InfoTelesys Lawsuit: I. CLAIMS UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED /
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS VIOLATED
Forty Forth Claim For
Relief Malicious Prosecution
PLAINTIFFS:
Clive Boustred, RCB and WFB.
DEFENDANTS:
IRWIN JOSEPH, Irwin Joseph
JEREMY FOGEL, Jeremy Fogel,
JAMES WARE, James Ware
SAMUEL S. STEVENS, Samuel S. Stevens
MICHAEL E. BARTON, Michael E.
Barton
ART DANNER, Art Danner (deceased)
TRILLA E. BAHRKE, Trilla E. Bahrke
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON, Phyllis J. Hamilton
MARK TRACY, Mark Tracy (Former Sheriff)
MICHAEL MACDONALD, Michael Macdonald (Deputy
Sheriff)
M POOL, M Pool (Deputy Sheriff)
HEMMINGWAY, Hemmingway (deceased)
AMY CHRISTY, Amy Christy
BROZOZOWSKI, Brozozowski
BOB LEE, Bob Lee (Santa Cruz District Attorney)
STEVE DROTTAR, Steve Drottar
TRILLA E. BAHRKE, Trilla E. Bahrke
CHRISTOPHER M. CATTRAN, Christopher M. Cattran
COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, County of Santa Cruz
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, State of California
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, United States of America
Jon Doe’s, 1 to n.
VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS & ULTIMATE FACTS
On or about March 10, 2003 and repeatedly up till
present time, in the above named Judicial District, the above listed
DEFENDANTS repeatedly denied Clive Boustred, RCB and WFB their
constitutional rights under the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th,
11th and 14th Amendments, DEFENDANTS committed said crimes willfully
under the color of law with the intent to maliciously harm PLAINTIFFS.
DEFENDANTS filed as many as seven false and malicious criminal cases
against PLAINTIFFS.
In response to the attempted murder of Mr. Boustred
by the Sheriffs, the government set about maliciously and outrageously
prosecuting Mr. Boustred. In a blatant and outrageous conspiracy, as
many as seven false and fraudulent cases were filed against Mr.
Boustred. Sheriffs, District Attorneys and Judges ganged up and
violently assaulted and prosecuted Mr. Boustred and his children.
After the sheriffs attempted to murder Mr.
Boustred, Santa Cruz District Attorney Bob Lee and his Ass. Stephen
Drottar along with the sheriffs and judges in Santa Cruz immediately
filed two false felonies and two false misdemeanors against Mr. Boustred
for “Assault With a Deadly Weapon”, and “Driving Feloniously along his
private road at an alleged 40mph” when evidence proved Mr. Boustred
drove slowly at 27mph. The Sheriffs filed an absurdly false police
report amongst other things making a completely fraudulent charge that
Mr. Boustred had committed a Felony 278.5 PC kidnap, and giving this as
the reason the Sheriffs had to ‘chase’ Mr. Boustred – the Sheriffs were
in the possession of Mr. Boustred’s Stipulated Custody Order which
showed that Mr. Boustred had legal custody of his children, despite the
fact that Mr. Boustred was following the law when he filed a TRO against
his ex for endangering WFB on the learner ski run. The misdemeanors
they filed against Mr. Boustred after they shot at him and his children
were “Child Endangerment” and “Resisting Arrest” as Mr. Boustred “froze”
when Deputy Sheriff Brozozowiski cut Mr. Boustred’s wrist with a
handcuff while drilling the knuckle of his fist into the nape of Mr.
Boustred’s neck. The Sheriffs and Judge Michael E. Barton kidnapped Mr.
Boustred’s children WFB and RCB, with Barton ordering that Mr. Boustred
not communicate with his own sons for three years. The Sheriffs handed
WFB and RCB to Anamaria and her boyfriend Stefan Tichatschke, despite a
lawful court order barred Tichatschke from having any contact with WFB
and RCB. Barton even prevented WFB and RCB’s father and uncle form
communicating with their grand father and uncle.
One month after holding WFB and RCB completely
isolated from their dad, Ass. DA Steven Drottar and Investigator Michael
Lindsey with the cooperation of Anamaria and without letting Mr.
Boustred know, interrogated RCB, aged seven, in an outrageous and
criminal attempt to put words in RCB’s mouth so as to use RCB as a false
witness against his father.
This is merely an abbreviated version of some of
the crimes the government committed against Mr. Boustred, his children
and companies. It ignores all the detail regarding the other three false
arrests where the government held Mr. Boustred without any right to bail
and the utterly and the absurdly sham hearings and trials they gave Mr.
Boustred.
In order to cover up the extreme malpractice of the
attempted murder of Petitioner, Authorities in Santa Cruz County and the
State of California embarked on an ongoing malicious prosecution of
Petitioner Clive Boustred, some examples of this assault against Mr.
Boustred are:
·
2 false felonies & 8 false misdemeanors have been filed
against Petitioner in 6 separate cases.
·
3 times Petitioner has been falsely arrested & imprisoned
for a total of 5 months, twice without any right to bail & once with
bail set at 15 times the legal schedule.
·
Petitioner’s
Motions, Habeas Corpus’
and Appeals have been ignored and denied at all levels of Californian
Courts without any hearing or showing of good cause. In jail the Santa
Cruz Sheriffs even refused to let Petitioner file any Habeas Corpus.
·
Without any basis at law or hearing in the interests of
the children, Petitioner was ordered to not communicate with his
children RCB aged seven and WFB aged three for three years. Petitioner’s
children continue to be unlawfully held from Petitioner.
·
Petitioner was given a sham trials where the jury was
palpably tampered with and where Petitioner was not allowed to put
either the facts or law before the jury: any and all evidence in favor
of Petitioner was thrown out - including such forms of evidence as the
sheriff’s own recordings and reports which irrefutably proved
Petitioner’s innocence; in the trial, prosecution’s witnesses were
allowed to submit known lies and hearsay into the record while
Petitioner’s factual testimony was literally struck from the record and
Petitioner was ordered to not testify to the truth nor to put forward
any defense theory favorable to Petitioner; Petitioner was also
prevented from bringing his witnesses before the jury. Petitioner was
fraudulently found guilty under the color of law.
·
Santa Cruz Superior Court insisted on allowing biased
judges and commissioners whom PETITIONERS had sued and even while suits
were actively being prosecuted against said criminals, to preside over
Petitioners divorce case (SC Sup. Ct. FL 16028) and the Court moved the
case off calendar, effectively locking up petitioner remaining assets
and holding Petitioner and his children hostage.
·
California’s
courts refuse to file Petitioner’s
plea’s & motions,
they even refuses to allow petitioner to depose opposing parties or
authorize Petitioners subpoenas, provide trial transcripts or even allow
Petitioner to photocopy his proceedings. Although most of Petitioners
Motions for hearing and Orders to Show Cause are ignored, when a hearing
is given, Californian courts they simply sanction Petitioner, ignore the
matters brought before the court and unlawfully dismiss all motions and
actions.
·
Six months after shooting at Petitioner, after unlawfully
impounding Petitioners vehicle off his church’s
parking lot, Santa Cruz Sheriffs literally ran around Petitioners Church
and Petitioner’s
children’s school
with mug shot lineups to identify the
‘criminal Clive’ with
new false charges, slandering, libeling and destroying petitioners
relationship with his church. That false case (M19946) was at least
dismissed.
·
Santa Cruz Sheriffs have even unlawfully entered and
searched Petitioners home.
·
Petitioners have had to borrow money to hire six lawyers
who were unfortunately neither prepared nor able to stand up to the
criminal nature of the Californian courts or who actively conspired
against Petitioners. Petitioners can no longer afford attorneys & have
struggled to put forward this pleading.
·
As a consequence of this malicious prosecution, Petitioner
has been driven into bankruptcy & effectively eliminated along with his
corporations & means to support. This case only provides a partial
listing of all the malicious prosecution PLAINTIFFS have suffered. As a
consequence of the MALICIOUS PROSECUTION, PLAINTIFFS are naturally not
able to properly prosecute the DEFENDANTS.
Further evidence relating to said MALICIOUS
PROSECUTION is incorporated in each of the other Claims for Relief’s
“VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS & ULTIMATE FACTS” section and Exhibits and
incorporated herein by reference.
DAMAGES
As a proximate consequence of the willful and
malicious actions of DEFENDANTS, PLAINTIFF’S have sustained
extraordinary damage in a sum to be determined per proof, including
severe and extreme emotional stress and anguish, parental alienation,
lost time, lost business and prosperity, damaged reputation including
both slander and libel, interference with the pursuit of happiness, loss
of domestic tranquility, loss of general welfare, and the loss of basic
liberties such as enjoying life with one’s own children!
Damages incurred by Plaintiffs as a direct or
indirect consequence to the above mentioned and referenced actions by
DEFENDANTS are also incorporated herein as listed in the “K DAMAGES”
section of this Complaint.
Said damages include the sum certain amounts of $66,016,803,250.00 and
$3,001,000.00 from the prior lawsuits filed by PLAINTIFFS.
AUTHORITIES
AUTHORITIES in section “K. COMMON AUTHORITIES” are
incorporated herein by reference in addition to the following
AUTHORITIES: |
