 15A was only approx. 560 feet
north of Robinson’s riparian lots. Under false pretenses of “frivolity”, “vexatiousness”, and
a fictitious “passed resolution”/”legislative act”, Defendant-Appellee Lazzara conspired to
conceal that the Appellants had the equal rights of, e.g., Cayo Costa landowners Alice M. S.
Robinson, original Subdivider A. C. Roesch, Janet Lay, and John Lay. In exchange for
Appellees’ bribes, Lazzara conspired to treat the Plaintiff-Appellants disparately from said
similarly-situated Cayo Costa landowners.
131. Lazzara has no immunity for his brazenly corrupt extra-judicial criminal activities.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT U.S. MAGISTRATE S. POLSTER CHAPPELL
132. Defendant-Appellee corrupt U.S. Magistrate Judge S. Polster Chappell concealed
a. The invalidity and nullity of said eminent domain fraud-scheme O.R. 569/875;
b. The invalidity and scam of fraudulent lot “00A0”;
c. The invalidity and scam of fictitious block “1”;
d. Her affiliations with Defendant-Appellees Lee County and State of Florida and objective
partiality.
e. The illegality of her objectively partial sanctions, Recommendations, and Report(s)
against Plaintiff-Appellant Dr. Busse
133. The Plaintiffs are suing said Defendant Chappell in her private individual and official
capacities.
134. Polster Chappell concealed that the Constitution(s) require all bills to be signed by the
36
the Constitution, this was mandatory. Therefore, forged O.R. 569/875 was never enacted in
accordance with the essential requirements of the Constitution, and thus invalid,
inoperative, and void.
135. The Plaintiffs were entitled to the absolutely mandatory recusal of said corrupt
Defendant Magistrate, who concealed the prima facie absence of any platted lot “00A0”,
block “1”, and “unidentified/undesignated areas” on the public record in exchange for
Appellees’ bribes.
136. Even though Lee County had never [and could have never possibly] laid any affirmative
“claim” on un-platted, legally un-described, and uncertain [non-existent]
“unidentified/undesignated areas”, Polster Chappell conspired to fabricate a “legislative
act”. In exchange for Appellees’ bribes, Polster Chappell conspired to extend said fraud
and extortion of Plaintiffs’ property under false pretenses of, e.g., fraudulent lot “00A0”,
block “1”, “frivolity”, and scam O.R. 569/875, which Chappell knew were all null and void.
137. Polster Chappell concealed that no area determinations, such as, e.g., “107 Acres” by co-
conspirator K. M. Wilkinson, and “200 Acres” by co-conspirators Tjoflat, Birch, and Dubina
could have been factually or legally possible.
DEFENDANT CORRUPT U.S. MAGISTRATE MARK ALLAN PIZZO
138. Defendant-Appellee corrupt U.S. Magistrate Judge Mark Allan Pizzo concealed
a. The invalidity and nullity of said eminent domain fraud-scheme O.R. 569/875;
b. The invalidity and scam of fraudulent lot “00A0”;
c. The invalidity and scam of fictitious block “1”;
37
d. The illegality of his objectively partial sanctions, Recommendations and Reports
against the Plaintiff-Appellants. In particular, the illegality of F.R.C.P. 11 sanctions for
pleadings filed in State Court.
139. The Plaintiffs are suing said Defendant Pizzo in his private individual and official
capacities.
140. Pizzo concealed that the Constitution(s) require all bills to be signed by the presiding
officers of the two houses and the Secretary of the State and the Clerk of the House of
Representatives during the legislative session. Such bills when so signed must be presented
to the Governor by the legislature before adjournment. Like all other provisions of the
Constitution, this was mandatory. Therefore, forged O.R. 569/875 was never enacted in
141. In his perverted ‘Report and Recommendation [Case # 2:08-cv-899-FtM-99MAP; Doc.
# 121], Pizzo perpetrated a fraud on the Court and falsely pretended that Plaintiffs had not
stated a cause of action and slandered Plaintiffs as vexations and frivolous.
DEFENDANT JACK N. PETERSON
142. In his 02/29/2008 Deposition, Defendant Jack N. Peterson had stated under oath that
Appellant(s) are the exclusive record owners of said riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A.
143. Peterson concealed that
a. No judicial determination had ever challenged or diminished Plaintiffs’ prima facie
perfect title to said riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A;
38
b. Lee County never had any legitimate claim” to any or all of Plaintiffs’ riparian Gulf-
front lot;
c. Lee County and Peterson conspired to threaten, harass, and intimidate the Plaintiffs in
order to compel them to refrain from asserting their Constitutionally-guaranteed rights
under, e.g., the 14th, 1st, 4th. 7th, and 5th Amendments and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, 1988.
144. Defendant Peterson had conceded that Lee County had removed and/or eliminated any
“claim” and/or “cloud” under color of said prima facie scam O.R. 569/875. In particular,
Defendant Peterson had asserted the platted designated 60’ wide street adjoining Plaintiff’s
riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A, which they own fee simple. See, e.g., Defendant Peterson’s
Brief in the 11th Circuit.
145. Said Defendant Peterson had conceded that Lee County did “not necessarily own” the
uncertain “undesignated areas” fraudulently “claimed” in eminent domain extortion-
scheme O.R. 569/875. See, e.g., business correspondence between the eminent domain
attorneys at Brigham & Moore and said Defendant.
146. Peterson had directly controverted the 11th Circuit’s brazen criminal fabrications of a
“legislative act”. In his Briefs’ Peterson had proven the platted “designated” “street”
adjoining Plaintiffs’ upland.
147. All of the lands which the Plaintiffs indisputably and admittedly own, i.e., their
riparian upland, said designated adjoining street, and the accretions thereto were
perfectly “identified” on said 1912 Plat of Survey referenced in scam O.R. 569/875 and
Plaintiffs’ Warranty Deed. Said 11th Circuit Judges conspired to conceal that the sham
“claim” of “undesignated areas” could not have possibly diminished or encumbered
39
Plaintiffs’ perfect title and fee simple ownership of said platted designated street, upland,
and accretions.
148. Peterson further evidenced how and why the 11th Circuit perverted the public record in
exchange for Appellees’ bribes.
DEFENDANT(S) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND U.S. ATTORNEY
149. The Plaintiffs are suing the U.S. Attorneys James “Russ” Dedrick, Sean Flynn, Kent
Anderson, and Brian Albritton in their private individual and official capacities.
150. Said Defendant U.S. Attorneys concealed that the Constitution(s) require all bills to be
signed by the presiding officers of the two houses and the Secretary of the State and the
Clerk of the House of Representatives during the legislative session. Such bills when so
signed must be presented to the Governor by the legislature before adjournment. Like all
other provisions of the Constitution, this was mandatory. Therefore, forged O.R. 569/875
was never enacted in accordance with the essential requirements of the Constitution, and
thus invalid, inoperative, and void.
151. Said Defendants conspired to falsely pretend that the Federal Courts did not have
jurisdiction over said eminent domain [extortion and fraud] issues and Plaintiff-Appellants’
ripe Federal claims. Said Defendants conspired with the Appellees to manufacture ripeness
requirements and to conceal patently clear Federal subject-matter jurisdiction over said
State eminent domain [extortion and fraud] issues and the State’s deliberate deprivations
as evidenced by the public records.
40
DEFENDANT U.S. MARSHAL RICK JESSUP
152. The Plaintiffs are suing Defendant U.S. Marshal Rick Jessup in his private individual
and official capacities. Pursuant to the investigation by the Naples Police Department, said
Defendant harassed, intimidated, and threatened the Plaintiffs with arrest in Naples,
Florida, for suing and prosecuting Defendant John E. Steele and judicial Defendants for,
e.g., deliberate deprivations under the 1st, 14th, 4th, 5th, and 7th Amendments, obstruction of
justice, fraud, and extortion under false pretenses that said scam O.R. 569/875 was a
“legislative act”. Jessup knew that said prima facie eminent domain extortion-scheme was
null and void ab initio and that Plaintiffs were entitled to own their said Constitutionally-
protected property and exclude the government without threats of, e.g., retaliation, arson,
trespass, seizure, and destruction of private property, and arrest without any probable
cause.
DEFENDANT(S) U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
153. Defendant U.S. Department of Justice conspired to deliberately deprive Plaintiff Dr.
Busse of his Constitutionally-protected immigration privileges in retaliation for his actions
against the various Government Officials and while blowing the whistle on Lee County
eminent domain extortion and fraud-scheme O.R. 569/875.
154. Without any due process and equal protection, Defendant U.S. Department of Justice
deliberately, arbitrarily, and capriciously deprived Plaintiff-Appellant Dr. Busse of
mandatory and non-discretionary immigration benefits.
155. Said Defendant(s) concealed that said Plaintiff(s) had a
41
a. Constitutionally-protected right to redress his/their grievances under the 1st
Amendment without retaliation and governmental abuse and oppression;
b. Constitutionally-protected right to own his/their property and exclude said
Governments.
156. Defendants U.S. Department of Justice concealed that the Constitution(s) require all bills
to be signed by the presiding officers of the two houses and the Secretary of the State and the
DEFENDANT KENNETH M. WILKINSON AND ROGER J. DESJARLAIS
157. Defendants Kenneth M. Wilkinson and Roger J. Desjarlais, in their private individual
and official capacities as Lee County Property Appraiser, and Chief Deputy, respectively,
conspired to
a. Conceal the prima facie nullity and invalidity of said scam;
b. Falsely pretend that said Lee County scam O.R. 569/875 was a legitimate instrument
even though they knew that Lee County had removed and eliminated any cloud” and/or
“claim”
c. Falsely pretend that said Lee County fraudulent “claim” encumbered Appellants’
perfect title to prima facie riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A;
42
d. Concoct fictitious lot “00A0” [fraudulent “PID 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0”] and block
“1” [fake “PID 07-12-44-21-00001.0000”], which could not be found to appear on said
1912 Cayo Costa Plat;
e. Abuse and mis-treat the Appellants disparately from similarly-situated Lee County
riparian landowners such as, e.g. Alice M. S. Robinson, and A. C. Roesch under
f. Seize, confiscate, and/or destroy the substantial fencing of Appellants’ riparian Gulf-
front Lot 15A;
g. Forge boundaries and a plat of said undedicated Cayo Costa Subdivision;
h. Tamper with the public record evidence in order to deliberately deprive and defraud
the Appellants and obstruct justice;
i. Perpetrate a fraud on the Court(s) under false pretenses that said forged “claim” O.R.
569/875 was a “resolution” and fictitious lot “00A0” and block “1” were platted and
legally described land parcels even though said lot and block had never appeared on said
1912 Cayo Costa Plat.
158. Said Defendants concealed that the Constitution(s) require all bills to be signed by the
43
DEFENDANTS AMY TUCK FARRINGTON AND SHERRI L. JOHNSON
159. Defendants Amy Tuck Farrington and Sherri L. Johnson conspired with the other
Defendant-Appellees to conceal the prima facie invalidity and illegality of said scam O.R.
569/875 and diminish Plaintiffs’ perfect title and ownership of said riparian Gulf-front Lot
15A absent even a shred of evidence in support of their frivolous and fraudulent “claims”.
160. Said Defendants fraudulently “claimed” that Plaintiff-Appellants did not own their
platted designated street and accretions thereto. They conspired to forge and tamper with
the 1912 plat and perpetrate a fraud on the Court. They conspired to obstruct justice and
extend the fraud, trespass, and arson under, e.g., false pretenses of said concoctions of a
“legislative act”, un-platted lot “00A0”, and fictitious block “1”.
161. Said Defendants conspired to perpetrate a fraud on the Courts and extort cost,
damages, and their Constitutionally-protected property from the Plaintiffs by falsely
pretending that Appellants were frivolous, which was factually and legally impossible.
162. Johnson perpetrated a fraud on the Florida Bar when she concocted criminal
allegations against Plaintiff Dr. Busse, who had blown the whistle on scam O.R. 569/875.
163. Said Defendants concealed that he Constitution requires all bills to be signed by the
presiding officers of the two houses and the Secretary of the State and the Clerk of the
House of Representatives during the legislative session. Such bills when so signed must be
inoperative, and void. Johnson and Tuck Farrington were absolutely obligated to disclose
44
said perpetrated fraud of a legislative act, which they knew could not have possibly
existed.
DEFENDANT CHARLIE GREEN
164. Defendant Charlie Green in his private individual and official capacity as Clerk of Lee
County Courts conspired to
a. Conceal the prima facie invalidity and nullity of said Lee County scam O.R. 569/875;
b. Conceal that the prima facie defective and unexecuted sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 of
“unidentified/undesignated areas” was null and void for uncertainty in the description
of said un-platted “areas” and/or “lands”;
c. Usurp judicial authority in order to falsely pretend that Lee County was the “grantor” of
said fictitious “unidentified/undesignated areas” and to deliberately deprive and
defraud the Plaintiffs of their lands.
165. Because the fictitious description of “unidentified areas” was by definition and prima
facie null and void, any Lee County “claim” was invalid.
166. Defendant Green conspired to conceal that Plaintiffs’ perfect unencumbered Warranty
Deed conferred upon them valuable rights, of which they may not be involuntarily and
deliberately deprived without due process of law and judicial determination.
167. It was for the Federal Courts to determine, as a matter of law, whether or not the
fictitious description of un-platted “undesignated areas”, which was so vague, indefinite,
and uncertain as to amount to a prima facie nullity, could have possibly constituted any
“claim”.
45
168. Furthermore, Defendant Green concealed that any eminent domain or condemnation
“claim” was legally and factually impossible, because the public could not possibly access
any land parcels in private undedicated Cayo Costa. Green concealed the absolute absence
of any Lee County eminent domain authority, except for public use. Private use was
expressly prohibited by the Florida and Federal Constitutions.
169. Despite the prima facie deficiency and invalidity of said scam, Green conspired to
falsely pretend that Lee County was the “grantor” of “undesignated areas”. See
www.leeclerk.org.
170. Defendant Green concealed that legislature cannot exercise judicial function and is
precluded from delegating the exercise of judicial functions to ministerial officers. Here, Lee
County had no power whatsoever to invalidate any or all of Appellants’ conveyance of said
riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A.
171. Defendant Green concealed that judiciary, legislative, and executive government
branches were to remain forever separate and distinct. Judicial determination of any
[fictitious] Lee County interest in Appellants’ riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A was entirely
outside the scope of any authority of Lee County’s legislative body and/or the Clerk of
Court. Illegally, Lee County and Defendant Green conspired to usurp judicial authority to
deliberately, arbitrarily, and capriciously deprive the Plaintiff-Appellants of their
Constitutionally-protected property.
172. Defendant Charlie Green conspired with Defendant-Appellees State to suspend Plaintiff
Dr. Busse’s driver’s license without any probable cause in order to harass, intimidate, and
threaten said Appellant and to compel him to refrain from any further litigation and
invalidation of said scam O.R. 569/875.
46
DEFENDANT STEVEN CARTA
173. Defendant-Appellee Steven Cart conspired to conceal that Lee County never granted,
and could not have possibly ever “granted” that which Carta knew Lee County never had
any interest in. Carta conspired to falsely pretended that Lee County had an interest in
Plaintiffs’ riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A even though Carta knew that O.R. 569/875 was a
prima facie extortion and fraud-scheme. Carta violated his obligation to disclose
Defendant-Appellees’ prima facie crimes of deliberate deprivations under 18 U.S.C. §§
241, 242, and obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1503.
174. Defendant Steven Carta conspired to conceal that the Constitution(s) require all bills to
be signed by the presiding officers of the two houses and the Secretary of the State and the
DEFENDANTS CHAD LACH AND CHARLES B. STEVENS
175. Defendants Chad Lack in their private individual and official capacities as Cayo Costa
State Park, and Assistant Park Managers, respectively, conspired to
a. Assault the Plaintiffs on their prima facie riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A;
b. Conceal the invalidity and nullity of Lee County’s scam O.R. 569/875;
47
c. Threaten, harass, and intimidate the Plaintiffs within said undedicated private
residential Cayo Costa Subdivision;
d. Trespass and encourage trespass by the public onto said private Cayo Costa
Subdivision, which they knew was never dedicated to the public;
e. Set and/or encourage open fires and arson in said residential Cayo Costa Subdivision,
which is absolutely prohibited under Florida law;
f. Endanger Plaintiffs’ and/or other Cayo Costa residents’ lives by arson and/or open fires
in said private residential Subdivision;
g. Confiscate, seize, and/or destruct Plaintiffs’ substantial fencing of said prima facie
riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A;
h. Seize, confiscate, and/or destroy Plaintiffs’ private property on said prima facie
riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A, which said Defendants knew abuts the platted natural
boundary of the “Gulf of Mexico”;
i. Extort Plaintiffs’ property under false pretenses that Lee County had a purported
interest in Plaintiffs’ prima facie riparian Gulf-front Lot 15, to which Plaintiffs hold
exclusive perfect title.
j. Conceal that any public use of Appellants’ private easements within said private
undedicated Cayo Costa is unlawful and disturbs the peace.
DEFENDANT DONALD D. STILWELL
176. Defendant Donald D. Stilwell in his private individual and official capacity [disgraced
Lee County Manager] conspired to
48
a. Conceal the prima facie invalidity and nullity of prima facie defective fake “claim”
O.R. 569/875 of uncertain, un-platted, and un-described “unidentified areas”;
b. Extort Plaintiff’s
c. Falsely pretend that said scam O.R. 569/875 was an “adopted/passed resolution”;
d. Confiscate, seize, and destroy Plaintiff [-Appellants’] property, fence, building
materials, fence materials, tent, building and gardening tools, carts, etc.,
DEENDANT KAREN FORSYTH
177. Defendant-Appellee Karen Forsyth, in her private individual and official capacities
conspired to conceal that Lee County never had any interest in Appellants’ said admittedly
Gulf-front Lot 15A and their designated adjoining street and the accretions thereto.
178. Forsyth falsely and fraudulently pretended that Lee County had an interest in
unplatted and uncertain “undesignated areas” in order to extort and defraud the Plaintiff-
Appellants.
DEFENDANT DONNA MARIE COLLINS
179. The Plaintiffs are suing Defendant Donna Marie Collins in her private individual and
official capacities for the publicly recorded fraud and extortion outside the scope of her Lee
County employment. See “First Case”; Doc. # 89; 89-2.
180. After said 1998 removal of any “cloud” and fraudulent “claim” under Blue Sheet
980206, Defendant Collins concealed that absent any legitimate “claim”, legal description,
signatures and execution of said eminent domain extortion-scheme, no inverse, direct, or
any other type of condemnation could have possibly occurred and that Lee County never had
49
any interest in said riparian Lot 15A and the fictitious, un-platted, and non-existent
“undesignated areas” in scam O.R. 569/875.
181. Collins knew that Lee County’s removed sham “claim” of uncertain and fabricated
“undesignated”/”unidentified areas” invoked Federal subject-matter-jurisdiction over said
eminent domain [fraud and extortion] issues.
182. Collins conspired to conceal that the law did not recognize said fake “claim” of
uncertain lands, and it was as if said forgery had never been drafted.
DEFENDANTS JAMES P. GERSTENLAUER, AND CLERKS OF FEDERAL COURTS,
LESLIE KING, SHERYL L. LOESCH, THOMAS K. KAHN
183. The 11th Circuit conspired to conceal who, when, where, how, why, and with what
authority could have possibly “claimed” non-existent “undesignated”/”unidentified areas”.
184. No public use, necessity, was apparent from the face of prima facie scam O.R. 569/875.
185. The Clerk of the U.S. District Court in Fort Myers conspired with, e.g., Defendant
Richard A. Lazzara, and John E. Steele to reject and/or refuse to file multiple pleadings by
the Plaintiffs, who blew the whistle on said fraud, extortion, and judicial corruption.
186. Pursuant to an “order” by Defendant corrupt Judge Richard Lazzara, the Plaintiffs were
given time until February 13, 2009, to file their “responses”. Prior to said deadline however,
Defendant Clerk of the U.S. District Court, Leslie King, conspired to reject and refuse to
file Plaintiffs’ filings. Said Defendants conspired to extend prima facie fraud-scheme O.R.
569/875 absent any justification. Said Clerk then demanded that Plaintiff(s) be “escorted” by
security.
50
187. In return for Appellants’ payment(s) of, e.g., multiple $455.00, and other fees, and absent
any evidence of any legitimate “claim” by Lee County, the 11th Circuit deliberately
deprived and defrauded the Appellants of their right(s) to, e.g., own their Constitutionally-
protected property, exclude Government(s), be free from governmental abuse, fraud,
corruption, and extortion, redress their governmental grievances, be free from disparate
treatment, have reasonable court access, and blow the whistle on said judicial corruption,
case-fixing, and bribery.
188. Even though the 11th Circuit admitted and conceded Plaintiffs’ perfect title and
ownership, Defendant Clerk Thomas K. Kahn and his staff conspired with the judicial
Defendants to arbitrarily, capriciously, and falsely pretend that multiple of Plaintiff-
Appellants’ pleadings could not be filed.
189. Said unlawful rejections of Plaintiff-Appellants’ pleadings, such as, e.g., Appellants’
Motions to enjoin any enforcement of scam O.R. 569/875, Motions for invalidation of said
fraud-scheme were improperly rejected, because the 11th Circuit has been conspiring to
extend said forgery and eminent domain extortion-scheme and extort the Plaintiffs.
190. In effect, the Plaintiffs have been paying fees to be told said brazen lies about a non-
existent “legislative act” and a permanent taking of “200 Acres in all”.
191. No intelligent person or juror could have possibly determined that Appellants’ multiple
Appeals should be dismissed [fixed]. See any and all 11th Circuit Dockets relating to said
extra-judicial corruption, case-fixing, and bribery under false pretenses that the Federal
Courts lacked jurisdiction, that Plaintiffs and/or their well-evidenced assertions were
frivolous [non-meritorious] and/or vexatious, and that their patently clearly ripe eminent
domain claims were not ripe. None of the fictitious ripeness requirements could have
51
possibly attached to, e.g., the 4th, 14th independent claims. See West Peninsular Title Co.,
supra; in said case Defendant J. L. Edmondson had presided and set binding precedent of
ripeness.
192. Admittedly, said eminent domain extortion-scheme stated on its face that it was a scam.
The Federal Courts extorted $455.00 and other fees from the Appellants to fabricate and
falsely pretend that said scam was a “legislative act”. Said 11th Circuit Defendant Judges
abused, oppressed, and extorted the Appellants under color of said forged “claim” of
“undesignated” lands.
193. The Appellants were entitled to redress their grievances and to injunctive relief from
said scam and any enforcement of removed sham “claim” O.R. 569/875.
194. While Plaintiffs’ Warranty Deed was signed, sealed, and witnessed, purported Lee
County sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 was never signed, executed, sealed or witnessed. No
evidence of any legislative intent existed, and Lee County had never affirmatively “claimed”
the fictitious un-platted and uncertain “unidentified/undesignated areas”. The prima facie
disparate treatment was patently clear: the 11th Circuit perverted a facially defective and
unexecuted sham “claim” into a “legislative act”, and ignored Plaintiff-Appellants’ perfect
title and ownership. Said judicial crimes of, e.g., obstruction of justice and deliberate
deprivations have been patently clear and indisputable. The cover-up of said crimes has
been another crime.
195. Sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 was void for legislative intent and uncertainty, because no
reasonable surveyor could have possibly ascertained and located the fictitious un-platted
“undesignated/unidentified areas”. Here, Lee County’s prima facie intent was not to sign,
52
execute, seal, and acknowledge said sham “claim”. The 11th Circuit’s perversion of the truth
and obstruction of justice was brazen and unlawful.
196. Following Plaintiff-Appellants conversation with Defendant James P. Gerstenlauer, 11th
Circuit Executive Director, regarding said scam O.R. 569/875, said crimes by the judicial
Defendants, and a judicial conference, Defendant U.S. Marshal Rick Jessup harassed,
intimidated, and threatened the Appellants with arrest during the night in Naples, Florida,
in order to obstruct justice and scare the Appellants away. Said Defendant Gerstenlauer
conspired to obstruct justice and block Appellants’ reasonable court access in order to
protect the judicial Defendants.
197. Defendant Gerstenlauer concealed that in exchange for Defendant-Appellees’ bribes,
11th Circuit Judges Gerald Bard Tjoflat, Birch, and Dubina conspired to “conclude” in their
March 5, 2009, fraudulent Opinion [Appeal # 08-13170-BB]:
“Since Busse’s takings claim was not ripe because he had not pursued available state
remedies and he failed to adequately plead his other federal claims, the district court
correctly dismissed all of his claims.”
Gerstenlauer knew that the 11th Circuit concealed Dr. Busse’s said State Court and State
Appellate Court actions, in which Dr. Busse and/or Prescott had for years pursued the
exclusive available state remedies of invalidation and damages for the “validly” and
“adequately” pleaded “unconstitutional temporary takings” and other ripe independent
Federal “claims” under said eminent domain extortion-scheme O.R. 569/875.
198. Said Defendants conspired to fabricate that eminent domain extortion-scheme O.R.
569/875 had been adopted absent any evidence of, e.g., any execution, legal description,
boundaries, legislator, legislative history, legitimacy of said unauthorized forged “claim”
53
of uncertain “unidentified” lands. See said Opinion, p. 2. In exchange for Appellees’ bribes,
the Defendant corrupt Federal Judges, Gerstenlauer, said Clerks, and other Appellees
conspired to deliberately deprive and defraud the Appellants of their Constitutionally-
protected property, which included, e.g., riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A [PID 12-44-20-01-
00015.015A], the private Cayo Costa easements, vested riparian rights, and their causes of
action. The Appellees conspired to conceal Appellants’ Constitutionally-guaranteed rights to
own and exclude, to redress their grievances, to be free from governmental abuse and
oppression, arbitrary and capricious seizure and confiscation of their private property for
private use without any legitimate governmental authority or purpose, due process, and equal
protection.
DEFENDANT MIKE SCOTT
199. Defendant Mike Scott, in his individual private and official capacity as Lee County
Sheriff, conspired to
a. Conceal the prima facie invalidity of Lee County scam O.R. 569/875;
b. Enforce and extend said scam O.R. 569/875 in exchange for Appellees’ bribes;
c. Seize, confiscate, and/or destroy Appellants’ substantial fencing of their said riparian
Gulf-front Lot 15A;
d. Threaten, harass, and intimidate the Appellants in order to extort their private property
under false pretenses that prima facie scam O.R. 569/875 was a legitimate “instrument”
and/or “resolution”;
e. Deliberately disturb the peace violative of his duties as Lee County Sheriff;
54
f. Deliberately deprive the Plaintiffs of their Constitutionally-protected rights to own
said prima facie riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A and exclude said Defendant Governments
and Officials.
TOBY PRINCE BRIGHAM, W. MOORE, AND BRIGHAM MOORE
200. Defendants [and Defendant-Appellees] Toby Prince Brigham, William Moore, at
Brigham & Moore, Eminent Domain Attorneys, conspired to
a. Conceal the prima facie invalidity, illegality, and nullity of said fraudulent “claim”
O.R. 569/875;
b. Falsely pretend that Plaintiff(s)’ prima facie perfect title to said riparian Gulf-front
Lot 15A was unencumbered by said scam O.R. 569/875, which lacked any legal
description, ascertainable boundaries, and was never executed, signed, and sealed by
Lee County in order to enrich himself and Brigham Moore;
c. Concealed that inverse [or any other type of] condemnation was unavailable, because a
null and void “claim” could not have possibly effected any permanent taking;
d. Play along to get along in said conspiracy to deliberately deprive and defraud the
Plaintiffs of said property under false pretenses that Lee County had a legitimate “claim”
to un-platted and uncertain “unidentified/undesignated areas”;
201. Said Defendants committed legal malpractice by advising Plaintiff(s) against Federal
adjudication of Plaintiff(s) eminent domain extortion and fraud issues and conspiring to
conceal the patently clear illegality and invalidity of said forgery O.R. 569/875.
202. Defendant Toby Prince Brigham’s advice to pursue any inverse condemnation remedy
was unintelligent, and legally and factually impossible, because said prima facie invalid
55
scam O.R. 569/875 could not have possibly effected any permanent taking absent, e.g., any
legal description, ascertainable boundaries of the “claimed” “unidentified/undesignated
areas”, execution, and any legislative authority.
203. Defendant Toby Prince Brigham attempted to unjustly enrich himself and Brigham &
Moore under false pretenses that Lee County may have eminent domain power under said
scam O.R. 569/875, which lacked any legal description and ascertainable boundaries.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs [P.-Appellants] demand
1. An Emergency Order enjoining any and all Defendants [Def.-Appellees] from arbitrarily,
capriciously, and irrationally enforcing said sham “claim” O.R. 569/875 of uncertain, un-
platted “unidentified/undesignated areas” absent any Lee County legislative intent,
execution, seal, witnesses, legal description, and ascertainable boundaries;
2. An Emergency Order enjoining said Defendants from any further perpetrations of fraud on
the Federal Courts under said false pretenses;
3. An Emergency Order enjoining the 11th Circuit from said perpetrations of fraud and
extortion;
4. An Order declaring that Plaintiffs pursued invalidation of scam O.R. 569/875 in the State
and State Appellate Courts for years;
5. An Emergency Order for injunctive relief from any trespass by said Defendants and/or the
public onto said private undedicated Subdivision and Plaintiffs’ riparian Gulf-front Lot 15A
6. An Emergency Order adjudicating said prima facie unexecuted sham “claim” O.R.
569/875 to be null and void for uncertainty;
56
7. An Emergency Order automatically staying and/or vacating any and all orders by the 11th
Circuit because of said fraud perpetrated on said Federal Courts;
8. An Emergency Order enjoining any open fires and/or arson in the private undedicated
residential Cayo Costa Subdivision;
9. An Order enjoining any and all Defendants from unlawfully enforcing said null and void
fake “claim” O.R. 569/875;
10. An Order invalidating said forgery O.R. 569/875 [writ of mandamus; injunctive relief];
11. An Order directing the clerk to forward any and all records to law enforcement and the
Federal Bureau of Investigation for prosecution of said corrupt Defendants for obstruction
of justice and the invalidation of prima facie Lee County scam O.R. 569/875;
12. An Order granting the exclusive remedy of invalidation and damages for the concededly
and admittedly “unconstitutional temporary takings” under false pretenses that Lee
County had a valid “claim” of un-platted “undesignated areas”;
13. An Order declaring that null and void scam O.R. 569/875 could not have possibly effected
any permanent taking and/or inverse [or any other] condemnation;
14. An Order declaring that of course the Federal Courts had jurisdiction over Plaintiff [-
Appellants’] eminent domain extortion and fraud issues and their “unconstitutional
temporary takings” and other “validly” pleaded ripe claims under false pretenses that said
eminent domain scam O.R. 569/875 was a “passed resolution” and/or “legislative act”;
57
_________________________________ ________________________________
/S/JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT /S/DR. JORG BUSSE
Plaintiff, pro se Plaintiff, pro se
P.O. BOX 845, Palm Beach, FL 33480 P.O. Box 7561, Naples, FL 34101-7561
T: 561-400-3295 T: 239-595-7074; JRBU@aol.com
58

09 CV 341 001 Complaint

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

09 CV 341 001 Complaint

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE,

versus Case # 2:09-cv-

GERALD B. TJOFLAT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, JOEL F. DUBINA,

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

NOTICE OF [EXTRA-] JUDICIAL CRIMES UNDER FALSE PRETENSES

OF FICTITIOUS LOT “00A0”

OF FRAUDULENT BLOCK “1”

OF UN-PLATTED, UNCERTAIN “UNIDENTIFIED/UNDESIGNATED AREAS”

OF EXCECUTION OF PRIMA FACIE DEFECTIVE AND UNSIGNED O.R. 569/875

THAT SCAM O.R. 569/875 WAS A “LEGISLATIVE ACT”

THAT FORGERY O.R. 569/875 WAS AN AUTHORIZED, LEGITIMATE “CLAIM”

THAT PLAINTIFFS WERE FRIVOLOUS

THAT PLAINTIFFS’ PERFECT TITLE/OWNERSHIP OF RECORD WAS ENCUMBERED

THAT PLAINTIFFS DID NOT STATE HIGHLY RECOGNIZABLE/ADMITTED CAUSES

THAT PLAINTIFFS’ RIPE EMINENT DOMAIN ISSUES WERE NOT RIPE

[E.G.: OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE;

EMINENT DOMAIN EXTORTION AND FRAUD;

JUDICIAL CORRUPTION, CASE-FIXING, AND BRIBERY;

GOVERNMENTAL ABUSE AND OPPRESSION;

FALSE PRETENSES THAT SCAM O.R. 569/875 WAS A “LEGISLATIVE ACT”;

CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS

ADOPTIONS OF SELF-AUTHENTICATING PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE

03/05/2009 AND 04/21/2009 11TH CIRCUIT SHAM OPINIONS:

2009, Opinions, in which said Circuit conspired to

whatsoever [e.g., execution, seal, witnesses, legal description, ascertainable boundaries,

legislator, legislative power, purpose, history];

b. Falsely pretend that Appellant Dr. Busse’s “[‘unconstitutional temporary’] takings

claim was not ripe”;

c. Conceal that said fraudulent “claim” of uncertain, un-platted, and fictitious

“unidentified/undesignated areas” could not have possibly effected any permanent

d. Conceal that Lee County never had any legitimate “claim”

legislative intent, authority, etc.;

i. Obstruct justice and Federal adjudication of Appellant(s) multiple independent ripe

County prima facie scam O.R. 569/875;

identical riparian Gulf-front lands, A. C. Roesch.

2. The corrupt 11th Circuit concealed that

a. A "bill" is a proposition reduced to writing, submitted to the consideration of the

signed by the presiding officers of the respective Houses.

Thus, it failed to comply with the mandatory requirements of the Constitution.

Defendants Steele, Lazzara, Polster-Chappell, Pizzo conspired to fabricate a “legislative

act”, which was factually and legally impossible.

the Governor or passed over his veto;

official acts of the legislative and executive departments.

automatically stayed and/or must be vacated.

11TH CIRCUIT’S SHAM ORDERS:

AWARD OF COST AND DAMAGES TO DEFRAUD AND EXTORT

PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE OF CONSPIRACY TO DELIBERATELY DEPRIVE,

DEFRAUD, AND OBSTRUCT JUSTICE UNDER COLOR OF SCAM O.R. 569/875

[ADOPTION BY REFERENCE IN THIS COMPLAINT]

Wilkinson, who fabricated an un-platted lot “00A0”, and block “1”.

and rejected their pleadings.

Notice of Judicial Corruption and Bribery.

UNEXECUTED VOID “CLAIM” OF UNPLATTED, UNCERTAIN “AREAS”:

uncertain un-platted “undesignated/unidentified areas”.

“lots”, and/or “blocks”]. The sham “claim/defense” of “undesignated/unidentified areas”

05/05/2008 FRAUDULENT OPINION AND ORDER [DOC. # 338; “FIRST CASE”]:

PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE OF PRIMA FACIE FRAUDULENT OPINION AND

ORDER BY DEFENDANT CORRUPT JUDGE JOHN E. STEELE

[ADOPTION BY REFERENCE IN THIS COMPLAINT]

“claimed” uncertain un-platted “undesignated/unidentified areas”, was a “legislative act”.

See Doc. # 338, p. 12.