You are on page 1of 29

7/19/2010 Federal Bureau of Investigation - Tam…

This is Google's cache of http://tampa.fbi.gov/. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on


Jul 15, 2010 01:03:36 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn
more

These search terms are highlighted: florida fbi Text-only version

Tampa Home Top Story Get Tampa Alerts


Contact Tampa
Contact Us
5525 West Gray Street
Territory/Jurisdiction Tampa, FL 33609
Phone: (813) 253-1000
About Us
E-mail: tampa.division@ic.fbi.gov
• Our People &
Capabilities
• What We Investigate
• Our Partnerships
Tampa Leadership
• Tampa History
Press Room
Wanted by the FBI -
Tampa Mortgage Fraud Special Agent in Charge
Charges Filed in ‘Operation Stolen Dreams’ Steven E. Ibison
In Your Community
Twenty-one additional people were charged in the
FBI Jobs Middle District of Florida in a massive collective
effort to confront mortgage fraud. Details Assistant Special Agents in Charge
Main FBI Website
• Christopher W. Davis (Orlando)
Search FBI Website More News • Kevin Ray Eaton • David F. Reign
Administrative Officer: John Gustafson

Take advantage of the Get advice and tips for Help us find wanted
many services we protecting your family, fugitives and missing
offer to the public and your community, and persons. Rewards
to law enforcement. your workplace. are being offered in
some cases.

• Criminal Background Checks • New E-Scams and Warnings • Wanted by the FBI - Tampa
• Requests for FBI Records • Reporting Internet Crime • Most Wanted Terrorists
• FBI Training Academy • Sex Offender Registry • Seeking Terrorism Info
• Name Checks • Crime Statistics • Top Ten Fugitives
• Victim Assistance • Submitting Case Tips • Featured Fugitives
• Laboratory Services • Common Fraud Schemes • Crime Alerts
• Fingerprint Card Orders • A Parent's Guide to Internet Safety • Kidnappings, Missing Persons
• More Services • More Tips and Suggestions • Unknown Bank Robbers

Accessibility | eRulemaking | Freedom of Information Act | Legal Notices | Legal Policies and Disclaimers | Links
Privacy Policy | USA.gov | White House
FBI.gov is an official site of the U.S. Federal Government, U.S. Department of Justice.

…googleusercontent.com/search?q=ca… 1/1
Jennifer Franklin Prescott, Government Corruption Victim
Dr. Jorg Busse, Public Corruption Victim
07/20/2010

CERTIFIED DELIVERY
Defendant Drew Heathcoat
Defendant Supervising Clerk
Defendant Crooked Charlene Edwards Honeywell
Corrupted U.S. District Court, U.S. Courthouse
2110 First Street
Fort Myers, FL 33901
F: 239-461-2179

RE: Extortion, Public Corruption, and Anarchy in U.S. District Court, M.D. of Florida
Falsification and Destruction of Official Records
Criminal Investigation of Public Corruption in District Court and Clerk’s Office
Falsification of $5,048.60 judgment and writ of execution
Concealment and Cover-Up
Forgery of “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”

Dear Sirs:

1. On, e.g., 07/16/2010 and 07/20/2010, Defendant Drew Heathcoat and the U.S. District Clerk
obstructed justice and concealed the non-existence of
a. Any recorded judgment in the falsified amount of $5,048.60;
b. Any genuine writ of execution;
c. Any electronic filing privileges for Plaintiffs Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin
Prescott.
2. In particular, Defendant Drew Heathcoat unlawfully refused the perform ministerial acts such
as, e.g., determining:
a. “Did the U.S. District Clerk issue any authentic writ of execution in Case No.
2:2007-cv-00228; Yes or No?”
b. Did the U.S. District Clerk falsify any writ of execution in Case No. 2:2007-cv-
00228; Yes or No?”
c. “And if so, what was the amount?”
d. “Did the Clerk alter or illegally modify the judgment in the amount of $24.30 issued
as mandate on 06/11/2009 in Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 365; Yes or No?”
e. “Has there been any recorded judgment in the amount of $5,048.60 in Case No.
2:2007-cv-00228; Yes or No?”
f. “Is the U.S. District Clerk obstructing the filing of Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal from
order, Doc. # 213, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791; Yes or No?”
g. “Why is the U.S. District Clerk obstructing the filing of Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal
from order, Doc. # 236, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791?”
h. “Is the District Court obstructing a written statement by the Clerk, who is the
Custodian of Court records, that after diligent search no recorded judgment in the
amount of $5,048.60 could be found; Yes or No?”
i. “Does the District Clerk have any record of any “electronic filing privileges” in the
name of Dr. Jorg Busse and/or Jennifer Franklin Prescott; Yes or No?”

3. The Plaintiffs were entitled to be free of said public corruption and criminal & unlawful
acts by Defendant Clerk Drew Heathcoat and the U.S. District Clerk.
4. Given the publicly recorded extortion, coercion, and falsification and destruction of
official records and documents by the U.S. District Clerk in Plaintiffs’ Cases such as, e.g., ##
2:2007-cv-00228; 2:2009-cv-00791; 2:2010-cv-00089, the Plaintiffs seek criminal
investigation and stay of any further proceedings in the prima facie corrupt U.S. District
Court, Middle District of Florida.
5. Because of the record coercion, threats of, e.g., arrest and civil contempt, retaliatory
punishment and sanctions, and extortion of money in the falsified amount of “5,048.60”,
the Plaintiffs will no longer respond to any further unlawful communications and crimes of
this Court.
6. The Plaintiffs have left this jurisdiction and are prosecuting in a so far undisclosed venue.
Govern yourself accordingly!

/s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott


c/o International Court of Justice
Peace Palace
The Hague, Netherlands

/s/Jorg Busse, M.D., M.M., M.B.A.


c/o International Court of Justice
Peace Palace
The Hague, Netherlands

2
PUBLISHED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
AGAINST DEF. CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL
CORRUPT U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

CERTIFIED DELIVERY
Federal Bureau of Investigation
5525 West Gray Street
Tampa, FL 33609
Phone: (813) 253-1000

CERTIFIED DELIVERY
U.S. Dept. of Justice
Criminal Division

DEFENDANT CHARLENE E. HONEYWELL


RECORD LACK OF IMMUNITY - PERPETRATION OF UNLAWFUL ACTS
1. The Plaintiff public corruption victims are suing Defendant corrupt U.S. District Judge
Charlene Edwards Honeywell (“Honeywell”), a female Afro-American Judge, in her private
individual capacity and official capacity. Defendant Honeywell’s unlawful and criminal acts
on record were outside any immunity and official capacity.
FELONIES OUTSIDE ANY “official” CAPACITY
2. Defendant Corrupt Honeywell had knowledge of the actual commission of felonies and
concealed them. Here even though Def. Honeywell had knowledge of, e.g., judicial Co-
Defendant Chappell’s, Steele’s, Pizzo’s, and Lazzara’s obstruction of justice and
fraudulent concealment of facially forged “land parcels”, a falsified “writ of execution”,
falsified “$5,048.60 judgment”, Corrupt Honeywell did not make the same known to some
judge or person in authority, but covered up for said Offenders in exchange for bribes, 18
U.S.C. §§ 3, 4.
ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT
3. Defendant Crook Honeywell knew that Defendant principal Offenders Steele, Chappell,
Pizzo, and Lazzara had committed record offenses and assisted said Offenders, 18 U.S.C. §§
3, 4. See, e.g., Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, Doc. # 50, assistance with facially fraudulent
“writ of execution”; see Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. ## 213, 236, assistance with record
forgeries.
DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS UNDER COLOR OF FAKE “writ” AND “resolution”
4. Defendant Government Whore deliberately deprived the Plaintiffs, e.g., under color of a
fake “writ of execution” and “resolution 569/875”, 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242.
RECORD RETALIATION UNDER COLOR OF WRIT OF EXECUTION & SANCTIONS
5. With the intent to retaliate, Corrupt Honeywell knowingly took actions harmful to the
Plaintiff public corruption victims, which included interference with Plaintiffs’ livelihood
and record land ownership, because the Plaintiff landowners had provided truthful
information relating to the commission of Federal offenses to law enforcement, 18 U.S.C. §§
1513.
6. Knowingly, Honeywell extorted Plaintiffs’ property and/or threatened to do so, with
corrupt intent to retaliate against the Plaintiffs because the Plaintiffs had blown the whistle
on public corruption; in particular, because the Plaintiffs had produced records and testimony
conclusively evidencing Government corruption and fraud, and information about the
commission of Federal offenses by Government Officials. Here, Plaintiff Government crime
and corruption victims had the right to be reasonably protected from the Government
Offenders and Judges of record, 18 U.S.C. § 3771.
RECORD POLICY, CUSTOM, AND CULTURE OF CORRUPTION
7. Customarily, and over and over again, Honeywell coerced the Plaintiffs to refrain from
prosecuting and producing crime evidence. Idiotic lies and threats of “sanctions” have played
a central role in Honeywell’s record crimes and concealment. Just like Jews and
Government opponents in Nazi Germany, the Plaintiff Government crime victims are
running from the anarchy, extortion, and coercion in Honeywell’s court of perversions
where un-recorded and non-existent judgments can be perverted into a “lien on property”.
BLACKMAIL, EXTORTION, UNLAWFUL COMMUNICATIONS & THREATS
8. In retaliation and exchange for bribes, Defendant Crooked Judge Honeywell made
threatening demands without any justification under color of law, authority, and falsified
official records. In particular, Defendant Corrupt Judge threatened, e.g., “monetary
sanctions”, “civil contempt”, and/or arrest, merely because the Plaintiff public corruption
victims had exposed and blown the whistle on, e.g., Honeywell’s crimes, extortion,
coercion, and fraud on the Court.
EXACTION OF MONEY BY THREAT OF, E.G., ARREST AND CIVIL CONTEMPT
9. Honeywell exacted, threatened to exact, and/or conspired with other Officials and
Defendants to exact money from Plaintiffs by threat of “monetary sanctions”, “civil
contempt”, and/or arrest under color of, e.g., office and falsified official records. In
particular, Def. Honeywell conspired to extort $5,048.60” in the absence of any recorded
authentic judgment and justification. Honeywell caused other Government Officials to
falsify, alter, and destroy official records for criminal and illegal purposes of concealing
Honeywell’s extortion, coercion, obstruction of justice and other crimes of record.
Honeywell made unlawful communications and threatened Plaintiff public corruption
whistleblowers. See, e.g., Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, Doc. # 50, p. 3:
“Shortly thereafter, the writ was issued (2:07-CV-228, Dkt. 425).”
Defendant Government Whore Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that no “writ”
had ever been issued and/or could have possibly been issued, because, e.g., no recorded
“$5,048.60 judgment” had ever existed. For criminal & illegal purposes of, e.g., extorting
and obstructing justice, said Defendant falsely and idiotically pretended lack of
“authority” over record extortion under color of a falsified official record by U.S.
Defendants, Case No. 2:2010-00089, Doc. # 50, 07/14/10, p. 3:
“Because Case No. 2:07-CV-228 was assigned to Judge John Steele, this Court does
not have the authority to grant relief from the writ of execution.”
10. Just like a bungling Government idiot, Def. Honeywell contradicted herself in the next
paragraph, in which she cited “Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)”, Doc. # 50, pp. 3-4:
“A party may move for relief from a final judgment or order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b).”
“As such, the matter is closed, except for the issue of sanctions.”
“Plaintiffs have given the Court more than enough grounds to impose sanctions for
their misconduct.”

2
MISCONDUCT AND EXTENSION OF RECORD CRIMES AND FALSIFIED “WRIT”
11. Def. Honeywell recklessly extended the record Government crimes and falsified “writ”,
Doc. # 425:
“To the extent that Plaintiffs request injunctive relief, the Motions will be denied.”
See Doc. # 50, p. 4.
12. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed that sanctions were not any “issue” but
Honeywell’s record crimes and unlawful acts such as, e.g., extortion, concealment, and
fraud were. In said organized cover-up, Defendant Honeywell concealed that there had
never been any “$5,048.60 judgment” of record and that no “judgment” of record had ever
even referenced any “frivolous appeal”.
13. Honeywell promoted the record culture and policy of corruption, anarchy, lawlessness
and perversion of law and facts. With corrupt intent to obtain illegal benefits, Honeywell
“incomprehensibly” and “disjointedly” copied and pasted together illegal “orders” and
judicial trash without ever addressing the complained about legal issues and claims for relief.
RECKLESS DEPRIVATIONS AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE & COURT ACCESS
14. For criminal and illegal purposes of obstructing justice, extorting, coercing, and
concealing, Defendant Criminal Honeywell obstructed, and caused other Officials and
Defendants to obstruct, the filing of, e.g., Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal from “order”, Doc. #
213, Notice of Appeal from “order”, Doc. # 236, Case No. 2-2009-cv-00791:
“The Clerk is directed to terminate these motions.
3. The Clerk is further directed to no longer accept ANY filings from Plaintiffs
in this case because a judgment has been entered and Plaintiffs have filed a
notice of appeal as to the Court’s Order (Dkt. 213), and this case is CLOSED.
4. Finally, the Clerk is also directed to strike Published Public Notices from the
record (Dkt. 220, 221, 223, 225, 226, 229, 230, 232, 233, 234, 235).”
ILLEGAL DESTRUCTION AND MUTILATION OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
15. With corrupt intent to extort, blackmail, coerce, defraud, deprive, and obtain illegal
benefits, Defendant Corrupt Honeywell destroyed, mutilated, caused others to destroy and
mutilate, and conspired with, e.g., other Officials to destroy and mutilate official records,
Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. # 236, 07/02/2010, p. 3:
“Plaintiffs have also filed several documents entitled “Published Public Notice” (Dkt.
220, 221, 223, 225, 226, 229, 230, 232, 233, 234, and 235). These documents do not
relate to any pending motion. Further, they are not motions which request affirmative
relief by the Court. They are immaterial to this case, which has been dismissed.
Moreover, some of the documents contain scandalous materials. These notices
should, therefore, be stricken.” See Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. # 236, pp. 2-3.
MISUSE OF PUBLIC OFFICE, CONCEALMENT, AND COVER UP
16. In exchange for bribes, Defendant Government Whore Honeywell obstructed, delayed, and
prevented the communication of judicial and Government corruption information relating to
the commission of felonies by, e.g., U.S. Agents J. E. Steele, S. Polster Chappell, M. A.
Pizzo, R. A. Lazzara, and Def. record Forger of “land parcels” K. M. Wilkinson, and
Crooked Attorney Jack N. Peterson, § 838.022 (1)(c), Fla. Stat.
DELIBERATE DERPRIVATIONS AND PERVERSIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
17. U.S. Defendant Honeywell recklessly perverted express Florida and Federal Constitutional
guarantees of, e.g., the rights to due process, equal protection of the law, to own property,
exclude Governments from private property, redress Government grievances, prosecute by

3
jury trial, be free of Government corruption, extortion, coercion, oppression, falsification of
records, unlawful seizure of private property under fraudulent pretenses such as, e.g.:
a. Idiotically and brazenly, Def. Whore Honeywell manufactured and conspired with other
Government Officials to pervert express Constitutional guarantees and concoct that
property rights are not fundamental rights;
b. Def. Honeywell concocted and conspired to concoct that Plaintiffs could not assert their
perfected “state claims” against U.S. Agents in U.S. Courts;
c. Def. Honeywell fabricated and conspired to fabricate that Defendant Forger of “land
parcels” Wilkinson had filed a non-existent “Rule 38 motion”. Here, Defendant
Honeywell falsified and caused others to falsify dockets, docket entries, and official
records. See § 838.022 (1)(a), Fla. Stat.;
d. Def. Predator Honeywell concealed, covered up, and/or altered official records and
documents, § 838.022 (1)(b), Fla. Stat.;
e. With corrupt intent to obtain illegal benefits for Lee County Officials and to harm the
Plaintiff record landowners & corruption victims, Def. Honeywell maliciously fabricated
and conspired to fabricate a “regulation” by nameless, un-named, and non-existent
“legislators”. See § 838.022 (1), Fla. Stat.
OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESS & FILING OF NOTICE OF APPEAL, DOC. 213
18. On or around 07/16/2010, Defendant Whore Honeywell prevented and conspired with other
Officials such as, e.g., Defendant Clerks Drew Heathcoat and Diane Nipper the filing of
Plaintiffs’ Notice of Appeal from Order, Doc. # 213 …, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, and the
communication of information relating to the commission of felonies in the U.S. District
Court, Fort Myers, Florida.
19. Recklessly, Honeywell’s illegal and felonious acts deprived the Plaintiffs of their rights as
stated in Doc. # 214, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791.
“RULE 38/WRIT OF EXECUTION”-FRAUD-SCHEME, CONSPIRACY TO EXTORT
20. Pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 39, costs may be taxed against the appellant, if a judgment is
affirmed. Defendant Whore Honeywell knew and concealed that the “costs allowed” and/or
taxed were “$24.30”, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. ## 365, p. 15; 386-3, p. 15. Def.
Honeywell concealed that no costs were ever allowed under purported “Rule 38”.
“FRIVOLOUS APPEAL”-FRAUD & EXTORTION-SCHEME
21. “FRAP 38, Frivolous Appeal - Damages and Costs” provides that
“if a court of appeals determines that an appeal is frivolous, it may, after a separately
filed motion or notice from the court and reasonable opportunity to respond, award
just damages and single or double costs to the appellee.”
22. Defendant Government Whore Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that pursuant to
11th Cir. R. 38-1, Time for Filing Motions, Motions for damages and costs pursuant to FRAP
38 must be filed no later than the filing of appellee’s brief. Here, Defendant Wilkinson had
tendered and/or filed his prima facie fraudulent brief on or around 08/08/2008. See Appellate
Case No. 2008-13170-BB, certified Docket sheet. Admittedly, Defendant Wilkinson never
filed any “Rule 38 motion” before 08/08/2008.
23. Admittedly, Defendant Wilkinson had never filed any Rule 38 motion. Rule 38 only provided
for damages and costs. Here, Defendant Wilkinson had never filed any such motion and
perpetrated fraud on the Court. See certified Docket. Defendant Government Whore
Honeywell concealed said “Rule 38 motion”-fraud-scheme and conspiracy to extort.
CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL ILLEGALITY & CRIMINALITY OF FAKE “WRIT”

4
24. On or around 07/14/10, Defendant corrupt U.S. Judge Honeywell conspired with, e.g., U.S.
Defendants Chappell and Steele to fraudulently conceal the prima facie nullity and illegality
of a facially forged “writ of execution” and “July judgment”, Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089,
Doc. # 48, p. 1:
“On February 1, 2010, Magistrate Judge Chappell issued an order granting Defendant
Kenneth M. Wilkinson's Motion for Issuance of a Writ of Execution (2:07-CV-228,
Dkt. 424). Shortly thereafter, the writ was issued (2:07-CV-228, Dkt. 425).”
25. Defendant crooked Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that
Defendant Wilkinson had never filed any “Rule 38 motion”, Fed.R.App.P.
26. Defendant corrupt U.S. Judge Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal
that Defendant Co-conspirator Chappell had fabricated a mandate and/or judgment, Case No.
2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 424:
“On July 28, 2009, the Eleventh Circuit issued a Judgment awarding Wilkinson
$5,000.00 in attorney’s fees and double costs in the amount of $48.60, as sanctions
for Busse’s pursuit of a frivolous appeal.”
27. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that admittedly
Defendant Wilkinson had never alleged a “frivolous appeal” and that no mandate or
“judgment awarding Wilkinson $5,000.00 in attorneys fees…” had ever existed, Case No.
2:2007-cv-00228.
28. In the certified record absence of any “Rule 38 motion” by Def. Wilkinson, a fraudulent
“judgment” in the amount of “$24.30” “issued as mandate on June 11 2009”, Case No.
2:2007-cv-00228.
29. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that the mandated
“amount of $24.30” had been paid and was not “outstanding”:
“The Judgment to date remains outstanding.”
30. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired with other U.S. Agents to
conceal that
a. No such mandated “judgment” existed, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228;
b. No mandated “judgment” was ever “recorded in the Public Records of Lee County”;
c. The fraudulently alleged “certification” was facially forged;
d. “Instrument No. 2009000309384” could not have possibly become any “lien” on any
property pursuant to Ch. 55, 56; and 55.10 Florida Statutes; and
e. No “writ of execution” legally existed.
31. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired with U.S. Defendants Chappell,
Steele, and other U.S. Agents to conceal that nothing in that or any other Case could have
possibly “served as a lien against” any property under Florida and Federal law:
“A certified copy of the Judgment was recorded in the Public Records of Lee County,
Florida at Instrument No. 2009000309384 and serves as a lien against the property.”
32. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that
a. Defendant Wilkinson had never filed any “Rule 38 motion”;
b. Kenneth M. Wilkinson had never been awarded any mandated “judgment”;
c. Def. Wilkinson was not “entitled to tax….”;
d. The prima facie fraudulent “Writ” was due to be denied as unlawful and unauthorized.

5
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF JURISDICTION & FRAUD ON THIS COURT
33. On or around 06/23/10, Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed the jurisdiction of this
Court over the unlawful acts of the Defendant U.S. Agents and recklessly deprived the
Plaintiffs of any chance of justice and adjudication of their perfected claims, Doc. # 213:
“B. Supplemental Jurisdiction
The decision to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over pendent state claims rests
within the discretion of the district court.” Raney v. Allstate Ins. Co., 370 F.3d 1086,
1088-89 (11th Cir. 2004). Once a district court dismisses all claims over which it had
original jurisdiction, it may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the
remaining state claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). This Court, therefore, declines to
exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ remaining state claims.”
34. Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that this Court had jurisdiction of
any and all claims involving the Defendant U.S. Government Officials and including “state
claims”. Defendant Honeywell had no “discretion” but was absolutely obligated to adjudicate
Plaintiffs’ claims, because United States Agents had perpetrated unlawful and criminal acts
of record.
35. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Co-Defendant U.S. Judges Steele and
Chappell themselves had removed Plaintiffs’ State action, 2006-CA-003185, BUSSE v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, to Federal Court. See 2:2008-cv-00899.
36. “Declining jurisdiction” over unlawful and criminal U.S. Governmental acts proved
Defendant Honeywell’s fraud on the Courts and required her disqualification.
RECKLESS OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESS
DISPARATE DENIAL OF COURT ACCESS RIGHTS
37. Recklessly, Defendant Honeywell again obstructed Plaintiffs’ court access on 06/23/10, Doc.
# 213, p. 21:
“With its discretionary authority, the Court declines to exercise supplemental
jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state claims.”
OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESS UNDER FALSE PRETENSES OF “misconduct”
38. On 07/07/10, Defendant Honeywell again fabricated “misconduct” and/or “loss” of
“electronic filing privileges” in response to Plaintiffs’ “specific” demand for “equal court
access and privileges for filing purposes.” See Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, Doc. # 38, p. 1;
see Def. Honeywell’s previous fabrications, Case No. 2:09-CV-791, Doc. ## 133, 151.
RECORD CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE & ADJUDICATION
39. Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Defendant U.S. Judges and Officials not to justly
and speedily adjudicate Plaintiffs’ conclusively proven “state claims” against Federal
Defendants.
DENIAL & FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS
40. On or around 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell recklessly and disparately denied the
Plaintiffs the equal protection of the laws under fraudulent pretenses, Doc. # 213, p. 19:
“In this case, Plaintiffs claim that they were denied equal protection of the laws by
Defendants in relation to Lot 15A. As a general matter, Florida counties may exercise
eminent domain over property not owned by the state or federal government. Fla.
Stat. § 127.01(1)(a); id. “Since a state landowner would not be subject to eminent
domain power but [Plaintiffs], as . . . [alleged] private landowner[s], would be,”
Plaintiffs cannot be similarly situated to a state landowner. Busse, 317 Fed. Appx. at
973. Plaintiffs, “therefore cannot rely on [their] disparate eminent domain treatment

6
vis-a-vis state landowners as the basis for an equal protection claim.” Id.
Consequently, the Court finds that Plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief
can be granted and dismisses their Equal Protection claim.”
41. In exchange for Defendants’ bribes, Defendant Honeywell fixed and fraudulently concealed
Plaintiffs’ perfected “equal protection claim” and the record absence of any “eminent
domain” “exercise”. On 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed that none
of the Government Defendants ever had any “eminent domain power” and perpetrated fraud
on the Court.
CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL U.S. JURISDICTION & OBSTRUCT COURT ACCESS
42. Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Federal Defendants to conceal Federal
jurisdiction and obstruct Plaintiffs’ meaningful court access.
43. In particular, Defendant Honeywell conspired to conceal that of course, the Plaintiffs
rightfully prosecuted 1st, 14th, 4th, 7th and 5th Amendment violations by Federal Defendants in
Federal Court.
44. On or around 06/23/10, Defendant U.S. Judge Honeywell fabricated “necessary state
procedures”, Doc. # 213, p. 18:
“They have not exhausted the necessary state procedures to address their dispute
prior to filing in federal court. Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiffs failed to state
a claim upon which relief can be granted and dismisses their Seventh Amendment
claim.”
45. Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that Plaintiffs’ prosecution of
Federal Defendants for Seventh Amendment Violations did of course not require “necessary
state procedures”. Brazenly and idiotically, Defendant Honeywell concocted “necessary
state procedures” on the record. Said reckless fabrications were outside Honeywell’s scope
of immunity and official capacity.
DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS OF COURT ACCESS UNDER FALSE PRETENSES
46. Without any meritorious “defense” or “claim”, and under facially idiotic pretenses of
“frivolity” and “vexatiousness”, Defendant Honeywell deliberately deprived the Plaintiffs of
court access.
CONCEALMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO OWN PROPERTY AND
CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL THAT PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE FUNDAMENTAL
47. Defendant Honeywell conspired to fraudulently conceal that property rights are most
fundamental rights. On or around 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell conspired to brazenly
and irrationally concoct, Doc. # 213, p. 20:
“Property rights would not be fundamental rights since they are based on state law.”
Id. Here, Plaintiffs claim that they have been denied their alleged property rights in
Lot 15A. These property rights are defined by state law. Therefore, the Court finds
that Plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and dismisses
their Substantive Due Process Claim.”
48. No halfway intelligent and non-corrupt judge in Defendant Honeywell’s shoes could have
possibly denied that property rights and the right to own property are most fundamental
rights. Honeywell’s above assertion was recklessly false and for unlawful and criminal
purposes of extorting property and fees and illegally bypassing due process and equal
protection of the law.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF PLAINTIFFS’ PREVIOUS “STATE ACTION”

7
49. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed Plaintiffs’ State action, Case No. 2006-CA-
003185 (Lee County Circuit Court), BUSSE v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Doc. # 213, p. 15:
“Although they have been previously told by the Eleventh Circuit that they must
proceed in state court prior to bringing suit in federal court for several of their claims,
Plaintiffs refuse to do so and continue to re-file their complaints with additional
Defendants and claims all surrounding the same property dispute.”
50. Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Officials such as, e.g., Defendants Steele and
Polster Chappell to conceal Plaintiffs’ 2006 State action of record, 2006-CA-003185.
Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendants Steele and Chappell had removed
Plaintiffs’ record 2006 State action to Federal Court. See 2:2008-cv-00899.
51. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed Plaintiffs’ fundamental entitlement to sue
Defendant U.S. Agents in Federal Court for any and all claims.
06/23/2010 SLANDER OF RECORD REAL PROPERTY TITLE, DOC. # 213
52. On or around 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell unintelligently slandered Plaintiffs’ record
marketable title to riparian Lot 15A, “Cayo Costa”, Doc. # 213, 2:2009-cv-00791:
“In a resolution adopted in December 1969 by the Board of Commissioners of Lee
County, Florida, Lot 15A, among other property, was claimed as public land
(“Resolution 569/875") (Dkt 5, Ex. 3, p. 9). See Prescott, et al., v. State of Florida, et
al., 343 Fed. Appx. 395, 396-97 (11th Cir. Apr. 21, 2009); Busse, et al. v. Lee County,
Florida, et al., 317 Fed. Appx. 968, 970 (11th Cir. Mar 5, 2009).”
07/14/2010 FABRICATION OF “WRIT OF EXECUTION”
53. On or around 07/14/2010, Defendant Honeywell irrationally fabricated a “writ of
execution”, Doc. # 48, p. 1, 2:2010-cv-00089:
“In the motion, Plaintiffs appear to seek a release of the writ of execution and
attachment of a lien to property issued in Busse v. Lee County, Florida, et al., Case
No. 2:07-CV-228-FtM-29SPC. That case was before Judge John Steele and
Magistrate Judge Sheri Chappell.”
54. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed the record lack of any “writ of execution”
mandated “July 2009 judgment”, and of any ‘Rule 38 motion” by Def. “land parcel” Forger
Wilkinson. See Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228; see Case Docket as certified on 07/16/2010 by
Def. Clerk D. Nipper.
55. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the record 03/05/2009 “judgment” and paid
“amount of $24.30” “issued as mandate on 06/11/2009”, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, had
ruled out any possibility of a “writ of execution”.
56. Because of her irrational contradictions on record, Defendant Honeywell’s “orders” were
facially arbitrary, capricious, incomprehensible, and idiotic:
57. In particular, no rational, competent, and honest judge in Defendant Honeywell’s shoes
could have possibly reconciled a fake “writ of execution” with a fake “claim”.
58. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that in the hypothetical event of any involuntary
title transfer to Government, no “writ of execution” could have possibly existed.
59. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that in the hypothetical event of a “writ of
execution”, there could not have possibly been any involuntary title transfer to Lee County,
Florida. For bribes, Def. Whore Honeywell conspired to extort Plaintiffs’ property under
fraudulent pretenses of a non-existent “Rule 38 motion”, fake “judgment”, and fake “writ”.

8
TRESPASS ONTO PRIMA FACIE PRIVATE “CAYO COSTA” SUBDIVISION
60. Defendant Honeywell’s unlawful and criminal acts of record, reckless orders, Case ##
2:2009-cv-00791; and 2:2010-cv-00089, slander of title, fraudulent pretenses and/or
fabrications of a non-existent mandated “judgment”, “writ of execution”, “lien” proximately
caused unlawful and criminal trespass onto Plaintiffs’ private street and up lands on the Gulf
of Mexico in the private undedicated residential “Cayo Costa” Subdivision.
61. Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that the public had no Subdivision
access, because as a matter of law, the public had no right to use any of the prima facie
private street and alley easements as legally conveyed in reference to the 1912 Plat of Survey
in PB 3 PG 25.
ILLEGAL FIRES AND ARSON
62. Defendant Honeywell’s reckless orders, Case ## 2:2009-cv-00791, and 2:2010-cv-00089,
slander of title, fraudulent pretenses and/or fabrications of a non-existent mandated
“judgment”, “writ of execution”, “lien” have been inducing the public to start unlawful fires
and perpetrate arson on private “Cayo Costa” Subdivision property, PB 3 PG 25 (1912).
CONSPIRACY TO COVER UP FOR GOVERNMENT CROOKS
63. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal the record crimes and
illegal acts of, e.g., U.S. Defendants John E. Steele, Sheri Polster Chappell, Richard A.
Lazzara, Mark Allan Pizzo, and to cover up for said Government Crooks.
RECORD THREATS AND FABRICATIONS OF “VIOLATION OF ORDER”
64. On or around 07/14/20, Defendant Honeywell again threatened, intimidated, and coerced
the Plaintiffs to refrain from prosecuting Defendant Honeywell, 2:10-cv-00089, Doc. # 49, p.
2:
“…Plaintiff Busse has directly violated an order of this Court.”
65. Defendant Government Whore Honeywell has been a named party Defendant, because she,
e.g., accepted Defendants’ bribes, fixed Plaintiff’s Cases under false pretenses of a
“regulation”, fabricated a “writ of execution”, perverted the Florida and Federal
Constitutional guarantees of the most fundamental rights to own property and exclude
Governments, redress Government grievances, be free of Government corruption,
oppression, unlawful seizure of property, et al. The Plaintiff corruption victims sued Def.
Honeywell in her individual private capacity outside any immunity, because Def.
Honeywell maliciously extended, e.g., record Government extortion, corruption, and crimes
and unlawful acts. See, e.g., Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. # 213, 236; Case No. 2:2010-
cv-00089, Doc. ## 48, 49, 50.
66. Under color of office, Defendant Honeywell falsified and/or caused other persons to falsify
official record and documents. See § 838.022, Fla. Stat.
RECORD EXTORTION OF FEES AND PROPERTY
67. For unlawful and criminal purposes of extorting fees and Plaintiffs’ record property,
Defendant Honeywell fabricated a “writ of execution”.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF RECORD “06/11/2009 MANDATE”
68. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that a facially fraudulent 03/05/2009 “judgment”
“issued as mandate on June 11, 2009” and was received by the U.S. District Court on
06/15/2009. See Doc. # 365; Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF CLOSURE OF CASE 08-17130-BB ON 06/11/2009
69. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit
had closed Case No. 2008-13170-BB on 06/11/2009.

9
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF “$24.30” MANDATE
70. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit
had “allowed the amount of $24.30” “issued as mandate on June 11, 2009”
71. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the “amount of $24.30” was not outstanding.
72. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that no “writ of execution” could have possibly
existed on the record.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF NON-EXISTENCE OF “RULE 38 MOTION”
73. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendant crooked Official Kenneth M.
Wilkinson had never filed any Rule 38 motion.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF RECORD COERCION
74. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed that Defendant K. M. Wilkinson expressly
coerced the Plaintiff corruption victims to refrain from prosecution on the record. See
Wilkinson’s “Rule 27-4 motion”.
COERCION
75. On the record, Defendant Honeywell coerced the Plaintiffs to refrain from prosecution under
color of authority and office.
76. Without any authority or justification, Defendant Honeywell threatened, intimidated,
harassed, and “punished” the Plaintiffs on the record, including the obstruction of court
access.
FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF NON-EXISTENT “LAND PARCELS”
77. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendant Forger K. M. Wilkinson had
unlawfully and criminally forged “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-
01-00001.0000”. Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that said forged
“parcels” did not appear on the 1912 “Cayo Costa” Subdivision Plat of Survey in Lee
County Plat Book 3 Page 25.
78. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that said non-existent and forged “land parcels”
had never been legally described, platted, and/or conveyed in reference to said Plat of
Survey, PB 3 PG 25 (1912) and had never existed.
BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION
79. In exchange for Defendants’ bribes, Defendant Honeywell concealed said evident record
forgeries and covered up for Defendant K. M. Wilkinson.
80. Defendant Honeywell accepted Defendants’ bribes and enforced the culture and policy of
corruption in her office even though Honeywell knew that the prima facie fake “writ of
execution”, “lien”, “judgment”, and “land parcels” had never existed and could not have
possibly existed.
DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS & FRAUD ON THE COURT
81. With wanton disregard for Plaintiffs’ fundamental rights to, e.g.
a. Be free of Government corruption, extortion, coercion, and threats;
b. Be free of unlawful seizure;
c. Redress Government grievances without coercion, extortion, and threats;
d. Have meaningful and free court access;
e. Have due process and equal protection of the law;
f. Own property;
g. Exclude Defendant Governments from Plaintiffs’ record property.
Defendant Honeywell perpetrated fraud on the Court and deliberately deprived the
Plaintiffs of their express fundamental rights under the Federal and Florida Constitutions.

10
/s/Jorg Busse, M.D., M.M., M.B.A.
c/o International Court of Justice
Peace Palace
The Hague, Netherlands

/s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott


c/o International Court of Justice
Peace Palace
The Hague, Netherlands

11
12
13
14
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
27
26

You might also like