FBI Public Corruption Complaint Against Crooked U.S. Judge C. E. Honeywell

8/9/2019 FBI Public Corruption Complaint Against Crooked U.S. Judge C. E. Honeywell

1/16

F.B.I. PUBLIC CORRUPTION COMPLAINT

AGAINST CROOKED CHARLENE E. HONEYWELL

CORRUPT U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

CERTIFIED DELIVERYFederal Bureau of Investigation

5525 West Gray Street

Tampa, FL 33609

Phone: (813) 253-1000

DEFENDANT CHARLENE E. HONEYWELL

RECORD LACK OFIMMUNITY- PERPETRATION OF UNLAWFUL ACTS

1. The Plaintiff public corruption victims are suing Defendant corrupt U.S. District JudgeCharlene Edwards Honeywell (Honeywell), a female Afro-American Judge, in herprivate

individual capacity and official capacity. Defendant Honeywells unlawful and criminal actson record were outside any immunity and officialcapacity.

FELONIES OUTSIDE ANY official CAPACITY

2. Defendant Corrupt Honeywell had knowledge of the actual commission of felonies andconcealed them. Here even though Def. Honeywell had knowledge of, e.g., judicial Co-Defendant Chappells, Steeles, Pizzos, and Lazzaras obstruction of justice andfraudulent 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 somejudge or person in authority, but covered up for said Offenders in exchange forbribes, 18U.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 fraudulentwrit of execution; see Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. ## 213, 236, assistance with recordforgeries.

DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS UNDER COLOR OF FAKE writ AND resolution

4. Defendant Government Whore deliberately deprived the Plaintiffs, e.g., under color of afake 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 thePlaintiff public corruption victims, which included interference with Plaintiffs livelihood

and record land ownership, because the Plaintiff landowners had provided truthfulinformation 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, withcorrupt intent to retaliate against the Plaintiffs because the Plaintiffs had blown the whistleon public corruption; in particular, because the Plaintiffs had produced records and testimonyconclusively evidencing Government corruption and fraud, and information about thecommission of Federal offenses by Government Officials. Here, Plaintiff Government crime


2/16

2

and corruption victims had the right to be reasonably protected from the GovernmentOffenders 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 fromprosecuting and producing crime evidence. Idiotic lies and threats of sanctions have played

a central role in Honeywells record crimes and concealment. Just like Jews andGovernment opponents in Nazi Germany, the Plaintiff Government crime victims arerunning from the anarchy, extortion, and coercion in Honeywells court of perversionswhere un-recorded and non-existentjudgments can be perverted into a lien on property.

MISUSE OF PUBLIC OFFICE, CONCEALMENT, AND COVER UP

8. In exchange forbribes, Defendant Government Whore Honeywell obstructed, delayed, andprevented the communication of judicial and Government corruption information relating tothe 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, andCrooked Attorney Jack N. Peterson, 838.022 (1)(c), Fla. Stat.

DELIBERATE DERPRIVATIONS AND PERVERSIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

9. U.S. Defendant Honeywell recklessly perverted express Florida and Federal Constitutionalguarantees 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 byjury trial, be free of Government corruption, extortion, coercion, oppression, falsification ofrecords, 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 thatproperty rights are not fundamental rights;

b. Def. Honeywell concocted and conspired to concoct that Plaintiffs could not assert theirperfected state claims against U.S. Agents in U.S. Courts;

c. Def. Honeywell fabricated and conspired to fabricate that Defendant Forger of landparcels Wilkinson had filed a non-existent Rule 38 motion. Here, DefendantHoneywell falsified and caused others to falsify dockets, docket entries, and officialrecords. See 838.022 (1)(a), Fla. Stat.;

d. Def. Predator Honeywell concealed, covered up, and/or altered official records anddocuments, 838.022 (1)(b), Fla. Stat.;

e. With corrupt intent to obtain illegal benefits for Lee County Officials and to harm thePlaintiff record landowners & corruption victims, Def. Honeywell maliciously fabricatedand conspired to fabricate a regulation by nameless, un-named, and non-existentlegislators. See 838.022 (1), Fla. Stat.

OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESS & FILING OF NOTICE OF APPEAL, DOC. 213

10. On or around07/16/2010, Defendant Whore Honeywell prevented and conspired with otherOfficials such as, e.g., Defendant Clerks Drew Heathcoat and Diane Nipper the filing ofPlaintiffs Notice of Appeal from Order, Doc. # 213 , Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, and thecommunication of information relating to the commission of felonies in the U.S. DistrictCourt, Fort Myers, Florida.

11. Recklessly, Honeywells illegal and felonious acts deprived the Plaintiffs of their rights asstated in Doc. # 214, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791.

RULE 38/WRIT OF EXECUTION-FRAUD-SCHEME, CONSPIRACY TO EXTORT


3/16

3

12. Pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 39, costs may be taxed against the appellant, if a judgment isaffirmed. Defendant Whore Honeywell knew and concealed that the costs allowed and/ortaxed were $24.30, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. ## 365, p. 15; 386-3, p. 15. Def.Honeywell concealed that no costs were everallowedunder purported Rule 38.

FRIVOLOUS APPEAL-FRAUD & EXTORTION-SCHEME

13. FRAP 38, Frivolous Appeal - Damages and Costs provides thatif a court of appeals determines that an appeal is frivolous, it may, after a separatelyfiled motion or notice from the court and reasonable opportunity to respond, awardjust damages and single or double costs to the appellee.

14. Defendant Government Whore Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that pursuant to11th Cir. R. 38-1, Time for Filing Motions, Motions for damages and costs pursuant to FRAP38 must be filed no later than the filing of appellees brief. Here, Defendant Wilkinson hadtendered and/or filed his prima facie fraudulent brief on or around 08/08/2008. See AppellateCase No. 2008-13170-BB, certified Docket sheet. Admittedly, Defendant Wilkinson neverfiledany Rule 38 motion before 08/08/2008.

15. Admittedly, Defendant Wilkinson had neverfiled any Rule 38 motion. Rule 38 only provided

for damages and costs. Here, Defendant Wilkinson had neverfiled any such motion and perpetrated fraud on the Court. See certified Docket. Defendant Government WhoreHoneywell concealed said Rule 38 motion-fraud-scheme and conspiracy to extort.

CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL ILLEGALITY & CRIMINALITY OF FAKE WRIT

16. 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 illegalityof 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 DefendantKenneth 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).

17. Defendant crooked Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal thatDefendant Wilkinson had never filed any Rule 38 motion, Fed.R.App.P.

18. Defendant corrupt U.S. Judge Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to concealthat Defendant Co-conspirator Chappell had fabricated a mandate and/orjudgment, Case No.2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 424:

On July 28, 2009, the Eleventh Circuit issued a Judgment awarding Wilkinson$5,000.00 in attorneys fees and double costs in the amount of $48.60, as sanctionsfor Busses pursuit of a frivolous appeal.

19. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that admittedlyDefendant Wilkinson had never alleged a frivolous appeal and that no mandate orjudgment awarding Wilkinson $5,000.00 in attorneys fees had ever existed, Case No.2:2007-cv-00228.

20. In the certified record absence of any Rule 38 motion by Def. Wilkinson, a fraudulentjudgment in the amount of $24.30 issued as mandate on June 11 2009, Case No.2:2007-cv-00228.

21. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that the mandatedamount of $24.30 had been paid and was not outstanding:

TheJudgmentto date remains outstanding.


4/16

4

22. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired with other U.S. Agents toconceal thata. 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 anyproperty pursuant to Ch. 55, 56; and 55.10 Florida Statutes; ande. No writ of execution legally existed.

23. 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 havepossibly 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 andserves as a lien against the property.

24. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal thata. Defendant Wilkinson had neverfiledany Rule 38 motion;b. Kenneth M. Wilkinson had never been awardedany mandatedjudgment;

c. Def. Wilkinson was not entitled to tax.;d. The prima facie fraudulent Writ was due to be denied as unlawful and unauthorized.FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF JURISDICTION & FRAUD ON THIS COURT

25. On or around 06/23/10, Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed the jurisdiction of thisCourt over the unlawful acts of the Defendant U.S. Agents and recklessly deprived thePlaintiffs 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 restswithin 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 hadoriginal jurisdiction, it may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over theremaining state claims. 28 U.S.C. 1367(c)(3). This Court, therefore, declines toexercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs remaining state claims.

26. Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that this Court had jurisdiction ofany and all claims involving the Defendant U.S. Government Officials and including stateclaims. Defendant Honeywell had no discretion but was absolutely obligated to adjudicatePlaintiffs claims, because United States Agents had perpetrated unlawful and criminal actsof record.

27. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Co-Defendant U.S. Judges Steele andChappell themselves had removed Plaintiffs State action, 2006-CA-003185, BUSSE v.STATE OF FLORIDA, to Federal Court. See 2:2008-cv-00899.

28. Declining jurisdiction over unlawful and criminal U.S. Governmental acts provedDefendant Honeywells fraud on the Courts and required her disqualification.

RECKLESS OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESS

DISPARATE DENIAL OF COURT ACCESS RIGHTS

29. 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 supplementaljurisdiction over Plaintiffs state claims.

OBSTRUCTION OF COURT ACCESS UNDER FALSE PRETENSES OF misconduct


5/16

5

30. On 07/07/10, Defendant Honeywell again fabricated misconduct and/or loss ofelectronic filing privileges in response to Plaintiffs specific demand for equal courtaccess and privileges for filing purposes. See Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, Doc. # 38, p. 1;see Def. Honeywells previous fabrications, Case No. 2:09-CV-791, Doc. ## 133, 151.

RECORD CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE & ADJUDICATION

31. Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Defendant U.S. Judges and Officials not to justlyand speedily adjudicate Plaintiffs conclusively proven state claims against FederalDefendants.

DENIAL & FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS

32. On or around 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell recklessly and disparately denied thePlaintiffs 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 byDefendants in relation to Lot 15A. As a general matter, Florida counties may exerciseeminent 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 eminentdomain power but [Plaintiffs], as . . . [alleged] private landowner[s], would be,

Plaintiffs cannot be similarly situated to a state landowner. Busse, 317 Fed. Appx. at973. Plaintiffs, therefore cannot rely on [their] disparate eminent domain treatmentvis-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 reliefcan be granted and dismisses their Equal Protection claim.

33. In exchange for Defendants bribes, Defendant Honeywell fixed and fraudulently concealedPlaintiffs perfected equal protection claim and the record absence of any eminentdomain exercise. On 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed that noneof the Government Defendants ever had any eminent domain power and perpetrated fraudon the Court.

CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL U.S. JURISDICTION & OBSTRUCT COURT ACCESS

34. Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Federal Defendants to conceal Federaljurisdiction and obstruct Plaintiffs meaningful court access.

35. In particular, Defendant Honeywell conspired to conceal that of course, the Plaintiffsrightfully prosecuted 1st, 14th, 4th, 7th and 5th Amendment violations by Federal Defendants inFederal Court.

36. On or around 06/23/10, Defendant U.S. Judge Honeywell fabricated necessary stateprocedures, Doc. # 213, p. 18:

They have not exhausted the necessary state procedures to address their disputeprior to filing in federal court. Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiffs failed to statea claim upon which relief can be granted and dismisses their Seventh Amendmentclaim.

37. Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that Plaintiffs prosecution ofFederal Defendants forSeventh AmendmentViolations 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 Honeywells scopeofimmunity and officialcapacity.


6/16

6

DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS OF COURT ACCESS UNDER FALSE PRETENSES

38. Without any meritorious defense or claim, and under facially idiotic pretenses offrivolity and vexatiousness, Defendant Honeywell deliberately deprived the Plaintiffs ofcourt access.

CONCEALMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO OWN PROPERTY AND

CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL THAT PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE FUNDAMENTAL39. Defendant Honeywell conspired to fraudulently conceal that property rights are mostfundamental rights. On or around 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell conspired to brazenlyand 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 inLot 15A. These property rights are defined by state law. Therefore, the Court findsthat Plaintiffs failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and dismissestheir Substantive Due Process Claim.

40. No halfway intelligent and non-corrupt judge in Defendant Honeywells shoes could havepossibly denied that property rights and the right to own property are most fundamental

rights. Honeywells above assertion was recklessly false and for unlawful and criminal purposes of extorting property and fees and illegally bypassing due process and equalprotection of the law.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF PLAINTIFFS PREVIOUS STATE ACTION

41. 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 mustproceed 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 additionalDefendants and claims all surrounding the same property dispute.

42. Defendant Honeywell conspired with other Officials such as, e.g., Defendants Steele andPolster Chappell to conceal Plaintiffs 2006 State action of record, 2006-CA-003185.Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendants Steele and Chappell had removedPlaintiffs record 2006 State action to Federal Court. See 2:2008-cv-00899.

43. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed Plaintiffs fundamental entitlement to sueDefendant U.S. Agents in Federal Court for any and all claims.

06/23/2010 SLANDER OF RECORD REAL PROPERTY TITLE, DOC. # 213

44. On or around 06/23/2010, Defendant Honeywell unintelligently slandered Plaintiffs recordmarketable 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 LeeCounty, 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, etal., 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

45. On or around 07/14/2010, Defendant Honeywell irrationally fabricated a writ ofexecution, Doc. # 48, p. 1, 2:2010-cv-00089:

In the motion, Plaintiffs appear to seek a release of the writ of execution andattachment of a lien to property issued inBusse v. Lee County, Florida, et al., Case


7/16

7

No. 2:07-CV-228-FtM-29SPC. That case was before Judge John Steele andMagistrate Judge Sheri Chappell.

46. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed the record lack of any writ of executionmandated July 2009 judgment, and of any Rule 38 motion by Def. land parcel ForgerWilkinson. See Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228; see Case Docket as certified on 07/16/2010 by

Def. Clerk D. Nipper.47. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the record 03/05/2009 judgment and paidamount of $24.30 issued as mandate on 06/11/2009, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, hadruled out any possibility of a writ of execution.

48. Because of her irrational contradictions on record, Defendant Honeywells orders werefacially arbitrary, capricious, incomprehensible, and idiotic:

49. In particular, no rational, competent, and honest judge in Defendant Honeywells shoescould havepossibly reconciled a fake writ of execution with a fake claim.

50. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that in the hypothetical event of any involuntarytitle transferto Government, no writ of execution could havepossibly existed.

51. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that in the hypothetical event of a writ of

execution, there could not havepossibly been any involuntary title transferto Lee County,Florida. For bribes, Def. Whore Honeywell conspired to extort Plaintiffs property underfraudulent pretenses of a non-existent Rule 38 motion, fake judgment, and fake writ.

TRESPASS ONTO PRIMA FACIE PRIVATE CAYO COSTA SUBDIVISION

52. Defendant Honeywells unlawful and criminal acts of record, reckless orders, Case ##2:2009-cv-00791; and 2:2010-cv-00089, slander of title, fraudulent pretenses and/orfabrications of a non-existent mandatedjudgment, writ of execution, lien proximatelycaused unlawful and criminal trespass onto Plaintiffs private street and up lands on the Gulfof Mexico in the private undedicated residential Cayo Costa Subdivision.

53. Defendant Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that the public had no Subdivisionaccess, because as a matter of law, the public had no right to use any of the prima facieprivate street and alley easements as legally conveyed in reference to the 1912 Plat of Surveyin PB 3 PG 25.

ILLEGAL FIRES AND ARSON

54. Defendant Honeywells reckless orders, Case ## 2:2009-cv-00791, and 2:2010-cv-00089,slander of title, fraudulent pretenses and/or fabrications of a non-existent mandatedjudgment, writ of execution, lien have been inducing the public to start unlawful firesand perpetrate arson on private Cayo Costa Subdivision property, PB 3 PG 25 (1912).

CONSPIRACY TO COVER UP FOR GOVERNMENT CROOKS

55. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal the record crimes andillegal 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

56. On or around 07/14/20, Defendant Honeywell again threatened, intimidated, and coercedthe Plaintiffs to refrain from prosecuting Defendant Honeywell, 2:10-cv-00089, Doc. # 49, p.2:

Plaintiff Busse has directly violated an orderof this Court.57. Defendant Government Whore Honeywell has been a named party Defendant, because she,

e.g., accepted Defendants bribes, fixed Plaintiffs Cases under false pretenses of aregulation, fabricated a writ of execution, perverted the Florida and Federal


8/16

8

Constitutional guarantees of the most fundamental rights to own property and excludeGovernments, 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, 50.58. 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

59. 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

60. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that a facially fraudulent 03/05/2009 judgmentissued as mandate on June 11, 2009 and was received by the U.S. District Court on06/15/2009. See Doc. # 365; Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF CLOSURE OF CASE 08-17130-BB ON 06/11/200961. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th

Circuithad closed Case No. 2008-13170-BB on 06/11/2009.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF $24.30 MANDATE

62. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th

Circuithad allowed the amount of $24.30 issued as mandate on June 11, 2009

63. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that the amount of $24.30 was not outstanding.64. 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

65. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendant crooked Official Kenneth M.Wilkinson had never filed any Rule 38 motion.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF RECORD COERCION

66. Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed that Defendant K. M. Wilkinson expresslycoerced the Plaintiff corruption victims to refrain from prosecution on the record. SeeWilkinsons Rule 27-4 motion.

COERCION

67. On the record, Defendant Honeywell coerced the Plaintiffs to refrain from prosecution undercolor ofauthority and office.

68. Without any authority or justification, Defendant Honeywell threatened, intimidated,harassed, and punished the Plaintiffs on the record, including the obstruction of courtaccess.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF NON-EXISTENT LAND PARCELS

69. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that Defendant Forger K. M. Wilkinson hadunlawfully 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 forgedparcels did not appear on the 1912 Cayo Costa Subdivision Plat of Survey in LeeCounty Plat Book 3 Page 25.


9/16

9

70. Defendant Honeywell knew and concealed that said non-existent and forged land parcelshad never been legally described, platted, and/or conveyed in reference to said Plat ofSurvey, PB 3 PG 25 (1912) and had neverexisted.

BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION

71. In exchange for Defendants bribes, Defendant Honeywell concealed said evident record

forgeries and covered up for Defendant K. M. Wilkinson.72. Defendant Honeywell accepted Defendants bribes and enforced the culture and policy ofcorruption in her office even though Honeywell knew that the prima facie fake writ ofexecution, lien, judgment, and land parcels had never existed and could not havepossibly existed.

DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS & FRAUD ON THE COURT

73. 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 thePlaintiffs of theirexpress fundamental rights under the Federal and Florida Constitutions.


10/16

10


11/16

11


12/16

12


13/16

13


14/16

14


15/16

15


16/16

16

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	judicialfraud
View:	216 times
Download:	0 times

FBI Public Corruption Complaint Against Crooked U.S. Judge C. E. Honeywell

Documents