LEE COUNTY COMMISSION – PUBLIC CORRUPTION

DEFENDANT JOHN E. MANNING

LEE COUNTY PUBLIC CORRUPTION

DEF. LEE COUNTY COMMISSIONER JOHN E. MANNING

“SIX COMMISSIONERS FACED CRIMINAL CHARGES”

NEWS-PRESS, July 9, 2010, www.news-press.com

By Gabriella Souza, gsouza@news-press.com “Manning comes with …” “At the time, the board [of Lee County Commissioners] was in turmoil. Commissioners and county staff came under fire for illegal dealings and between 1983 and 2000; six commissioners faced criminal charges. "It was a revolving door of county commissioners and county managers," Manning said. Manning, who had decided not to run for re-election, was prosecuted in 2000. He said he wanted to end his time as a commissioner so he could go back to the private sector.”

LEE COUNTY COMMISSIONER JOHN E. MANNING

CHARGED IN RECORDS CASE

NEWS-PRESS, May 11, 2000, www.news-press.com Failure to disclose meetings alleged …

By Lee Melsek

“Prosecutors filed criminal charges against Lee County Commissioner John Manning on Wednesday for failing to disclose years of private meetings with lobbyists seeking such things as land-use changes, roads and multimillion-dollar county contracts. Manning, who voted to approve the county law he's accused of violating, claims he misinterpreted the law. He is charged with a second-degree misdemeanor …” LEE COUNTY COMMISSION – PUBLIC CORRUPTION

NEWS-PRESS, LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

July 10, 2010, www.news-press.com

“The News-Press exposed his failure to obey that law, local prosecutors then charged him with violating the disclosure law and the courts fined him after he pleaded no contest.”

LEE MELSEK Fort Myers Beach

LEE COUNTY PUBLIC CORRUPTION

LEE COUNTY PUBLIC CORRUPTION

LEE COUNTY COMMISSION – PUBLIC CORRUPTION

14

15

DEFENDANT CORRUPT LEE COUNTY COMMISSION

NEWS-PRESS, LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

July 10, 2010, www.news-press.com

Recall Past Actions

“Don’t you just love the integrity of politics? John Manning back as commissioner because he has experience? John Manning is the commissioner who wrote an ordinance, then broke his own ordinance, and his attorney then called Manning’s ordinance a stinky little law or something to that effect. I wonder if Charlie Crist was aware of this when he appointed Manning back to the Lee County Commission?”

RON SMILEY Fort Myers

LEE COUNTY COMMISSION – PUBLIC CORRUPTION

NEWS-PRESS, July 13, 2010, www.news-press.com

TRANSPARENCY ABOVE ALL ELSE: EDITORIAL

“We expect our elected officials to be law-abiding citizens who seek to uphold the rules they create. When they don’t, we question their integrity and ability to serve. Recently, criticism has surfaced about newly appointed interim Lee County Commissioner John Manning’s decade-old no contest plea and $1,000 fine for violating the county’s lobbyist disclosure ordinance. He had a been a three-term county commissioner at that point and helped craft the ordinance. That no contest plea has come back to haunt him in letters to the editor, for example, as he was appointed to the post and is seeking election to it. At least one of his opponents, former Cape Coral Economic Development Director Mike Jackson, sees it as old news, and after 10 years, it likely is. Manning’s also facing former Cape Coral Councilman Chris Berardi and former Lee County School Board Member Bob Chilmonik. This issue should still matter, however. Voters have a right to take into consideration the whole record of a candidate. In a questionnaire for The News-Press Editorial Board, Manning affirmed his support for the Sunshine Law — open records and open meetings laws — opposing exemptions to it and looking to expand it further. That’s a good sign, and redemption certainly is an American value. Manning has a chance to correct his past

error by striving to be the most transparent public official in our community. Anything less than that should be grounds to vote for one of his opponents in the Aug. 24 primary election.”

Sunshine Dimmed “Re: “Manning comes with polished reputation,” July 9. Only a single sentence in an otherwise fawning profile of Manning hinted that something was not quite right during his earlier time on the commission. Alas, there was no attempt whatsoever to detail to readers and voters the betrayal of the public trust Mr. Manning committed while a commissioner in the late ‘90s. Only this vague reference to the fact “he pleaded no contest for not following the county’s lobbyist disclosure law and paid $1,000 in fines and court costs.” The law, which Manning voted to adopt in the early ‘90s, is an important Lee County addendum to the state’s open government requirements. The Lee County law requires commissioners to keep logs of their private meetings with lobbyists. They must disclose the names of the lobbyists, the dates of the meetings, the issues they discussed and the people and companies those lobbyists represent. It’s a noble attempt to prevent government in the shadows much like other counties have adopted. It lets the public know who is influencing, or attempting to influence, our elected commission behind closed doors. While the other four commissioners were dutifully obeying that law and filing their disclosure logs every three months with the Clerk’s Office Minutes Department, John Manning chose to ignore it for the entire four years of his last term

in office. He chose government in the shadows as he met with companies and their high-priced lawyers and lobbyists seeking votes and favors in the privacy of his office or theirs.”

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTMIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT MYERS DIVISION

JORG BUSSE

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 2:07-cv-228-FtM-29SPC

LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA; BOARD OF LEECOUNTY COMMISSIONERS; THE LEE COUNTYPROPERTY APPRAISER; STATE OF FLORIDABOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNALIMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND, STATE OFFLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTALPROTECTION,

Defendants.___________________________________

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on review of defendant’s

Motion for Entry of Order Directing Public Sale of Real Property

(Doc. #432) filed on May 21, 2010. No response has been filed and

the time to respond has expired.

Upon review, the Court desires a response from plaintiff.

Recognizing that a Pre-Filing Injunction (Case No. 2:09-cv-791-FTM-

36SPC, Doc. #245) was issued on July 20, 2010, prohibiting any

further filings without leave of Court, the Court will grant

plaintiff leave to file a single responsive document to defendant’s

motion.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 434 Filed 07/22/10 Page 1 of 2

Plaintiff may file one response to defendant’s Motion for

Entry of Order Directing Public Sale of Real Property (Doc. #432)

within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS of this Order. If no response is

received, the Court will rule on the motion without the benefit of

a response and without further notice.

DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this 22nd day of

July, 2010.

Copies: PlaintiffCounsel of record

-2-

Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 434 Filed 07/22/10 Page 2 of 2

PUBLIC CORRUPTION COMPLAINT AGAINST DEFENDANT BEVERLY B. MARTIN CORRUPT U.S. CIRCUIT JUDGE CERTIFIED DELIVERY Federal Bureau of Investigation 5525 West Gray Street Tampa, FL 33609 Phone: (813) 253-1000

DEFENDANT BEVERLY B. MARTIN RECORD LACK OF IMMUNITY - PERPETRATION OF UNLAWFUL ACTS

1. The Plaintiff public corruption victims are suing Defendant Beverly B. Martin (“Martin”) in her private individual capacity and official capacity as U.S. Circuit Judge. Defendant Martin’s unlawful and criminal acts on record were outside any immunity and official capacity.

FELONIES OUTSIDE ANY “official” CAPACITY 2. Under color of undocketed and/or falsified Cases ## 2010-10963 and 2010-10967, Def.

Martin falsified official records and documents and caused others to falsify for criminal and illegal purposes of extorting money and property under fraudulent pretenses of “frivolity”.

3. Def. Martin knew and concealed that the only paid judgment of record had been in the amount of $24.30. When the Plaintiffs conclusively proved the prima facie criminality, illegality, and nullity of a falsified “$5,048.60 judgment”, which could nowhere be found, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Def. Martin retaliated with further case fixing on “Jul 19 2010”.

COERCION, EXTORTION UNDER FALSE PRETENSES, AND COVER-UP 4. Def. Martin coerced the Plaintiff corruption victims to refrain from redressing their

grievances of a facially falsified and un-recorded “$5,048.60 judgment”, fake “writ of execution”, Doc. # 425, and forged “land parcels”. No court had ever reviewed the record forgeries of said fake “land parcels”, and Def. Martin conspired with other Offenders to keep it that way and keep Plaintiffs out of Court. Just like a Government whore, Def. Martin procured her order through brazen fraud on the Court, Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540; see also 1.550.

CONTEMPT OF FLORIDA LAW, CHAPTERS 55, 56, 71, 73, 74, 95, 712, FLA. STAT. 5. Def. Martin concealed that here nothing could have possibly become a lien on Plaintiffs’

property under Ch. 55, 56, 71, Fla. Stat. MARTIN’S KNOWLEDGE OF CRIMES AND UNLAWFUL ACTS

6. Defendant Corrupt Martin had knowledge of the actual commission of felonies such as, e.g., the falsifications of a. a “$5,048.60 judgment”; b. an appeal [see Case ## 2010-10967, and/or 2010-10963]; c. a “writ of execution” [Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228, Doc. # 425]; d. “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”; e. a “regulation”, “resolution 569/875”, “legislative act”, and/or “O.R. 569/875”. However, Def. Martin concealed and conspired to conceal said record falsifications. Here even though Def. Martin had knowledge of, e.g., judicial Co-Defendant Polster Chappell’s,

2

Steele’s, Pizzo’s, and Lazzara’s obstruction of justice and fraudulent concealment of facially forged “land parcels”, a falsified “writ of execution”, falsified “$5,048.60 judgment”, Corrupt Martin did not make the same known to some judge or person in authority, but covered up for said Offenders in exchange for bribes, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3, 4.

ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT 7. Defendant Crook Martin knew that Defendant principal Offenders Steele, Chappell, Pizzo,

and Lazzara had committed record offenses and assisted said Offenders, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3, 4. In particular, Martin assisted said Offenders with a facially fraudulent “writ of execution” and the falsification and/or destruction of official records.

DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS UNDER COLOR OF FAKE “writ” AND “resolution” 8. Defendant Martin deliberately deprived the Plaintiffs, e.g., under color of a fake “writ of

execution”, “resolution 569/875”, and “frivolous appeal”, 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242. RECORD RETALIATION UNDER COLOR OF WRIT OF EXECUTION & SANCTIONS

9. With the intent to retaliate, Corrupt Martin knowingly took actions harmful to the Plaintiff public corruption victims, which included interference with Plaintiffs’ livelihood and record land ownership, because the Plaintiff landowners had provided truthful information relating to the commission of Federal offenses to law enforcement, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1513.

EXTORTION ASSISTANCE UNDER COLOR OF “FRIVOLOUS APPEAL” 10. Knowingly, Def. Martin assisted the extortion of Plaintiffs’ property and/or threatened to do

so, with corrupt intent to retaliate against the Plaintiffs because the Plaintiffs had blown the whistle on public corruption; in particular, because the Plaintiffs had produced records and testimony conclusively evidencing Government corruption and fraud, and information about the commission of Federal offenses by Government Officials. Here, Plaintiff Government crime and corruption victims had the right to be reasonably protected from the Government Offenders and Judges of record, 18 U.S.C. § 3771.

CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE AND COURT ACCESS 11. Def. Martin conspired with other Defendants and Officials to “restrict Appellant’s ability to

pursue future appeals” for, e.g., criminal and unlawful purposes of concealing: a. Facially forged “land parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-

00001.0000”; b. Falsification of [a recorded “$24.30 judgment” into] an un-recorded“$5,048.60”-

extortion-and-execution scheme; c. Falsification of a “writ of execution” in the absence of a recorded “$5,048.60”

“judgment”; d. Destruction and falsification of official Court records.

EXACTION OF MONEY BY THREAT OF, E.G., ARREST AND CIVIL CONTEMPT 12. Def. Martin conspired to exact money from Plaintiffs under color of, e.g., “frivolous appeal”

even though Martin knew that no legal basis for and justification of “frivolity” had ever or could have possibly ever existed.

CONSPIRACY TO ASSIST EXTORTION AND BLACKMAIL 13. In particular, Def. Martin conspired and assisted to extort $5,048.60 and property in the

absence of any recorded authentic judgment and justification. Martin caused other Government Officials to falsify, alter, and destroy official records for criminal and illegal purposes of concealing other Defendant Officials’ extortion, coercion, obstruction of justice and other crimes of record.

3

14. Def. Martin made unlawful communications and threatened Plaintiff public corruption whistleblowers with obstruction of court access and deliberate deprivations of Plaintiffs’ express fundamental rights to redress Government grievances, own property, and exclude Governments.

MISCONDUCT AND EXTENSION OF RECORD CRIMES AND FALSIFIED “WRIT” 15. Under prima facie fraudulent pretenses of “frivolous appeal”, Def. Martin recklessly

extended the record Government crimes, and FIXED and “DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS”. Def. Martin assisted and conspired the reckless perversion and falsification of a recorded “Judgment” and “Bill of Costs” in the amount of $24.30 “issued as mandate on 06/11/2009” for criminal and illegal purposes of extortion, coercion, and retaliation against the Plaintiff corruption whistle blowers. In order for the record fraud under said fake “land parcels” to continue and for illegal purposes of silencing the Plaintiff landowners, Def. Martin “SUSPENDED” and perverted the Rules and caused the Clerk to “discard” more documents.

FALSIFICATION OF APPEAL NUMBERS 16. The payment records regarding Plaintiffs’ multiple appeals conclusively proved the

falsifications and fabrications of “Appeal Number 10-10963 and/or 10-10967”. See U.S. District Court payment records and receipts. The U.S. Clerk refused to certify and authenticate the payment record. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 44.

17. Def. Martin pulled “frivolity” out of her ass without any explanation and/or justification whatsoever. Review of the recorded judgment patently clearly evidenced that the District and Circuit had fabricated “lack of jurisdiction” for illegal purposes of concealment and cover-up. Plaintiffs were entitled to defend their unimpeachable, unencumbered, and marketable record title against Government extortion and fraud, which of course had invoked Federal jurisdiction directly under the express guarantees of the Federal and Florida Constitutions.

18. Here with wanton disregard for the law, and including Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540, 1.550, Ch. 55, 56, 71, 73, 74, 95, 712, Fla. Stat., Def. Martin conspired to oppress Plaintiffs with prima facie non-existent and/or illegal orders, judgments, and/or mandates…

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

Florida Department of Law Enforcement U.S. Department of Justice The Florida Bar Real Property Probate and Trust Lawyer Section, The Florida Bar Barack Hussein Obama Eric Holder

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26