We had a server outage, and we're rebuilding the site. Most of the site features won't work. Thank you for your patience.
imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

white themeblack themered themetheme help
About Us Contact Us Calendar Publish RSS
latest news
best of news




A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List


IMC Network:

Original Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq kenya nigeria south africa canada: hamilton london, ontario maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg east asia: burma jakarta japan korea manila qc europe: abruzzo alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol brussels bulgaria calabria croatia cyprus emilia-romagna estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege liguria lille linksunten lombardia london madrid malta marseille nantes napoli netherlands nice northern england norway oost-vlaanderen paris/Île-de-france patras piemonte poland portugal roma romania russia saint-petersburg scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki torun toscana toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia latin america: argentina bolivia chiapas chile chile sur cmi brasil colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso venezuela venezuela oceania: adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne perth qc sydney south asia: india mumbai united states: arizona arkansas asheville atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado columbus dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca sarasota seattle tampa bay tennessee urbana-champaign vermont western mass worcester west asia: armenia beirut israel palestine process: fbi/legal updates mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer projects: print radio satellite tv video regions: oceania united states topics: biotech

Surviving Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: canada: quebec east asia: japan europe: athens barcelona belgium bristol brussels cyprus germany grenoble ireland istanbul lille linksunten nantes netherlands norway portugal united kingdom latin america: argentina cmi brasil rosario oceania: aotearoa united states: austin big muddy binghamton boston chicago columbus la michigan nyc portland rochester saint louis san diego san francisco bay area santa cruz, ca tennessee urbana-champaign worcester west asia: palestine process: fbi/legal updates process & imc docs projects: radio satellite tv
printable version - js reader version - view hidden posts - tags and related articles

Lawsuit Threatens Bush Presidency --- Media Blackout

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


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


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.


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


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




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


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


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


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.


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: ____________________________
Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments

Listed below are the 10 latest comments of 21 posted about this article.
These comments are anonymously submitted by the website visitors.
Corrected Version Of Lawsuit Martin F. Abernathy Thursday, Aug. 28, 2003 at 1:19 PM
Somewhere thewiz Thursday, Aug. 28, 2003 at 1:50 PM
All of that could have been prevented... nonanarchist Thursday, Aug. 28, 2003 at 3:42 PM
nonsense. Sheepdog Thursday, Aug. 28, 2003 at 5:38 PM
Hello smashtheleft Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 7:33 AM
fake smashtheleft nonanarchist Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 3:51 PM
Help! nonanarchist Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 3:54 PM
fake nonanarchist nonanarchist Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 3:56 PM
nonanarchist Scottie Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 4:02 PM
fake Scottie nonanarchist Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 4:03 PM
nonanarchist Scottie Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 4:05 PM
fake Scottie nonanarchist Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 4:06 PM
nonanarchist Scottie Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 4:14 PM
fake Scottie nonanarchist Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 4:18 PM
nonanarchist Scottie Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 4:29 PM
fake Scottie nonanarchist Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 4:32 PM
nonanarchist Scottie Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 4:59 PM
fake Scottie nonanarchist Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 5:30 PM
nonanarchist Scottie Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 5:36 PM
fake Scottie nonanarchist Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 5:37 PM
nonanarchist Scottie Friday, Aug. 29, 2003 at 5:42 PM

Local News

Woolsey Fire: Worst News of 2018? J01 12:18AM

Oppose Environmentally-Harmful Development D10 4:03AM

Oppose Environmentally-Harmful Development D10 3:58AM

OUR HOUSE Grief Support Center Presents Night for Hope O30 5:38PM

Marshall Tuck’s racist dog whistle O27 5:01AM

Marshall Tuck’s ethnocentrism contradicts Californian values O27 4:32AM

Contra Costa-Hawkins O25 3:48AM

Debunking Some Anti-Prop 10 Propaganda O12 6:56AM

Why Should California Choose De Leon Over Feinstein? O10 9:55PM

Change Links September 2018 posted S02 10:22PM

More Scandals Rock Southern California Nuke Plant San Onofre A30 11:09PM

Site Outage Friday A30 3:49PM

Change Links August 2018 A14 1:56AM

Setback for Developer of SC Farm Land A12 11:09PM

More problems at Shutdown San Onofre Nuke J29 10:40PM

Change Links 2018 July posted J09 8:27PM

More Pix: "Families Belong Together," Pasadena J02 7:16PM

"Families Belong Together" March, Pasadena J02 7:08PM

Short Report on the Families Belong Together Protest in Los Angeles J30 11:26PM

Summer 2018 National Immigrant Solidarity Network News Alert! J11 6:58AM

More Local News...

Other/Breaking News



Judge Delays Ruling on Puerto Rico Debt Deal White House Opposes Island's Food Assistance J18 6:04PM



Paraphysique de proxémie guerrière J18 7:59AM


FARCELONA 8.17.2017 J17 3:23PM



PR Debt Cancel, Judge Reviews Cofina Debt J16 9:04PM

Réseautage, fragmentation du capital J16 4:20PM

Paraphysique de manipulation mentale et sociale J15 9:51AM

The Global Justice Project and Human Survival: We're Badly Off Track J15 5:08AM

The Global Justice Project and Human Survival: We're Badly Off Track J15 5:08AM

The Global Justice Project and Human Survival: We're Badly Off Track J15 5:08AM

Markets as a Fetish, Globalization, and Dissent Management J14 1:03PM

State Debts - The Primal German Fear J13 5:09PM

Sans liberté, sans égalité, sans fraternité J13 8:09AM

From Progressive Neoliberalism to Trump - and Beyond J12 9:22PM

Copper Cures Cancer J11 1:42PM

Steven Taylor, Investor who Evicts J11 9:24AM

Du sectarisme, des sectes, des clans J11 8:10AM

“Animaniacs in Concert!” Starring Voice Legend Rob Paulsen J10 6:34PM

Patrick Kilpatrick discusses and signs Dying for Living J09 11:51PM

SexActs vs Sexuality USA 2018 Invitations to Power Marriages without Affection J09 8:36PM

Changer de mentalité, changer de société J09 9:17AM

Teacher Strike? Time for Labor Studies J09 6:26AM

More Breaking News...
© 2000-2018 Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy