When you read the below document please keep in mind, that the abuse I endured in or about April 24, 2012 was intense. When you put the court record, the digital record, their statements to law enforcement, the communications to third parties including but not limited to third parties who received emails from Bob Atchison and those connected to him, the back and forth banter, only then can you begin to understand my desperately wanting Bob Atchison and those he manipulated with his lies to leave me alone. Year after year, day after day, they continued concoct ways of which they thought for sure would harm me. When I filed this Civil RICO, I was unaware of Mary Lee sending to Bob Atchison's home a court protected record pertaining to an adoption proceedings of which both Bob and Rob published contents of it online as well as sent it to third parties. It was during this time that I was being threatened to be murdered, strangers were being sent to my home, my property stolen, the 911 calls I made to law enforcement because I was scared to death and it is important to note that when the below action was filed I did not have the 6-17-2004 Austin Police Report. I had only the 2 page Press Release about a Terroristic Threat and that it was found to unfounded. I did not know that there was more than 10 page report of which contained numerous lies told to the police with the criminal intent that I would be arrested. I only received this full report last year. I also didn't know if there was such a thing as a CIVIL RICO, I know there is a CRIMINAL RICO so I had to do research. I am not a licensed attorney, I sucked trying to represent myself and to be honest my then state of mind was impaired by the severe PTSD that came about because of the stalking and harassment, to name but a few. It was a scary moment and both Bob Atchison and Rob Moshien and others connected to them who they were able to manipulate terrorized me and did it with a smile and joy in their hearts.
__________________________________________________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR
DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF AND DAMAGES FROM
RACKETEERING, CONSPIRACY TO
ENGAGE IN A PATTERN OF RACKETEERING
ACTIVITY, FRAUD, INVASION OF PRIVACY;
INTRUSION UPON SECLUSION, STALKING,
PUNITIVE AND TREBLE DAMAGES; AND
RELATED CLAIMS;
JURY DEMANDED:
__________________________________________________________________________
INTRODUCTION
This is a complex civil action for RICO remedies authorized by the federal statutes at 18 U.S.C. 1961 et seq.; for declaratory and injunctive relief; for actual, consequential and exemplary damages; and for all other relief which this honorable Court deems just and proper under all circumstances which have occasioned this Initial COMPLAINT. See 18 U.S.C. '' 1964(a) and 8 ("Civil RICO"). In addition to the RICO claims, there are additional claims for intrusion upon seclusion, invasion of privacy, appropriation of name, violation of plaintiff's constitutional right to privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, civil conspiracy and abuse of process; there is an allegation of using threats in interstate commerce. See 18 U.S.C. Section 1951.
The main defendant is Robert David Atchison, and his co‐conspirators Pallasart Web Design, Pallasart Web Ventures, Inc and Pallasart’s Alexander Palace Time Machine & John Does 1-50 Inclusive.
The criminal conspiracy took place in Austin, Texas, Chicago, Illinois, California, New Jersey, Virginia, New York, New Mexico, Anchorage, Alaska and Florida.
The primary cause of this action is a widespread criminal enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity across State lines, and a conspiracy to engage in racketeering activity involving numerous RICO predicate acts during the past ten (10) calendar years.
The predicate acts alleged here cluster around criminal threats, fraud, racketeering, invasion of privacy and subjugation; and defamation and filing false police reports, obstruction of justice, obstruction of criminal investigations, obstruction of State and local law enforcement.
Other RICO predicate acts, although appearing to be isolated events, were actually part of the overall conspiracy and pattern of racketeering activity alleged herein, e.g. fraud, racketeering, invasion of privacy, subjugation, defamation. The primary objective of the racketeering enterprise has been to inflict severe and sustained economic hardship upon Plaintiff, with the intent of impairing, obstructing, preventing and discouraging Plaintiff from producing a film about Russian history and filing bankruptcy.
Moreover they have made threats to harm her.
JURISDICTION
This honorable Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to the civil RICO remedies at 18 U.S.C. 1964, and the holdings of the U.S. Supreme Court in Tafflin v. Levitt, 493 U.S. 455 (1990), and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Lou v. Belzberg, 834 F.2d 730, hn. 4 (9th Cir. 1987). Further jurisdiction is conferred pursuant to U.S.C. 18 U.S.C.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On March 5, 2012, Plaintiff filed a bankruptcy petition in the Bankruptcy Court of the United States for the Central District of California, Chapter 7. Since 2005 the defendants, and each of them, have engaged in a pattern of defamation, abuse of process and threats, etc., committing perjury and filing false police reports and court documents. This was committed in the Courtroom of the Honorable Gisela D. Triana‐Doyal. In fact, a Mr. Curt Baggett, a Dallas forensic document examiner, examined certain documents filed by the main defendant, and stated that they were forged and that perjury was committed, Exhibit E.
The Defendants, and each of them, have engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity, defaming the plaintiff, making threats of violence, and committed fraud on the Plaintiff and the court. This case has been continued to May 8, 2012 at which time it is anticipated the case will be dismissed and plaintiff intends to file a 2nd petition. The obstruction anticipated by Defendants has now occurred in that case, and continues to this day, with the defamation, intimidation and fraud and deceit. Police reports from the Austin Police Department are attached as exhibits. Shots were fired at the Plaintiff's home by the alleged co‐conspirators and the threats and harassment continue to this day; the scenario of threats is documented by various police departments, nationwide.
STRUCTURE AND INCORPORATION OF PRIOR PLEADINGS AND EXHIBITS
Particular attention of this honorable Court is now drawn to Exhibits A & B and (Police Report from the Austin, Texas, Police Departments in regards to the false police reports. Documents will later be added as Exhibits including but not limited to communications either sent or communicated to the San Bernadino District Attorney’s Office, the California Attorney General’s Office, the Beverly Hills Police department, Homeland Security, Federal Bureau of Investigations (F.B.I.), U.S. Marshal’s Office in Texas, the Santa Monica Police department, the Los Angeles Police Department, the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, the Anchorage Police Department, the Alaskan State Troopers, the Irvine Police Department, the Park County Police department in Cody, Wyoming and other law enforcement agencies in both the state of Idaho & Montana. Exhibits C and D are documented Retaliations which also qualify as one or more of the RICO Predicate Acts that are itemized at 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(1)(B), (1)(D), and (5). Plaintiff now testifies that the partial list of acts and events now documented in said exhibits constitute probable cause for granting all relief requested infra in the instant COMPLAINT. Moreover, further acts and events occurred after August 1, 2001, which also qualify as RICO predicate acts that constitute further probable causes for all the relief requested infra. For example, Plaintiff herein alleges that obstruction of justice did in fact occur whenever Plaintiff was deprived of specific relief from the federal bankruptcy courts in Los Angeles, California.
COUNT ONE:
Acquisition and Maintenance of an Interest in and Control of an Enterprise Engaged in a Pattern of Racketeering Activity: 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(5), 1962(b) Plaintiff now re‐alleges each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby incorporates same by reference, as if all were set forth fully herein. Substance prevails over form. At various times and places partially enumerated in Plaintiff’s documentary material, all Defendants did acquire and/or maintain, directly or indirectly, an interest in or control of a RICO enterprise of individuals who were associated in fact and who did engage in, and whose activities did affect, interstate and foreign commerce, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(4), (5), (9), and 1962(b).
During the ten (10) calendar years preceding March 1, 2003 A.D., all Defendants did cooperate jointly and severally in the commission of two (2) or more of the RICO predicate acts that are itemized in the RICO laws at 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(1)(A) and (B), and did so in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) (Prohibited activities).
Plaintiff further alleges that all Defendants did commit two (2) or more of the offenses itemized above in a manner which they calculated and premeditated intentionally to threaten continuity, i.e. a continuing threat of their respective racketeering activities, also in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) supra.
Pursuant to the original Statutes at Large, the RICO laws itemized above are to be liberally construed by this honorable Court. Said construction rule was never codified in Title 18 of the United States Code, however. See 84 Stat. 947, Sec. 904, Oct. 15, 1970. Respondent superior (principal is liable for agents misconduct: knowledge of, participation in, and benefit from a RICO enterprise).
COUNT TWO:
Conduct and Participation in a RICO Enterprise through a Pattern of Racketeering Activity: 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(5), 19628 Plaintiff now re‐alleges each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby incorporates same by reference, as if all were set forth fully herein. Substance prevails over form. At various times and places partially enumerated in Plaintiff=s documentary material, all Defendants did associate with a RICO enterprise of individuals who were associated in fact and who engaged in, and whose activities did affect, interstate and foreign commerce. Likewise, all Defendants did conduct and/or participate, either directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of said RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(4), (5), (9), and 19628.
During the ten (10) calendar years preceding March 1, 2003 A.D., all Defendants did cooperate jointly and severally in the commission of two (2) or more of the RICO predicate acts that are itemized in the RICO laws at 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(1)(A) and (B), and did so in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 19628 (Prohibited activities).
Plaintiff further alleges that all Defendants did commit two (2) or more of the offenses itemized above in a manner which they calculated and premeditated intentionally to threaten continuity, i.e. a continuing threat of their respective racketeering activities, also in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 19628 supra.
Pursuant to 84 Stat. 947, Sec. 904, Oct. 15, 1970, the RICO laws itemized above are to be liberally construed by this honorable Court. Said construction rule was never codified in Title 18 of the United States Code, however. Respondent superior (as explained above).
COUNT THREE:
Conspiracy to Engage in a Pattern of Racketeering Activity: 18 U.S.C.'' 1961(5), 1962(d) Plaintiff now re‐alleges each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby incorporates same by reference, as if all were set forth fully herein. Substance prevails over form.
At various times and places partially enumerated in Plaintiff's documentary material, all Defendants did conspire to acquire and maintain an interest in a RICO enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 1962(b) and (d). At various times and places partially enumerated in Plaintiff’s documentary material, all Defendants did also conspire to conduct and participate in said RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 19628 and (d). See also 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(4), (5) and (9).
During the ten (10) calendar years preceding March 1, 2003 A.D., all Defendants did cooperate jointly and severally in the commission of two (2) or more of the predicate acts that are itemized at 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(1)(A) and (B), in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d). Plaintiff further alleges that all Defendants did commit two (2) or more of the offenses itemized above in a manner which they calculated and premeditated intentionally to threaten continuity, i.e. a continuing threat of their respective racketeering activities, also in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) (Prohibited activities supra).
Pursuant to 84 Stat. 947, Sec. 904, Oct. 15, 1970, the RICO laws itemized above are to be liberally construed by this honorable Court. Said construction rule was never codified in Title 18 of the United States Code, however. Respondent superior (as explained above).
RELIEF REQUESTED
Wherefore, pursuant to the statutes at 18 U.S.C. 1964(a) and 8, Plaintiff requests judgment against all named Defendants as follows:
ON COUNT ONE:
1. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants, both jointly and severally, have acquired and maintained, both directly and indirectly, an interest in and/or control of a RICO enterprise of persons and of other individuals who were associated in fact, all of whom engaged in, and whose activities did affect, interstate and foreign commerce in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) (Prohibited activities).
2. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from acquiring or maintaining, whether directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any RICO enterprise of persons, or of other individuals associated in fact, who are engaged in, or whose activities do affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
3. That all Defendants and all of their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from committing any more predicate acts in furtherance of the RICO enterprise alleged in COUNT ONE supra.
4. That all Defendants be required to account for all gains, profits, and advantages derived from their several acts of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s).
5. That judgment be entered for Plaintiff and against all Defendants for Plaintiff=s actual damages, and for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b), according to the best available proof.
6. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff treble (triple) damages, under authority of 18 U.S.C. 1964 8, for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b), according to the best available proof.
7. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff all damages sustained by Plaintiff in consequence of Defendant's several violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b), according to the best available proof.
8. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff His costs of the lawsuit incurred herein including, but not limited to, all necessary research, all non‐judicial enforcement and all reasonable counsel's fees.
9. That all damages caused by all Defendants, and all gains, profits, and advantages derived by all Defendants, from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b) and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s), be deemed to be held in constructive trust, legally foreign with respect to the federal zone [sic], for the benefit of Plaintiff, His heirs and assigns.
10. That Plaintiff have such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper, under the circumstances of this action.
ON COUNT TWO:
1. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants have associated with a RICO enterprise of persons and of other individuals who were associated in fact, all of whom did engage in, and whose activities did affect, interstate and foreign commerce in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 19628 (Prohibited activities).
2. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants have conducted and/or participated, directly or indirectly, in the affairs of said RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of the RICO laws at 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(5) ("pattern" defined) and 19628 supra.
3. That all Defendants and all of their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from associating with any RICO enterprise of persons, or of other individuals associated in fact, who do engage in, or whose activities do affect, interstate and foreign commerce.
4. That all Defendants and all of their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from conducting or participating, either directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of any RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of the RICO laws at 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(5) and 19628 supra.
5. That all Defendants and all of their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from committing any more predicate acts in furtherance of the RICO enterprise alleged in COUNT TWO supra.
6. That all Defendants be required to account for all gains, profits, and advantages derived from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 19628 supra and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s).
7. That judgment be entered for Plaintiff and against all Defendants for Plaintiff=s actual damages, and for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 19628 supra, according to the best available proof.
8. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff treble (triple) damages, under authority of 18 U.S.C. 19648, for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 19628 supra, according to the best available proof.
9. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff all damages sustained by Plaintiff in consequence of Defendant's several violations of 18 U.S.C. 19628 supra, according to the best available proof.
10. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff His costs of the lawsuit incurred herein including, but not limited to, all necessary research, all non‐judicial enforcement and all reasonable counsel's fees.
11. That all damages caused by all Defendants, and all gains, profits, and advantages derived by all Defendants, from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 19628 supra and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s), be deemed to be held in constructive trust, legally foreign with respect to the federal zone [sic], for the benefit of Plaintiff, His heirs and assigns.
12. That Plaintiff have such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper, under the full range of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.
ON COUNT THREE:
1. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants have conspired to acquire and maintain an interest in, and/or conspired to acquire and maintain control of, a RICO enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. ''1961(5), 1962(b) and (d) supra.
2. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants have conspired to conduct and participate in said RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(5), 19628 and (d) supra.
3. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from conspiring to acquire or maintain an interest in, or control of, any RICO enterprise that engages in a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(5), 1962(b) and (d) supra.
4. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from conspiring to conduct, participate in, or benefit in any manner from any RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. '' 1961(5), 19628 and (d) supra.
5. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from committing any more predicate acts in furtherance of the RICO enterprise alleged in COUNT THREE supra.
6. That all Defendants be required to account for all gains, profits, and advantages derived from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s).
7. That judgment be entered for Plaintiff and against all Defendants for Plaintiff's actual damages, and for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra, according to the best available proof.
8. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff treble (triple) damages, under authority of 18 U.S.C. 19648, for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra, according to the best available proof.
9. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff all damages sustained by Plaintiff in consequence of Defendant's several violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra, according to the best available proof.
10. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff His costs of the lawsuit incurred herein including, but not limited to, all necessary research, all non‐judicial enforcement, and all reasonable counsel's fees.
11. That all damages caused by all Defendants, and all gains, profits, and advantages derived by all Defendants, from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) supra and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s), be deemed to be held in constructive trust, legally foreign with respect to the federal zone [sic], for the benefit of Plaintiff, His heirs and assigns.
12. That Plaintiff have such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper, under the full range of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.
COUNT IV
Intrusion upon seclusion.
For years, the defendants, and each of them, have conspired to intrude upon plaintiff's seclusion, with imaginary torts dreamed up by them, and many false documents filed; they have web sites that are solely for the purpose of criminal activity and harassment, and to intrude and invade privacy in violation of United States and State law. The plaintiff has been damaged emotionally, physically and financially by these illegal acts.
COUNT V
Invasion of Privacy
For years, the defendants, and each of them, have conspired to intrude upon plaintiff's seclusion, in furtherance of the racketeering enterprise, with imaginary torts dreamed up by them, and many false documents filed; they have web sites that are solely for the purpose of criminal activity and harassment, and to intrude and invade privacy in violation of United States and State law. The plaintiff has been damaged emotionally, physically and financially by these illegal acts. When the plaintiff seek to have her constitutional rights enforced, the defendants respond with a barrage for forgery, perjury and physical threats, i.e, coercion, extortion and intimidation. Plaintiff=s right to privacy is guaranteed by the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
COUNT VI
Appropriation of Name and Identity
In furtherance of the racketeering enterprise, the defendants, and each of them, have appropriated plaintiff's name and identity, with fancy elaborate web‐site schemes, false reports to the Department of Motor Vehicles and police departments. The plaintiff has experienced severe damages as direct and proximate result of her identity being stolen, and they have falsely accused her for abuse of process, having multiple ID's, etc.
COUNT VII
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
In furtherance of the racketeering enterprise, the defendants, and each of them, have wantonly, recklessly, maliciously and with oppression caused the plaintiff great emotional distress; this is proximately and directly a result of the continuous intimidation, fraud, and even gunshots being fired at her place of residence.
COUNT VIII
Civil Conspiracy
In furtherance of the racketeering enterprise, the defendants, and each of them, have conspired to file defamatory documents with the bankruptcy court, state and federal court, and have colluded and conspired to do this across state lines; this conspiracy involves a pattern of invasion of privacy, subjugation, abuse of process and physical threats, and mentioned, supra.
COUNTY IX
Abuse of Process
In furtherance of the racketeering enterprise, the defendants, and each of them, have conspired to file defamatory documents with the bankruptcy court, state and federal court, and have colluded and conspired to do this across state lines; this conspiracy involves a pattern of invasion of privacy, subjugation, abuse of process and physical threats, and mentioned, supra. They have abused the legal process by filing false and misleading police reports, and forged documents in Texas and United States District Court.
COUNT X
False Light
In furtherance of the racketeering enterprise, the defendants, and each of them, have attempted to portray the defendant in false light, solely to damage her further; they made false accusations regarding her integrity, sexual morality, and business acumen as a film maker, etc.
COUNT XI
Stalking
In furtherance of the racketeering enterprise, the defendants, and each of them have colluded and conspired to stalk Plaintiff and do this across state lines; this conspiracy involves a pattern of stalking, harassment, subjugation and physical threats, and mentioned, supra.
Comments
Post a Comment