by Martin F. Abernathy
Thursday, Aug. 28, 2003 at 1:16 PM
abemarf59@hotmail.com Providence, RI
This could be the lawsuit that ends Bush's *illegitimate* presidency!
To Contact Charles A. Schlund
Charles A. Schlund
8520 N. 54th Drive
Glendale, AZ 85302
(623) 931-5963
(623) 931-6420
(602) 670-2017
++++++++++
Plaintiff Schlund’s verified complaint is relevant, signed under oath
per Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 11, that he has experienced
the extreme physical and emotional pain and suffering of the torture and
the violation of his Constitutional Rights. That the government’s
activities of using the sophisticated electronic technologies/devices
have hurt, injured and caused him “extreme” pain and suffering both
physically and psychologically (Verified Complaint) including loss of
trust in the United States government which is especially hurtful for
depriving him of serious constitutional rights.
He expresses in detail in his Complaint that the individual officers
have used “improper, excessive, and unjustified force”, violating his
United States and Arizona constitutional rights. He asserts that the
government’s “improper, excessive, and unjustified force” is the “direct
and proximate cause” of his “sustaining intermittent life-threatening
injuries”.
Plaintiff Schlund, in layman terms, has expressed that during the
torture sessions of him, he is able to utilize his innate natural senses
to allow him to feel, smell, see, hear, touch and physically be aware of
when his physical body is being touched and affected by an outside
energy stimulus which has the capabilities to transfer energy, including
sound, which has the severe result of psychological and physiological
deterioration of his mind and body when the Government is torturing him
in that manner.
“The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ clear understanding that the sophisticated
and complex electronic surveillance and other electronic [devices] can be ‘used in
tandem with surveillance technologies’ and ‘other electronic devices’ or ‘other
sophisticated electronic surveillance devices ought not be permitted in a free
society.” (Id. Koyomejian) Plaintiff Schlund alleges the United States
has not yet become Nazi Germany, but if this is allowed by the Court to
continue, we will be no different than that of Nazi Germany.
Plaintiff Schlund has also detailed that during the torture sessions he suffers
from, included however not limited to, forced sleep deprivation, pain
and suffering throughout his body, headaches, nausea, screaming in his
ears, violent shaking of his body and intra-cranial cavity, his eyes
extremely ache and feel like they’re going to explode, experiences
severe diarrhea, expectorates blood and experiences blood coming from
his anus. His teeth have cracked from the sound and electronic force
vibration and fell apart and he has been blinded and so psychologically
distracted due to intolerable and joint inflictions of the torture and
surveillance distraction that his left thumb was torn off by a machine
he was working on, causing the immediate primitive amputation of his
thumb. This happened after Plaintiff Schlund repeatedly informed the
government that the electronic mode they were using was blinding him
when it was turned on. After arriving at the hospital in Phoenix,
Arizona, the on-staff physician polished up the primitive amputation of
his thumb by the machine, exacerbating the excruciating pain and
suffering experienced by him as well. The aforesaid is irrefutable,
irreparable harm to him. Plaintiff Schlund leaves here to supplement
this motion with his affidavit.
He voices that the extreme nature and degree of the infliction of
torture punishment on him by the government prevents him from handling
his normal business duties and responsibilities. The torture of
Plaintiff Schlund was so heavy on Election Day that Plaintiff was unable
to vote because he was prevented from voting by the use of torture.
Plaintiff is right now being forcibly stopped by the Justice Department from
serving on jury duty. Plaintiff was called for jury duty just the other day and
the torture of plaintiff is forcing plaintiff under torture to not be able to
serve on jury duty.
It has also violated his freedoms of association and privacy and those
associations, including speech, protected under the First Amendment, and
in direct violation of his privileges between his attorney, doctors,
clergy, religion, violation of equal protection under the law, violation
of his freedom of privacy to his personal papers, effects and things
from governmental intrusion, and violation of his rights to political
and commercial free speech, also protected under the Constitution.
The Supreme Court has issued prior decisions which support the issuing
of injunctive relief for Plaintiff Schlund which involve a wide range of
scientific and other electronic force technologies admittedly used not
only by the United States Government, but others as well. See, Central
Intelligence Agency v. John Cary Sims and Sidney M. Wolfe, 471 U.S. 159,
85 L Ed. 2d 185 S.Ct. 1881 (1965).
2. Torture and banishment allowed by the court if not stopped results
in Plaintiff Schlund being beyond the reach of all of the protecting
clauses of the United States Constitution, resulting in irreparable
harm.
Irrefutably, torture is extreme punishment whether physiologically,
psychologically or both. The government’s illegal activities of
torturing Plaintiff Schlund are done in an electronic manner unseen by
the untrained human eye. The government’s electronic torture and
surveillance of Plaintiff Schlund is conducted in a manner in which
Plaintiff cannot defend himself against such egregious invasions of his
privacy or torture having the effect of placing him outside and beyond
the reach of any of the protecting clauses of the United States
Constitution – banishing him from such protections guaranteed
thereunder. In other words, it strips him of all the rights which are
given to him as a United States citizen and by God. Use of electronic
torture and surveillance devices and systems on Plaintiff forcibly
banishing him from the constitutional protections is a type of torture
called banishment. Banishment is a severe form of torture recognized
by the United States Supreme Court. United States vs. Ju Toy, 198 U.S.
253 (1905) at pgs. 258 and 259.
The United States in the U.S. v. Ju Toy, case held government
activities which place a person (Plaintiff Schlund) beyond the ability
to use his United States Constitutional protections to stop illegal or
pretextually legal (under color of authority or office) torture or
banishment is punishment. (Id. p. 269). It went further clarifying
that such activity is the most severest punishment, “ It is inflicted principle
upon political offenders ………….. usually punishment on criminals whether
real or pretended”. (Id.)
In the case before the bench, Plaintiff Schlund has been and is
pretextually and judicially branded as a criminal and was set-up by
sloppy, dirty, and corrupt government agents who got caught by the
Honorable Federal Judge Lacey who held they committed “outrageous” acts
of fabrication of evidence, witness tampering, obstruction of justice
and other severe and repetitive acts of immoral and grossly unethical
conduct under color of authority and office. The officials themselves
were radical and uncivilized criminals violating federal law. They
should have been jailed.
The Honorable Federal Judge Lacey after acquitting plaintiff while
standing and beating on his desk demanded that the corrupt federal
agents be arrested for perjury and yelled that no one commits perjury in
his court.
See a similar recent example attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, as
self-authenticated evidence per F.R.C.P. 902(6).
The corrupt agents nearly ended up in jail themselves on sua sponte
contempt charges vigorously voiced on bedrock of anger by United States
District Court Judge Lacey. The judge’s clear expressions were in
essence that the corrupt and dirty cops were the actual criminals not
Plaintiff Schlund who was merely painted as a criminal in the bogus and
fabricated proceedings marshaled against him by the DOJ and DEA. (Id.)
Plaintiff Schlund is a whistle blower on dirty law enforcement
activities anchored in corruption. Plaintiff Schlund, in reality, is a
political witness despised by those who are steeped in government
corruption. The DOJ, DEA and judges under their influence, in a
concerted effort, have and continue to have, exiled or banished (to the
extent of their influence) Plaintiff Schlund from the effective use of
the judicial system or use of other departments and agencies of the
state/federal government. He is subject to the species of torture
called judicial banishment or exile. He has been placed in the status
of a political witness and tortured as well in this fashion. United
States vs. Ju Toy, 198 U.S. 253 (1905) at pg. 258:
“Banishment of a citizen not merely removes him from the limits of his
native land, but puts him beyond the reach of any of the protecting
clauses of the Constitution. In other words, it strips him of all the
rights which are given to a citizen. I cannot believe that Congress
intended to provide that a citizen, simply because he belongs to an
obnoxious race, can be deprived of all the liberty and protections which
the Constitution guarantees; and if it did so intend, I do not believe
that it had the power to do so.”
Plaintiff Schlund is a person of the obnoxious race or status of a
whistle blower of corruption – a political witness against government
corruption. Therefore, the court ordering the termination of the
violations of Plaintiff Schlund’s rights, the torturing of Schlund and
the equal access to the use of the law, will level the playing field of
due process, equal protection and uphold the ends of justice. U.S. v.
Ju Toy; Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and In. Re.
the Matter of S-V, Interim Decision No. 3430 (BIA 2000); 8 C.F.R. §
208.17(a)(2001)[defining torture], by way of example. Torture of
political witnesses or for [other government motive] is not new and
fully acknowledged by the judicial decisions Siderman DeBlake v.
Republic of Argentina, 965 F. 2d 699 (9th Cir. (1992), supra; F.R.C.P.
706.
The result of this court not granting the requested relief will be that
the court will be procedurally authorizing the use of torture and
banishment and aiding/abetting in the cover-up of wireless electronic
trespass, torture, murder and treason. 18 U.S.C. § 238 [Treason Against
the United States]. Plaintiff Schlund’s testimony as to the severity
and extreme harm of the injuries and damages he has sustained and
continues to sustain must be adopted as truthful, especially in light of
no conflicting evidence to the contrary. See, Allen Scribner, 812 F 2d
426, 430, 437 (9th Cir. 1987) [“[A] Plaintiff’s testimony, standing
alone, is sufficient to sustain a verdict.”] Plaintiff Schlund’s
statements have been consistently reliable for over twenty-five (25)
years since he was acquitted. He has passed two (2) independent lie
detector tests, despite the proof is not admissible in court. Also, his
Verified Complaint is construed as an affidavit, which is acknowledged
under Rule 56(e), which can be relied upon for purposes of granting
injunctive relief.
As to the nature of the technology and the raw reality of the
government torturing its citizenry, here for Plaintiff Schlund, as
bizarre as it may seem, the reality of torture has been firmly
recognized in the Siderman DeBlake case supra. The 9th Circuit Court
of Appeals expended great effort to give strong and credible weight to
the factual reality of torture of citizens by the government under its
reliable pattern of always denying it.
Modernly, the technology almost has no limits and it is not logical
that the government would use old technology when it can be using the
most updated modernized technology for “surveillance” and other purposes
which are less costly, more effective and efficient.
Plaintiff Schlund’s Complaint avers the government needs this pretext
of claiming he is engaged in criminal activity to justify obtaining a
probable cause warrant in order to continuously conduct the surveillance
activities as aforesaid. He claims the CIA/DEA utilizes “corrupt” judges
that Plaintiff Schlund had been working with the FBI against, to obtain
these warrants, or otherwise the government just simply conducts the
investigation without a warrant, hoping he will commit a criminal act
and then use that as a justification for the probable cause to seek
legitimate warrants, while the judge turns a blind eye to the
perpetuation of illegal surveillance and torture activities, in
violation of his civil rights and those that associate with him.
This is exactly what the Honorable Circuit Judge Kozinski greatly feared,
as he expressed in his powerful dissent in the Kovomejian decision.
However, because Koyomejian was a criminal matter, when the government
is believed to be conducting illegal or otherwise improper
investigations utilizing said technologies, it would be proper for the
court to grant injunctive relief to protect Plaintiff Schlund’s
constitutional rights. Plaintiff Schlund has never been convicted of
anything and is not guilty of any crime.
Plaintiff Schlund is seeking injunctive relief to restrain the actual
and threatened acts of irreparable injury which are in fact cruel and
unusual punishment to him personally and to his constitutional rights,
as expressed above. Even minor deprivation or violation of an
individual’s freedom of speech is always protected by injunctive relief
against the violator. Plaintiff Schlund requests the relief as a
preventive and protective measure to allow him to have relief from the
torture which causes him irreparable harm, injury, and damages, as set
forth in this motion. It is the rule, rather than the exception, that
an injunction is not restricted to acts “contrary to law” but may also
issue to restrain acts contrary to fairness. See, Standard Oil Co. v.
United States, 283 U.S. 163, 75 L.Ed. 926, 51 S.Ct. 421 (1982); Swift
and Co. v. United States, 276 U.S. 311, 72 L.Ed. 587, 48 S.Ct. 311
(1981). For the court to deny this Motion and stop the lawsuits from
going forward by the use of torture would result in the court becoming a
co-conspirator to the cover-up of murder and the claims listed in the
Complaint. This includes the court’s participation in the overthrow of
the United States - treason.
Plaintiff has stressed the resulting psychological and physiological
injury and damages, including but limited to, his feelings, sensibility,
honor, personal reputation, deprivation of his children’s love,
affection and companionship, and the torturous interference with his
personal guaranteed rights under the United States Constitution. All of
these are appropriate for the court to issue an injunctive relief order
terminating the government’s torture activity causing irreparable harm
in those regards.
“The interests protected by an injunction against torts are not
limited to those in property or to those of an economic character. They
include all interests defined and discussed in the restatement of this
subject. Thus. injunctive relief is available for the protection of
interests of personality, even though the harm done or threatened
consists of nothing more to injury to feelings, sensibility, or honor.
Examples are interests in privacy, in personal reputation, and in the
domestic relations.” See, Restatement, Torts, Section 973, comment (a);
Koyomejian and Siderman DeBlake.
Torture is defined as a criminal act subject to relief in the World
Court if relief cannot be obtained in the subject country (USA). If the
court allows such violations, it gives the appearance the court is no
different than the violator, which results in a chilling effect of the
public trusting their own government. (See Exhibit “A”, a current
reality.)
Normally, Plaintiff Schlund would seek the protections enunciated under
criminal law enforced by the police against the violators of his
constitutional rights, but such options are not available under the
present circumstances. Plaintiff has tried to file 1,000’s of
complaints for the use of torture. The Justice Department, Attorney
General John Ashcroft, Janet Reno and the Inspector Generals Office have
refused to even answer the complaints. The Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, Rule 65, provides that in appropriate cases, to prevent
irreparable harm, the court may issue an injunctive relief order in its
discretion.
NOTICE OF INTENT TO EXERCISE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS UNDER
TORTURE AND THREAT OF DEATH BY THE GOVERNMENT
Plaintiff Schlund while under torture and under the threat of
death by the government must place the United States on notice that the
Justice Department and courts by allowing the use of terrorist acts and
torture against Plaintiff Schlund has resulted in injuries that
Plaintiff will in time die from. Plaintiff Schlund under the torture by
the government will never be able to get married or pursue happiness in
any way. Plaintiff Schlund has been driven out of business by the
governments use of torture and has been forced under torture to not be
able to maintain records resulting in forcing Plaintiff Schlund under
torture to not be able to file taxes. Anytime Plaintiff tried to file
taxes he was punished and tortured and at times was knocked out with the
pain from the torture of him as the government tried to stop him.
The Government has threatened to murder Plaintiff’s children
and has tortured Plaintiff for the past 25 years and has framed
Plaintiff for every crime they could to justify the Government’s
Nazi-like criminal conduct. The torture of Plaintiff Schlund has now so
damaged him that in time he will no longer be able to defend himself or
be able to work or even feed himself or his grandchildren. Social
Security has been mostly destroyed by Plaintiffs inability under torture
to file taxes.
The courts issued warrants that were used to take Plaintiffs passports
for 12 years before returning them and then took them again. The
government used these passports to open bank accounts in Plaintiff
Schlund’s name to frame him as being involved in drugs.
Acts which are continuous and ongoing by the Government are
electronic intrusions and trespasses in, on and upon Plaintiff Schlund’s
home and/or vehicles for the purpose of planting new evidence every time
Plaintiff executed his freedom of speech and redress of rights and
complains to the Justice Department, police or the courts the torturing
of Plaintiff is increased and new evidence against Plaintiff is again
planted.
This process of obstruction of justice and witness
tampering by the Government has continued each day for 25 years and may
never stop without this court assisting with the requested relief.
Plaintiff has repeatedly offered the Government while under the torture
to plead guilt to any crime they wish in exchange for relief from the
torture.
Plaintiff has confessed to every crime that he can think
of while under torture in exchange for some relief from torture or in
exchange for sleep.
The government has no interest in trying or convicting
Plaintiff for any purported crime, the government’s only interest is to
torture plaintiff to limit his freedom of speech and whistle-blowing
activities. To imprison Plaintiff would look like the government was
imprisoning him as a political witness. In fact Plaintiff Schlund would
be a political prisoner of the United States. To give the illusion of
freedom Plaintiff Schlund is allowed to appearingly remain free while in
reality he is held prisoner electronically and controlled to a degree
more horrible then possible in any prison without the use of the
electronic implants used to torture Plaintiff Schlund.
The Justice Department and the Courts to date have acted
like Plaintiff has no rights of any kind and, in fact, have
intentionally violated Plaintiffs rights. The Government has asserted
by its acts and conduct Plaintiff is presumed to be guilty and,
accordingly, the court has based its decisions on the presumption of
guilt rather than the constitutional duty imposed on it to act on the
constitutional presumption Plaintiff Schlund is innocent until proven
guilty in a court of law. They have acted like Nazis. Because of this
plaintiff has been stopped with torture from voting, owning a home or
even being allowed to work or to run a business. Plaintiff Schlund has
also been deprived of the exercise of his right to freedom of religion,
of going to church and, in fact, has been tortured forcing Plaintiff out
of church violating his Constitutional rights of freedom of religion
and association.
The only time that the torture was terminated was when
Plaintiff was arrested for a contractor code violation. While he was in
jail, all torture was stopped. Plaintiff reached the point while under
torture that he would gladly go to jail for the rest of his life in
exchange for not being further tortured.
Plaintiff Schlund places the court on notice that he will
exercise his rights to civil protest to be arrested in protest of his
never ending torture by the Government. The Government uses electronic
stalking, violence and terrorism and Plaintiff Schlund will use peaceful
civil protest as his response to the Government’s outrageous and
despicable conduct and acts of evil and terrorism. Plaintiff Schlund has
no problem with the government conducting any investigation but will no
longer allow the government to torture him further without civilly
protesting the Government’s use of torture.
The Government in its criminal conspiracy and paranoid
delusions will claim that this is a threat against the Government and
that the Government does not respond to threats. Nazis. In truth, the
Government is the one violating Plaintiffs rights by electronic
stalking, torture and threats and is threatening Plaintiff with further
torture, sleep deprivation and further cruel and unusual punishment.
Plaintiff will 90 days from the filing of this motion start
peaceful civil protest of his torture which is being committed under the
authority of the courts. If the U.S. Supreme Court, in its decisions,
says it is legal to burn American flags as an expression of free speech,
then it is legal to do other kinds of peaceful protest. Plaintiff will
protest by burning copies of the Constitution at the Sandra Day O’Connor
Court House in protest of his torture to get arrested and tried for his
peaceful protest to the Government’s use of torture. The Government has
reduced the American Constitution in Plaintiff’s situation into a
worthless piece of paper with their corruption. Plaintiff will force
the Government to hold Plaintiff in prison for the rest of his life or
until the Government agrees to terminate the torture of Plaintiff.
Anytime the Government tries to release Plaintiff from prison and again
tortures Plaintiff he will again go straight to the court house and
again burn new copies of the Constitution until he is again arrested. If
Plaintiff is released from jail on his own recognizance or for any other
reason he will again return to the court house and again burn new copies
of the Constitution as soon as he is tortured again.
As the Government fully knows, Plaintiff will be tortured as
long as the Government has implants in his body or on his body or in
proximity to his body capable of torturing him. Anyone with any
electronic knowledge can design implants or other monitoring devices
that are not capable of torture and that is all that Plaintiff Schlund
asking for with the paranoid and delusional Government insisting that
they have a right to use torture against him as a political witness, in
violation of his rights.
Let the court fully understand how evil the government has
acted in its use of torture against Plaintiff as an electronic political
prisoner of the United States. Plaintiff alleges that while working and
driving from job to job in his truck he has to drive through school
zones where children cross the street. As Plaintiff Schlund would enter
these areas, the Government would torture Plaintiff Schlund making him
scream in agony as the Government tried to force Plaintiff Schlund to
run over these innocent children. These crimes were committed by the
Government to try to force Plaintiff Schlund to possibly injure or kill
innocent children so the government could blame Plaintiff Schlund and
prosecute him as a horrible evil criminal. Then when Plaintiff Schlund
would get to his intended job site the torture would be reduced by
millions of times for the filming of Plaintiff to show that he can work
and is in good shape.
As soon as Plaintiff would leave the job and get on the
freeway the Government would then again torture Plaintiff as abovesaid
and make him scream in agony trying to force Plaintiff into an accident
to possibly kill or injure some innocent person(s) so the Government
could try to justify prosecuting him for the hoped for accident by the
Government.
Plaintiff Schlund will no longer tolerate these crimes by
the Government. He will not allow the Government to force the death of
innocent people so the Government can target Plaintiff as abovesaid. To
stop these crimes by the Government, Plaintiff Schlund has no other
choice other then to force his incarceration as a political prisoner of
the United States.
Plaintiff alleges that if this court does not grant his
reasonable motion for relief of torture on the grounds set forth herein,
he may begin the expression of his constitutional rights as stated in
this motion despite he would prefer the relief he is entitled to under
settled law set forth herein.
CONCLUSION
Based on the above said, Plaintiff Schlund respectfully requests the
court to issue the appropriate injunctive relief order terminating the
government’s various types of torture of him, to maintain the status quo
of the parties and protect his constitutional rights as follows:
1. The court order the government to cease and desist all activities of
every nature and kind which result in the torture of Plaintiff Schlund
and his witnesses;
2. The government cease and desist utilizing any type of electronic or
other devices which emit any form of electronic force utilized by it to
influence, control, inflict pain or suffering to any degree whatsoever,
whether psychologically or physiologically to Plaintiff Schlund;
3. The court order the government to cease and desist all activities of
every nature and kind whatsoever which result or may result in the
torture and witness tampering of Plaintiff Schlund’s family, friends and
his witnesses;
4. That the government cease and desist all activity which directly or
indirectly, irrespective of degree, which does or may cause pain and/or
suffering, whether physiological or psychological to Plaintiff Schlund’s
family, friends and witnesses;
5. The court order the removal and documentation of all implants in
Plaintiff Schlund;
6. The court order an independent expert knowledgeable of the nature
and types of electronic integrated systems used by the government for
surveillance and torture of American citizens to advise the court of the
government’s ability to torture Plaintiff Schlund electronically;
7. That independent experts F.R.C.P. 706 and a magistrate or reference
be ordered by the court to conduct an in-depth Evidentiary Hearing
relating to the methods and systems of surveillance and torture of
Plaintiff Schlund as set forth in his Complaint and Motion herewith, for
a determination of the factual basis asserted by Plaintiff Schlund and
findings of fact and conclusions of law, with the expert’s and
magistrate’s or references’ report, of findings being submitted directly
to this court immediately upon the conclusion of the hearing;
8. That the government and any other person or entity shall also be
restrained, and it is the obligation of the government to notify said
individual/entity of the injunctive order terminating the torture of
Plaintiff Schlund;
9. Any and all such further relief in the court’s discretion that is
fair, just and equitable under the circumstances.
Date: _____________________ By: _____________________________
Charles August Schlund, III
Plaintiff Pro Per
COPIES of this Motion mailed this
_______ day of August, 2003 to:
George W. Bush, an individual; and as
President of the United States
White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500
Mr. John Ashcroft
Attorney General of the United States
950 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
Office of the Solicitor General
United States of America
Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
U. S. Attorney’s Office
Department of Justice
555 Fourth Street, NW, 10th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20001
Office of the Inspector General
United States of America
Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
Suite 4322
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
U.S. Department of Justice
Federal Bureau of Investigation
J. Edgar Hoover Building
935 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20535-0001
United States Department of Justice
Drug Enforcement Administration
Department of Justice
Mail Stop: AXS
2401 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, Virginia 22301
United States Department of Justice
Drug Enforcement Administration
P.O. Box 28128
Washington, D.C. 20005
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528
By: ____________________________