Charlene E. Honeywell Sodomy & Rape of the Law

8/9/2019 Charlene E. Honeywell Sodomy & Rape of the Law

1/48

ORGANIZED JUDICIAL CRIME RACKETEERING, EXTORTION,

1. The publicly recorded extortion and fraud scheme of Government seizure and

forced sale of Plaintiffs Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, would be absolutely impossible, if Lot 15A

had been claimed as public land as fraudulently pretended by Def. Honeywell. Here, the

record had conclusively evidenced the lack of anyjudgmentand lack of any involuntary title

transfer to Lee County, FL. See Case 2:2007-cv-00228; Doc. ## 436, 288, 282. Here,

Defendant Honeywell fraudulently pretended and conspired with other Officials to falsely

pretend that the Plaintiff record owners Lot 15A had been claimed as public land, Case

2:2009-cv-00791; Doc. # 245.

PRIMA FACIE IDIOTIC AND INCOMPREHENSIBLE claim as public land

2. Defendant land parcel Forger Kenneth M. Wilkinson falsified a lien on exempt Lot

15A, Cayo Costa, in the record absence of anyfinal judgmentand mandate. Def. Wilkinson

fraudulently concealed that he was not anyjudgment creditor, but moved the Court toforce

the sale of Lot 15A, while Defendant Honeywell idiotically pretended that Lot 15A had

been claimed as public lands.

3. No intelligent, honest, and fit judge and/or person in Honeywells shoes could possibly

reconcile the publicly recorded fatally conflicting nonsense and hoax of a prima facie

falsified land claim of Lot 15A and a facially forgedjudgment lien in the absence of any

judgment. Here absurdly, Defendant Corrupt C. E. Honeywell perpetrated organized

judicial crimes:

At the heart of each case, Plaintiffs allege that they are the owners of Lot 15A in theCayo Costa subdivision of Lee County, Florida (Dkt. 1, 1; Dkt. 5, 1). Plaintiffsattempt to challenge a resolution adopted in December 1969 by the Board ofCommissioners of Lee County, Florida, where Lot 15A, among other property, wasclaimed as public land (Resolution 569/875") (Dkt 5, Ex. 3, p. 9). See Prescott, et


2/48

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). To fully establish the need for a global pre-filing injunction, the Court willsummarize the pertinent facts of each previous case that Plaintiffs filed relating to thisproperty dispute. See Doc. # 245, 07/20/2010, p. 3.

WARRANTY DEED PROVED JUDICIAL RACKETEERING, FRAUD & CRIMES

4. Here, Plaintiffs publicly recorded WARRANTY DEED,Lee County INSTRUMENT

#2010000171344, proved the absurd judicial hoax and racketeering/extortion scheme of

a resolution 569/875 and claim of Lot 15A as public land. No law, resolution, legislative

act, whatsoever, could have possibly involuntarily divested the Plaintiffs of their

unimpeachable marketable record title to and ownership of Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, PB 3, PG

25 (1912).

PUBLICLY RECORDED resolution-RACKETEERING & EXTORTION SCHEME

5. Any involuntary alienation would have been strictly a judicial function. No legislator

ever had (or could have possibly had) any authority to divest the Plaintiffs of their record

title against Plaintiffs will. See Separation-of-Powers-Doctrine and Floridas express

Constitutional Protections; 14th, 4thU.S. Const. Amendments.

PRESCOTT v. STATE OF FLORIDA PROVED ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIME

6. Prescott, et al., v. State of Florida, et al., 343 Fed. Appx. 395, 396-97 (11th Cir. Apr. 21,

2009) had stated:

I. BACKGROUND

A. Current Action

The Appellants are owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision in Lee

County, Florida.

The Appellants' Lot 15A is on the west side of the Cayo Costa subdivision on

the Gulf of Mexico and is adjacent to land that was claimed through Resolution

569/875 to create the Cayo Costa State Park.

CRIMINAL & ILLEGAL pre-filing injunction, DOC. # 245

7. Here, the Plaintiff record owners and title holders had paid real property taxes, Lot

15A, Cayo Costa, and were entitled to defend against, e.g., publicly recorded Government

2


3/48

racketeering, wire fraud, extortion, retaliation, obstruction of justice, deliberate

deprivations, and bribery. See Lee County Tax Collectors public records, riparian Lot

15A, Cayo Costa.

8. Here, Defendant Crooked Judge Honeywell had no authority to fraudulently conceal

Plaintiffs unimpeachable record ownership, real property tax payments, rights to own

and exclude Government from Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, under color of facially forged

resolution 569/875 and by prima faciecriminal and illegalmeans of a global pre-filing

injunction, Doc. # 245, Case 2:2009-cv-00791.

BRIBERY & OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

9. Here in exchange forbribes, Defendant Crooked Judge Honeywell obstructed justice,

retaliated, and deliberately deprived the Plaintiff record title holders and owners of their

fundamental rights to redress Governmental grievances and defend against unlawful

Government seizures of Plaintiffs private property, racketeering, extortion, due process

and equal protection violations, 1st, 14th, 4th, 7th U.S. Constitutional Amendments.

FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT AND CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL

10. Here, Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that, e.g.:

a. The Plaintiffs are the unimpeachablerecord owners ofLot 15A in the Cayo

Costa subdivision of Lee County, Florida, pursuant to, e.g., Ch. 712, Fla. Stat., Floridas

self-enforcing Marketable Record Title Act;

b. No claim o r resolution, whatsoever, could have possibly involuntarily

divested the Plaintiffs of their perfected marketable record title to Lot 15A, Cayo

Costa, PB 3 PG 25 (1912);

c. No legislator or lawmaker, whatsoever, had any authority to usurp judicial

authority to make a judicial ordertransferring titleagainst Plaintiffs will;

d. Nojudge had ever made any orderorjudgmentinvoluntarily alienatingLot 15A;

3


4/48

e. The Board of Commissioners of Lee County, Florida, never adopted any

resolution 569/875 in December 1969;

f. No name of any commissionerappeared on prima facie scam O.R. 569/875;

g. Scam O.R. 569/875 was not any law, resolution, or legislative act and

unauthorized;

h. Involuntary-alienation-by-fake-resolution was a racketeering & extortion

scheme;

i. The prima facie sham land claim lacked any color and was legally

incomprehensible;

j. Lot 15A was never claimed as public land; see Tax Records & Grantor-Grantee

Index;

k. Prima facie extortion and fraud scheme O.R. 569/875 was not any claim;

l. The law did not recognize facially incomprehensible resolution 569/875;

m. The legal description of Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, did not appear in the sham

resolution;

n. No valid authentic legal description appeared in the facially forged resolution;

o. Falsified resolution 569/875" had neverlegally existed;

p. Scam O.R. 569/875 did not, and could not havepossibly, compliedwith Ch. 11,

Fla. Stat., Legislative Organization, Procedures, and Staffing;

q. Said facially forged resolution was not any writing, instrument, ormuniment of

title;

r. The fake resolution was not any conveyance, instrument, or eminent domain

document;

4


5/48

s. The prima facie unauthorized global pre-filing injunction was an organized

Governmental crime scheme forcriminal and illegal purposes of, e.g., extortion and

racketeering;

t. Def. Honeywell obstructed justice under color of authority & scam O.R.

569/875;

u. Def. Honeywell obstructed justice under color of a fakewrit of execution, Doc.

# 425;

v. Def. Lee County Commissioners had no authority to sign any claim of

uncertain and legally un-described lands;

w. Lot 15A was never subject to any enforcementof any money judgmentagainst Dr.

Busse;

x. The fakewrit of execution, Doc. # 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228, violated Floridas

Judgment Lien Law; see Ch. 55, Fla. Stat.;

y. Defendant Appellee Kenneth M. Wilkinson was not anyjudgment creditor;

z. Def. K. M. Wilkinson never incurred any actual and necessaryattorneys fees;

see business records on file;

aa. Dr. Jorg Busse was not anyjudgment debtor;

bb. Lot 15A was exempt real property and owned by the entireties;

cc. Litigation has been pending and nofinal judgmentexisted.

DEF. HONEYWELLS IDIOTIC RETALIATORY CONCOCTIONS

11. For criminal purposes of racketeering, retaliation, extorting Plaintiffs property,

fabricating and/or falsifying the adoption of fake resolution 569/875, Defendant

Crooked U.S. Judge Honeywell concocted in Doc. # 245, p. 2:

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs have a persistent history of filing baseless, incomprehensible and repetitivepleadings which have impacted the resources of this Court, as well as of Defendants.

5


6/48

Here, Plaintiff unimpeachable record owners of Lot 15A had a history of pleading well-

proven and publicly recorded Government fraud, corruption, deliberate deprivations,

extortion, retaliation, racketeering, et al., which tarnished the reputation of this Court as a

ruthless criminal organization.

RECORD LACK OF ANY instrument& COVER-UP OF SCAM O.R. 569/875

12. Neither Defendant Honeywell nor Defendants Lee County were the holder of any

instrumentand/orfake O.R. 569/875.

RECORD LACK OFgrantorANDgrant FAKE claim, O.R. 569/875

13. 695.09, Fla. Stat., states:

695.09 Identity of grantor.--No acknowledgment or proof shall be taken, except asset forth in s. 695.03(3), by any officer within or without the United States unless theofficer knows, or has satisfactory proof, that the person making the acknowledgmentis the individual described in, and who executed, such instrument or that the personoffering to make proof is one of the subscribing witnesses to such instrument.

Facially forged claim, fake resolution 569/875, was not any genuine legally

comprehensible paper, but a prima facie extortion and racketeering scheme. Here, there

had been no grant and/orconveyance. Here, there was no grantor, and nothinguncertain

and legallyun-described could havepossibly beengrantedto anyone and/orLee County.

Here, nobodyknewwho couldhave possibly executedfacially unlawful and unauthorized

scam O.R. 569/875. Here, there were nosubscribing witnesses.

NO entitlement to enforce FACIAL SCAM O.R. 569/875

14. 673.3011, Florida Statutes, states:

673.3011 Person entitled to enforce instrument.--The term "person entitled toenforce" an instrument means:(1) The holder of the instrument;

6


7/48

Here, Defendants Lee County were never the holder of any instrumentO.R. 569/875 and

not entitled to enforceprima facieunauthorizedscam O.R. 569/875. See Title XXXIX,

Commercial Relations, Ch. 673, Negotiable Instruments.

15. Here, Defendant Corrupt Judge Honeywell fraudulently concealed that prima facie

sham claim O.R. 569/875 was not any negotiable instrumentand on its face null and

void. On its face, publicly recorded scam O.R. 569/875 lacked any authentic legal

description, legislative names,signatures, history, acknowledgment, and witnesses. Here as a

matter of law, nobody was entitled to enforceunauthorizedextortion and fraud scheme

O.R. 569/875.

LEE COUNTY, FL, WAS NOT ANY real party in interest

16. Pursuant to Floridas real party in interest Rule, Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.210(a), Lee County

was not any real party in interest. Here, Lee County had no interest, was not any record

owner, and Lee Countys presence was neither necessary nor proper to a complete

determination of the cause. Id.

CONSPIRACY TO FRAUDULENTLY CONCEAL AND EXTORT

17. Here, Defendant Honeywell fraudulently concealed and conspired to conceal that Lee

County, FL, had never been any real party in interest.

RECORD LACK OF ANY GENUINE INSTRUMENT

18. 697.10, Fla. Stat., states:

697.10 Liability for error in mortgage deed or note.--In any action relating to realproperty, if the court shall find that any person has prepared an instrument which dueto an inaccurate or improper legal description impairs another person's title to realproperty, the court may award to the prevailing party all costs incurred by her or himin such action, including reasonable attorney's fees, and in addition thereto mayaward to the prevailing party all actual damages that she or he may have sustained asa result of such impairment of title.

7


8/48

Here, facially forged O.R. 569/875 was not anygenuine instrument. Here, there was no

authentic accurate legal description in said prima facie sham and legally

incomprehensible claim.

19. Here, Defendant Crooked Honeywell recklessly slandered and conspired with other

Officials to slander Plaintiffs perfected marketable title to said Lot 15A under color of

falsified resolution 569/875, which impaired Plaintiffs title to their record riparian real

property on the Gulf of Mexico, Parcel 12-44-20-01-00015.015A.

20. Here, Plaintiffs were entitledtoall costs incurred by them while defending their record

Lot 15A ownership against, e.g., publicly recorded Government racketeering, retaliation,

extortion, obstruction of justice, fraud on the Court, deliberate deprivations, and

bribery.

ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIME SCHEMES

21. Defendant Corrupt Judge C. E. Honeywell evidenced, e.g., organized Government

crime, racketeering, extortion, obstruction of justice, bribery, retaliation, Doc. # 245,

pp. 3 through 12:

To fully establish the need for a global pre-filing injunction, the Court willsummarize the pertinent facts

Here Defendant Honeywell summarized facts pertinent to the conclusively proven

fraudulent Governmental concealment and cover-up of the prima facie criminality,

illegality, and nullity of extortion and fraud scheme O.R. 569/875.

22. In each fixed case, Judges and/or Government Officials conspired to, e.g., defraud,

deliberately deprive, racketeer and extort Cayo Costa land and money from the Plaintiffs

under fraudulent and false pretenses of, e.g., facially forged resolution 569/875 and

frivolity. Here, obstruction of justice, retaliation, bribery, and silencing the Plaintiffs

were unlawfulacts. See Doc. # 245, pp. 3 through 12.

8


9/48

CONSPIRACY TO FALSIFY ATTORNEYS FEES AND EXTORT

23. Defendant Charlene Edwards Honeywell conspired with other Government Officials and

Defendants to falsify attorneys fees.

24. Defendant Crooked Judge Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that Defendant

Appellee Kenneth M. Wilkinson, Lee County Property Appraisers Office had never

incurred and could not have possibly incurredactual and necessary attorneys fees in the

amount of$5,000.00.

ANARCHY & BRIBERY IN FLORIDAS FEDERAL COURTS LOSS OFjurisdiction

25. On June 11, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals had lost jurisdiction, Case 2008-13170-

BB. Jurisdiction followed the mandate and final money judgment in the amount of$24.30

for copies under Fed.R.App.P. 39. Frivolity of the appeal had never been any issue

whatsoever. Neither the Appellant nor the Appellee nor anyone else had ever raised the

fabricatedissue of afrivolous appeal. See Opinion and Mandate.

26. Therefore in July 2009, the 11th Circuit could not have possibly awardedanything to

Defendant land parcel Forger Kenneth M. Wilkinson.

27. After June 11, 2009, Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson did not incur any actual and

necessary attorneys fees in said CLOSED APPELLATE CASE, 2008-13170-BB.

CRIMINAL FALSIFICATION OFJuly 29, 2009, judgment

28. Here, no Florida judgmentexisted that could have possiblyserved as any basis for a

valid judgment lien. In particular, no Florida state court or United States District Court had

ever made any $5,048.60 mandate and/or money judgment. Here, no dispositive andfinal

orderhad been made. In particular, the central issues such as, e.g., the facially forged land

parcels 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0 and 07-44-21-01-00001.0000 had never been

reviewedat all.

POLICY & PATTERN OF RAPE, COVER-UP, CONCEALMENT, AND CONSPIRACY

9


10/48

29. Defendants policy and pattern of cover-up and fraudulent concealment perfect Floridas

organized Government crime machine. Just like pervert priests in the Catholic Church

encourage sodomy, Defendant Florida Judges and Government Officials encouraged, e.g.,

rape of the law, intimidation of victims, and retaliation for criminal purposes of extending

the criminal culture or racketeering and corruption. Once Officials perpetrated their pervert

fucking, cover-up, concealment, and conspiracy followed underfalse pretenses that, e.g., the

victims proof was frivolous and that the victims must be silenced by, e.g., a global pre-

filing injunction.

30. Here, Dr. Busse had paid the $24.30 and Defendant record Forger Wilkinson and the

Courts were estopped from falsifying any debt, outstanding judgment, and/or$5,048.60.

31. Here, no $5,048.60 judgment could be found in the U.S. District Court, Case 2:2007-

cv-00228. No judgment lien attached to Lot 15A. Here, nojudgmentexisted to operate as a

lien against exempt real property, Lot 15A, Ch. 55, Fla. Stat.

32. In order for anyjudgmentto operate as a lien, a certified copy thereof must be recorded.

Here, the only moneyjudgmentand final mandate in the amount of$24.30 had been paid and

could not havepossibly been outstanding.

33. A valid curative affidavitwould have been required had the facially falsified and forged

judgment been genuine. No curative valid affidavit was everfiled and/or recorded under

Floridas Rules.

34. Furthermore, Lot 15A has been owned by Dr. Jorg Busse in such a manner that is would

be exempt and could notpossibly be subjectto any levy and/orexecution.

35. Defendant fake lot 00A0 Forger Kenneth M. Wilkinson was not any lien holder.

Here, no lien holder was identifiedor could havepossibly been identified.

36. Here, the sham $5,048.60 judgment was a record racketeering and extortion

scheme, and Defendant Crook Wilkinson neverperfected and could not have possibly

10


11/48

perfectedanyjudgment lien on Lot 15A. The falsifiedaffidavitproved perjury and violated

the Rules.

37. No authentic and valid writ of execution was ever served upon Dr. Jorg Busse.

38. Litigation has been pending since 2006 and nofinal judgmentexisted.

39. Def. Wilkinson was neverentitledto entry of any order directing public sale of Lot 15A.

40. Here, Defendant Charlene E. Honeywell conspired with Defendant Officials Wilkinson,

Steele, Polster Chappell and other Officials and Defendants to fraudulently pretend and

fake an outstanding judgment for criminal and illegal purposes of, e.g., racketeering,

retaliating, extorting Plaintiffs land and money, and coercing the Plaintiff(s) to refrain

from prosecution in violation of their Civil Rights and the 1st, 14th, 7th, and 4th Const.

Amendments.

THE 11th APP. CIRCUIT HAD DENIED DEF. FORGER WILKINSONS MOTION

41. In the Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida,

Docket No. 2008-00364-CV-FTM-29-SPC, the U.S. Court of Appeals had stated:

C. Rule 11 SanctionsAlthough this issue is closer, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretionin denying Appellee [*15] Wilkinson's motion for sanctions. The district court wasintimately familiar with the Appellees' claims in both complaints and their conductthroughout the litigation and was thus in the best position to determine whether Rule11 sanctions were appropriate. We note that the district court has now warned theAppellees that their conduct may warrant sanctions in the future if continued.

III. CONCLUSIONTherefore, we affirm the district court's orders dismissing the Appellants' complaint,denying the Appellants' motion for recusal, and denying the Appellees' motion forsanctions.

11


12/48

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTMIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT MYERS DIVISION

DR. JORG BUSSE,Plaintiff [-Appellant],

KENNETH M. ROESCH, J.R., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

versus Case # 2:2007-cv-228-FtM-JES-SPC

LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA, et al., Defendants.AFFIDAVIT

NOTICE OF APPEAL, RACKETEERING,

AND ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIMES

__________________________________________________________________________/

NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM FRAUDULENT order(s), DOC. ## 434, 435, 424, AND

RACKETEERING,EXTORTION,RETALIATION, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, AND

ANY AND ALL NULL & VOID orders BY DEF. J. E. STEELE & S. P. CHAPPELL,

AND FALSIFIED writ of execution, DOC. ## 425, 424, 434, 435, 433, 430; AFFIDAVIT

EMERGENCY MOTION TO ENJOIN FRAUD ON COURT, DOC. ## 435, 434, 424, 425

EMERGENCY MOTION TO ENJOIN sale of real propertyWHICH GOVERNMENT HAD FRAUDULENTLY claimed TO own

UNDER COLOR OF FORGED land parcel 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0, ANDFACIALLY FORGED O.R. 569/875 & FAKE legislative act/resolution/regulation

DIRECT INDEPENDENT ATTACK ON ORGANIZED GOVERNMENT CRIMES:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Ex Rel. et al. v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al.

DEF. HONEYWELL OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE & PERVERTED FLORIDA LAW

12


13/48

42. A judgment, order, or decree does NOT become a lien on real property unless the

address of the person who has a lien as a result of such judgment, order, or decree is

contained in the judgment, order, or decree or an affidavit with such address is

simultaneously recorded with the judgment, order, or decree, 55.10, Florida Statutes.

PUBLICLY RECORDED NOTICES OF ORGANIZED JUDICIAL CRIMES

43. Multiple publicly recorded NOTICES, and NOTICES OF APPEAL such as, e.g., Doc. ##

427, 428, had given this Court repeated notice and conclusive proof of, e.g., publicly

recorded organized Government and judicial crimes, racketeering, extortion,

retaliation, obstruction of justice, bribery, and corruption.

PATTERN, POLICY, AND CUSTOM OF ORGANIZED CRIME & CORRUPTION

44. However, this Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit only intensified

their publicly recorded retaliation, obstruction of justice, oppression, racketeering, and

extortion. See, e.g., Doc. ## 435, 434, 425, 426. Said Courts are operating just like crime

organizations. Public records and conclusive record evidence mean absolutely nothing.

Silencing, shutting up, threatening, intimidating, punishing, and sanctioning

whistleblowers such as here, e.g., the Plaintiff Appellant Dr. Jorg Busse are the policy,

custom, and pattern of said corrupt Courts.

DEF. JOHN E. STEELE EXTENDED EXTORTION & RACKETEERING SCHEME

45. Here, there had been NO judgment in the falsified amount of $5,000.00 and/or

$5,048.60. Here, there had been NO July 29, 2009 judgment, order, or decree. Here,

there had only been a final mandate and money judgment for copies under Rule 39,

Fed.R.App.P., in the amount of $24.30, Doc. # 365. Here, Dr. Jorg Busse had paid the

$24.30 for the copies to Defendant Appellee K. M. Wilkinson. Therefore here, Defendant

Racketeer Kenneth M. Wilkinson had NO lien, and the motion for entry of order directing

13


14/48

public sale of real property, Doc. # 432, was a prima facieracketeering, extortion, and

fraudscheme of record, civil RICO provisions.

DEF. STEELE CONCEALED PERJURY & GOVERNMENT EXTORTION SCHEME

46. Here, Defendant Steele fraudulently concealed that the fraudulent Affidavit by Def.

Jack N. Peterson had falsified a fake July 29, 2009 judgment in Docket 08-13170-BB.

47. Here, CASE No. 2008-13170-BB had been CLOSED on 06/11/2009. See said Case

Docket.

48. Here, Defendant Steele fraudulently concealed that NOTHING could have possibly

become a lien on real property and/or on Plaintiff(s) riparian Parcel, S-T-R-A-P # 12-44-

20-01-00015.015A, PB 3 PG 25 (1912) pursuant to 55.10, Florida Statutes.

PUBLICLY RECORDED LACK OF ANY lien and writ of execution

49. Here, Defendant Appellee Forger and Racketeer K. M. Wilkinson

a. NEVER had any lien;

b. NEVER was the holder of said forged judgment.

50. Here, Defendant Steele fraudulently concealed that the facially fraudulent writ of

execution, Doc. # 425:

a. Was a prima facie extortion and racketeering scheme;

b. Perverted $24.30 into the falsified amount of 5,048.60;

c. Had NOT been witnessedby any U.S. Judge.

51. Plaintiff Dr. Jorg Busse had asserted and conclusively proven in his Third Amended

Complaint, Doc. ## 282, 288:

24. Without title evidence in the public Grantor/Grantee Index, Defendant [KennethM. Wilkinson; Property Appraiser] conspired to concoct un-platted lot A (PropertyI.D. 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0), block 1 (Property I.D. 07-44-21-01-00001.0000), andpark. Id., p. 24. See attached Exhibits, USA, Ex Rel. et al. v. USA et al.

14


15/48

CONSPIRACY TO PERVERT & CORRUPT FLORIDA LAW & OFFICIAL RECORDS

52. Defendant Crooked Judge Steele conspired with other Judges, Defendants, and Officials

to pervert official records, documents, and Florida law. Here, e.g., s. 55.10, Fla. Stat. stated:

55.10 Judgments, orders, and decrees; lien of all, generally; extension of liens; transferof liens to other security.--(1) A judgment, order, or decree becomes a lien on real property in any county when acertified copy of it is recorded in the official records or judgment lien record of the county,whichever is maintained at the time of recordation, provided that the judgment, order, ordecree contains the address of the person who has a lien as a result of such judgment, order,or decree or a separate affidavit is recorded simultaneously with the judgment, order, ordecree stating the address of the person who has a lien as a result of such judgment, order, ordecree. A judgment, order, or decree does not become a lien on real property unless theaddress of the person who has a lien as a result of such judgment, order, or decree iscontained in the judgment, order, or decree or an affidavit with such address issimultaneously recorded with the judgment, order, or decree.

FRAUDULENT PRETENSES AND OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE & FILINGS

53. Defendant Corrupt U.S. Judge John Edwin Steele fraudulently pretended, Doc. # 434:

This matter comes before the Court on review of defendants Motion for Entry ofOrder Directing Public Sale of Real Property (Doc. # 432) filed on May 21, 2010.Noresponse has been filedand the time to respond has expired. Upon review, the Courtdesires a response from plaintiff.

Here over and over again, Plaintiff Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin Prescott had

filed, e.g., multiple responses, court actions, appeals to directly attack, defend

against, and expose Defendant Crooked U.S. Judge John E. Steeles publicly recorded:

a. Racketeering;b. Extortion;c. Obstruction of justice;d. Deliberate deprivations;e. Acceptance ofbribes;f. Fraud upon the State and Federal Courts;g. Destruction and alteration ofCourt records;

h. Corruption.

See attached Exhibit of UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Ex Rel. et al. v. UNITED

STATES et al., as filed in U.S. District Court.

15


16/48

DEF. STEELES RECKLESS DECEPTION AND FRAUD ON THE COURT

54. Def. Steele recklessly deceived the Court, because he disallowed the Plaintiffs to

respond and then fraudulently pretended that the Plaintiffs had purportedly not

responded. However as a matter of record, the Plaintiffs had published conclusive evidence

of theirfiled responses worldwide. Here, more than one Million readers had read the

responses, which Def. Crook Steele had destroyed, altered, and rejected, and caused

others to destroy, alter, and reject. See, e.g., Google and YouTube.

DEF. STEELE OBSTRUCTED PLAINTIFFS COURT ACCESS FRAUD ON COURT

55. As part of a criminal organization, Def. Steele fabricated and conspired to fabricate a

publicly recorded card house of judicial shit:

In this regard, some of the allegations in the Third Amended Complaint arecontradicted by the resolution which is attached to it. The copy of the Resolutionattached to the Third Amended Complaint establishes that it was signed, executed,and duly recorded in the public records, and plaintiff will not be allowed to assertotherwise. See Doc. # 338, p. 12.

Here, no authenticgenuine resolution was attached to the Third Amended Complaint,

Doc. ## 288, 282. Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 44, there was a lack of any publicly recorded

resolution. No genuine resolution had ever legally existed; none had ever been legally

recorded.

Here by not allowing the Plaintiffs to assert otherwise, Def. Steele recklessly deprived the

Plaintiffs of any opportunity of justice. Here, Def. Criminal Steele perpetrated fraud on the

Court, covered up, and concealedGovernment crimes.

Just like other crime organizations, Steele relied on silencing his opponents, retaliation,

intimidation, and injury.

56. In the Third Amended Complaint, the Plaintiff(s) had asserted and conclusively

proven, e.g., the:

a. Prima facieillegality of the fictitious resolution, O.R. 569/875;

16


17/48

b. Prima facie nullity of the fake resolution;c. Prima facie criminality of the falsified resolution.

57. Only a court judgment could havepossibly transferred title to Governmentand/orLeeCounty. Here on its face, the facially forged resolution was

a. Not any court judgment;

b. Not any muniment of title;c. Not anygenuine instrument:d. Not any conveyance;e. Not authentic.

RACKETEERING, EXTORTION, DECEPTION, AND FRAUD ON THE COURT

58. Therefore, any resolution forged orgenuine would have been, and could have only

been, entirely irrelevant, immaterial to any involuntary title transfer, because only a court

judgmentcould havepossibly divested the Plaintiffs of their private riparian street easement

and street land on the Gulf, PB 3 PG 25 (1912), against their will.

DEF. CROOK STEELE HAD NOAUTHORITYTO SILENCE THE PLAINTIFFS

59. Here in exchange for bribes, Def. Criminal Steele perverted supreme law and

disallowed the Plaintiffs to assert the truth and public record evidence without which any

justice was absolutely impossible.

60. The Plaintiff(s) do not submit to said Criminal on the bench just like they would not

submit to a Roman Catholic priest demanding to fuck the Plaintiff(s) in the ass. Here, the

Plaintiffs defended against organized Government crimes & sodomy and sued Defendant

Racketeer J. E. Steele in Federal Court.

61. Here on the record, Def. Crook Steele adopted the policies and custom of crime

organizations such as, e.g., silencing opponents, retaliation, intimidation, racketeering,

extortion, and injury.

DEF. RACKETEER STEELES FACIALLY IDIOTIC & ILLEGAL order, DOC. # 434

62. No intelligent, rational, fit, and reasonable judge and/or person in Def. Crooked Judge

Steeles shoes could havepossiblyallowedthe fake writ of execution, Doc. # 425, and the

faciallyfraudulent public sale motion, Doc. # 432.

17


18/48

63. Any enforcementof a non-existent judgment against Dr. Busse by public sale of said

adjoining riparian street land and private implied street easement on the Gulf of Mexico

would have been absolutely impossible, if the record title had been in the name of

Government and/orLee County.

64. Publicly selling the very riparian street land and private Gulf-front street easement,

PB 3 PG 25 (1912), which Lee County had fraudulently claimed to own [but never did

and could not possibly have owned as a matter of law] further exposed and conclusively

proved the prima facie idiotic and criminalmind of Def. Racketeer John Edwin Steele.

Emboldened by absolute power and public corruption, Def. Steele continued his record

Government shit flies-policy, Doc. # 434.

IDIDOCY & IMPOSSIBILITY OF public sale of real property

65. One of the legal issues had been Plaintiff(s) unimpeachable record ownership of the

platted riparian street land and implied private street easement adjoining Plaintiffs upland on

the Gulf of Mexico, S-T-R-A-P 12-44-20-01-00015.015A (Lot 15A, Cayo Costa) as legally

described and perfectly conveyed to Plaintiff Dr. Busse and J. Franklin Prescott in reference

to the 1912 Plat of Survey of the private undedicated Cayo Costa Subdivision in Lee

County Plat Book 3, Page 25. See Plaintiffs WARRANTY DEED, Lee County

INSTRUMENT # 2010000171344, which expressly stated the extent of Plaintiff(s)

conveyance; see PRESCOTT v. STATE OF FLORIDA, 343 Fed. Appx. 395, 396-97 (11th

Circuit Apr. 21, 2009).

FOR BRIBES, DEF. STEELE MADE A MOCKERY OF THE PROCEEDINGS

66. Here as a matter of law, Public Sale of Real Property, which Def. Steele had

fraudulentlypretended to have been claimed by Lee County was absolutely impossible.

Here, Def. Steele made a fool of himself, because that which had been claimed by

Government could not be simultaneously publicly sold.

18


19/48

BRAZEN FABRICATIONS AND FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC RECORD

67. Here in his fraudulent opinion and order, Doc. # 338, Steele brazenly fabricated and

falsified Government ownership without any evidentiary supportwhatsoever. Def. Steele

knew that those [fake] lots had never been owned by government, which had been the

very issue for the Courts review. Here, 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0 and 07-44-20-01-

00001.0000 were prima facie fake land parcels, which Defendants Steele and Sheri

Polster Chappell could notfindon the 1912 Cayo Costa Plat, PB 3 PG 25, because they had

been forged by Defendant Kenneth M. Wilkinson. See Transcript of November 2007

Hearing before Def. Crooked Judge Polster Chappell.

DEF. CRIMINAL STEELE IN CRIMINAL JUDICIAL ORGANIZATION

68. As a Criminal in this Crime Organization of record, Def. Steele extended the

racketeering and retaliationscheme.

Third Amended Complaint states that defendants have taken over 200 acres pursuant to the Resolution, far in excess of his 2.5 acres. The only assertion ofdisparate treatment is for those lots owned by government, which plaintiff allegesdid not have their rights taken. However, a private owner such as plaintiff can not becompared to a public owner such as a government unit. Therefore, no equalprotection claim is stated, and such claims will be dismissed without prejudice.See Doc. # 338, p. 13.

69. Here in essence, the scheme was:

Plaintiffs will not be allowed to assert those [fake] lots owned by Government,which nobody can find on the Cayo Costa Plat. Plaintiffs will not be allowed to assertthe public record evidence of the non-existence and forgery of said fake lots.Therefore, the case is dismissed and fixed in exchange forbribes.

70. By criminal means of fake land parcels, and a fake resolution, Defendant

Governments and Officials extorted, defrauded, deprived, and treated the Plaintiffs

disparately, while the Plaintiffs were never even allowed to assert the conclusive record

evidence and truth. Here, there was fraud on the Court, and any and all of Def. Steeles

orders were null and void ab initio.

19


20/48

71. Pleading, e.g., fraud, conspiracy to defraud, deprivations, conspiracy to deprive,

forgery of land parcels, and extortion were remedies available in Florida and Federal

Courts. See Doc. ## 288, 282, Third Amended Complaint.

72. Just like a bungling Governmentidiot, Defendant Steele concealed and conspired with

other Officials to conceal that, e.g.:

a. Plaintiff(s) perfect record title to their adjoining street land nevertransferredtoLee County, FL;b. Plaintiff(s) unimpeachable record title could not have possibly transferredunder any existing law or modification thereof, Fed.R.Civ.P. 11;c. Lee Countys sham claims were facially fraudulent and frivolous claims forcriminal and illegal purposes of racketeering, retaliation, extortion of money($5,048.60) and land, and illegal sale of real property, Doc. # 434;

d. Lee County never claimed and could not have possibly claimed Plaintiff(s)street land under any law;e. The law did not recognize Lee Countys racketeering & extortion scheme O.R.569/875.

See Chapters 73, 74 ( Eminent Domain); 95 ( Adverse Possession); 712 (Floridas self-

enforcing Marketable Record Title Act), Fla. Stat.; Floridas express Const. Guarantees of

fundamental rights to own real property and exclude Government without, e.g.,

retaliation, extortion, racketeering, oppression, bribery, and public corruption.

73. Because Def. Steele is part of a criminal organization, Def. Steele retaliated and

silenced the Plaintiff(s) in said idiotic, arbitrary, capricious, and malicious manner of public

record. In particular, Steele shut up the Plaintiffs by calling them names such as, e.g.,

vexatious.

74. Only if Plaintiffs unimpeachable record title to said riparian street land and private

riparian street easement had never transferred from the Plaintiffs to Lee County and/or

Government, could there possibly be any public sale of said private riparian street

easement and land on the Gulf of Mexico. See PRESCOTT v. STATE OF FLORIDA,

343 Fed. Appx. 395, 396-97 (11th Circuit Apr. 21, 2009). Here forbribes, and under color

20


21/48


22/48

motion or petition filed not later than fourteen (14) days following the entry ofjudgment. The pendency of an appeal from the judgment shall not postpone the filingof a timely application pursuant to this rule.

J. E. STEELE & B. B. MARTIN FABRICATED writ of execution, DOC. # 425, 434, 435

78. In the recorded presence of a final $24.30 money judgment issued as mandate on

06/11/2009 for costs of Appellees copies, Doc. # 365, and in the record absence of any

$5,048.60 judgment, Def. Steele knew and fraudulently concealed that the fake writ of

execution, Doc. # 425, had been falsified and was null and void. On its very face, no U.S.

judge and no witness had appeared on the falsified writ, Doc. # 425.

CONSPIRACY TO COVER UP AND CONCEAL GOVERNMENT CRIMES

79. Def. Steele conspired with other Government Officials and Defendants to cover up and

fraudulently conceal the prima facie criminality, illegality, and nullity of, e.g.:

a. Fake$5,048.60 judgment;b. Fake land parcels 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0 and 07-44-21-01-00001.0000;c. Fake land claim O.R. 569/875;d. Fake resolution, fake resolution 569/875;e. Fake regulation, fake land use regulation;f. Fake regulatory taking in the recorded absence of any regulation;g. Fake inverse condemnation while Plaintiffs objected to and defendedagainstany involuntarytitle transferto Lee County;h. Fake eminent domain claims in the record absence of any condemnationproceedings.

80. Here, Government and judicial racketeering, extortion, obstruction of justice & court

access, bribery, public corruption, fraud, and deliberate deprivations did not, and could

notpossibly, involuntarily divestthe Plaintiff(s) of their record title to riparian Parcel 12-44-

20-01-00015.015A on the Gulf of Mexico.

55.10 REQUIRED AJUDGMENT- NOLIEN ON PROPERTY

81. Under Florida law, a non-existentjudgmentdid not become, and could not havepossibly

become a lien on real property. Here, section 55.10 could not have possibly applied to a

non-existent mandate. Here, the finalmandate of$24.30 for copies, Doc. # 365, had

22


23/48

been paid. See Affidavits on file. Furthermore here, Defendant Steele fraudulently

concealed that

A judgment, order, or decree does not become a lien on real property unless theaddress of the person who has a lien as a result of such judgment, order, or decree is

contained in the judgment, order, or decree See Ch. 55, Florida Statutes.

Here, judicial Defendants knew and fraudulently concealed that there could not have

possibly been any lienon real property and/or on Plaintiffs property.

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, BRIBERY, AND RACKETEERING

82. In exchange forbribes, Defendant Racketeer John E. Steele silencedthe Plaintiffs and

kept them away from the Court:

a. Disallowed the Plaintiffs to assert the truth and conclusive public recordevidence;b. Removed Plaintiffs State action to Federal Court;c. Removed and destroyed Plaintiffs State Court records;d. Unlawfully sanctioned and punished the Plaintiffs;e. Arbitrarily & capriciouslydenied the Plaintiffs equal electronic court access;f. Illegally enjoined the Plaintiffs from filing their pleadings;g. Rejected Plaintiffs pleadings;h. Caused the Def. Clerk to alter and destroy Court records and crime evidence;i. Retaliated against the Plaintiffs;j. Caused the Def. U.S. Marshal to threaten, intimidate, and harass the Plaintiffs.

CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE & PERPETRATE FRAUD ON THE COURTS

83. Defendant John Edwin Steele conspired with, e.g., Defendant Crooked U.S. JudgeCharlene E. Honeywell and other Officials to shut up the Plaintiffs by criminal and illegalmeans of, e.g.:

a. Enjoining Plaintiffs from filing their pleadings [Pre-filing injunction];b. Destroying Plaintiffs pleadingsc. Rejecting Plaintiffs pleadings;d. Falsifying a regulation;e. Fabricating law;f. Concocting afictitiousinvoluntary title transferto Lee County absent any courtjudgment.

FINAL 06/11/2009 MANDATE

84. The 11th Circuit decided Case 2008-13170-BB by opinionentered on 03/05/2009. On

06/11/2009, the Defendant Clerk of said Appellate Court filed the mandate, which consisted

23


24/48

of a copy of the opinion and ajudgment that had been drafted and signed by a Clerk of said

Court, and directions as to costs in the amount of$24.30. See Fed.R.App.P. 41.

85. The Clerk of the Court signed her name on a copy of thejudgment, which was stamped

"ISSUED AS MANDATE 06/11/2009" and CLOSED SAID CASEon 06/11/2009.

CONSPIRACY TO COVER UP & CONCEAL ORGANIZED CRIME & EXTORTION

86. Here, Defendants Beverly B. Martin, Kenneth M. Wilkinson, John E. Steele, Sheri

PolsterChappell, Sherri L. Johnson, Jack N. Petersonconspired to cover up and conceal

that

a. No $5,048.60 judgment, order, or decree had ever been entered.

b. No $5,048.60 judgment had ever been issued as mandate.c. No $5,048.60 judgment had ever been received by the U.S. District Court.d. No $5,048.60 judgment had ever been recorded by the U.S. District CourtClerk.

J. E. STEELES, S. P. CHAPPELLS & B. MARTINS RACKETEERING OF RECORD

87. Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin Prescott are suing Defendant Racketeer John

Edwin Steele for, e.g., racketeering, extortion, retaliation, fraud, and reckless

deprivations.

JOHN E. STEELES EXTORTION ON THE PUBLIC RECORD

88. Def. Racketeer John E. Steele perverted a publicly recorded$24.30money judgment

(issued as mandate June 11, 2009) into a $5,048.60 and real property extortion scheme

and conspiracy. See Doc. ## 434, 435, 425, 422, 365, 386, 288, 282, 1, 25, 338.

RACKETEER JOHN E. STEELES RECORD RETALIATION

89. By criminal means of falsifying a fake $5,048.60 judgment, Def. Corrupt Judge

Steele retaliated against Plaintiffs Dr. Jorg Busse & J. Franklin Prescott, Doc. ## 434, 425,

435.

24


25/48

RACKETEER JOHN E. STEELES CONCEALMENT OF $24.30 JUDGMENT

90. Def. U.S. Racketeer John E. Steele fraudulently concealed the publicly recorded

$24.30money judgment issued as mandate June 11, 2009, Doc. ## 365; 434, 435, 422,

425, 338.

CONSPIRACY TO EXTORT AND RETALIATE

91. Racketeer John E. Steele conspired with other Government Officials and Defendants to

extort $5,048.60, Dr. Jorg Busses and Jennifer Franklin Prescotts riparian real property,

and Hundreds of Acres of land and implied private easements under, e.g., false and

fraudulentpretenses offake land parcels 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0 and 07-44-20-01-

00001.0000, and under color of prima facie forged and fraudulentO.R. 569/875.

STEELE CONCEALED RECORD ABSENCE OF FAKEPARCELSANDJUDGMENT

92. Defendant Crooked U.S. Judge John E. Steele could not locate said fake land parcels

on the 1912 Plat of Survey of the private undedicated residential Cayo Costa Subdivision in

Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25.

CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL LACK OF ANYRECORD OF FAKE LAND PARCELS

93. Def. Extortionist John E. Steele conspired with other Officials and Defendants to

fraudulently conceal the lackof any $5,048.60judgment and said fake land parcels.

DOCUMENTATION OF FINAL $24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT (JUNE 15, 2009)

94. The publicly recorded $24.30 money judgment issued as mandate June 11, 2009,

Doc. ## 365 (pp. 1), documented:

a. In-House Reproduction of Appellees Brief;b. No. of Original Pages: 18;c. Total No. of Documents Reproduced: 11 (9);d. Total No. of Copies: 198;e. Costs Requested: $29.70.f. CostsAllowed: $24.30.

95. Here, no sanctions, no fees, and no $5,048.60 had ever been documented.

25


26/48

DEF. RACKETEER STEELES FALSIFCATION OF writ of execution, DOC. # 425

96. In the record absence of any $5,048.60 judgment against Dr. Jorg Busse, no witness

and no United States Judge appeared on the face of the falsified writ of execution, Doc.

# 425, Case 2:2007-cv-00228. See also scam Doc. ## 434, 435, 425, 422, 338.

DEF. RACKETEER JOHN EDWIN STEELES OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE

97. Forcriminal and illegal purposes ofconcealing racketeering and extortion, Defendant

Crooked Judge John E. Steele had obstructed justice and Plaintiff(s) Court access, Doc. #

422. In Doc. # 434, 07/22/10, Def. Steele pretended:

No response has been filed and the time to respond has expired. Upon review, the

Court desires a response from plaintiff

26


27/48

RECORDED & PUBLISHED RACKETEERING & EXTORTION

$24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT ISSUED AS MANDATES JUNE 11, 2009

98. The publicly recorded $24.30money judgment issued as mandate June 11, 2009. See

Doc. ## 365 (p. 1), 386-3 (p. 1).

$24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT UNDER FRAP 39, COSTS

99. The $24.30money judgment was awarded pursuant to Rule 39, Fed.R.App.P.

COPY OF $24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT, DOC. # 386-3

100. A copy of the final$24.30 money judgment issued as mandate was included in

Defendant Appellees facially fraudulent motion for issuance of a writ of execution, Doc.

# 386. See pages 10 and 24.

101. Of the $29.70 requested in Racketeer Wilkinsons Bill of Costs, Doc. # 386, the

11th Circuit allowed $24.30 forCosts under FRAP 39:

$24.30 WERE THE ALLOWED ACTUAL AND NECESSARY COSTS

102. Here, $24.30 were the allowed actual and necessary costs.

$24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT BECAME FINAL ON JUNE 15, 2009

103. Pursuant to Doc. ## 365 (p. 1), 386-3 (p. 1), the U.S. District Court received and

filed the $24.30money judgment on June 15, 2009:

27


28/48

RACKETEERING: EXTORTION OF MONEY:

FRIVOLOUS APPEAL MOTION WAS ADMITTEDLY NEVERFILED

104. Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson extorted money, Doc. # 386, by fraudulently

pretending aRule 38 motion, which Wilkinson knew he had neverfiled:

The Judgment4. On August 22, 2008, Wilkinson filed a Motion for Sanctions pursuant to EleventhCircuit Rule 27-4

Said Rule 27-4 motion could not havepossibly been for a frivolous appeal.

THE 11th CIRCUIT HAD CLOSED CASE ON 06/11/2009

105. The 11th Circuit had CLOSED THE CASE on 06/11/2009:

BRIBERY

106. Here, Defendant Appellee K. M. Wilkinson and his Attorney had no right to

bribe the 11th Circuit and illegally cause the 11th Circuit to fraudulently alter the recorded

final $24.30 mandate after the CASE HAD BEEN CLOSED and the 11th Circuit had

LOST JURISDICTION.

DEFENDANTS APPELLEES RACKETEETING AND EXTORTION WERE ILLEGAL

107. Def. Wilkinsons record racketeering and extortion were illegal and

unauthorized by law.

28


29/48

RACKETEERING & EXTORTION IN VIOLATION OF:

FED.R.CIV.P. 54; LOCAL RULE 4.18; 28 U.S.C. 1921-1924; FRAP 39

108. The $24.30 money judgment pursuant to Rule 39, Fed.R.App.P., became final

on June 15, 2009.

LOCAL RULE 4.18 APPLICATIONS FOR COSTS OR ATTORNEY'S FEES

(a) In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 54, all claims for costs or attorney's feespreserved by appropriate pleading or pretrial stipulation shall be asserted by separatemotion or petition filed not later than fourteen (14) days following the entry ofjudgment. The pendency of an appeal from the judgment shall not postpone the filingof a timely application pursuant to this rule.

DEF. WILKINSON VIOLATED REQUIREMENTS UNDER 28 U.S.C. 1920-1924

109. With wanton disregard for Plaintiff(s) rights and due process, Def. Wilkinson

violated the law and Rules:

The $24.30 money judgment was unauthorized by law. Itemization was for$24.30. No documentation for$24.30. The record unauthorizedBill of Costs was for$24.30. Bill of Costs must be verifiedas required by 28 U.S.C. 1924. No knownaffidavit. Plaintiff(s) objected to the unauthorized$24.30 money judgment. The unauthorized$24.30 money judgment was procured through, e.g., publiclyrecorded racketeering and extortion by illegal and criminal means of fraud andextortion scheme O.R. 569/875, and facially forged land parcels 00A0 and00001. See RICO Complaint in U.S. District Court.

RACKETEERING & EXTORTION IN VIOLATION OF:

FRAP 39 [FED.R.APP.P. 39]

110. A copy of Rule 39, Fed.R.App.P., is attached.

(d) Bill of Costs: Objections; Insertion in Mandate.(1) A party who wants costs taxed must within 14 days after entry ofjudgment file with the circuit clerk, with proof of service, an itemized andverified bill of costs.

111. Here, the judgment, No. 2008-13170-BB had been entered: March 5, 2009,

Doc. ## 365, 386. Defendant Appellee Wilkinson had filed with the circuit clerk a $24.30

29


30/48

Bill of Costs. Date signed was 3-17-2009, which was issued on: Jun 11 2009, Doc.

## 365, 386, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.

112. No proof of service existed on the record.

113. The 14 days after entry of judgment on March 5, 2009 had expired on

March 19, 2009.

APPEAL BECAME FINAL ON JUN 15, 2009

114. An appeal becomes final on the date themandate is issued. Here, the judgment

entered March 5, 2009 was issued as mandate Jun 11 2009.

115. Since the clerkhad responsibilities for entering a judgment, Fed.R.App.P. 36, and

for taxation of costs, Fed.R.App.P. 39(d), the duty to issue the mandate contemplated by

Rule 41 was the responsibility of the clerk.

116. 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). The District Court received and filed the Appellate Courts June 11, 2009 mandate on

JUN 15 2009 when the Appeal, No. 2008-13170-BB, became final. Thereafter, the 11th

Circuit had no jurisdiction as a matter of law. Here, there have been publicly recorded

racketeering and extortion by Government Agents.

NO 11th CIRCUIT JURISDICTIONAFTER JUN 15, 2009

117. Jurisdiction followed themandate. The effect of the mandate is to bring the

proceedings in a case on appeal in our Court to a close and to remove it from the jurisdiction

of this Court, returning it to the forum whence it came. It was the date on which the $24.30

mandate was received and filed, Jun 15, 2009, which determined when the district court

reacquired jurisdiction for further proceedings.

118. Issuance of the $24.30mandate on June 11, 2009, and the District Courts receipt

and filing on June 15, 2009 was an event of considerable institutional significance. A

30


31/48

mandate could NOT possibly simply "issue", because it should have been issued, or

because the panel may have intended it to issue, or because the statute commands it to issue.

See F.R.App.P. 27, 41.

ADOPTION BY REFERENCE OF FEDERAL LAWSUIT, CIVIL RICO

119. The Plaintiffs hereby adopt by reference their attached Federal action in this

published Government Racketeering and Corruption Notice, USA, Ex Rel et al. v. USA

et al.

WILKINSONS RACKETEERING, RETALIATION, AND COERCION

120. Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson retaliated on or around August 20, 2008, Doc. #

386-2:

In order to discourage the Appellant from engaging in the same practices

121. Wilkinson coerced Plaintiff Appellant to refrain from rightful prosecution for

prima facie criminal and illegal purposes ofconcealing crimes and covering up.

CRIMINAL AND ILLEGAL FALSIFICATIONS

122. Just like Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson had falsifiedfake land parcels, and a

fake real property transaction, O.R. 569/875, Defendant Forger Wilkinson falsified a

fake judgment; July 29, 2009 in Docket 08-13170-BB against Appellant JORG BUSSE in

the amount of $5,048.60. See, e.g., INSTR 4371834, O.R. 4517 PG 1914, Collier County

Circuit Court.

123. Here, Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson could not have possibly heldthat which

had neverexisted. Here, said $24.30 money judgment had been the final mandate, and the

facially null and void writ of execution, Doc. # 425, was a prima facie racketeering and

extortions scheme just like the fake regulation, fake legislative act and/or O.R.

569/875 that had never legally existed and never been legally recorded.

31


32/48

RACKETEERING-EXTORTION-FRAUD SCHEMES, DOC ## 432, 434, 435

124. Plaintiff Dr. Jorg Busse attached a copy and Exhibits of prima facie

racketeering-extortion-fraud schemes, Documents ## 432, 434, and 435, and adopted

them by reference in this NOTICE OF APPEAL and EMERGENCY MOTIONS.

FRAUDULENT ATTACHMENT OF FICTITIOUS DEBT TO CAYO COSTA LAND

125. The publicly recorded and facially fraudulent attachment of a fakejudgment

and/ordebtto Plaintiff(s)s Lee County property was a criminal and illegal scheme.

DECEPTION, TRICKERY, AND FRAUDULENT MEMORANDUM

126. Jack N. Peterson and Def. Appellee K. M. Wilkinson conspired to perpetrate

fraud on the Courts and attach a sanctionable memorandum to theirunlawful motion,

Doc. # 432.

TRANSFER PURSUANT TO FLORIDA LAW

127. Here, there had been NO lien. Here, Def. Wilkinson did NOT have any lien. Here,

Def. Wilkinson had NOT been any $5,048.60 judgment holder. Here, there had been NO

affidavitas required by section 55.10, Fla. Stat.

128. Here that which did NOT exist and/or was NULL and VOID could NOT have

possibly been enforcedunder Florida law.

129. Ifthere had been any authenticjudgment, any valid order, and anygenuinelien,

Plaintiff(s) would have been entitled to transfer under Florida law, s. 55.10, Fla. Stat.:

(5) Any lien claimed under this section may be transferred, by any person having an interest in thereal property upon which the lien is imposed or the contract under which the lien is claimed, from such

real property to other security by either depositing in the clerk's office a sum of money or filing in theclerk's office a bond executed as surety by a surety insurer licensed to do business in this state. Suchdeposit or bond shall be in an amount equal to the amount demanded in such claim of lien plus interestthereon at the legal rate for 3 years plus $500 to apply on any court costs which may be taxed in anyproceeding to enforce said lien. Such deposit or bond shall be conditioned to pay any judgment, order,or decree which may be rendered for the satisfaction of the lien for which such claim of lien wasrecorded and costs plus $500 for court costs. Upon such deposit being made or such bond being filed,the clerk shall make and record a certificate showing the transfer of the lien from the real property tothe security and mail a copy thereof by registered or certified mail to the lienor named in the claim oflien so transferred, at the address stated therein. Upon the filing of the certificate of transfer, the realproperty shall thereupon be released from the lien claimed, and such lien shall be transferred to said

32


33/48

security. The clerk shall be entitled to a service charge of up to $15 for making and serving thecertificate. If the transaction involves the transfer of multiple liens, an additional service charge of upto $7.50 for each additional lien shall be charged. Any number of liens may be transferred to one suchsecurity.

NOservice OF ANY writ of execution UPON DR. JORG BUSSE

130. Here, Dr. Jorg Busse was never servedand could not have possibly been served

[with] any writ of execution. No evidence of any service existed on the record. Doc. ##

425, 429, 430, were facially fraudulent and for criminal and illegal purposes of, e.g.,

racketeering, extortion, retaliation, obstruction of justice, and unconstitutionalproperty

seizure in brazen violation of, e.g., the 4th, and 14th U.S. Constitutional Amendments, and

Chapters 55, and 56, Florida Statutes.

MANDATORY SUSPENSION OFANY ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS

131. Under color of a prima facie falsified writ of execution, Doc. ## 425, 435, 434

and in the publicly recorded absence of any debt, and after Dr. Jorg Busse had paid the

final mandate of $24.30 for copies (under FRAP 39) to Def. Wilkinson, the Def. U.S.

Marshal and Defendants Richard Jessup and Ryan Barry recklessly extended, e.g., the

extortion, racketeering, and organized crimes of public record in order to retaliate against

Dr. Busse, extort fees and said real property without any authority and for organized and

conspiratorial criminal purposes. Here, said Officials coerced the Plaintiff(s) to refrain from

rightful prosecution and obstructed justice. Here, any and all Marshal(s), Sheriff(s), and/or

law enforcement Officials were under the absolute obligation to NOT enforce and/or

suspend any proceedings on the illegal execution of the facially fraudulent and forged

writ, Doc. ## 425, which had never been served upon Dr. Busse.

AFFIDAVIT; DEMAND FOR MANDATORY SUSPENSION OF PROCEEDINGS ON

FRAUDULENT AND ILLEGAL execution, CH. 56, 55, U.S. CONST. AMENDMENTS

33


34/48

132. Here Dr. Jorg Busse had demanded, has been demanding, and again demands

the absolutely mandatory suspension of anyproceedings to enforce and/orexecute a prima

facie fictitious, un-documented, un-substantiated, un-recorded and null and voiddebt in

the facially falsified amount of $24.30. Here. Dr. Busse had fully paid the $24.30final

money judgment and 06/11/2009mandate (copies). Here, the Defendants and Wilkinson

knew that the 11th Circuit never had any jurisdiction and authority to alter and amend the

$24.30 mandate/judgment and to sanction and punish the Plaintiff corruption victim Dr.

Jorg Busse, who rightfully prosecuted Crooked Government Officials.

AFFIDAVIT: ORGANIZED CRIME, RACKETEERING, EXTORTION, CORRUPTION

133. In this organized crime scheme, Defendant Beverly Martin had suspended, and

conspired with, e.g., judicial Def. Steele, Chappell, Lazzara, Pizzo, Honeywell, and other

Defendants and Officials to suspend, the Rules and extended anarchy and lawlessness to

obtain unlawful benefits. Here, Def. Crooked Judge Martin recklessly violated Section

838.022, Official Misconduct, Fla. Stat.

WHEREFORE, PlaintiffGovernment corruption and racketeering victims demand

1. An Orderdeclaring that Defendant K. M. Wilkinson did NOT have any lien;

2. An Order declaring that Defendant Wilkinson did NOT hold any $5,048.60 judgment

as falsely pretended and falsified by said Defendant Wilkinson and Defendant Crooked

Attorney JACK N. PETERSON [see falsified, fraudulent and deceptive affidavits

asserting a fake July 29, 2009 judgment in the Collier and Lee County Public Records;

3. An EMERGENCY Order suspending and enjoining as absolutely mandatory any

proceedings on any illegal and criminal execution in violation of, e.g., Chapters 55 and 56,

Fla. Stat., and the 4th, 14th, 1st, and 7th U.S. Const. Amendments, 18 U.S.C. 1961 1968;

42 U.S.C. 1983, 1985, 18 U.S.C. 241, 242; s. 838.022, Fla. Stat.;

34


35/48

4. An Order sanctioning Defendant Attorney JACK N. PETERSON forrecorded perjury

and conspiring with Def. Wilkinson and other Government Officials to extort, racketeer,

retaliate, and deliberately deprive Dr. Jorg Busse and Jennifer Franklin Prescott;

5. An Orderdeclaring the final record mandate in the amount of$24.30paid;

6. An Order vacating and setting aside the facially oppressive and unconstitutional pre-

filing injunction, Doc. # 245, Case No. 2:2009-cv-00791, which on its face was for

criminal and illegal purposes ofracketeering, retaliation, intimidation, oppression, and

protection of the organizedCriminals and criminal Defendants in this Court and the 11th

Circuit;

7. An Order restraining and preventing the record violations of section 1962 under the

RICO civil provisions;

8. An Orderdeclaring the lackof any recorded mandate and/ormoney judgmentother than

the $24.30, which was issued as mandate on June 11, 2009 and recorded on June 15, 2009

pursuant to the certified Docket, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, U.S. District Court, M.D.

Florida, Fort Myers Division;

9. An Order declaring that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit had lost

jurisdiction on 06/11/2009, as had also been evidenced by its own Case Docket, 08-13170-

BB];

10. An Ordersanctioning and punishing Defendant Kenneth M. Wilkinson for the publicly

recorded falsifications of, e.g., said fake judgment, land parcels, fake resolution,

extortion, and racketeering, all of which obstructed justice;

11. An Order declaring INSTRUMENT 4371834, O.R. 4517 PG 1914, Collier County

Public Records, and the equally fraudulent filing in Lee County part of a racketeering,

extortion, and fraud scheme

35


36/48

12. An Orderrestraining any furtherracketeering by Defendant Government Officials and

in particular the illegal forced selling of Plaintiffs said riparian Cayo Costa property, Lot

15A, in the absence of any recorded$5,048.60 judgment;

13. An Orderdissolving and/or reorganizing the corrupt Government enterprise under, e.g.,

civil RICO, and 18 U.S.C. 1964(a);

14. An Orderremoving the publicly recorded corrupting influence and make due provision

for said express fundamental rights of innocent persons under the Florida and Federal

Constitutions and, e.g., the 14th, 1st, 7th, 4th, 5th, and 11th U.S. Constitutional Amendments;

15. An EMERGENCY Orderrecusing Defendant Crooked, Objectively Partial, and Unfit

Government Racketeer John E. Steele;

16. An Order making the Government enterprise of record subject of injunctive relief,

because it is designed to aid the illegal enterprise of, e.g., obstructing justice, retaliating

and punishing, and extorting money, Government fees, and property;

17. An Orderenjoining said U.S. Courts from retaliating against the Plaintiffs because they

blew the whistle on Government crimes & corruption, rather than punishing the Defendant

Racketeers of record and providing remedies and relief to the Plaintiff racketeering and

corruption victims;

18. An EMERGENCY Orderrecusing Defendant Crooked and Objectively Partial and Unfit

Judge C. E. Honeywell;

19. An EMERGENCY Orderrecusing Defendant Corrupt and Objectively Partial and Unfit

Judge S. Polster Chappell;

20. An Order forequitable relief;

21. An Orderdeclaring Plaintiffs record title to Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, free & clear and

unencumbered;

36


37/48

22. An Orderdeclaringfake land parcels 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0 and 07-44-21-01-

00001.0000 falsified and prima facie forgeries as conclusively evidenced by the 1912

Cayo Costa Plat in Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25;

23. An Order for EMERGENCY relief from the publicly recorded public corruption,

extortion, coercion, fraud, and concealment in said Courts;

24. An Order forcompensatory damages;

25. An Order fortriple punitive damages;

26. An Order for triple punitive damages under, e.g., Civil RICO, 18 U.S.C. 1964,

1964(c);

27. An Order forexpenses, costs, legal expenses, and fees;

28. An Orderenjoining any and all Governments and the Defendants and Officials from any

trespass onto the private undedicated Cayo Costa Subdivision as legally described in

reference to said 1912 Plat in PB 3 PG 25;

29. An Order declaring the prima facie forgeries of non-existent land parcels 12-44-20-

01-00000.00A0 and 07-44-21-01-00001.0000 fraudulent and criminal acts of record;

30. An Order permanently enjoining any and all entries and publications of any resolution

569/875, O.R. 569/875, legislative act 569/875, and non-existent land parcels 12-

44-20-01-00000.00A0 and 07-44-21-01-00001.0000 from any and all Government

records and publications;

31. An Order permanently enjoining any and all Governments and Defendants from

fraudulently claiming asserting publishing Government ownership of the street lands

along the Gulf of Mexico as legally described and conveyed in reference to the Plat of the

prima facie private Cayo Costa Subdivision;

37


38/48

32. An Order enjoining and restraining any extortion of property and money and

foreclosure fraud by Defendants Eugene C. Turner, Richard D. DeBoest, II, Chene M.

Thompson, and Hugh D. Hayes.

___________________________/s/Jorg Busse, M.D., M.M., M.B.A.Private Attorney General; Plaintiff public corruption & racketeering victim

10 Benning ST # 135West Lebanon, NH 03784-3402, U.S.A.c/o International Court of JusticePeace PalaceThe Hague, Netherlands

_____________________[/s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott]Private Attorney General; Plaintiff Government racketeering & corruption victim

10 Benning Street # 135West Lebanon, NH 03784-3402, U.S.A.c/o International Court of JusticePeace PalaceThe Hague, Netherlands

38


39/48

EXHIBITS

SUPPORTING PUBLIC RECORD EVIDENCE

EXTORTION, FRAUD, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, RETALIATION, BRIBERY

A. FACIALLY FRAUDULENT AFFIDAVIT [DEF. JACK

N. PETERSON, K. M. WILKINSON] INSTR 4371834, O.R. 4517 PG 1914, Collier

County Public Records

B. PRIMA FACIE NULL & VOID writ of execution,

Case No. 2:07-cv-00228

C. PRIMA FACIE NULL & VOID O.R. 569/875 AND

LAND EXTORTION SCHEME

D. 07/21/2010 letter by Def. Racketeer JACK N.

PETERSON

E. Def. CHARLIE GREENS recording instructions

F. RACKETEERING AND EXTORTION record

evidence, Doc. # 429, Case 2:07-cv-228

G. Docket as CERTIFIED by Def. Diane Nipper on

07/16/2010, Case No. 2:07-cv-00228

Conclusively evidencing record absence of fictitious and fabricated appeal 09-13196

H. FALSIFICATION of appeal no. 09-13196 by Def.

Beverly B. Martin pursuant to CERTIFIED docket at B., which evidenced the lackof any

such appeal and the frivolity-racketeering-and-extortion-scheme of record; JUL 19

2010 CASE FIXING &

DISMISSAL AS FRIVOLOUS

39


40/48

I. DOC. # 434, 07/22/2010, by Def. JOHN E. STEELE,

CASE NO. 2:2007-CV-00228

J. Third Amended Complaint, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228,

Doc. # 288, 282 (11 pages),

PRIMA FACIE NULL AND VOID legislative act and/or law, Fake O.R. 569/875,

FACIALLY FALSIFIED regulation and/or resolution attached as Page 9 of 11;

ETHICS COMPLAINT against Def. Crooked Lee County Official JACK N. PETERSON

Attached as Page 10 of 11

K. PRIMA FACIE FRAUDULENT and FRIVOLOUS

motion by Defendant Racketeer and land parcel Forger K. M. Wilkinson; Appellee

Property Appraisers Motion for Sanctions for Filing of a frivolous Motion, Rule 27-4,

Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 386-2, pp 1-3, Doc. # 386-3, p. 15

L. BINDING PRECEDENT and RECORD EVIDENCE of

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, JUDICIAL RETALIATION, and EXTORTION under

color offake judgment & writ,

WEST PENINSULAR TITLE CO. v. PALM BEACH COUNTY, 41 F.3d 1490(11th

Cir.1995); Murrell v. United States, 269 F.2d 458 (5th Cir.1959)

M. Lee County, FL, INSTRUMENT # 2010000171344,

WARRANTY DEED Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, Lee County Plat Book 3, Page 25 (1912) (2

pages)

N. RECORD RACKETEERING EVIDENCE: Motion for

Issuance of writ of execution ,

RECORDED EVIDENCE ofEXTORTION, FRAUD & FALSIFICATION of un-recorded

judgment, Doc. # 386, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, by Def. Racketeer Jack N. Peterson;

PERVERSION ofrecorded$24.30 judgment into fake $5,048.60 debt

40


41/48

O. Lee County Tax Collectors Office, Statement of Paid

Property Taxes, Lot 15A, Cayo Costa

(2 pages)

P. DENIAL of Appellee Wilkersons Motion to Alter or

Amend the Judgment,

FALSIFICATION ofRule 38 motion, record evidence, Doc. # 386-5

FALSIFICATION ofRule 38 judgment, record evidence, Doc. # 386-5

FALSIFICATION ofRule 38 bill of costs, record evidence, Doc. # 386-5

FALSIFICATION of unsubstantiated $5,000 in attorneys fees, Doc. # 386-5

By Defendant Racketeers Dubina, Chief Judge, Tjoflat, and Birch, Circuit Judges

Facially forged and pasted certification, Doc. # 386-5, p. 2, right lower corner

Q. MEMORANDUM OF NO DEDICATION OF THE

CAYO COSTA ROADS TO PUBLIC,

From The Office of Lee County, Florida, Attorney, Dec. 29, 2000, Joan C. Henry, Esq.

R. 1912 Plat of undedicated private Cayo Costa Subdivision

in Lee County Plat Book 3, P. 25

S. Recorded Survey of riparian Lot 15A, Cayo Costa, PB 3

PG 25 (1912) on the Gulf of Mexico

T. FraudulentLee County Inventory Control File, FALSIFIED

parcel 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0

O.R. 1651 / 2488, O.R. 2967 / 1084 1090, BLUE SHEET 980206, 03/24/1998(6 pages)

U. Falsified Parcel 12-44-20-01-00000.00A0 by Def.

Racketeer Kenneth M. Wilkinson (2 p)

V. Falsified resolution, legislative act, and/or law by

Def. Racketeer John Edwin Steele,

41


42/48

Doc. ## 288, 282, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228

W. Judgment Issued as Mandate June 11 2009, in the

amount of$24.30, FRAP 39 (1 p)

RACKETEERING/EXTORTION EVIDENCE: March 5, 2009 opinion, 11

th

Circuit

X. Bill of Costs Issued as Mandate June 11 2009, in the

amount of$24.30, FRAP 39 (1 p)

Y. Fraudulent Conclusion and Case Fixing by Defendant

U.S. Circuit Judges, Doc. # 365, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228; Doc. # 386.

Z. STATE Court Docket, Plaintiffs Case No. 2006-CA-

003185, BUSSE v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Defendant Judge GERALD, LYNN, Jr., Filed

07/31/2006,

REMOVED to U.S. District Court by Def. Judges John E. Steele and S. Polster Chappell

AA. EXTORTION & PUBLIC CORRUPTION NOTICE to

Def. Drew Heathcoat, U.S. Clerk (2 pages)

BB. Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent in Charge,

Steven E. Ibison

CC. DESTRUCTION of official records as evidenced by

search of 2007-00228, 11th Circuit

DD. DESTRUCTION of Docket No. 201010963, U.S. Court of

Appeals, 11th Circuit

EE. CASE FIXING, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, AND

RETALIATION by Def. Judges Black, Carnes, and Martin, dated JUL 19 2010 (2 pages)

FF. NOTICE OF CORRUPTION AND LETTER

DEMANDING AUTHENTICATION, Def. JOHN LEY, U.S. Circuit Clerk, 11th U.S.

Appellate Circuit (2 pages)

42


43/48

GG. Motion to Stay Prima Facie Illegal Execution as a

Matter of Law, Case No. 2:10-cv-

00390 (5 pages)

HH. Section 838.022, Florida Statutes, OFFICIAL

MISCONDUCT

Chapter838, Fla. Stat., BRIBERY, MISUSE OF PUBLIC OFFICE

II. Case No. 2:2010-cv-00089, Doc. # 29, pp. 4, 7, Def. U.S.

Attorney, Tony West, Matthew

L. Fesak, affirming U.S. jurisdiction under civil RICO

JJ. FACIALLY FALSIFIED writ of execution, Case No.

2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 425

KK. Section 55.10, Florida Statutes,Judgments,

Chapter55Judgments, Florida Statutes

LL. Defendant Racketeer K. M. Wilkinsons Answers to

Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories under oath, 10/22/2007; in particular, asserting under

oath the RECORD ABSENCE of public Cayo Costa easements, Answer # 24

MM. Florida 19th Statewide Grand Jury on Public

Corruption (09/30/2009 Petition), Florida Statewide Prosecution Office, Office of the

Attorney General of Florida.

NN. FALSIFIED Plat of Cayo Costa Subdivision as

falsified and filed by Defendant Racketeer K. M. Wilkinson as Exhibit A, Case No. 2:2007-

cv-00228

OO. Publicly recorded Case Fixing and Obstruction of Justice

by Defendant Judges Gerald B. Tjoflat, Susan Birch, and Joel F. Dubina, Chief Judge, U.S.

Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit, Doc. # 365, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228

43


44/48


45/48

WEST PENINSULAR TITLE CO. v. PALM BEACH COUNTY

AAA. OTHER; OTHER PUBLIC RECORDS

45


46/48

CC: Federal Bureau of Investigation

U.S. Department of Justice

Eric Holder, Attorney General

Barack Hussein Obama, The White House

Florida Department of Law Enforcement

The Florida Bar

Real Property Probate and Trust Lawyer Section, The Florida Bar

46


47/48

AFFIDAVIT OF DR. JORG BUSSE

STATE CERTIFIED RESIDENTIAL APPRAISER, REAL ESTATE BROKER

STATE OF FLORIDA

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority authorized to administer oaths and take

acknowledgments, personally appeared Dr. Jorg Busse, and who, after first being duly sworn,

deposes and says upon oath the foregoing, 32 pages, and attached publicly recorded Complaint in

U.S. District Court, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Ex Rel. et al. v. UNITED STATES OF

AMERICA et al.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

__________________________

/s/JORG BUSSE, M.D., M.M., M.B.A.

Sworn to and subscribed before me on August 3, 2010.

Name of Notary Public:

Expiration of Commission:

__________________

/s/Notary Public

47


48/48

AFFIDAVIT OF DR. JORG BUSSE

STATE CERTIFIED RESIDENTIAL APPRAISER, REAL ESTATE BROKER

STATE OF FLORIDA

BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority authorized to administer oaths and take

acknowledgments, personally appeared Dr. Jorg Busse, and who, after first being duly sworn,

deposes and says upon oath the foregoing and attached Complaint in U.S. District Court,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Ex Rel. et al. v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT.

__________________________

/s/JORG BUSSE, M.D., M.M., M.B.A.

Sworn to and subscribed before me on the ___ day of August, 2010.

Name of Notary Public:

Expiration of Commission:

__________________

/s/Notary Public