UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT MYERS DIVISION
[“TRANSFERRED” FROM: SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, WEST PALM BEACH DIVISION]

JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE,

Plaintiffs,

versus Reassigned Case # 2:09-CV-00791-CEH-SPC

ROGER ALEJO; KENNETH M. WILKINSON; JACK N. PETERSON; ROGER

DESJARLAIS; LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA; LEE COUNTY VALUE
ADJUSTMENT BOARD; LORI L. RUTLAND; STATE OF FLORIDA, BOARD
OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND; STATE
OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; CHAD
LACH; CHARLES “BARRY” STEVENS; REAGAN KATHLEEN RUSSELL;
KAREN B. HAWES; ROGER DESJARLAIS; CHARLIE GREEN; BOB JANES;
BRIAN BIGELOW; RAY JUDAH; TAMMY HALL; FRANK MANN; UNITED
STATES ATTORNEY(S); SEAN P. FLYNN; E. KENNETH STEGEBY; DAVID P.
RHODES; A. BRIAN ALBRITTON; CYNTHIA A. PIVACEK; JOHNSON
ENGINEERING, INC.; STEVEN CARTA; MIKE SCOTT; HUGH D. HAYES;
GERALD D. SIEBENS; STATE OF FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL;
WILLIAM M. MARTIN; PETERSON BERNARD; SKIP QUILLEN; TOM
GILBERTSON, RYAN LENGERICH, NEWS PRESS,
Defendants.

NOTICE OF APPEAL

DEMAND FOR RELIEF FROM JUDICIAL CORRUPTION

____________________________________________________________________________/

PUBLISHED NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM ORDER, “DOC. # 213”, “FILED 06/23/10”,

AND OF RECORD JUDICIAL CORRUPTION , EXTORTION, AND COERCION
REQUIRING DEF. HONEYWELL’S DISQUALIFICATION, DOC. ## 3, 4, 2:10-cv-00390

DEMAND FOR RELIEF FROM DEF. CORRUPT JUDGE HONEYWELL’S CRIMES,

FABRICATIONS, EXTORTION, COERCION ON THE PUBLIC RECORD,
DOC. ## 213, 210, DOC. ## 48, 49, 2:2010-CV-00089
 PLAINTIFFS SUED DEFENDANT CORRUPT JUDGE C. E. HONEYWELL

1. Plaintiff public corruption victims sued Defendant Crooked Judge C. E. Honeywell in her

private individual capacity for unlawful and criminal acts outside any immunity and official

capacity such as, e.g., extortion, coercion, deliberate deprivations, fraud, fraud on the

Court, fraudulent concealment. See 2:2010-cv-00390.

ADOPTION OF COMPLAINT AGAINST DEF. HONEYWELL BY REFERENCE

2. Hereby, the Plaintiffs adopt by reference their Complaint, Doc. # 1, 2:2010-cv-00390, in this

Notice of Appeal.

3. On the record, and over and over again, Defendant “judicial whore” Honeywell obstructed

justice and Plaintiffs’ meaningful court access by fabricating and/or fraudulently concealing,

e.g., a “resolution 569/875”, “writ of execution”, “lien”, and fake “land parcels”. See Doc. #

425; 365; 386; Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.

4. Here, Def. Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that

a. the judgment on the Docket was for the amount of $24.30, Doc. # 365, “issued as

mandate June 11 2009”, Case No. 2:2007-cv-00228.

b. Doc. # 425 was not and could not have possibly been any legally recognized “writ of

execution”, and that

c. Defendant Wilkinson had never filed any “Rule 38 motion”;

d. Her sanctions and/or threats were for criminal purposes of extorting fess and

property and coercing the Plaintiffs to refrain from prosecution.

FURTHER RECORD EVIDENCE OF DEF. HONEYWELL’S CRIMES AND FRAUD

5. The publicly recorded chain and abstract of title, Lot 15A, Parcel # 12-44-20-01-

00015.015A, PB 3 PG 25 (1912), and Plaintiffs’ publicly recorded Warranty Deed, INSTR #

2
 2010000171344, Lee County Public Records conclusively evidenced the prima facie

illegality and criminality of Defendant Honeywell’s false assertions in her “order”, Doc. #

213. As a matter of law, fake “resolution 569/875” was not any “instrument”, “muniment of

title”, and/or conveyance, but a facially null and void paper. In particular, no legislative

name, signature, history, record, adoption, execution, recordation had ever legally existed.

See EXHIBITS OF INSTR. # 2010000171344, Lee County, and INSTR # 4450927,

Collier County, Florida.

DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS UNDER COLOR OF “WRIT” AND AUTHORITY

6. Here facially incompetent and corrupt Def. Honeywell knew and concealed that under

Florida and Federal law, eminent domain and/or any involuntary alienation could NOT

possibly be done by “resolution” and/or “legislative act”. Plain and short, Honeywell’s

“order”, Doc. # 213, conclusively proved to be “convoluted and incomprehensible” judicial

trash. Here, the law did not recognize “resolution 569/875”, the fake land parcels, fake “writ

of execution”, and “lien”, Ch. 55, 55.10, Fla. Stat.

7. Here, Defendant Honeywell concealed and conspired to conceal that the the. U.S. Marshal

and Defendant Richard Jessup [2:2010-cv-00089] acted, and conspired to act, without any

authority, because on its face, Doc. # 425, had been null and void.

DEF. HONEYWELL’S POLICY OF CORRUPTION AND LAWLESSNESS

8. In her record idiotic pattern, policy, and custom, Honeywell coerced, punished, and

threatened the Plaintiffs Nazi style without ever reviewing the legal issues, the claims for

relief, and by perverting and corrupting the law. See , e.g., Ch. 55, 73, 74, 95, 712, Fla. Stat.,

and Florida Constitution.

3
 PUBLISHED NOTICE OF APPEAL, AND

OF PUBLIC CORRUPTION, CONCEALMENT, COERCION, AND EXTORTION

9. Hereby, the Plaintiffs appeal from Defendant crooked U.S. District Judge Honeywell’s

“order”, Doc. # 213, “filed 06/23/10”. Here, said judicial Defendant evaded and obstructed

mandatory disqualification in this Case, because Honeywell had “disqualified herself” in

related and/or associated Case 2:2010-cv-00390 on the very same day, 06/22/2010.

HONEYWELL’S OBJECTIVE LACK OF QUALIFICATION ON THE RECORD

10. Judicial Defendant Honeywell affirmed, Doc. # 213, p. 5, that the Plaintiff record owners of

“Lot 15A”, riparian Parcel # 12-44-20-01-00015.015A, “appeared for a “quasi-judicial

proceeding”, because the Plaintiffs were the record owners of “Lot 15A”. See public records

on file admittedly affirming Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable ownership of Lot 15A.

11. Here, the Plaintiffs “appeared for” said “proceeding”, because they were the affirmed record

owners of Lot 15A and entitled to appear. Therefore here, crooked Judge Honeywell’s

fraudulently and idiotically pretended, Doc. # 213, p. 5:

“In a resolution adopted in December 1969 by the Board of Commissioners of Lee

County, Florida, Lot 15A, among other property, was claimed as public land
(“Resolution 569/875") (Dkt 5, Ex. 3, p. 9).”

HONEYWELL’S 06/22/2010 DISQUALIFICATION / RECUSAL, 2:2010-cv-00390

12. On 06/22/10, Def. crooked Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell “disqualified herself”. See

Order, Doc. # 3, 2:2010-cv-00390. The “public land” had never existed:

4
 DEF. HONEYWELL’S PREMEDITATED & DELIBERATE DEPRIVATIONS

13. On 06/22/2010, Honeywell premeditated and conspired with other Defendants to deliberately

deprive the Plaintiff record landowners of their fundamental right to own their riparian Gulf-

front lands, subject Parcel # 12-44-20-01-00015.015A as legally described and conveyed in

reference to the 1912 “Cayo Costa” Subdivision Plat of Survey in Lee County Plat Book 3,

Page 25. See, e.g., Doc. # 213, filed 06/23/10.

PUBLIC TAX RECORDS EVIDENCED HONEYWELL’S FRAUD SCHEME

14. In particular, Honeywell knew that the Plaintiff unimpeachable record property owners had

paid real property taxes for said subject Parcel. See attached public records of Lee County

Tax Collector; Parcel # 12-44-20-01-00015.015A.

15. Here, Honeywell fraudulently concealed the dispositive evidence that the Plaintiffs were the

unimpeachable record “owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision in Lee County,

Florida.” See Prescott, et al., v. State of Florida, et al., 343 Fed. Appx. 395, 396-97 (11th

Cir. Apr. 21, 2009):

“I. BACKGROUND
A. Current Action
The Appellants are owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa subdivision in
Lee County, Florida. On May 5, 2008, the Appellants filed the present pro se
complaint against numerous state and county officials n1 alleging that they had
violated the Appellants' constitutional rights with respect to their Cayo Costa
property. 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 all accretions thereto as

5
 public land to be used for public purposes. 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.”

16. In particular, Defendant corrupt Judge Honeywell fraudulently pretended on the public

record, Doc. # 213, p. 5:

“I. BACKGROUND 4
Plaintiffs allege that they are the owners of Lot 15A in the Cayo Costa Subdivision of
Lee County, Florida (Dkt. 1, ¶1; Dkt. 5, ¶1). In a resolution adopted in December
1969 by the Board of Commissioners of Lee County, Florida, Lot 15A, among other
property, was claimed as public land (“Resolution 569/875") (Dkt 5, Ex. 3, p. 9). See
Prescott, et 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).”

HONEYWELL’S BRAZEN RECORD FRAUD ON THE COURT & CRIMES

17. Here, crooked Honeywell knew and fraudulently concealed that

a. The Plaintiffs were the unimpeachable record owners of said “Lot 15A”;

b. No “resolution” had ever existed;

c. No “resolution 569/875” had ever existed;

d. No “resolution” had ever been “adopted”;

e. No “resolution” had ever “claimed” Plaintiffs’ “Lot 15A”;

f. No “resolution” could have possibly involuntarily divested the Plaintiff record

property owners and record property tax payers of their riparian Gulf-front Lot

15A.

6
 EMERGENCY OF HONEYWELL’S CRIMES ON THE RECORD

18. Here, Honeywell’s fraud, fraud on the Court, and corrupt & criminal acts were an

EMERGENCY. Here, the prima facie criminality, idiocy and irrationality of Honeywell’s

acts were an EMERGENCY.

EMERGENCY OF LIEN & SIMULATANEOUS GOVERNMENT OWNERSHIP CLAIM

19. Here, Honeywell knew that her co-conspirator and fellow judicial Defendant Sheri Polster

Chappell had fraudulently made an order for the illegal Governmental seizure of said “Lot

15A”. See fraudulent “writ of execution” and fraudulent “lien”.

20. Here, Defendant Government Officials could not possibly “seize” that which Honeywell

fraudulently pretended was “public land”. Here pursuant to the public record, as dispositively

affirmed by, e.g., said U.S. Court of Appeals and Defendants Lee County, the Plaintiffs held

exclusive record title to their “Lot 15A” and had paid any and all property taxes as

conclusively evidenced by the public record:

21. Here, Honeywell’s record stupidity alone disqualified her:

7
a. How could Government possibly “seize” what Defendant Governments fraudulently
“claimed” to be “Government owned”?

b. Why did Honeywell unintelligently contradict the 11th Circuit’s dispositive

affirmation of the public record evidence of Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable land
ownership, see Prescott, et al., v. State of Florida, et al., 343 Fed. Appx. 395, 396-97
(11th Cir. Apr. 21, 2009).

c. Why did Honeywell corruptly and idiotically contradict Defendants’, Lee County,
FL, record affirmation of Plaintiffs’ publicly recorded ownership of said “Lot 15A”:

8
9
10
 FACIALLY DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS AND OBJECTIVE INCOMPETENCE

22. Here, no fit, intelligent, honest judge in Honeywell’s shoes could have possibly refused

disqualification. In particular, no fit, intelligent, and honest judge in Honeywell’s shoes could

have recused herself in Case # 2:2010-cv-00390 and refused mandatory recusal in this Case.

HONEYWELL’S CASE FIXING ON THE RECORD, DOC. # 213

23. Here prior to 06/22/2010, Honeywell had premeditated Case fixing by criminal means of

fraudulently pretending that Plaintiffs’ “Lot 15A” was “public land”, Doc. # 213, p. 5.

CONCEALMENT OF GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION AS “ADVERSE RULING”

24. On 06/22/2010, Honeywell “disjointedly” and “unintelligently” pretended that

“Adverse rulings are not grounds for recusal.” See 2:2009-cv-00791, Doc. # 210, p. 3.

Here, Honeywell’s facially deceptive material misrepresentation of Plaintiffs’ record land

ownership was not an “adverse ruling”, but prima facie trickery, deception, and fraud on the

court. Here, intelligent and rational “analysis” was impossible, because Honeywell deceived

the Court about the record ownership of Lot 15A and fabricated that Plaintiffs’ land had been

“claimed as public land”. Here, no “legal description” of Plaintiffs’ Lot 15A had ever even

appeared in fake “resolution 569/875”, and no “resolution” could have possibly involuntarily

transferred any title to Lee County as affirmed by the public record. See Prescott, et al., v.

State of Florida, et al., 343 Fed. Appx. 395, 396-97 (11th Cir. Apr. 21, 2009). Here, the

very grounds for Honeywell’s “disqualification”, Doc. # 3, equally applied in 2:09-cv-00791

and required Honeywell’s recusal. Here, Honeywell acted capriciously so that she could

unlawfully fix Plaintiffs’ Case on 06/22/2010. See Doc. 213. Here, Honeywell “frivolously”

responded and characterized, e.g., Governmental CORRUPTION, concealment, fraud, and

conspiracy to deliberately deprive, 18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, as “adverse rulings”.

11
12
 BRAZEN CORRUPTION & CONCEALMENT ON THE RECORD

25. Here, Defendant Honeywell brazenly concealed the above record of Plaintiffs “state court

proceeding”, Case # 2006-CA-003185, Lee County Circuit Court, www.LeeClerk.org (Doc.

# 213, p. 6):

26. Here Honeywell knew that judicial co-Defendants and co-Conspirators John Edwin Steele

and Sheri Polster Chappell had removed said State court proceeding from State to Federal

Court, 2:2008-cv-00899 (12/05/2008).

27. In her record pattern and policy of CORRUPTION, Honeywell again rambled

“incomprehensibly” and never got to the well-proven legal issues complained about such as,

e.g., public CORRUPTION and fraud.

CORRUPT HONEYWELL’S CONTEMPT OF THE LAW

28. Here, Honeywell was in contempt of the law and obstructed justice & the proper application

of the law. Here, Defendant Honeywell had personal knowledge of the Government

CORRUPTION & CRIME SCHEMES. Personally, Defendant Honeywell employed, e.g.,

the “frivolity” and “vexatiousness” cover-up schemes and obstructed justice.

HONEYWELL’S CONSPIRACY TO CONCEAL CORRUPTION AND COVER UP

29. In particular, Defendant Honeywell concealed and conspired to conceal, e.g.:

• Fake “lot” and “block” numbers such as, e.g.:

o “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0”;

13
 o “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”;
Neither fake “lot” “00A0” nor “block” “00001”ever existed. See PB 3, PG 25.
• Fake “Government ownership” claims of fake “parcels”;
• Fake “transaction(s)” such as, e.g., “O.R. 569/875”;
• Fake “land” “parcels”;
• Fake “frivolity” “defenses”;
• Fake “vexatiousness” “claims” and “contentions” unwarranted under existing law;
• Fake “legal descriptions” such as, e.g.:

”ALL UNNUMBERED AND ACCRETED LANDS”

Here, Honeywell concealed that the prima facie fake “claims”, contentions, and “defenses”

on the record had no possible legal basis and were “frivolous” and unlawful.

HONEYWELL’S “PERSONAL [CORRUPTION] KNOWLEDGE” REQUIRED RECUSAL

30. Here, Honeywell had “personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the

proceeding”. See Doc. # 210, p. 2. Here, Honeywell personally discussed with other Judges,

Government Officials, and Defendants the “disputed evidentiary facts concerning the

proceeding”, and how to fix Plaintiffs’ Cases and conceal record CORRUPTION evidence.

Here, Honeywell had “personal knowledge” of well-proven Government CORRUPTION and

concealment of Government crimes.

31. Here, Honeywell is most likely to be a material witness in the Government CORRUPTION

proceedings, 28 U.S.C. 455(b).

14
 PUBLICATIONS OF PUBLIC CORRUPTION & DEF. HONEYWELL’S CRIMES

32. The Plaintiffs have been publishing the conclusive record evidence of public CORRUPTION

and fraudulent concealment worldwide at multiple social publication and news sites, as well

as www.YouTube.com, and Google Blogs. See, e.g., www.scribd.com/Judicial%20Fraud.

CONCLUSIVE & UNCONTROVERTED PROOF OF CORRUPTION ON FILE

33. By presenting to this Court pleadings, written motions, and other papers, the Plaintiffs had

certified that to the best of their knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry

reasonable under the circumstances, Def. Honeywell criminally concealed and conspired to

conceal well-evidenced Government CORRUPTION and fraudulent Government “claims” of

“Government ownership” of non-existent and forged “land” “parcels” “12-44-20-01-

00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”.

34. “Frivolity” and “vexatiousness” were not any “defense” and not warranted under existing

law. Here, crooked Honeywell presented “sanctionability” and “frivolity” for unlawful

purposes such as to harass the Plaintiffs, cause unnecessary delay, and needlessly increase

the cost of litigation. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11.

35. No competent, honest, and intelligent judge in Honeywell’s shoes could have possibly

concocted that the proof of Government CORRUPTION and fake “land parcels” on the

record was “not meritorious”.

36. No intelligent, fit, and professional judge in Honeywell’s shoes could have possibly perverted

Florida’s Eminent Domain, Adverse Possession, and Record Marketable Title Act the way

Honeywell did. Here, Honeywell’s dishonesty, incompetence, and threats on the record have

been terrorizing and punishing. The Plaintiffs feared for their fundamental rights and have

been suing Honeywell, PRESCOTT v. HONEYWELL, Case # 2:2010-cv-00390-36-DNF.

15
37. Here, Honeywell had “personal knowledge” that Defendants’ fraudulent denials of Plaintiffs’

factual contentions were not warranted on the record evidence and not reasonably based on

belief or a lack of information. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b).

38. Objectively CORRUPT and partial Defendant Judge Honeywell’s fraudulent perversions of

Plaintiffs’ well-proven factual contentions were not warranted on the record evidence and not

reasonably based on belief or a lack of information. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b).

39. Pursuant to the public record evidence, Honeywell’s belief and policy were CORRUPTION

and terror, and the Plaintiffs object to the CORRUPTION and CRIMES on the record.

40. Here Honeywell concealed the prima facie criminality and nullity of, e.g., forged “land”

“parcels” “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0” and “07-44-21-01-00001.0000” and Government

ownership claims and fake “defenses” in the record absence of any Government title

evidence.

41. The record conclusively proved Honeywell’s intimidating contempt of the law, and in

particular of, e.g., Chapters 712; 73, 74; 95, Florida Statutes; and Florida and Federal

Constitutions.

HONEYWELL CONSPIRED TO FALSELY PRETEND RIPENESS REQUIREMENTS

42. Idiotically and corruptly, Honeywell fraudulently pretended “ripeness requirements” for,

e.g., claims of record 4th, 1st, 14th, and 7th U.S. Const. Amendment violations, fraud, and

CORRUPTION. See Doc. # 213.

43. Here, Plaintiffs could directly assert, and rightfully asserted, their claims for relief from, e.g.,

Government CORRUPTION and fraud in Federal Court. Honeywell knew that no ripeness

requirements had ever existed.

16
44. Here, the Plaintiffs rightfully defended against Honeywell’s NAZI-style terror and

CORRUPTION and demanded EMERGENCY relief from Honeywell’s well-proven fraud

upon the Court and legally “incomprehensible” bogus contentions of “frivolity” and “public

land”.

45. Here, the Plaintiffs had pleaded, e.g., fraud and fraudulent concealment in both State and

Federal Courts. See State Case # 2006-CA-003185; www.LeeClerk.org.

46. Here, Honeywell fraudulently concealed that the Plaintiffs paid property taxes and held

perfected marketable title to said “Lot 15A”. Here, Honeywell’s “order”, Doc. # 213,

constituted prima facie premeditated and deliberate deprivations under color of office and

authority. Here, Honeywell had no authority to pervert the public record and obstruct justice.

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

21, 2009).

47. Here, Honeywell knew that the Lee County Attorney had categorically ruled out any

possibility of any Lee County ownership of Plaintiffs’ property, 12/29/2000 Memorandum:

17
18
 HONEYWELL’S COVER-UP FOR FELLOW JUDICIAL GANG MEMBERS

48. Here like a brainless parrot, Honeywell merely repeated the null and void orders by the

named judicial Defendants. Because the Plaintiffs had demanded relief from said null and

void orders by judicial Defendants such as, e.g., Steele, Polster Chappell, Pizzo, Lazzara,

which were based on facially fraudulent and legally impossible “Government ownership”

“claims”, Honeywell was obligated to review de novo and use a brain. However here,

Honeywell never reviewed anything, but repeated the same old judicial trash on the record

and continued to pervert the public record just like said fellow judicial Defendants had. Here,

by her own admission more than one hundred (100) pages of Plaintiffs’ Complaint had never

even been filed (see Doc. # 1):

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand

1. An Order compelling Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why she did

not fraudulently conceal Plaintiffs’ record ownership of said Lot 15A, Parcel # 12-44-20-01-

00015.015A as evidenced in Plaintiffs’ Complaint and pleadings;

2. An Order compelling Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why she did

not fraudulently conceal Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable record ownership of said Lot 15A, Parcel

# 12-44-20-01-00015.015A as affirmed by the public record;

3. An Order compelling Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why she did

not maliciously pervert the dispositive affirmation of Plaintiffs’ record ownership by the U.S.

19
 Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, Prescott, et al., v. State of Florida, et al., 343 Fed.

Appx. 395, 396-97 (11th Cir. Apr. 21, 2009);

4. An Order compelling Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why she did

not capriciously conceal Plaintiffs’ unimpeachable record ownership of said Lot 15A, Parcel

# 12-44-20-01-00015.015A, which the Defendants Lee County had asserted before the 11th

Circuit U.S. Appellate Court, Appeal # 08-13170, BUSSE v. LEE COUNTY;

5. An Order compelling Defendant Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why the grounds for “her

disqualification”, Doc. # 3, Case 2:2010-cv-00390, did not absolutely demand her recusal in

this Case;

6. An Order compelling Defendant Honeywell to SHOW CAUSE why her “rulings” were not

NULL AND VOID and procured through the criminal scheme of false “frivolity” and

“vexatiousness” pretenses and the concealment of said fake “legal descriptions”, fake “land”

“parcels”, and fake “Government ownership” “claims” and contentions;

7. An EMERGENCY Order recusing Defendant crooked Judge Honeywell, because she

disrespected the law, disrupted the proceedings in favor of the Defendants, perverted the

facts of record, and could not possibly be trusted to be impartial and fair, 28 U.S.C. § 455.

/S/JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT

Governmental Corruption & Fraud Victim, Plaintiff, pro se
P.O. BOX 845, Palm Beach, FL 33480; T: 561-400-3295
____________________________________
/S/JORG BUSSE, M.D., M.M., M.B.A., C.P.M.
Judicial Corruption & Crime Victim; Plaintiff, pro se
State Cert. Res. Appraiser, Licensed Real Estate Broker, Mortgage Broker, Appraisal Instructor;
JRBU@aol.com

20
13
14
 Def. Crooked Honeywell’s Real Estate Fraud:

• Fake “lot” and “block” numbers such as, e.g.:

o “12-44-20-01-00000.00A0”;
o “07-44-21-01-00001.0000”;
Neither fake “lot” “00A0” nor “block”
“00001”ever existed.
• Fake “Government ownership” claims;
• Fake “transaction(s)” such as, e.g., “O.R.
569/875”;
• Fake “resolution” and “law” “claims”;
• Fake “land” “parcels”;
• Fake “frivolity” “defenses”;
• Fake “vexatiousness” contentions;
• Fake “legal descriptions”:

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30