black criminal judicial complaint res

8/9/2019 Black Criminal Judicial Complaint res

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/black-criminal-judicial-complaint-res 1/20

of 2

Judicial Council of the 11th Circuit

COMPLAINT OF JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT OR DISABILITY

To begin the complaint process, complete this form and prepare the brief statement of factsdescribed in item 5 (below). The RULES FOR JUDICIAL-CONDUCT AND JUDICIAL-DISABILITY

PROCEEDINGS, adopted by the Judicial Conference of the United States, contain information on

what to include in a complaint (Rule 6), where to file a complaint (Rule 7), and other important

matters. The rules are available in federal court clerks’ offices, on individual federal courts’

Web sites, and on www.uscourts.gov.

Your complaint (this form and the statement of facts) should be typewritten and must be legible.

For the number of copies to file, consult the local rules or clerk’s office of the court in which

your complaint is required to be filed. Enclose each copy of the complaint in an envelope

marked “COMPLAINT OF MISCONDUCT” or “COMPLAINT OF DISABILITY” and submit

it to the appropriate clerk of court. Do not put the name of any judge on the envelope.

1. Name of Complainant: DR. JORG BUSSE

Contact Address: P.O.BOX 7561

NAPLES, FL 34101-7561

Daytime telephone: ( 239 ) 595-7074

2. Name(s) of Judge(s): JUDGE BLACK

Court: U.S.COURTOFAPPEALS,11thCIRCUIT

3. Does this complaint concern the behavior of the judge(s) in a particular lawsuit or

lawsuits?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If “yes,” give the following information about each lawsuit:

Court: ITCONCERNS:CORRUPTION,CASE-FIXING,BRIBERY

Case Number:

Docket number of any appeal to the Circuit: ___________________

Are (were) you a party or lawyer in the lawsuit?

[ ] Party [ ] Lawyer [ ] Neither



of 2

If you are (were) a party and have (had) a lawyer, give the lawyer’s name, address, and

telephone number:

4. Have you filed any lawsuits against the judge?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If “yes,” give the following information about each such lawsuit:

Court: LAWSUIT PENDING

Case Number:

Present status of lawsuit:

Name, address, and telephone number of your lawyer for the lawsuit against the judge:

Court to which any appeal has been taken in the lawsuit against the judge:

Docket number of the appeal:

Present status of the appeal:

5. Brief Statement of Facts. Attach a brief statement of the specific facts on which the

claim of judicial misconduct or disability is based. Include what happened, when and

where it happened, and any information that would help an investigator check the facts.

If the complaint alleges judicial disability, also include any additional facts that form the

basis of that allegation.

6. Declaration and signature:

I declare under penalty of perjury that the statements made in this complaint are true and

correct to the best of my knowledge.

(Signature) /S/JORG BUSSE,M.D.,M.B.A.,M.M. (Date) 04/22/2009



CRIMINAL JUDICIAL COMPLAINT AGAINST JUDGE BLACK

1

5. BRIEF STATEMENT OF PUBLICLY RECORDED/SPECIFIC FACTS

1. Attached is self-authenticating unauthorized and null-and-void Lee County

[FL] Official Record [O.R.]569/875. Defendant Judge Black [“Black”]

conspired to conceal the invalidity of prima facie unexecuted sham land

[eminent domain] “claim” O.R.569/875. Under false pretenses of a “legislativeact ”, Black conspired to defraud and deliberately deprive the Appellants of

their Constitutionally-protected riparian Gulf-front lands [PID 12-44-20-01-

00015.015A]. In the sham 04/21/2009 11th

Circuit Opinion, Black conceded that

“Appellants’ [riparian] Lot 15A is on the west side of the Cayo Costa

subdivision on the Gulf of Mexico…”

Here, Black conceded that Appellants’ riparian lands abut the “Gulf of

Mexico”, which is the platted natural monument and Lot boundary.

BLACK CONCEALED PLATTED DESIGNATED 60’ WIDE STREET

2. Defendant Black [“Black”] concealed that a designated 60’ wide street appears

“on the west side” of the 1912 Plat of the private undedicated residential

subdivision. See Plat Book 3, p. 25.

BLACK CONCEALED ABSENCE OF ANY “UNDESIGNATED AREAS ”

3. Defendant Black conspired to conceal that no “‘undesignated areas’ appear on

said Plat and that no “ Lee County Resolution 569/875” exists. Black stated:

“Most of the allegations in the complaint concern the 1969 Lee County

Resolution 569/875, which claimed the undesignated areas on the east and

west side of the Cayo Costa subdivision plat and accretions thereto as

public land to be used for public purposes.” Opinion, p. 3.

Defendant Black concealed that admittedly, Lee County never executed andsigned eminent domain fraud and extortion-scheme O.R.569/875. Said fraud-

scheme was devoid of any resolution number .

CONCOCTION OF “UN-NUMBERED AND UNLETTERED AREAS ”

4. Black concealed that no ‘undesignated areas’ and no ‘certain un-numbered and unlettered areas lying West of the Westerly tier of blocks in said subdivision’

appear on said 1912 Plat. Black concealed that in its eminent domain fraud-

scheme, Lee County fraudulently “claimed” accretions to undesignated un-

numbered and unlettered areas, which do not appear on said 1912 Plat. Black

conspired to extend said eminent domain fraud-scheme. Black concealed that

Appellants’ multiple independent claims regarding state eminent domain fraud

issues were ripe.

BLACK CONCEDED THAT APPELLANTS OWN DESIGNATED STREET

5. Defendant Black conceded that Appellants own the platted adjoining designated

60’ wide street:




2

“The Appellants are owners of Lot 15A [PID 12-44-20-01-00015.015A] in

the Cayo Costa subdivision in Lee County, Florida.” Opinion, p. 2.

6. Defendant Black knew that the Appellants hold perfect title to and own the

platted adjoining designated 60’ wide street, the upland, and accretions thereto.

Black concealed that said platted designated street 60’ wide is a private

easement, which is Constitutionally-protected property. See also “First Case”;

Legal Opinion [Doc. # 31-4].

7. Defendant Black conspired not to review de novo eminent domain extortion

and fraud-scheme O.R.569/875, which invoked Federal jurisdiction. Black

concealed that Lee County itself removed and eliminated any cloud by eminent domain fraud-scheme O.R.569/875 pursuant to Blue Sheet 980206 and

O.R.2967/1084-1090. Black conspired to fix and dismiss Appellants’ ripe

Federal claims under the 14th

, 4th

, 5th

, 1st, and 7

thAmendments to protect his

fellow Defendant Judges. Black obstructed justice and just adjudication by

concealing the invalidity of said eminent domain fraud-scheme which wasprima facie devoid of legal description/boundaries, seal , execution, vote count ,

names of any single legislator , resolution number, public purpose.

8. Black conspired not to construe the fictitious undesignated un-

numbered/unlettered areas in the light most favorable to Appellants, but

extended the fraud-scheme. Corrupt and dishonest Official Black does more

harm to the public and Appellants than common criminals, because he

obstructs investigation. Baucom v. Martin, 677 F.2d 1346(11th

Cir.1982). Black

has no immunity for his crimes of, e.g., false pretenses, misprision of felonies,

deliberate deprivations, fraud.

EXHIBITS:

Eminent domain extortion-scheme O.R.569/875, which invoked jurisdiction

Self-authenticating 1912 Plat devoid of

undesignated areas;

undesignated un-numbered and unlettered areas on the west side;

Public record evidence of platted designated 60’ wide street




3

DEFENDANT BLACK CONSPIRED TO CONCEAL

Defendant Black conspired to conceal that:

(1) O.R.569/875 is an eminent domain fraud and extortion-scheme

(2) Lee County never had any authority to ‘claim’/condemn uncertain lands

(3) Eminent domain fraud-scheme O.R.569/875 invoked Federal jurisdiction

(4) Any [inverse] condemnation was impossible absent a legal description

(5) Any condemnation [inverse or direct ] was impossible for private use

(6) This Circuit concocted “200 Acres” to be the ‘claimed’ area absent boundaries

(7) Appellants pursued remedy of invalidation in State court

(8) Invalidation and damages for the temporary taking were exclusive remedies

(9) A designated 60’ wide street appears on the west side of Cayo Costa

(10) No “undesignated ” areas exist on the Plat

(11) No undesignated un-numbered and unlettered areas appear on said Plat

(12) No legal description exists

(13) No ascertainable boundaries exist(14) “ Reverse condemnation remedy” did not exist for said fraud-scheme

(15) Appellees treated Appellants disparately as compared to A. M. S. Robinson

(16) Any O.R.569/875 cloud was removed [Blue Sheet 980206 / O.R.2967/1084]

(17) Appellants own the accretions to their riparian Lot and adjoining street

(18) No identifiable legislators ever “passed” fraud-scheme O.R.569/875

(19) Absent any legal description, said fraud-scheme violated due process

(20) Eide, Reahard, Tinney, Greenbriar, did not apply to eminent domain fraud

(21) The D.C. Judges were objectively partial, because no legislative act existed

(22) Appellants stated ripe claims: e.g., unconstitutional temporary takings

(23) No public lands existed in private undedicated Cayo Costa

(24) This Circuit engaged in case-fixing and bribery

(25) Lee County never held title to the fictitious undesignated areas “claimed”

DEFENDANT BLACK’S CONCESSIONS

Defendant Black conceded that:

(26) Appellants’ riparian Lot 15A abuts the “Gulf of Mexico”

(27) Appellants are the legal record owners of Lot 15A[12-44-20-01-00015.015A]

(28) As owners of Lot 15A, Appellants own the adjoining designated street

(29) R. 11 sanctions were inappropriate, because eminent domain issues were ripe

CONSPIRACY AND FALSE PRETENSES

Defendant Black conspired to falsely pretend that:

(30) Reverse condemnation is an available remedy [invalidation was available]

(31) Appellants’ claims under the 1st, 4

th, 14

th, 5

th, and 7

thAmend. were not ripe

(32) Regulatory case law applied to said eminent domain fraud-scheme



11TH

CIRCUIT FRAUD, CORRUPTION, CASE-FIXING, BRIBERY

UNDER FALSE PRETENSES THAT NULL AND VOID O.R.569/875

IS A PURPORTED “ LEGISLATIVE ACT ”:

THE 11TH

CIRCUIT

• CONCOCTED A “ LEGISLATIVE ACT ” [NO RECORD EXISTS];

• CONCEALS O.R.569/875’s PRIMA FACIE INVALIDITY;

• PERVERTED SAID SHAM “CLAIM” INTO A “ LEGISLATIVE ACT ”;

• OBSTRUCTED JUSTICE FOR APPELLEES’ BRIBES.

UNEXECUTED O.R.569/875 IS INVALID FOR MANY REASONS:

1. IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND IPSE DIXIT CONFISCATORY

2. NO ASCERTAINABLE LEGAL BOUNDARIES

3. NO LEGAL DESCRIPTION – SURVEY IMPOSSIBLE

4. NO SIGNATURE(S) BY LEE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

5. NO EXECUTION BY LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA

6. NO IDENTIFIABLE “ LEGISLATOR”

7. NO RESOLUTION NUMBER

8. NO RECORD OR ENTRY IN COUNTY RESOLUTION BOOK(S)9. NO NOTARIAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT

10. NO SEAL

11. NO IDENTIFIABLE PUBLIC USE/PURPOSE

12. NO NECESSITY

13. PUBLIC USE FACTUALLY AND LEGALLY IMPOSSIBLE

14. EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED BY FLORIDA CONSTITUTION

15. VIOLATES FLORIDA’S EMINENT DOMAIN STATUTES

16. VIOLATES 14TH

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

17. VIOLATES 4TH


18. VIOLATES 5TH


19. DECEPTION OUTSIDE JUDICIAL CAPACITY AND JURISDICTION



Rules for Judicial-Conductand Judicial-Disability Proceedings

Adopted March 11, 2008, by the Judicial Conference of the United States

Effective April 10, 2008

WITH

Eleventh Circuit Judicial Conduct and Disability Rules

(Cited as 11th Cir. JCDR)

Effective April 1, 2009



CC: U.S. Supreme Court [11th

Circuit Corruption and Case-Fixing;

Concealment of fraud-scheme O.R.569/875];

Federal Bureau of Investigation

U.S. Department of Justice

Florida Department of Law Enforcement

U.S. Attorney

black criminal judicial complaint res

Documents