|
SUPERIOR COURT STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ
|
|
Case No. CV 158401
RESPONSE TO MEMORANDUM OF
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST FOR INJUNCTION, AND
RESPONSE TO DECLARATION OF MARK SPURLOCK IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST
FOR INJUNCTION.
Date: October
31, 2007 Time: 8:30 am
Department: 9 |
For good cause, Respondent brings this RESPONSE TO MEMORANDUM OF POINTS
AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST FOR INJUNCTION, AND RESPONSE TO
DECLARATION OF MARK SPURLOCK IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST FOR INJUNCTION before
the court.
Let the dates on the Petitioner’s letters and allegations of so-called
misconduct be judicially noted: Petitioner Exhibit D dated November 7,
2003; Exhibit E dated December 9, 2003. Nearly four years ago.
Respondent confesses that yes, four years ago he did indeed call Ms.
Simmons a “bitch” after Ms. Simmons made the false police call to have
Respondent falsely arrested on the eve of the six month anniversary of
the sheriffs shooting at Clive and his kids, September 9, 2003. As a
consequence, Respondent was again falsely arrested and held without any
right to bail for twenty one days and in which the sheriffs literally
stole Respondents vehicle from the Church parking lot. The sheriffs
refused to return Respondents vehicle until Respondent transferred title
to his vehicle to his friend, even then Respondent’s friend had to ask
three times to get back what was then his vehicle and pay the sheriffs
approximately $1,300 for the vehicle.
After Respondent called Ms. Simmons a bitch four years ago he quickly
apologized.
Let it be judicially noticed that in that false Santa Cruz Superior
Court Case, M19946, filed on Sep 25, 2003, which was instigated
fraudulently by Twin Lakes Baptist Church, Respondent was falsely
charged with the following:
SUPERIOR COURT OF
CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
Plaintiff,
-vs-
CLIVE FRANK BOUSTRED, DOB: 01/29/1961
Defendant(s) .
Case # M19946
COMPLAINT - CRIMINAL
BOB
LEE, District Attorney of the County of Santa Cruz, State of California,
accuses CLIVE FRANK BOUSTRED of the following crime(s) committed in the
County of Santa Cruz, State of California:
COUNT 1 - 6 Mo.
On or
about 09/09/2003, in the above named Judicial District, the crime of
DISOBEYING COURT ORDER, in violation of PENAL CODE SECTION 166(a)(4),
a Misdemeanor, was committed by CLIVE FRANK BOUSTRED, who did unlawfully
commit contempt of court by willful disobedience of a process and order
lawfully issued by a court, to wit, domestic violence restraining order.
COUNT 2 - 6 Mo.
On or
about 09/09/2003, in the above named Judicial District,
the crime of DISOBEYING COURT ORDER, in
violation of PENAL CODE SECTION 166(a)(4), a Misdemeanor, was
committed by CLIVE FRANK BOUSTRED, who
did unlawfully commit contempt of court by willful disobedience of a
process and order lawfully issued by a court, to
wit, domestic violence restraining order.
COUNT 3 - 6 Mo.
On or
about 09/08/2003, in the above named Judicial District, the crime of
DISOBEYING COURT ORDER, in violation of PENAL CODE
SECTION 166(a)(4), a Misdemeanor, was
committed by CLIVE FRANK BOUSTRED, who did unlawfully commit contempt of
court by willful disobedience of a process and order lawfully issued by
a court, to wit, domestic violence restraining order.
COUNT 4 - 6 Mo.
On or
about 09/09/2003, in the above named Judicial District,
the crime of TRESPASS BY ENTERING AND
OCCUPYING, in violation of PENAL CODE SECTION 602(1), a Misdemeanor, was
committed by CLIVE FRANK BOUSTRED, who did unlawfully commit a trespass
by entering and occupying real property and a structure located at Twin
Lake Christian School, without the consent of the owner, his/her
agent, and the person in lawful possession thereof.
Therefore, complainant declares under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on, September 25, 2003 at Santa Cruz, California.
All of the M19946 charges, like every criminal case filed against
Respondent, were false. The case was dismissed on in December of
that year for “Insufficient evidence” See Exhibit A attached to
this Declaration.
Let it be judicially noted that this case is therefore not the first
fraudulent and false case Twin Lakes Baptist Church, Inc. has
maliciously prosecuted against Respondent.
The earlier case the Church perpetrated against Respondent caused
Respondent extraordinary hardships, including fearing for his life,
being separated from his children, further destroying his businesses and
livelihood, and slandering and libeling Respondent in front of all the
Church, and falsely imprisoning Respondent for twenty one days all of
which Respondent spent not knowing if the Santa Cruz Sheriffs were going
to kill him, and significant financial damage.
In regard to Petitioners request for an Injunction. Petitioners are
seeking an injunction on behalf of individuals who have sought no
injunction and Petitioners are asking the court to violate the 1st
Amendment right to free press. See the article published by the U.S.
Department of State Bureau of International Information Programs --
Issues of Democracy, February 1997 -- Goodale on First Amendment and
Press Freedom, included as Exhibit B.
Respondent has an explicit right to publish News and articles covering
current events.
AUTORITIES
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that
"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom...of the press."
See also Exhibit B
Respondent in turn respectfully requests that the Court would issue an
Injunction against Twin Lakes Baptist Church ordering them to not
continue to harass Respondent; to not make false police calls against
Respondent; to not maliciously prosecute Respondent and to allow
Respondent free and uninhibited access to Respondent’s children in all
their activities.
Respondent respectfully raises the issue that Respondent feels
extraordinarily uncomfortable at Twin Lakes Baptist Church as a
consequence of the wrongdoings of the Church against Respondent and his
children. Respondent has only been to the Church around five times
in the last four years after the Church falsely called the sheriffs on
Respondent. And then only to deliver or collect documents and get
the ‘hell’ out of the Church as quickly as possible in case they make
another false police call. Respondent’s custody of his children has
been unlawfully modified, see MOTION TO VACATING AND SETTING ASIDE SANTA
CRUZ SUPERIOR COURT CASE NUMBER FL 16028 VOID EXPARTE ORDER DATED
FEBRUARY 20, 2003. Respondent respectfully asks the court to set aside
the void custody orders that have been issued that unlawfully modified
the Res Judicata Stipulated Custody Agreement and Order of August, 13,
2002. Due process dictates such rights "If the order is void, it may be
attacked at any time in any proceeding," Evans v Corporate Services, 207
Ill.App.3d 297, 565 N.E.2d 724 (2nd Dist. 1990) See Law of Voids in
above Motion.
Respondent respectfully asks the court for permission to take his
children out of Twin Lakes Baptist Church School, which is also the
children’s desire. Respondent also respectfully asks for the courts
assistance in preventing his ex-wife’s continued efforts to cause
problems.
I
declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
America and the State of California that the foregoing is true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that I have executed
this Declaration on October 31, 2007 at Santa Cruz
California.
_________________________________________________
Clive Frank
Boustred, Petitioner In Propria Persona, Sui Juris.
|
