Professional Documents
Culture Documents
20
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
NOTICE OF FAKE “lien”, FAKE “07/29/2009 judgment”, CH. 55, FLA. STAT.,
FACIALLY FORGED “judgment”, AND FAKE “writ of execution”, DOC. ## 386-5, 425
Plaintiffs,
Defendants.
/
Plaintiffs,
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court sua sponte. Upon review of the chamber’s email, the
Court discovered that Plaintiff Jorg Busse sent eighteen (18) emails to the chamber’s inbox. These
emails were discovered on July 5, 2010 and July 11, 2010. In a prior case filed by the Plaintiffs,
Magistrate Judge Mark Pizzo ordered Plaintiffs to cease and desist from “sending correspondence
to the chamber’s email account of any judge or employee of this Court” (2:08-CV-899, Dkt. 52, p.
3, ¶5)(emphasis added); See also 2:08-cv-899, Dkt. 76. Consistent with behavior in this and related
cases, Plaintiff Busse has directly violated an order of this Court. Again, the Court warns Plaintiffs
that such conduct is grounds for sanctions. See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 43-44, 111
S.Ct. 2123, 115 L.Ed.2d 27 (1991)(noting the court’s inherent power to impose sanctions for a
litigant’s misconduct); Barnes v. Dalton, 158 F.3d 1212, 1214 (11th Cir. 1998)(same).
cease and desist sending correspondence to the chamber’s email account of any judge and
employee of this Court. Failure to comply with this Order may result in the imposition of
sanctions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 and the inherent power of the Court, including but
not limited to civil contempt and monetary fines for each violation.
COPIES TO:
COUNSEL OF RECORD AND UNREPRESENTED PARTIES
-2-
“Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiffs shall
immediately cease and desist sending correspondence to the chamber’s email
account of any judge and employee of this Court. Failure to comply with this
Order may result in the imposition of sanctions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11
and the inherent power of the Court, including but not limited to civil contempt
and monetary fines for each violation.”
Here, Honeywell’s facially unlawful “order”, Doc. # 49, was deliberately vague and
ambiguous:
Here, Honeywell failed to identify, e.g., the nature and content of the alleged “e mails” and
who had discovered the purported “e mails” when, where, why, and how. Therefore,
Honeywell’s orders were null and void and for unlawful and criminal purposes of obstructing
justice and the just, speedy, and inexpensive adjudication of Plaintiffs’ claims for relief under
the Rules.
2. Here, Defendant conflicted [28 U.S.C. 455; 28 U.S.C. 144] and crooked Judge Honeywell’s
record cover up and concealment of Government crimes on the record were no reasons
whatsoever to obstruct any perfectly legal and rightful “correspondence”. Here, Honeywell
again illegally coerced the Plaintiffs to refrain from prosecuting her and other Defendant
Government Officials and from engaging in absolutely necessary and lawful correspondence.
3. Here, no fit, intelligent, and honest judge in Defendant Honeywell’s shoes could have
possibly not disqualified herself in this Case after Def. Honeywell’s record recusal in Case
No. 2:2010-cv-00390. Just like a bungling Government idiot and crook, here Honeywell
2
4. Here again, Judicial Officer Honeywell deliberately deceived this Court:
“In a prior case [removed from STATE Court] filed by the Plaintiffs, Magistrate
Judge Mark Pizzo ordered Plaintiffs to cease and desist from “sending
correspondence to the chamber’s email account of any judge or employee of this
Court” (2:08-CV-899, Dkt. 52, p. 3, ¶5)(emphasis added); See also 2:08-cv-899, Dkt.
76.” See Doc. # 49.
5. Said Case No. 2:08-cv-00899 had been removed from STATE to this Court by Co-
Defendant Crooked Judges John E. Steele and S. Polster Chappell, who after their removal
fraudulently “claimed” that Plaintiffs had purportedly not pursued STATE remedies, which
was a self-evident perversion of the record and truth. To add injury to insult and judicial
crimes, judicial Defendant Mark Allan Pizzo conspired to fraudulently sanction the Plaintiffs
6. Here, Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendant Judge Pizzo could not have
possibly sanctioned the Plaintiffs under FEDERAL R. Civ. P. 11 for Plaintiffs’ STATE
Court pleadings. Here, Defendant Honeywell further established herself as a judicial fool and
crook, who must be impeached under public policy to prevent further harm and injury to the
American people.
“behavior”:
“Consistent with behavior in this and related cases, Plaintiff Busse has directly violated
an order of this Court.” See Doc. # 49, p. 2.
8. Here, Honeywell failed to explain and support what “behavior” could have possibly been a
rule? Why is alleged “correspondence” “misconduct” under what law and rule? How could
necessary “correspondence” violate any law or rule. Here again, Defendant Honeywell
3
utterly failed on the public record to support any “misconduct” and/or “violation”. Here
under color of office and non-existent authority, Defendant Honeywell unlawfully and
criminally interfered with proper procedure and used wires and multi state dissemination of
her record judicial trash, Doc. ## 48, 49, and other “orders”, to, e.g., perpetrate fraud on the
Court, extort, threaten, and coerce the Plaintiffs from further prosecution. Therefore,
the Plaintiffs have been absolutely entitled, 28 U.S.C. § 144, 28 U.S.C. § 455.
9. Here in particular, Honeywell has disrespected and perverted the law for criminal purposes of
delaying and obstructing justice under color of, e.g., fake “land parcels” and facially forged
“resolution 569/875”, and a fake “judgment” and “writ of execution”, which Honeywell knew
had never existed, and as a matter of law, could have never possibly transferred title to the
10. Because the Plaintiffs have been forced to live in constant fear of Defendant Honeywell’s
illegal and criminal threats, punishment, sanctions, contempt threats, and fraudulent
allegations on the record, the Plaintiffs demand a different and hopefully impartial venue.
11. Like a bungling Government idiot, here Defendant Honeywell failed to present the legal
issue, the law, facts, application, and proper conclusion. Therefore, Honeywell’s order was
deceptive, fraudulent, null and void, and for prima facie unlawful purposes of keeping the
4
PLAINTIFFS OBJECT TO HONEYWELL’S NAZI TACTICS ON THE RECORD
12. The Plaintiffs expressly defend against Defendant Honeywell’s record Nazi tactics of
13. The Plaintiff public corruption victims hereby demand full disclosure of the alleged “e mails”
so that the can be entered as evidence in the criminal and civil prosecution of Defendant C.
E. Honeywell.
14. The Plaintiffs have had fundamental rights to, e.g., own property, exclude Government,
redress their Government grievances and in particular be free from, e.g., the record
Government corruption, extortion, fraud, fraud on the Court by Defendant Corrupt Judge C.
E. Honeywell and other Defendants and Officials under color of facially forged “land
procured “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228 and fake “lien”.
15. As an Afro American Judge, Defendant Crooked Judge Honeywell exhibited wanton
disregard for Plaintiffs’ Constitutional and Civil Rights and deliberately disrespected the law.
Who the f… does Defendant Honeywell believe she is to act just like a Nazi style judge and
display her well-proven ignorance and arrogance on the public record for the world to see?
16. Here, Plaintiffs had the equal rights of the Defendants to “correspond” under, e.g., the Rules
of Civil Procedure, and Local Rules of this Court. Therefore on its face, Honeywell’s order,
Doc. # 49, was intimidating and an unlawful threat to refrain from rightful prosecution and
5
blowing the whistle on Honeywell’s crimes of, e.g., fraudulent concealment, obstruction of
17. Here admittedly, Charlene E. Honeywell has been a named and served party Defendant, and
Honeywell had disqualified herself. See Case No. 2:2010-cv-00390. Therefore here,
Honeywell threatened and intimidated the Plaintiffs with punishment and sanctions.
18. Here for criminal and unlawful purposes of “silencing” and shutting up the Plaintiff
conspiring to conceal, e.g., fake “land parcels”, facially forged sham “land claim” “O.R.
569/875”, non-existent “07/29/09 judgment” [see Docket, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228], and a
fake “lien” [violative of Ch. 55, Fla. Stat.], Defendant Crooked Judge C. E. Honeywell made
unlawful “orders”, Doc. ## 48 and 49, without any authority whatsoever outside her judicial
capacity.
19. Defendant “judicial whore” C. E. Honeywell fraudulently concealed record absence of “writ
of execution”, record fake “land parcels” such as, e.g., “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0”, and
facially forged “resolution 569/875” [see Doc. ## 288, 282; Case No. 2:07-cv-00228, Lee
County PB 3 PG 25 (1912)]:
“In the motion, Plaintiffs appear to seek a release of the writ of execution and
attachment of a lien to property issued in Busse v. Lee County, Florida, et al., Case
No. 2:07-CV-228-FtM-29SPC. That case was before [Defendant] Judge John Steele
and [Defendant] Magistrate Judge Sheri Chappell. See Doc. # 48.
20. Here in exchange for Defendants’ bribes, Defendant Honeywell concealed and agreed to
conceal the stringent requirements of § 55.10, Florida Statutes, and non-existence of any
6
“lien”. Here in particular, Def. Honeywell knew that admittedly Defendant K. M. Wilkinson
had never even filed a Rule 38 motion, Fed.R.App.P. 38, and that Appellate Case No. 08-
“order”, Doc. # 48, further proved Defendant Honeywell’s prima facie pattern and policy of
corruption, extortion, bribery, and case fixing outside any official capacity.
21. Here in particular, Honeywell knew, concealed, and conspired to conceal with other Judges
and Defendants that a facially non-existent “judgment” could NOT have possibly “become a
22. Here Def. Honeywell knew that fake “resolution 569/875” and Def. Wilkinson’s forged
“land parcels” had never existed, and that no valid writ of execution was ever executed
and/or “witnessed” by any identifiable “judge”. Here, no “judgment” existed on the Docket,
Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228. See “Document 425 Filed 02/02/10”; see Doc. ## 288, 282.
23. Here, Defendant extortionist Honeywell conspired with other Judges, Officials, and
Defendants to extort Plaintiff corruption victims’ and whistleblowers’ property and fees
“under color of”, e.g., a facially forged “resolution 569/875”, fake “land parcels”, a non-
existent “07/29/09 judgment” and a fake “writ of execution”. See Doc. ## 425, 288, 282, 386,
24. Defendant Crooked Judge Charlene E. Honeywell fraudulently concealed and agreed to
conceal that Defendant JACK N. PETERSON had perjured himself, Doc. # 432-2, Case No.
2:2007-cv-00228:
7
“KENNETH M. WILKINSON, as Property Appraiser of Lee County, Florida, is the
holder of a judgment issued by the United States of Appeals in and for the Eleventh
Circuit on July 29, 2009 in Docket 08-13170-BB against Appellant JORG BUSSE in
the amount of $5,048.60”.
Peterson conspired with other Defendants, Judges, and Officials to fraudulently conceal
the non-existent “July 29, 2009 judgment” and the non-existent “lien”. See Ch. 55,
Florida Statutes.
25. Here, said Defendants conspired with other Defendants to fraudulently conceal that “CASE
NO. 2008-13170-BB” had been CLOSED on June 11, 2009. See Appellate Docket on file.
11th Circuit Record and Exhibits had been RETURNED to this Court on 06/11/2009.
26. The facially fraudulent “judgment issued as mandate June 11 2009” and received by the U.S.
District Court “2009 JUN 15 AM 11:20”, Doc. # 365, was in the amount of “$24.30”, Doc. #
386, 386-3, 365; “BILL OF COSTS” “issued on JUN 11 2009”; 11th CIRCUIT FORM MISC-
12 (12/07).
27. Here, Defendant Wilkinson had never claimed more than “$24.30”, and therefore under the
Rules, was never entitled to more than “$24.30”. See attached Fed. R. App. P. Here as a
matter of record, Defendant Wilkinson and/or his Attorney had “sworn” and/or “affirmed”
that the costs claimed were “$24.30”. See Doc. # 386-3; Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.
28. The Eleventh Circuit has held that the action becomes final on the date the district court
receives the appellate court's mandate. See U.S. v. Lasteed, 832 F.2d 1240-43 (11th Cir.
1987).
8
HONEYWELL CONCEALED DEFENDANTS’ CONCOCTION OF FAKE “$5,048.60”
29. Here, Defendant Crooked Honeywell concealed and agreed to conceal that Defendants
30. Under color of non-existent authority, Lee County, Florida, Defendants and Officials
31. In these State and Federal Cases since 2006, Defendant U.S. Judges idiotically conspired
with other Officials to conceal the prima facie record forgeries of said non-existent “land
parcels”. See, e.g., record Transcript of corrupted proceedings before Defendant “judicial
whore” Sheri Polster Chappell in November 2007 on file; Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.
32. Even though the State Court Judge himself was a Co-Defendant in this U.S. Court,
Defendant Corrupt Judges John E. Steele and Sheri Polster Chappell fraudulently concealed
Plaintiffs’ State Court action after said judicial Defendants themselves had removed
Plaintiffs’ legal action from State to Federal Court. See Case No. 2:2008-cv-00899 (BUSSE
v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Lee County Circuit Court; Def. Judge: Gerald, Lynn, Jr.).
33. In its facially fraudulent “judgment” “issued as mandate June 11 2009”, said 11th Circuit
9
“III. 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 …” Id.
Here as a matter of fact and record, Busse and Prescott “had pursued available state
adequately pleaded all their prima facie ripe federal claims, and demanded relief from said
34. Here, Judges concealed and conspired to conceal Busse’s pursuit in State Court and
Defendant Crooked Judge Steele’s and Chappell’s removal from State to Federal Court. See
35. Here insanely, and in exchange for Defendants’ bribes, Defendant Judicial Crooks Steele and
Chappell fraudulently and criminally pretended that Plaintiffs’ rights to own their real
property and exclude Government from their riparian Gulf-front street and up lands,
“fundamental” rights. See brazen bribery and public corruption on the record!
36. Furthermore here, Defendant “judicial whore” Honeywell knew and concealed that in
exchange for bribes, Defendants Steele and Chappell had conspired with other Defendants to
fabricate “ripeness requirements” under color of fake “resolution 569/875”. See Doc. # 338;
Fixed Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228. See Doc. ## 213; 236; Fixed Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791.
37. Here, the Plaintiff unimpeachable record landowners and public corruption victims sued
Defendant “judicial whore” C. E. Honeywell in her private individual capacity, because her
10
purported orders were outside any immunity and scope of official acts. See Docket 2:2010-
cv-00390.
38. Here, Defendant Crooked Judge Honeywell had admitted to having been served and
39. Idiotically, the Court then reassigned the Case to Co-Defendant Crooked Judge John Edwin
40. Here, no notice of appearance was filed on behalf of said Defendant Corrupt Judge
41. Judges, Defendants, and Officials knew and fraudulently concealed that said facially forged
“parcels” had never existed nor been legally described, conveyed, and platted. See 1912 Plat
42. Defendant crooked Officials Kenneth M. Wilkinson and Jack N. Peterson fraudulently
pretended:
“11. A certified copy of the [07/29/09] judgment has been recorded in the Public
Records of Lee County, Florida at Instrument No. 2009000309384 and serves as a
lien against the property.” See Doc. # 386, p. 3, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.
Here, the non-existent judgment did not serve as any lien. See Ch. 55, Fla. Stat.
43. Here, the Clerk of this U.S. District Court and custodian of said Court’s records could not
authenticate the fraudulently pretended “07/29/2009 judgment”, because said Clerk never
received any “07/29/2009 judgment”. Here, the Docket, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, was
44. Here, Def. U.S. Judges, Government Officials, and the other Defendants knew and agreed to
conceal that this Court had no “power” whatsoever to enforce a non-existent judgment.
11
DEF. WILKINSON FORGED “judgment”, “DOC. # 386-5, Page 2 of 2”
45. Defendant Crooked Official Kenneth M. Wilkinson had forged, e.g., “land parcels”, and
maps. Here, Defendant Wilkinson perpetrated fraud on the Court and facially forged a
“judgment”. See Doc. # 386-5, Page 2 of 2. The smaller font size of the page number “2” did
not match font size 14 of the text. The facially forged “judgment” was not, and could not
possibly have been, a true copy. See Exhibit below. The facially forged and pasted
“judgment” copy did not comply with § 55.10, Fla. Stat. E.g., said fake did not contain any
address.
“On February 2, 2010, the Clerk of this Court issued a Writ of Execution (D.E. 425).”
47. Here, said Clerk knew that no such “judgment” had ever been received from the Circuit Clerk
HONEYWELL CONCEALED THAT FAKE WRIT WAS VOID & NEVER WITNESSED
48. Here, “Doc. # 425 Filed 02/02/10” materially misrepresented in the record absence of any
identifiable “judge”:
Here on its face, the fraudulent “writ of execution” did not identify any “judge” and was
null and void. In particular, “Witness the Honorable ___ “ was blank. See Doc. # 425.
“4. On August 22, 2008, Wilkinson filed a motion for sanctions pursuant to Eleventh
Circuit Rule 27-4, requesting an order awarding attorneys’ fees in the amount of $5,000,
12
double costs and such other relief as the Court deemed appropriate for defendant
Appellant’s frivolous appeal.” See Doc. # 432, p. 2.
Here, Def. Wilkinson again deceived the Court, because Jorg Busse had been the Plaintiff
[and not the “defendant”] and Wilkinson had admittedly never filed any “Rule 38 motion”.
“Repy to Response. Any reply to a response must be filed within 7 days after service
of the response. A reply must not present matters that do not relate to the response.”
Here, Def. Wilkinson’s pleading(s) and brief had been without legal merit and could not be
law, or the establishment of new law. In addition, Def. Wilkinson’s pleadings contained
assertions of material facts that were patently clearly false and unsupported by the record,
“O.R. 569/875” In particular, prima facie sham “claim” “O.R. 569/875” was not any
“regulation”, “legislative act”, resolution, or “law” and as a matter of law, could not have
possibly divested the Plaintiffs of their property against Plaintiffs’ expressly stated will. Here,
the Plaintiffs had defended their unimpeachable record title against any condemnation and
refused to exchange their perfected title just because corrupt Government Officials, e.g.,
51. Here, no accounting whatsoever, and none was ever provided as required, could have
possibly explained and/or justified the fraudulent amount of “$5,048.60” under the Rules.
fraud, extortion, corruption on the record did not, and could not, possibly have “incurred”
13
WILKINSON FRAUDULENTLY MISREPRESENTED “REGULATORY TAKING”
52. Therefore here, Defendant Wilkinson’s “assertion” of a “regulatory taking” was on its face
pleadings and brief for the improper and illegal purposes of, e.g., extorting fees and property
from the Plaintiff public corruption victims, coercing the Plaintiffs to refrain from further
scheme “O.R. 569/875”, obstructing justice and just speedy adjudication of Plaintiffs’
claims for relief, harassing the Plaintiffs, and causing unnecessary delay and needless
increase in the cost of litigation since 2006 in State and Federal Courts over one single piece
53. Therefore here admittedly, Defendant Wilkinson had never filed any “Rule 38 motion”, never
54. Plaintiff public corruption victims filed another updated Criminal Complaint in this matter
1. An EMERGENCY Order striking Honeywell’s “order”, Doc. # 49, as facially unlawful and
for criminal purposes of coercing the Plaintiffs to refrain from further prosecution and
extorting fees and property under color of, e.g., forged “land claim” “O.R. 569/875” and a
non-existent “writ of execution” and “lien”, violative of Ch. 55, Fla. Stat.;
14
2. An EMERGENCY Order removing Honeywell as objectively unfit and crooked under 28
EXTORTION and CORRUPTION under color of authority and prima facie scam “O.R.
569/875”, said fake “lien”, fake “07/29/09 judgment”, and fake “writ of execution”, § 55.10,
“resolution”, whatsoever, could have possibly alienated Plaintiffs’ record property against
their will;
embarrassingly idiotic Governmental and judicial hoax of a “lien” and “public land claim”
[see, e.g., Doc. ## 213; 214; 212, Case No. 2:09-cv-00791; and Case No. 2:07-cv-00228,
Defendants Jack N. Peterson, and Kenneth M. Wilkinson from perverting the record &
7. An EMERGENCY order relieving the Plaintiffs from the fraudulent judgment, orders, and
proceedings of record such as, e.g., Doc. ## 48, 49; and Doc. ## 210, 212, 213, 214, Case
No. 2:09-cv-00791 at the dirty hands of Def. judicial whore Honeywell for said well-proven
reasons;
15
8. An EMERGENCY order relieving the Plaintiffs from the fraudulent concealment of their
State action, 2006-CA-003185, Lee County Circuit Court, BUSSE v. STATE OF FLORIDA;
9. An Order compelling Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why she did
not fabricate a “lien” and did not fraudulently conceal Plaintiffs’ record ownership of said
pleadings;
10. An Order compelling Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why she did
not fraudulently conceal Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable record ownership of said Lot 15A, Parcel
11. An Order compelling Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why she did
not maliciously pervert the dispositive affirmation of Plaintiffs’ record ownership by the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, Prescott, et al., v. State of Florida, et al., 343 Fed.
12. An Order compelling Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why she did
not capriciously conceal Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable record ownership of said Lot 15A, Parcel
# 12-44-20-01-00015.015A, which the Defendants Lee County had asserted before the 11th
13. An Order compelling Defendant Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why her “rulings” were not
NULL AND VOID and procured through the criminal scheme of false “frivolity” and
“vexatiousness” pretenses and the concealment of said fake “legal descriptions”, fake “land”
14. An EMERGENCY Order recusing Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell, because she
disrespected the law, disrupted the proceedings in favor of the Defendants, perverted the
16
facts of record, and could not possibly be trusted to be impartial and fair, 28 U.S.C. § 455; 28
U.S.C. § 144.
17
18
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36